Village Council Workshop

Village of Wellington 12300 Forest Hill Blvd Wellington, FL 33414 Action Summary - Final Monday, December 7, 2015 3:00 PM Village Hall Village Council Workshop Bob Margolis, Mayor John Greene, Vice Mayor Matt Willhite, Councilman Anne Gerwig, Councilwoman John T. McGovern, Councilman Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Margolis called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Ms. Cohen introduced the new Assistant Village Attorney, Aaron Dunlap. Mr. Dunlap introduced himself, provided his background history and his most recent experience within the law field. He also provided a brief update regarding active Development of Regional Impact studies within the state of Florida. Mayor Margolis welcomed Mr. Dunlap. 2. REVIEW OF COUNCIL AGENDA Mr. Schofield presented the Agenda for the December 8TH Council Meeting for discussion and review. A. 15-871 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR WELLINGTON COUNCIL MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 13, 2015, OCTOBER 27, 2015 AND NOVEMBER 10, 2015 Mr. Schofield introduced the item. This item is for the approval of the Minutes of the Regular Wellington Council Meetings of October 13, 2015, October 27, 2015 and November 10, 2015. There were no changes recommended. B. 15-844 AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE A CLAY COUNTY CONTRACT WITH MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING, LLC, AS A BASIS FOR PRICING TO PROVIDE SPORTS LIGHTING FOR OLYMPIA PARK BASKETBALL COURTS Mr. Schofield introduced the item. This item is for the authorization to utilize Clay County contract #13/14-8 with Musco Sports Lighting, LLC, as a basis for pricing to provide sports lighting for the Olympia Park basketball courts at a cost of $80,000. Mr. Barnes presented the item. He explained that within the past several years the basketball program had increased in popularity and participation at Olympia Park basketball courts and the indoors basketball space at Village Park for the recreation and travel programs. During the winter months the outdoor courts were being utilized as additional practice courts and the lighting was necessary. In reply to Vice Mayor Greene’s question if the programs were organized, Mr. Barnes said that the courts were being used for organized programs but open play courts were currently available located at the Community Park on South Shore Boulevard, the current Boys and Girls Club located on Wellington Trace and outdoor courts at the Village Park parking lot which was available for practice sessions. Mr. Barnes explained that there were several neighborhood parks throughout Wellington which have half and full courts that were readily available for open play. Village of Wellington Page 1 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 There were no changes recommended. C. 15-839 REVIEW OF CODE COMPLIANCE FINE REDUCTION FOR 13730 STAIMFORD DRIVE Mr. Schofield introduced the item. This item is for Council’s review and approval of a fine reduction request for 13730 Staimford Drive. Mr. Koch presented the item and explained that the case commenced in 2014 and was considered a hardship case due to the owner’s financial and medical issues. Currently the homeowner was employed and all the violations were corrected during the months of July through September 2015 but the accrued fine amount was $50,550.00. He stated that the owner indicated that they would continue to live in the home and have filed for Chapter 13 and were asking for a fine reduction in order to move forward with a modification arrangement through the foreclosure process. Ms. Cohen stated that the property owner was doing everything that they could in order to keep the house and had submitted a settlement offer that included a fine reduction in the amount of $1,000.00 because they could not afford staff’s $10,800.00 settlement offer. Vice Mayor Greene asked if the property owner was responsive during the initial phase of the Village violations. Mr. Koch explained that staff had contact with the property owner in July or August of 2014 of which the family explained their hardship situation and at that time there was not very much that staff could do to assist them. He noted that the amount of $50,550.00 was the daily accrual fine amount but the final decision would be made by the Special Magistrate. Vice Mayor Greene explained that he did not want to send out a message to the residents indicating that they could ignore the Village’s violation notices, ignore the Special Magistrate’s fines and towards the end of the process, throw themselves at the mercy of Council in order to obtain a fine reduction. He emphasized that the present case was a hardship case. Ms. Cohen explained that staff reviews each case on a case by case basis and if there was a case that seemed intentional or of a flagrant nature, those cases would be handled in a different manner as the case they were currently discussing. She added that the current case did not appear to be one of those cases. Mr. Schofield stated that repeat violator cases would not be brought before Council unless there was something unique about it. He explained that as per Council’s request, fine reductions would not be granted to repeat violators. Vice Mayor Greene stated that the message that needed to be sent was that Council was compassionate but that Council would not be sympathetic with the property owners that were trying to abuse the system, know how to play the game and drag the cases on for several years. He said that he was in support of reducing the fine for this