Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-09-2020 CC Minutes�ma SE�T�N HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL SUNSHINE LAW & PUBLIC RECORDS WORKSHOP — 5:00 P.M. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING, COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & REGULAR MEETING UPON ADJOURNMENT OF WORKSHOP WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9,2020 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA MINUTES 1. Mayor Dodd called the Sunshine Law and Public Records Workshop to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. A moment of silence was held. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Ed Dodd Vice Mayor Jim Hill (arrived 6:00 p.m.) Council Member Fred Jones Council Member Chris Nunn Council Member Bob McPartlan Citv Staff Present: City Manager Paul Carlisle City Attorney Manny Anon, Jr. City Clerk Jeanette Williams Community Development Director/CRA Manager Lisa Frazier Community Development Manager Dom Bosworth Community Development Planner Robert Loring Police Chief Daniel Acosta Police Lieutenant Constantine Savvidis 5. CONVENE SUNSHINE LAW & PUBLIC RECORDS WORKSHOP 20.024 A. Florida Government in the Sunshine Presentation - Mannv An6n. Jr.. Citv Attornev 5:32 pm The City Attomey introduced himself and displayed the attached PowerPoint presentation regarding the Sunshine Law, Public Records Act, and quasi-judicial hearings. Council Member McPartlan cited F.S.286.0114, "Members of the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard on any proposition before a board or commission. Reasonable rules and policies ensuring the orderly conduct of a public meeting and requiring orderly behavior of those in attendance may be adopted;" and he asked if having someone's temperature taken and require a mask, if someone cannot social distance, to come to the Council meeting would be a reasonable requirement. The City Attorney said the temperature taking and mask requirement are reasonable requirements. He also said the City Manager does have the authority to make such requirements under the emergency declaration as long as he comes back to Council for ratification. He noted if people don't want to comply, individuals can participate outside, Zoom in, and phone in to participate in the public meetings. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 2 Mayor Dodd said in a lot of the boards, the agenda items are succinct and straight forward and the Council is the appeal authority. He noted the Sunshine Law also applies to things that may come to the Council meeting in the future. The City Attorney advised if Council members do discuss items with board members they should disclose that conversation during the ex parte communication disclosure portion of the meeting. Sharon Herman asked if committee members can talk to Council. The City Attorney responded that they could talk to an individual council member but not two council members at the same time. The City Manager added that citizens cannot be a conduit and tell a council member what another has said. Mayor Dodd called for a recess at 5:44 p.m. 6. ADJOURN WORKSHOP & CONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Dodd convened the Regular City Council meeting at 6:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Hill joined the meeting at this point. AGENDA MODIFJVATIOyS Modcations for a di tons require unanimous vote of City Council Members Mayor Dodd called for a Point of Order in regard to the agenda order. He noted Public Input should be listed before the Consent Agenda. There was no objection to moving up the Public Input portion on the agenda. 8. PROCLAMATIONS. AWARDS BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENTS Presentations of proclamations, icates and awards, and brief timely announcements by Council and Staff. No public input or action under this heading. 20.010 A. Presentation by AouaCulture. LLC — Mike Elfenbein Mr. Elfenbein introduced himself and said has been working with Florida Wildlife Commission, Army Corp of Engineers, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, South Florida Water Management District, and the Dept. of Agriculture to create a pilot project to remove the sludge from the water bodies to improve the water quality throughout Florida. Nyla Pipes, One Florida Foundation, said she has seen a lot of different projects and concepts to get the water problems under control; and, Mr. Elfebein's process has the potential to address a number of problems the east coast of Florida is now facing. Nick Szabo, CEO of AguaCulture, I.I.C. presented a PowerPoint presentation showing how they would like to bring agriculture back to forefront as part of the water body solution. (See attached) He said the major benefits of the system are that it's sustainable, viable, green, repurposing a waste (creating a fertilizer), reduces chemical use, and the by-product will be a cleaner water. Vice Mayor Hill said he would love to see their process implemented in Sebastian; it would be a game changer if the nutrient output was minimized even more. Mayor Dodd said he watched AguaCulture's presentation at the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council meeting and he would love to see the Hardee Park Lake addressed. He Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 3 noted the consent agenda has a resolution of support for AguaCulture's Okeechobee test project. Vice Mayor Hill asked if the Community Development Manager received a phone call to pull item 9b off the agenda. She replied that she did. The City Attorney advised that since the hearing was advertised, it should be opened and announced that there has been an update for the record. Brief Announcements City of Sebastian Annual Christmas Parade — December 11 at 6:30 pm Vice Mayor Hill announced that the parade would departing Main Street at 6:30 pm, there are over 35 commitments with the Marching Sharks participating for the first time ever. He said it wasn't too late to be in the parade and more information could be obtained from the Chamber of Commerce. He also thanked Tony from the Sebastian Lions Club, the Chamber of Commerce, staff, and Police Chief Acosta for making the parade happen. Mayor Dodd said for those that didn't want to come out, the parade would be broadcasted by the City's MIS Division and the Sebastian Daily, Mayor Dodd remarked that the Sebastian River Chamber of Commerce's Light Up Night was a huge success and thanked the businesses that participated. 