case. Councilwoman Gerwig stated that when a case comes before Council, personal information about the property owner becomes part of the Village public documents, and she indicated that she would prefer that staff change the practice and have the Special Magistrate handle all the decisions and not have the case come before Council. She explained that her reason was not due Village of Wellington Page 2 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 to the lack of importance of the case but because she felt that the Special Magistrates did a good job in the past. Currently the Special Magistrates were only able to reduce the fine to a limited amount and if the resident was looking for a further reduction, the case would come before Council. She then elaborated on a Special Magistrate hearing she had watched regarding her son’s teacher who had a personal hardship whom was in tears and everyone was watching and listening to the hearing while she explained her situation and asked for further reductions. She questioned whether that was the right process or not she felt that Council’s intention was not to make the process difficult. Councilwoman Gerwig indicated that as per Ms. Cohen’s narration, staff was aware if someone was abusing the system or not. She reiterated that she would rather Council go back to the prior procedure where the Special Magistrate would make all the decisions. Ms. Cohen said that Council was limited to the fine reduction amount which was up to the Code Enforcement Manager. The Special Magistrates have always had the authority and the discretion to reduce the fine amounts but typically the procedure in place was that if staff was not recommending a lower fine amount, then the Special Magistrate would not recommend an additional fine reduction to the reduced amount suggested by staff. She indicated that could have been the reason that Special Magistrate did not reduce the amount further in the acse Councilwoman Gerwig was referring to. Councilwoman Gerwig said that she understood the procedures that the Special Magistrates use and said that she agreed in not wanting the neighborhoods to be in disrepair or have dirty roofs and driveways but she felt that the Village’s intention was not to have people leave their homes or bring extra money to a the closing during a bad situation. Vice Mayor Greene said that Council provided Mr. Koch with a procedure which he follows from the inception through the final ruling on the cases. Mr. Koch has the discretion to provide an 80% reduction of the fine which provided tremendous latitude and felt that Council did not want to get involved in every case. Vice Mayor Greene explained that issues occur when the situations go beyond a certain point, with no resolution. He said that he may have become a little cynical because of the behavior of a few people in the Village that continue to abuse the system. He said that until the Village forces compliance and sends a clear and consistent message, he would continue to be in favor of the cases coming back to Council in order for Council to use discretion in reviewing those cases. Ms. Cohen pointed out that even though Mr. Koch had the discretion to reduce the fines up to 80% of the amount, the Special Magistrate ultimately had the final say. Vice Mayor Greene said that there were many grants that were given out within the community for simple fixes. However, for an owner having economic issues, violations were not a simple fix. Vice Mayor Greene thought there were many things that the Village could do be good neighbors, i.e., volunteer assistance program through the schools. Mayor Margolis said that in the past the high school students would get their community service hours by helping with violations or repainting homes. Mr. Koch indicated that the volunteer home painting program was sponsored by Village of Wellington Page 3 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 the Solid Waste Authority and periodically the volunteers provide their assistance within the Village. Mayor Margolis suggested that the Community Services Department get involved by having the volunteer program be in addition to the Village’s current abatement program. Councilwoman Gerwig said that she worked with the Paint Your Heart Out Program and the interfaith groups have handled those types of projects for a handicapped couple and others. She suggested providing the assistance as a team in order to address the situations. Vice Mayor Greene said that he knew that Mr. Poag was listening and he knew that the kids would be able to add mulch, remove weeds and paint in order for them to receive their volunteer hours and would like to have a program developed. There were no changes recommended. D. 15-834 RESOLUTION NO. R2015-93 (PBIEC SEASON EQUESTRIAN SPU - TEMPORARY ACCESS TO LOTS 8, 9 AND 10 OF GRAND PRIX FARMS) A RESOLUTION OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL APPROVING A SEASONAL EQUESTRIAN USE PERMIT FOR GRAND PRIX FARMS, LOTS 8, 9 AND 10, LOCATED AT 3256 GRAND PRIX FARMS DRIVE, FOR TWO (2) TEMPORARY ACCESS DRIVEWAYS TO GENE MISCHE WAY FROM DECEMBER 14, 2015 TO APRIL 30, 2016; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Schofield introduced this item. This item is for the approval of Resolution No. R2015-93 for a Seasonal Equestrian Use Permit for Grand Prix Farms, Lots 8, 9 and 10, located at 3256 Grand Prix Farms Drive Farm December 14, 2015 to April 30, 2016. Mr. Basehart presented the item and explained that the approval was identical to the request that was provided the prior year and was a seasonal permit for Grand Prix Farms to connect driveways for lots 8, 9 and 10 to Gene Mische Way. He indicated that Council’s suggestion last year was for the applicant to provide a PUD Master Plan Amendment if the access driveways were to become permanent. The applicant submitted the PUD Master Plan Amendment but it was not submitted in a timely manner to be placed on the agenda before the season started. Mr. Basehart said that the Special Use Permit was summited to carry them until the PUD Master Plan Amendment was approved and was on the December 9, 2015 Equestrian Preserve Committee’s agenda and the permit would go on to PZAB in January 2016 and back to Council in February 2016 which would have been too late for the current season. Mayor Margolis explained that he had compared the current special use permit with the prior year’s permit and there seemed to be a slight difference. He asked if staff was currently looking at the access points on the permit and not the temporary parking. Mr. Basehart replied affirmatively and explained that the parking located within areas 8, 9 and 10 would be related to tents 8, 9 and 10 versus the prior year where the parking in the same areas was used for Village of Wellington Page 4 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 overflow. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if the applicant removed the access ways that staff had concerns with. Mr. Basehart replied affirmatively and explained that the temporary driveways were removed but the gates were in place and they were in compliance. Vice Mayor Greene asked if the horse traffic and safety issue concerns were addressed. Mr. Basehart explained that the concern was minimal because the horses were not going through Grand Prix Village and would not affect the roads internally. He said that the actual equestrian access and horse trail goes on to Gene Mische Way which was located south of the properties and the bridle trail was owned by Grand Prix Village which connects to the show grounds. Mr. Schofield stated that the bridle trails were located inside of Grand Prix Village and were specifically dedicated to the people located within Grand Prix Village and their guests. The equestrian traffic that would come from Palm Beach Point should not be traveling through Grand Prix Village. Councilwoman Gerwig asked Mr. Basehart for the date that the applicant submitted for the master plan. Mr. Basehart said that the date was during the end of September or the beginning October but he did not have the exact date but would provide her with the information. There were no changes recommended. E. 15-890 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-17 (APPROVING REFERENDUM QUESTION AMENDING THE VILLAGE CHARTER) AN ORDINANCE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 8 OF WELLINGTON’S MUNICIPAL CHARTER BY AMENDING SECTION 8, SUBSECTION G ENTITLED “VILLAGE CANVASSING BOARD” TO INCLUDE THE APPOINMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO THE CANVASSING BOARD WHEN NECESSARY TO AVOID TIED VOTES; PROVIDING FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THE PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT TO THE ELECTORS OF WELLINGTON AT THE ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 15, 2016; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Schofield introduced this item. This item is for the adoption of the ordinance approving the referendum question amending the Village Charter. Ms. Cohen presented the item and explained that this was the second reading of the ordinance. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if more than one community member would be needed at a given time. Ms. Cohen said that that if there was an even number only one more person would be needed. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if the Village of Wellington Page 5 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 ordinance should read “Community Member” and not “Community Members”. Ms. Cohen said that the ordinance could be listed either way. She said that she could not think of a situation where more than one person would need to be appointed. Councilwoman Gerwig said that Council could discuss the item further at the council meeting. There were no changes recommended. F. 15-889 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-21 (CANVASSING BOARD) AN ORDINANCE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL AMENDING ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 2 BY ADDING A NEW SECTION TO BE NUMBERED 2-2 ENTITLED CANVASSING BOARD; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ms. Cohen presented the item. This item is for the approval of Ordinance No. 2015-21 Amending Article 1, Chapter 2 by adding a new Section 2-2 entitled “Canvassing Board”. She indicated that Councilman McGovern requested to address the item after the Charter Amendment item and he would provide additional explanation at the following night’s council meeting. She indicated that if Council wanted to postpone addressing the item until after the election that would be acceptable to her. She indicated that she placed the item on the agenda in a proactive manner. Mayor Margolis thought that there was discussion to bring the item to Council after the election but he was not sure. There were no changes recommended. G. 15-757 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-12 (SOLICITATION) AN ORDINANCE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL, AMENDING CHAPTER 62 “TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES”, REPEALING SECTION 62-15 “HITCHHIKING OR SOLICITATION FROM ROADWAY PROHIBITED” AND