9 RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A. MOTION by Council Member McPartlan and SECOND by Vice Mayor Hill to approve the June 24, 2020 Board of Adjustment Minutes passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 B. Quasi -Judicial Public Hearinas i. CHRISTOPHER LAWHON, IN REGARDS TO LOT 16, BLOCK 493, SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS UNIT 15, LOCATED AT 242 DICKENS AVENUE, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 280 SF SHED TO BE TWO (2) FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND WITHIN A DEDICATED UTILITY EASEMENT, WHEREAS THE CODE REQUIRES THE STRUCTURE TO BE TEN (10) FEET FROM THE SIDE YARD PROPERTY LANE IN THE RS-10 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY) ZONING DISTRICT. (Transmittal, Report, Exhibits, Application, Signatures) Chairman Dodd opened the public hearing at 6:25 p.m. and the Community Development Manager read an e-mail from the applicant stating that he wanted to withdraw his application. (See attached) ii. CHRISTIAN ELLIS, IN REGARDS TO LOT 20, BLOCK 231, SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS UNIT 6, LOCATED AT 702 CARNATION DRIVE, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A FENCE SIX (6) FEET IN HEIGHT ON A CORNER LOT WITHIN THE SECONDARY FRONT YARD AREA, SPECIFICALLY ELEVEN AND ONE-HALF (11.5) FEET FROM THE CORNER PROPERTY LINE, WHEREAS THE CODE WOULD REQUIRE SUCH FENCE TO BE TWENTY (20) FEET FROM THE CORNER PROPERTY LINE. (Transmittal, Report, Exhibits, Application, Signatures) Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 4 The City Attorney read Mr. Ellis' request and Chairman Dodd opened the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. The board members did not have any ex parte communication to disclose. The City Clerk swore in all would be providing testimony. Mr. Ellis introduced himself and thanked the board for hearing his request. The Community Development Planner said the applicant has a home on a corner lot and is seeking relief from the Code to construct a fence within the front yard setback to clear the existing septic drain field. There was no one to speak in opposition or favor of the request. MOTION by Mr. Nunn and SECOND by Vice Chairman Hill to approve Mr. Ellis' request to construct a six feet high fence within the secondary front year area. Roll call: Vice Chairman Hill - aye Mr. Jones -aye Mr. McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn -aye Chairman Dodd -aye Motion carried. 5-0 10. ADJOURN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND CONVENE THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING A. MOTION by Vice Chairman Hill and SECOND by Mr. Nunn to approve the September 28, 2020 CRA meeting minutes passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 20.135 B. Award Bid ITB#21-02) Landscapino Maintenance in the CRA District to SSS Brevard OPCO LLC dba Trogrcal Property Management with an Annual Exoense of $171.684 (Transmittal. Bid Tab. Ex. A. Reference Checks. Soecs) The City Manager explained that Tropical Property Manager was the only bid response for the CRA district and they were willing to combine the maintenance of U.S. Highway 1 into one bid. He requested approval of the annual contract. MOTION by Vice Chairman Hill and SECOND by Mr. McPartlan to approve the annual landscaping maintenance contract with Tropical Property Management for the CRA district and the U.S. Highway 1 Corridor. Roll call: Mr. Jones - aye Mr. McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Chairman Dodd - aye Vice Chairman Hill - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Sunshine Law 8 Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 5 11. ADJOURN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AND RECONVENE THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUBLIC INPUT (moved up under agenda modifications) Zoom Participation Robert Stephen, 150 Concha Drive, thanked Council for the Sunshine Law workshop. He said the City jumped the gun on controlling the canal vegetation because the subcommittee didn't finish the Stormwater Integrated Pest Management Plan. Phone number starting with 916 was not able to connect. Denise Harlan said businesses and employees should be able to make their own decisions regarding the wearing of masks. 12. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes — November 18, 2020 Regular City Council Meeting 20.010 B. Resolution No. R-20-33 — Expressing Support for an Innovative Pilot Project by AguaCulture, LLC (Transmittal, R-20-33) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING AN INNOVATIVE PILOT PROJECT BY AGUACULTURE, LLC TO REMOVE INVASIVE AQUATIC VEGETATION AND UNCONSOLIDATED SLUDGE FROM LAKE OKEECHOBEE WHICH WILL REDUCE CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 20.010 C. Notification and Ratification Request of Emergency Contract for Ground Application Services from Aquatic Vegetation Control, Inc., using South Florida Water Management District Contract #4600004255 in an Amount Not to Exceed $50,000 (Transmittal, Agreement, Notice, Certificate, Rate Schad., Cover Page, Information) 20.136 D. Approve the Purchase of One (1) 2021 Ford F-350 from Bartow Ford in the Amount of $61,098.30 for the Building Maintenance Division (Transmittal, Quote, Contract, Other Quotes) 20.137 E. Approve the Purchase of One (1) 2021 Ford F-350 from Bartow Ford in the Amount of $33,400.70 for the Traffic Engineering Division (Transmittal, Quote, Contract, Other Quotes) 20.010 F. Approve the Purchase of a Semi -Tractor and Low -boy Trailer in the Total Amount of $165,085.00 for the Stormwater Division (Transmittal, Quotes, Award Info) 20.010 G. Approve the Purchase of a Mulcher Head from Kelly Tractor in the Amount of $38,005.00 for the Stormwater Division (Transmittal, Quote, Award Info) Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 6 20.136 H. Approve Alcoholic Beverages at the Yacht Club for Fantastikids Academy Company Event on December 12, 2020 from 6:00 pm to 10:00 pm - DOB Verified (Transmittal, Application, Receipt) Mayor Dodd asked to pull item C. MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member McPartlan to approve Consent Agenda Items A, B, D, E, F, G, and H. Roll call: Council Member McPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn -aye Mayor Dodd - aye Vice Mayor Hill - aye Council Member Jones - aye Motion carried. 