REPLACING WITH SECTION 62-15 “HITCHHIKING, SOLICITATION AND DISTRIBUTION ON PUBLIC ROADS”; PROVIDING FOR PROHIBITION OF HITCHHIKING; PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SOLICITATION AND DISTRIBUTION ON WELLINGTON’S LOCAL ROADS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Mr. Schofield introduced the item. This item is for the approval of Ordinance No. 2015-12 to amend Wellington’s Code of Ordinances regarding solicitation and distribution on Wellington’s local public roads, which includes all local roads within the municipal boundary that are dedicated to Wellington, Acme Improvement District and Pine Tree Improvement District. Village of Wellington Page 6 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 Mr. Schofield explained that the Village rarely receives requests from PBSO to adopt items but felt that the ordinance was very good and by adopting the ordinance, the procedure would be identical to the County wide standards which was compliant with the regulations. He said that people were entitled to be on the sidewalk but they could not be on the roadway travel lanes and the medians which would be a physical danger to themselves and the traffic. Vice Mayor Greene asked if the agencies that want to solicit for a fund raiser would have to apply for a permit. Mr. Schofield said that there was not any type of solicitation allowed on the roadways and medians thus no permits were needed for using the sidewalks. Councilwoman Gerwig wanted to ask Councilman Willhite how the ordinance would affect the Fire Fighter Drive for Muscular Dystrophy Association since they had to move the event to the Publix stores. Mayor Margolis asked if a representative from PBSO be available to answer questions regarding the item. Mr. Schofield said that he would contact Captain Hart. There were no changes recommended. H. 15-832 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-13 (FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT UPDATE) AN ORDINANCE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL, UPDATING THE WELLINGTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY INCORPORATING THE ANNUAL REVIEW AND REVISIONS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT TO REFLECT THE 2015/2016 THROUGH 2020/2021 FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE PROJECTS; AND UPDATING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SCHEDULE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO UPDATE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Schofield introduced the item. This item is for the approval on First Reading Ordinance No. 2015-13 updating the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) Schedule for Level of Service Improvements for Fiscal Years 2015/2016 to 2020/2021 (Table CIE 1) and the School District of Palm Beach County Capital Improvement Schedule (Table CIE 2) located in the Capital Improvement Element of Wellington’s Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Basehart presented the item. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if a super majority vote was needed. Mr. Basehart explained that the item was a reporting exercise. Mr. Schofield explained that a simple majority vote was needed and the approval process was the same process use when Council adopts the budget. There were no changes recommended. I. 15-827 INTENT TO CONTINUE USING THE UNIFORM METHOD OF Village of Wellington Page 7 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 COLLECTING NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS FOR WELLINGTON, FLORIDA AND ACME IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (a) RESOLUTION NO. R2015-86: A RESOLUTION OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA’S COUNCIL EXPRESSING THE INTENT OF WELLINGTON TO CONTINUE TO USE THE UNIFORM METHOD OF COLLECTING NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS AS AUTHORIZED AND PERMITTED BY SECTION 197.3632, FLORIDA STATUTES; EXPRESSING THE NEED FOR THE LEVY OF NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING FORTH THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY WITHIN WELLINGTON’S JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES THAT MAY OR SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE LEVY OF WELLINGTON NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (b) RESOLUTION NO. AC2015-13: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ACME IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT EXPRESSING THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT TO CONTINUE TO USE THE UNIFORM METHOD OF COLLECTING NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS AS AUTHORIZED AND PERMITTED BY SECTION 197.3632, FLORIDA STATUTES; EXPRESSING THE NEED FOR THE LEVY OF NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS AND SETTING FORTH THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT’S JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES THAT MAY OR SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE LEVY OF DISTRICT NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Schofield introduced this item. This item is for the approval of: (a) Resolution No. R2015-86 for Wellington and (b) Resolution No. AC2015-13 for Acme Improvement District for the intent to continue to use the Uniform Method of Collecting Non-Ad Valorem Assessments. Ms. Quickel presented the item. She explained that the annual resolutions were for the Village’s method of collection and the funds were collected by the County, afterwards the funds would be remitted to the Village. Mr. Schofield explained that one of the requirements was to adopt a balanced budget and the item was the means for the procedure. Currently staff was working on the following year’s budget and during April or May 2016 Council would be receiving information regarding the Capital portions of the budget. There were no changes recommended. J. 15-893 AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE 14022 VERONICA COURT Mr. Schofield introduced this item. This item is for the authorization to purchase the vacant lot located at 14022 Veronica Court at a cost of approximately $120,000 plus closing costs. Village of Wellington Page 8 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 Mr. Schofield explained that there were three appraisals provided and the owner was not interested in offers below the highest figure. Mr. Poag presented the item. He stated that he was asking Council for direction to move forward with the purchase of the property in order to start creating the neighborhood park. Mayor Margolis stated that funds were available for the project. Mr. Poag further explained that a portion of the funds was taken from the prior year’s Neighborhood funding. Mr. Schofield explained that the majority of the funding was from the CDBG funding along with the budget amount. Vice Mayor Greene asked what the benefits would be for the residents of the Hawthorne community to have a park. Mr. Poag explained that the closest park to the community was Primrose Park and in order to get to that park, the children would have to walk there or play in the streets. Both alternatives were safety issues, and the new park would eliminate the issue and would provide a location for the neighborhood families to gather. Mr. Poag added that there was a vacant lot in the cul-de-sac and at times the children go to that area and act mischievous; in the past there was a fire there; however, the property owner was not interested in selling the lot. Vice Mayor Greene asked for the amount that the Village currently spent on the project. Mr. Poag said that the amount was for appraisals that were done and was less than $400. Vice Mayor Greene asked if the Village would be paying the closing costs. Mr. Poag replied affirmatively. Councilwoman Gerwig said that the amount of $197,000 would include the park improvements but with certain limitations. Mr. Poag replied affirmatively and stated that staff would seek additional funding through the CDBG or KaBOOM, Inc. for the additional park improvements in several phases. Mr. Schofield explained that the amount spent for the Goldenrod Park was more than $300,000. Mr. Poag explained that the $197,000 was for the first stage, tot lot, fences, benches and a half court. Vice Mayor Greene asked if the adjacent property owners have provided their opinion regarding the project. Mr. Poag said that he received a call from the property owner of the adjacent lot who indicated his support for the park. Vice Mayor Greene asked if there were statistics indicating a reduction in crime, complaints or issues in the neighborhoods with the parks similar to Goldenrod. Mr. Poag explained that when staff meets with the residents while conducting the “Walk and Talk” neighborhood meetings, his department maintains the attendee’s comments and complaints. He indicated that the statistics have reduced drastically within all of the neighborhoods since Mr. Salas developed all of the youth programs. He explained that both he and Mr. Salas were in the neighborhoods, at McDonalds, talking and building a rapport with the children. They have also been working with Deputy Delia on a daily basis and no complaints have been received regarding Primrose Park within the past five to six months. Vice Mayor Greene said that he would like to use $10,000 of the $120,000 for scholarships instead of having the children hanging out in the street. He asked Village of Wellington Page 9 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 Mr. Poag to find another way to fund those programs and he reiterated that he would never advise a client to take the highest appraisal but he agreed to the project because of the safety issues. There were no changes recommended. K. 15-903 REQUEST FROM MR. RICHARD COSOLA TO SPEAK FOR 15 MINUTES TO COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF THE COVENTRY GREEN ASSOCIATION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF A BARRIER ALONG FOREST HILL BLVD FACING THE NORTH COURSE Mr. Schofield introduced this item. This item is for Mr. Richard Cosola to present a petition to Council on behalf of the Coventry Green Association requesting to have a barrier installed along Forest Hill Blvd. facing the north course. Mayor Margolis asked for information regarding the item prior to the Council meeting. Mr. Poag explained that the Coventry Green Association was asking for the barrier because they understood that the easement was owned by the Village. He indicated that the barrier was not owned by the Village but was a dedicated utilities easement. According to the covenants that were in the actual plat, the specifications indicate that there was not an allowance of construction, shrubs or anything allowed within the easement except for the utilities. The association’s request was for the Village to place a fence within the easement, but that was not allowed. Mayor Margolis asked if the association understood the specifications. Mr. Poag explained that when he received the request he researched it and contacted the manager and explained the specifications and presently he requested to be placed on the agenda. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if those specifications were the reason for the tree restriction in the area. Mr. Schofield replied affirmatively. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if there were actual utility lines in the easements. Mr. Schofield said that he was not aware there were actual utilities located in the easement but he was certain that there were no Village utilities located there; water and sewer. Mr. Poag questioned whether the Village would want to place public funds into building a fence on private property if a easement was abandoned. Mr. Schofield stated that the easement was dedicated to the HOA and they would need to go through with the paperwork for the abandonment procedure. Councilwoman Gerwig said that they would have to get the utility companies to sign off in order to plant vegetation in the easements. Both Mr. Poag and Mr. Schofield replied affirmatively. Councilwoman Gerwig said that she spoke to one of the representatives that explained that after going over the tunnel, the view was of the homeowner’s backyards and there was a lack of privacy. She indicated that if the HOA was able to plant the vegetation that would keep the Village from making any types of decisions regarding the matter. Village of Wellington Page 10 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 There were no changes recommended. 3. WORKSHOP None. 4. ATTORNEY'S COMMENTS Ms. Cohen stated that she provided Council with a memo written by a law firm and directed to Rick Asnani, a political consultant. She explained that she received a call from Mr. Asnani on Friday explaining that he has certain people that he would either want to run for election or knew of someone that he would want to appoint to Councilwoman Gerwig’s seat. He took it upon himself to consult with an attorney and the attorney is opining that the ballot question concerning filling vacancies in the office of councilmember in the same manner as the Mayor may be subject to challenge because it was not as clear and might mislead the voters. Mr. Asani’s attorney also pointed out that the title talks about the filling of Mayor and the amendment does not deal with mayoral vacancies. In addition, the primary purpose of the ballot initiative was to remove Council’s role in filling the vacancies. Ms. Cohen said that she was not sure if that was correct and thought that the chief purpose was to make the two different ways of filling the vacancy uniform. She further stated that case law requires that the ballot summary, ballot title and ballot summary be clear and ambiguous and that the purpose of the ballot question be clear and unambiguous. It requires that it advise the ramifications of the amendment and the primary effect would need to be stated or implied and no material, facts necessary to make it not misleading can be omitted. She indicated that not every single detail needed to be included in the ballot summary or the ballot question because the allowed amount was seventy-five words. The only point that she makes that could potentially be an issue was if we should have added provisions about the Vice Mayor taking over the responsibilities of Mayor if there was a vacancy in the office of Mayor. If you are acting as Mayor you can always appoint another acting Vice Mayor in order to have two people that could run a meeting. Councilwoman Gerwig referred to page three and asked for the reason why they were asking on her behalf; she said that they are asking the attorney about her. Ms. Cohen explained that they were asking an election attorney about her opinion concerning how Councilwoman Gerwig’s seat would be filled and if she was eligible to run in a special election or eligible to run in 2018. She said that she believed that the consultant has someone that he wanted to have appointed based on a prior conversation with him. Vice Mayor Greene said since there were four seats up for election, would they sit and wait for the open seat to appoint. Ms. Cohen said that she did not know and explained that the issue came out of the blue and she wanted Council to have a copy. Furthermore Ms. Cohen said that she has looked at the ballot summary and the ballot question and felt that the primary intent was to unify the way that Council was filling the vacancies. She did not see any real issue that would mislead the voters which was really what the court would have to determine. She wanted Council to know that there was always a possibility that any of these provisions and ballot questions could be challenged but since this was actually put in writing and she wanted Council to be aware. Ms. Cohen Village of Wellington Page 11 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 indicated that Council has the option to withdraw the question. Mayor Margolis wanted to clarify that Councilwoman Gerwig did not know who Jennifer Bloom was and that she never met with Rick Asnani to discuss the matter. Councilwoman Gerwig said that she knows Mr. Asnani but she didn’t ask him to ask the question that was on the document. She indicated that the letter was referring to herself but she didn’t direct and does not know the law firm or asked them to act on her behalf. Ms. Cohen stated that Mr. Asnani didn’t indicate that he was doing anything on behalf of Councilwoman Gerwig but was acting on behalf of his clients. Vice Mayor Greene indicated that paragraph number three states that Councilwoman Gerwig may run for her old council seat if the charter amendment passes. She stated that he didn’t know the reason why the document was drafted and provided to Council. Ms. Cohen stated that she believed that Mr. Asnani has a candidate or perhaps more than one