5-0 6:40 pm Item C Mayor Dodd said if they look at the canal system north of Hardee Park Lake, he was concerned that if the City kills the vegetation and it drops to the bottom and becomes muck, would they be creating an adverse action to our action. He requested Council discussion to remove some of the vegetation before they spray. Vice Mayor Hill said the manual harvesting has proven to be non -effective and the City Manager has been ordered to use best management practices whether it is spraying, pulling weeds, or manual harvesting. Mayor Dodd asked if they were creating a problem that is bigger than what they are solving. The City Manager said the majority of what they see floating is in Hardee Park is duckweed; they are hitting the invasives to keep them from expanding. MOTION by Mayor Dodd and SECOND by Vice Mayor Hill to approve Consent Agenda Item C. Council Member Nunn said he wasn't worried about causing any more issues in the areas they are concerned with as it was one of the methods to be used in the best management practices. Public Input Dr. Graham Cox, 1213 George Street, asked what is the emergency that the City has to spray right now. He asked that the stormwater engineer and the contractor meet to discuss rational and noted communication with the public is key. Zoom Participation Bob Stephen, 150 Concha Drive, said the spraying cannot continue and asked the Mayor to read the recent Indian River Lagoon Report Card. He said the operator was spraying willy nilly in the canal earlier in the day. Andrea Coy, Sebastian, said no matter what the City does, people won't be happy. It's not just the City spraying into the water as people have been dumping pool water/lawn runoff/dog fecal matter into the canal. She said when she was on Council, she followed the contracted operator at that time and he was targeting what he needed to do. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 7 Council Member Nunn said the authorization to spray was in no way a slap in the face to the Subcommittee, it was to get moving. He noted Council was happy with IPM land plan and looked forward to waterway plan. He also noted the operator is not using glyphosate. Roll call: Council Member Nunn - aye Mayor Dodd - aye Vice Mayor Hill - aye Council Member Jones - aye Council Member McPartlan - aye Motion carried. 5-0 13. COMMITl'EE REPORT & APpOINTMEN7S City committee repels an Louna''II MMam6ber regional) committee reports. No public Input or action except for City committee member nominations and appointments under this heading. A. Plannina and Zonina Commission (Transmittal, Applications, List, Advertisement) 20.028 i. Interview, Unless Waived, Submit Nominations for One Expired, Regular Member Position — Term to Expire November 1, 2023) MOTION by Mayor Dodd and SECOND by Council Member Jones to reappoint Mr. Hughan to the Planning and Zoning Commission passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 B. Charter Review Committee (Transmittal, Code, Applications, Advertisement) 20.139 1. Council Confirmation of Their Two Appointees Mayor Dodd — Michael Goodfellow, Sharon Herman Vice Mayor Hill — Linda Kinchen, Sherrie Matthews Council Member Jones — Larry Napier, Karen Jordan Council Member MCPartlan — Louise Kautenburg, Beth Mitchell Council Member Nunn — Grace Reed, Patti Sullivan ii. Interview. Unless Waived. Submit Nominations for Five at -Larne Members Dave Newhart, Amber Cards, Bruce Hoffman, John Christino, and Vicki Drumheller were appointed as the five at -large members. 14. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING 20.140 A. Resolution No. R-20-29—Aq�roved the Subdivision Preliminary Development Plan/Plat for Pods 1 & 2 for the Spirit of Sebastian Subdivision P1.ID (Transmittal. R- 20-29. Info. Plans. Minutes) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT FOR PODS 1 & 2 WITHIN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS SPIRIT OF SEBASTIAN, CONSISTING OF 77.99 ACRES, AND 208 LOTS, LOCATED EAST OF SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS UNIT 15, NORTH OF SOUTH MOON UNDER SUBDIVISION, WEST OF OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY, AND SOUTH OF VACANT INDUSTRIAL LAND; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 8 7:12 pm The City Attorney read the title to Resolution No. R-20-29 and Mayor Dodd opened the hearing at 7:05 p.m. Mayor Dodd stated he had conversation with the applicant regarding the presentation. The City Clerk swore in those who were to provide testimony. The Community Development Manager introduced the project and reviewed that the conceptual plan was approved by City Council in 2018 and this preliminary plat approval was the next step of the planned unit development process. If approved, the applicant will work on construction drawings that will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, an environmental analysis would be updated, and the applicant would then apply for a land clearing permit. The permanent reference markers will be inserted into the ground and the final plat will come to City Council for approval. The Community Development Manager said all of the code requirements have been met and available for review in the staff report. She asked that the staff report be included into the record. She also said the plan was presented to the Indian River School District to ensure school capacity. For Pods 1 and 2, she said an impact facilities statement was completed to show that an estimated annual $170,000 would be collected for property taxes at buildout, annual $25,000 for the stormwater fee, and a one-time recreational impact fee of $204,000 would be collected. She said the applicant has requested two adjustments from the Land Development Code which would need to be granted with the approval of the preliminary plat. She said the subdivision is required to have two entrances, one on Del Monte and one on Old Dixie that will be used during construction of Pods 1 and 2, and then it will be an emergency access until Pod 3 is completed which will provide an entrance on Bailey Drive. The second adjustment involves the length of roads that ends in cul-de-sacs which is longer than allowed by Code. The applicant has compensated for the length by providing an access tract for each cul-de-sac that an emergency vehicle can use. She said the City is asking that applicant to continue to work with the County to improve Old Dixie Highway but if that doesn't happen, the City would like to see some bike lanes added on S. Wimbrow Drive, north of CR512 during the construction of Pod 4. She also stated as outlined in the resolution, the City is requiring a license to encroach for the bridge over the canal and developer's agreement for the improvements to Del Monte Road. It will be the first subdivision served by gas lines and to keep homeowner association fees down, this subdivision will be requiring homeowners to maintain the landscaping easements. In response to some residents' concems with the off -site landscaping improvement proposed on Del Monte, the developer has agreed to remove the landscaping but continue with the proposed sidewalk and curb/gutter. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 9 7.31 pm The Community Development Manager said that staff recommends approval, with the conditions listed in the resolution, in addition to the two adjustments. Chuck Mechling, InSite Solutions, introduced himself and his team: Karen Mechling, Ralph Brown, Peter Robinson, Warren Dill, John Blum, Brian Goode, Dr. David Cox, Robin Pulinski, and Jodi Love. Mr. Mechling displayed a PowerPoint presentation, subdivision video, and landscaping slides. (See attached PowerPoint presentation) Vice Mayor Hill asked if the entire sidewalk system needs to be bonded out prior to the approval or is there a time certain prior to the next pod system that the sidewalks need to be constructed. The Community Development Manager responded that as Pod 2 is being built and the developer comes to final plat the next pod, the City would like to have a bond for the lots that don't have houses before the next pod to ensure a continuous sidewalk for the residents in that pod. Mr. Mechling said he was amenable to this, noting they do not want to have gaps in the sidewalks. Mayor Dodd complimented the project's package presented to Council noting it will be a great addition to Sebastian. Council Member Nunn said it will fit very well in the community. Council Member Jones thanked staff and the developer for working with the residents on Del Monte Road. Zoom Particination Andrea Coy, Sebastian, thanked Mr. Mechling and City staff who worked hard on this project. She looked forward to having another fine community developed by Mr. Mechling. Michelle Morris, Sebastian, said Mr. Mechling has been deeply rooted in the community for over 30 years; this is exactly what the community needs and hoped the project was approved. The City Attorney asked that the video and PowerPoint presentation by Mr. Mechling be included into the record. The Community Development Manager requested formal approval with the recommendations listed in the resolution and the two adjustments needed from the Code. MOTION by Vice Mayor Jim Hill and SECOND by Council Member McPartlan to approve Resolution No. R-20-29 with the conditions and recommendations per staff. Roll call: Council Member Nunn - aye Mayor Dodd - aye Vice Mayor Hill - aye Council Member Jones - aye Council Member McPartlan - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 10 The City Attorney clarified that the motion included the staff recommendations and the two adjustments from the Land Development Code. Mayor Dodd called for a recess at 7:41 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. All members were present. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 20.132 A. Consider the Repeal of Resolution R-20-08 and Adoot Resolution No. R-20-32 — Encouraainq the Voluntary Compliance of Wearina Face Coverinas fTransmittal. R- 20-32. Local State of Emeroencv) AN EMERGENCY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REPEALING RESOLUTION r-20-08 IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO ENCOURAGE VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE OF WEARING FACE COVERINGS WHEN IN PUBLIC, REQUIRING ALL PERSONS ENTERING A CITY FACILITY THAT CANNOT MAINTAIN SOCIAL DISTANCING TO WEAR FACE COVERINGS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Attorney read the title of Resolution No. R-20-32 MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member Jones to repeal R-20-08 and adopt R-20-32. Zoom Participants Mike Singer asked if one of the members would acknowledge that Council previously voted not to have a mandate. Mayor Dodd responded if the motion passed as stated, there is no actual mandate, but a strong suggestion that residents wear a mask and there is an agreement that City staff will require a mask if people cannot social distance in the City's Buildings. Vice Mayor Hill said this was simply codification of what Council stated at the last meeting with a 5-0 vote. Mr. Singer said he appreciated their clarifications and said it was concerning that citizens have to rely on a County committee as to what their rights are with what they do or don't do with their body. He said it gives vulnerable, fearful people the impression that they better do it and he suggested that the City make it clear the wearing of masks is voluntary. Mayor Dodd stated there is an agreement that the City Manager can request masks and have your temperature taken while entering City property; it is a matter of public safety. 8:00 pm Ruth Kulvesky, Indian River Freedom Coalition, said the City must cite a statutory exemption to turn away people from public meetings. She put the City on notice that she and the Coalition plans to file liability claims and demand access to the building. Andrea Coy said in listening to the last two speakers, it sounded as if those who have underlying conditions and choose to stay home were fools but science is telling us differently. She asked why they would want to risk her life or someone else's life because Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 11 they think they know better; what is so hard about wearing a mask; be responsible and have respect. Asserting maskless rights is not going to help right now. Stacie Meyer, Sebastian, said inalienable rights cannot be taken by anything; the government wasn't here to micromanage her health or prevent her from breathing unobstructively. 