that either wants to be appointed or potentially wants to run and this is why this was being asked. Vice Mayor Greene noted that the document brings up interesting things, i.e., if Councilwoman Gerwig losses the Mayor seat, and if the ballot question passes, then she would be able to run again for election. Councilwoman Gerwig stated that Ms. Cohen’s opinion was that she would not be able to run again. Ms. Cohen replied affirmatively and explained that the reason for that was because the Charter says that you cannot serve two consecutive terms but it does not say that you cannot be elected for two consecutive terms. In Councilwoman Gerwig’s case she will have served for six years and will either take a seat or vacates, that would leave two remaining years on her term. The Charter also states that any period of time where you are appointed or by special election filled an unexpired term does not count towards your two consecutive terms. Vice Mayor Greene said that if Councilwoman Gerwig wins the Mayoral seat that was not an appointment or a special election, it would be a general election and asked if her term be up in two years. Ms. Cohen presented the scenario; if Councilwoman Gerwig runs for election and loses, the question would be if she would be able to run in the special election and she didn’t think that she would be able to. If she was to run in the special election, Ms. Cohen thought that would be a violation of the Charter because if you interpret the Charter to mean you can’t serve more than eight years as opposed to be elected to two consecutive terms then it would run afoul of the other provision in the Charter which says that filling a term by an unexpired term by appointment or election does not count towards your term. In Councilwoman Gerwig’s case, if she was to run for the special election and holds the seat for two years it would not count towards her two remaining years. Then she would run in 2018 and get a four year term which would violate the Charter. Councilwoman Gerwig said that none of Councilman McGovern’s terms including the two year terms that he was elected to count towards his term limit which would lead him to serve for eleven years. Ms. Cohen said that was correct because the current election cycle was to fill that unexpired four year term. Village of Wellington Page 12 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 Vice Mayor Greene asked what the intent of the document was. Ms. Cohen said as to the ballot question it comes down to whether it’s ambiguous as to what the electorate was being asked to do. The attorney was taking the position that the primary purpose of the amendment was to remove Council’s discretion when appointing someone. She explained the intent of the change was to treat them both the same which has an effect of removing Council’s appointment of a vacancy. She wanted Council to be aware that someone was raising an issue and talking about potentially challenging it. Ms. Cohen explained that she had a discussion with Jeff Kurtz concerning the other ballot question on hotels, motels, condos. She said that Mr. Kurtz was contending that there was a substantial change in the ordinance when the Village removed the language to other transient occupancy uses; however, she didn’t see any merit to that because there was case law on it that she recently reviewed. Secondly, Mr. Kurtz raised the issue that it was a land use issue and it should have gone to PZAB and advertised in a different way; however, she felt that case law didn’t support that. Councilwoman Gerwig asked if Mr. Kurtz had a client. Ms. Cohen said that she didn’t think so. Mayor Margolis said that he recognized the name of Ronald Meyers who was one of the top elections and ethics attorneys in Florida. His associate was Jennifer Bloom who weighed in on this. Ms. Cohen said this was done at the request of a political consultant. Mayor Margolis asked Ms. Cohen if she was comfortable with the current procedure to defend the issues or would an opinion from another election attorney was needed. Ms. Cohen said that she could obtain an opinion but she felt that the issue was driven by a political consultant that wants to have his candidate either appointed or put them up for election. Ms. Cohen said that she would make an attempt to obtain an opinion within twenty-four hours. Vice Mayor Greene asked for the reason that the document was sent to the Village. Ms. Cohen said that the document was not sent to the Village and explained that she was contacted by Mr. Asnani by telephone on Friday and he raised the issue to her. She said she advised Mr. Asnani that if he had any case law regarding this that he should send it to her which was the information that was provided. She reiterated that she wanted Council to have a copy for informational purposes. Councilwoman Gerwig said that she wanted to make it clear that she was not involved in the current issue. She felt that there was not anything that the Village could do in order to protect a law suit. Ms. Cohen said that the question could be withdrawn but she didn’t see any legal reason to do so as she thought that it was defensible. Mayor Margolis asked if there was challenge that would be done before the election. Ms. Cohen replied affirmatively and explained that it would be done before the ballot question was presented. 5. MANAGER COMMENTS None. Village of Wellington Page 13 Village Council Workshop Action Summary - Final December 7, 2015 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS None. 7. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Village of Wellington Page 14