8:12 pm Mayor Dodd noted the two previous speakers participated via Zoom so the City has not violated the open meeting process. Mayor Dodd said for someone that is supposed to look out for the safety and welfare of the citizens, they have made a watered down resolution as they could make, provided support for the City Manager to protect the employees, they aren't doing anything invasive so he did not believe there were any Constitutional issues. Vice Mayor Hill said they are just giving the businesses the right to maintain their properties as they feel they have the right to maintain. The City Attorney said the resolution gives businesses the right to work and operate a business and does not provide for penalties. He reminded everyone that they are still under a federal, state, and local emergency. He said he was asked to look into if they were violating anyone's First or Fifth Amendment Rights. He said he believed establishing policy was well within the City's police power to pass a resolution or ordinance to protect City Hall, City Council members, meetings and citizens in the mist of COVID-19, that's why the City declared the emergency in March which was ruled legal by the judge. The proposed resolution they were about to consider was narrowly tailored to the safety of public and health with the least intrusive means. There are alternative methods for the public to participate in the meeting. The resolution does not include any penalties or fines, nor impede anyone's right to assemble. It is his opinion the proposed resolution does not violate anyone's First or Fifth Amendment Rights. Council Member Nunn said the temperature device used tonight was not the machine used at the last meeting; it does not take a picture which was a concern for some people. He said some believed the Police Department was going to issue citations today and collect money tomorrow which was not the case. He said the City has never had a mask mandate, just a strong suggestion to "please wear a mask." He said they are still asking for people to wear a mask, but it is still their choice. Council Member McPartlan stated they can't win in this situation and asked what happened to common courtesy. He noted in the workshop they discussed that they are allowed to do reasonable rules and enforce them. He said after the first week they passed the resolution he received a -mails that they were issuing death sentences; then, the following week people thanked him for dropping the mandate which they didn't have. He said he would strongly encourage people to wear a mask, it's just common courtesy. Roll call: Mayor Dodd - aye Vice Mayor Hill - aye Council Member Jones - aye Council Member MCPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 12 Motion carded. 5-0 16 PUBLIC INPUT (Moved up on the agenda) 17. NEW BUSINESS 20.064 A. Comprehensive Plan 2040 Presentation — Lisa Frazier. rommynity nP.vedopment Director. CRA Manacer (PPT) 8:27 pm 8:39 pm Mayor Dodd stated this item would be open for public input but this is not to be considered one of the official public hearings required to transmit the revision to the state. The Community Development Director said staff wanted to synthesize all of the information that has gone on for the Comprehensive Plan 2040. She displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See attached) She said when it is transmitted to the state, the state will be notified that the existing plan should be struck in its entirety except for the 2011 Economic Element. She said staff will be looking for a transmittal hearing dale which will give staff 10 business days to incorporate the received public input and transmit the proposed plan to the state. The state will then have 60 days to give the City their Objections, Recommendations, Comments Report. She said the Land Use Element was the most important element because it designates the use of the land which is based on the City's population. She stated there were four proposed changes that staff would like to seek Council's preference, directives in moving forward. Staff would like to see the area near the pickleball court changed to mixed use; the second change is the triangle area to mixed use; and the third is Vickers Land Mine to mixed use. The fourth change is the industrial property off 130'" currently known as Warrior Salvage. She said staff was seeking an option to keep that property compatible with the proposed use. Option one was to create a new land use designation —heavy industrial land use designation or intense industrial use land use designation. The difference is that heavy would be considered the typical uses in an industrial area and staff would add salvage yards. Option two, Intense Land Use would be changed under zoning to allow uses that will have site specific performance standards for that one property. The Community Development Director said at this point, Council could add more performance criteria under intense land use or heavy industrial land use if they so choose. Vice Mayor Hill said he thought at the previous discussion, they were going to designate this piece, because of its location near County, heavy industrial and have a new designation in the City —very site specific to that one property. Mayor Dodd said to do that, they need a land use designation, if they remove salvage yard/ auto warehouse/recycling center, then his fear was that someone will request a salvage yard by the industrial park. The intent was to allow Warrior Salvage to do what they want to. Mayor Dodd said his preference was to separate the land use for that property that allows them to establish what they can do within the land use, separate from all industrial uses. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 13 Council Member Nunn said at the Planning and Zoning Commission, there seemed to be strong aversion to adding a heavy land use, and asked how does this affect this. Mayor Dodd responded that the Commission didn't want to abide by what Council decided. Vice Mayor Hill said if future land is annexed into the City, this heavy designation would be good for us. The City Manager said that entire section off 130' should be heavy industrial or intense because that parcel of land has recycling, cabin manufacturing, boat building, so they aren't spot zoning. The Community Development Director said as a planner, her concern was what are they identifying as heavy; the items in blue on slide 13 have been prohibited from the City because of their potential environmental impact. She wasn't sure what they were looking to allow in heavy that they aren't already allowing in industrial. Vice Mayor Hill said there are intense activities happening around the property that may be included. She briefly described the remaining elements and stated that staff looked forward to bringing a proposed plan that they will approve to transmit to the state. She noted it can be done in one meeting unless there is a lot of discussion. It was the consensus of Council hold the transmittal hearing on January 27. Public Comment Louise Kautenburg, said this was one of the most important plans they will have to consider during their tenure. She said there was one land use change that was brought up that was an incorrect mapping (industrial use next to residential.) She said other Planning and Zoning Commission members didn't see that way because they were caught up in zoning that may be in the future. If they don't have a good rule book, they are going to make mistakes. If the City arbitrarily grants something for someone, they will be asked to do it again. They have an opportunity to make it as good as they think. Mayor Dodd said that property is being recommended as mixed use. Ms. Kautenburg said staff is recommending mixed use but the Commission did not. She was the dissenting vote. Shannon Cook, 130" Street, said he was happy with compromise and he asked if he could further expand his project concurrently during the comprehensive plan process. Warren Dill, representing Dr. Fischer who owns property off 990 Street, commonly known as the Vickers Sand Mine, said there was confusion at Planning and Zoning Commission meeting over the vote. He said Dr. Fischer hoped that Council would accept staffs recommendation for this property. 9:12 pm 20.141 B. First Reading Ordinance No. 0-20-03 — Proposing a Land Development Code Amendment to Section 54-2-5.10(21 Size and Dimension Criteria with Regards to Establishink�Sry tartina Points for Buildin Hei ht Measurement — Set Public Hearing, and Second Reading for Janua13. A21 Transmittal. 0-20-03. Sec. 26-1. Ex. A. Minutes) Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 54-2-5.10(2), SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA, REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF STARTING POINTS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Attorney read the title to Ordinance No. 0-20-03. The Community Development Manager explained this was an update to the Land Development Code, to coincide with the 2017 adjustment to the Florida Building Codes, that if in a special flood zone, the finished floor must be raised 12 inches above the established base flood elevation as well as additional requirements for properties in the V Zone. She said the City has been approached by contractors who want to build on riverfront who are losing height because of the City's starting point. She said staff wanted to adjust the building height measurement and noted the version included in their backup shows how the building height is currently measured. She requested passage on first reading with the public hearing to be held January 13, 2021. MOTION by Council Member McPartlan and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to approve Ordinance No. 0-20-03 on first reading and set the public hearing for January 13, 2021 passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 20.142 C. Resolution No. R-20-34 — City Council Meetina Procedures (Transmittal. R-20-02 with chances. R-20-34) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ESTABLISHING THE DATES AND TIMES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS; REVISING START AND END TIME; ADOPTING ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER; PROVIDING FOR PROCEDURES FOR AGENDA PREPARATION, AGENDA FORMAT, AGENDA MODIFICATIONS, PUBLIC INPUT, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND TRANSCRIPTS; REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. R-20-02; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF RESOLUTIONS OR PARTS OF RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENERS ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 9:17 pm The City Attorney read the title to Resolution No. R-20-34 Mayor Dodd asked how Council feels about modifying public speaking time from five to three minutes. It was noted that no one really abused the five minutes and discussion followed on where to place Public Input on the agenda. It was the consensus of Council to let the public speak on items not listed on the agenda early in the meeting. MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member McPartlan to approve Resolution No. R-20-34 with the noted changes passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 Mayor Dodd noted that the City will continue to use the Zoom technology but they will have to have quorum in person to hold a meeting. Council Member McPartlan asked if the reasonable procedures should be added. The City Attorney said subsection E would cover the establishment of procedures which will be added to future agendas. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 15 There was no public input. MOTION by Council Member McPartlan and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to continue the Council meeting until 10:00 p.m. passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 20.143 D. Resolution No. R-20-35 — City Council and City( Boards Procedures for Quasi - Judicial Headnas (Transmittal. R-99-12. R-20-35. Memo) 9:30 pm A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. R-99-12, AND REESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS; DETERMINING APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Attorney read the title to Resolution No. R-20-35. MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member McPartlan to approve Resolution No. R-20-25 passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 There was no public input. 20.144 E. Review and Approve 2021 Leoislative Session Priorities (Transmittal. List) The City Manager stated their priorities would need to be provided to Senator Mayfield and Representative Grail by January 9' for the upcoming delegation meeting. A unanimous voice vole was taken to move up the Septic to Sewer Conversions and Water Management on the list as the top priorities for the next legislative session. 18. CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS 20.020 A. Pelican Island Audubon Society. Graham Cox. and Donna Halleran v. City of Sebastian Joint Stipulation and Order The City Attomey, to be open and transparent, described the order and the letter to the Graves Brothers, stating the amount of $26,183 was paid in full on October 19, 2020 and the transcripts of the three closed sessions were available for public inspection. 20.020 B. October 26. 2020 Demand Letter to Graves Brothers The City Attorney said he worked with outside counsel to draft the October 26, 2020 memo to demand full payment from the Graves Brothers in the amount of $26,183 for attorney's fees and $42,703.13 for outside counsel. He stated the matter was still in negotiations with the City Manager. Council Member McPartlan said there was a newspaper article alluding that there was a back room deal and Council violated the Sunshine Law. The City Attorney said the meeting was about a strategic settlement, no official vote was taken, and everything has been made public. Sunshine Law & Public Records Workshop, BOA, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting December 9, 2020 Page 16 Mayor Dodd stated the conversation was how to unwind the contract since the court ruled against the City which included payments to the outside counsel; there were no back door deals being made. 19. CITY MANAGER MATTERS The City Manager wished everyone a Merry Christmas and invited all out to the parade. 20. CITY CLERK MATTERS - None 21. CITY COUNCIL MATTERS A. Council Member McPartlan wished everyone a Merry Christmas and remarked that this will be the happiest of a new year to kick away year 2020. B. Council Member Nunn thanked everybody for the things they do to keep the City going. He wished everyone a Merry Christmas. C. Mayor Dodd 20.145 i. Veterans Council of Indian River Countv (Letter) Mayor Dodd said the Veterans Council has invited a Council Member to join their meetings once a month. Council Member McPartlan offered to attend the meetings. Mayor Dodd wished everybody a Merry Christmas and invited the public out to the parade. D. Vice Mayor Hill wished everyone a Merry Christmas and he looked forward to seeing everyone at the parade. E. Council Member Jones wished everyone a Merry Christmas and join them at the parade. 22. Being no further business, Mayor Dodd adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 9:44 p.m. Approved at the January 13, 2021 Regular City Council meeting. Mayor Ed o Edo ATTEST (///I� 1iQ{�Am� — — J nerre Willlems, MMC—Clty Clerk C!* Florida Government in the Sunshine 11� W December 9, 2020 Prepared by the Office of the City Attorney City of Sebastian Topics for Review • Florida Government in the Sunshine: Open Meetings • Public Records • Quasi-judicial Review HOME OF P �. What is the Sunshine Law? • The Government in the Sunshine law is such an important part of Florida law that it is constitutionally guaranteed at Article I, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution. • Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law, also called the }O.Pen Meeting law, provides a governmental proceedings. Open Meetings Re irements: Florida Sta to 286.011 (1) & (2) Three Simple Requirements: 1. Meetings of public boards, councils and commissions must be open to the public; 2. Reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and 3. Minutes of the meetings must be taken. 4 n N C: �E.2 �U � fa U) C: (n(1) Z) 41 1 150 a-+ = U Q) -+� E _ Cn E� 0 m C� Ln Q) Ouujs,_M 4J 0L0V++O i0��-V� ._ - a--J Q)- N�0 � E mE:E Q= ��� M�'c�n .— 0 \Did Who is covered ,,der the law? • Councils, boards and commissions of state agencies, counties, municipal corporations and political subdivisions • Elected or appointed boards or commissions. I • Private companies doing business 1 on behalf of a government agency. • One person acting on behalf of a board or commission, or acting as liaison between board members, or acting in the place of the board or its members at their direction. Does the Open Meetings law apply to members - elect? Yes. Members -elect of public councils, boards and commissions are covered by the Sunshine Law immediately upon their election to public office. Can two members of the same public board socialize? Yes. Two members of the same board' may socialize, but they may not discuss matters which may come before the board. Be careful to avoid the annearance of impropriety. e Open Meetings Sanctions • An unintentional violation: non -criminal infraction punishable by a fine up to $500.00. F.S. 286.011 (3) (a) • A knowing violation: 2nd degree misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $500.00 and/or a jail term of not more than 60 days. F.S. 286.011 (3 (b). • Suspension or removal from office • Attorneys fees and court costs C7* ida's Public Records Law: Chapter 119, Florida Statute Florida's Constituti guarantees the access to Government in Article I, 24(a) Records Section 10 What is a public record? . They are not limited to traditional written documents. Tapes, photographs, films, emails and sound recordings are all considered public records subject to inspection unless a statutory exemption exists. F.S. 119.011(12) . The Florida Supreme Court has determined that public records are all materials made or received by an agency in connection with official business which are used to erpetuate co formalize knowled / hiss., Inc., 379 So.2d 633, 640 (Fla. 1980). What about emails? An email sent to or from a worK or nome computer is a public record if it is prepared or received in connection with official City business and if there no exemption from the Public Record is law. • The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that rp ivate email does not automatically M-1-T, 1111 a JIM record just because it is stored in a government computer. To be considered a public record, such email must meet the definition. 12 How long do public records have to be retained by the local government? The state Bureau of Archives and Records Management publishes a retention schedule. Our City Clerk's office oversees the retention of all City records. Please provide copies of all public records to the City Clerk. Summary of Open Meetings Law and Public Records Law • Open Meetings Law: No interaction with another member of your same council, board or commission except during an advertised public meetina where minutes a d • Public Records Law: Council, board and commission members must not dispose of any materials made or received that relate to Cit business. Instead, all such publi s4TuuRue provided to the City Clerk for retention pursuant to state requirements. • WHEN IN DOUBT, CONTACT THE CLERK'S OFFICE OR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITH ANY QUESTIONS. 14 Quasi -Judicial Review Procedure diiL3 . In 1995 the Florida Supreme Court changed the way local governments review and process land use decisions and other decisions that apply adopted policy. This court decision dramatically changed your jobs as decision -makers, placing you in the role of a 'u� pe when deciding quasi-judicial . This change in the law applies to quasi- judicial hearings before the City Council, the Board of Adjustment, the Code Enforcement Board, and the Planning and Zoning Board. What is the difference between quasi-judicial and legislative actions? • Decisions that set general policy rather than implement or apply policy are legislative. • Decisions that implement or apply an adopted policy are quasi-judicial. • Examples of quasi-judicial matters: re - zonings, conditional Use, Special Use, site plan approvals, development plan approvals, appeals of administrative decisions, code enforcement proceedings and variances. Sec. 54-1-2. 1 -Procedures for legislative and quasi judicial actions. So why does it matter? It matters because in a quasi-judicial hearing is where decisions implementing an adopted policy are considered: • You are acting in a quasi-judicial role, similar to a judge in a courtroom. • The decision you reach must be supported by competent substantial evidence. • You must apply the applicable law to the facts and evidence presented in the hearing. • Quasi-judicial hearings require that due ■ process be afforded. • Ex-parte communications should be avoided. 17 What does all of that jargon mean?? Competent Substantial Evidence: When a decision is quasi-judicial, the decision must be supported by competent substantial evidence. The Florida Supreme Court definition is: "The evidence... that is sufficiently relevant and material that a reasonable mind would accept it as adequate to support the conclusion reached." • Relevant • Material • Reasonable Some examples of competent substantial evidence exactly • Professional planning staff and Plannin and Zoning Board opinionycomments where there are facts in the record to support those opinions. • Professional expert opinion supported by facts the expert knows or has 71 reviewed. • Non-professional lay -person opinion that is fact -based on issues that are not highly technical or scientific. 19 What is NOT competent substantial evidence? a • Mere statements/opinions of public suppo`I L or opposition. • Attorney argument unless the attorney establishes on the record additional educational background or employment experience in the field at issue. • "Expert" testimony from non -staff professionals who do not state on the record the education or experience they are claiming to have. . Letters, documented phone calls, emails or petitions where there can be no cross- examination by the parties. 20 Must the Council, Board or Commission make a finding of fact. . Legally, no. The Florida Supreme Court has stated that findings of fact are not required in quasi-judicial proceedings. HOWEVER...... • Practically speaking: record that includes of facts based upon substantial evidence upheld by the courts YES! A hearing a coherent finding competent tends to be on appeal. 21 What is the recommendation about findings of fact by the CityC? Attorney's Office? . During the discussion and deliberation portion of the quasi-judicial hearing, the council, board or commission is strongly encouraged to discuss the evidence and testimony presented as it relates to the facts and to the Code or Ordinances criteria, and base a decision upon those specific, stated, factual findings. . Findings of fact should be recited in the motion for inclusion in the order. 22 What is due process and how does it fit in to a quasi-judicial decision? • Due process means following the established rules set up for the enforcement and protection of private rights. • Quasi-judicial hearings meet basic due process requirements if the parties are provided notice, provided an opportunity to be heard, and allowed to present evidence and cross- examine witnesses. We also require swearing -in of those who speak or testify at the hearing. What is an ex-parte communication? • It is a communication made outside of the hearing and off the record. Such a communication makes your final decision subject to a presumption of re'udice. Imagine someone who will be OpplItil M ly before a judge in a court of law talking to the judge about the case before the hearing! • Ex-parte communications include: all forms of communications, investigations, site visits and expert opinions. • Ex-parte communications should be avoided where they are identifiable. Just say no when someone wants to discuss a pending quasi-judicial matter with you outside of the council chambers. It protects you and it protects the proceeding! What happens if there is an ex- parte communication? • Ex-parte communications must be disclosed by the council, committee or board member at the beginning of the quasi-judicial hearing. In this way, an adverse party is provided the opportunity to confront, respond to and/or rebut any such disclosure to prevent the appearance of impropriety. Is there a special way we conduct quasi-judicial proceedings at the City of Vero Beach? Yes. The City Attorney's Office has a Quasi -Judicial Order of Proceeding that the Mayor or Chairman follows to make sure that the strict requirements of a quasi- judicial hearing are met. A copy of the Order of Proceeding is provided to you at the hearing. Resolution No. R-99-12/R-20- 35- Summary of Quasi-judicial ME hugs • Decisions that apply an adopted policy are quasi- judicial. • In a quasi-judicial hearing, elected and appointed officials act as "judges." • The decision you reach must be supported by competent substantial evidence, the applicable law must be followed, and due process must be afforded. • Ex-parte communications should be avoided, and if they occur, should be disclosed on the record. Open Government - Frequently Asked questions littD://www.mvflsunshine.com/DaRes.nsf/Mai n/321B47083DBGC4CDSS25791B006A54E3#5 The following questions and answers are intended to be used as a reference only — interested parties should refer to the Florida Statutes and applicable case low before drawing legal conclusions. . What is the Sunshine Law? Florida's Government -in -the -Sunshine law provides a right of access to governmental proceedings at both the state and local levels. It applies to any gathering of two or more members of the same board to discuss some matter which will foresee ably come before that board for action. There is also a constitutionally guaranteed right of access. Virtually all state and local collegial public bodies are covered by the open meetings requirements with the exception of thejudiciary and the state Legislature which has its own constitutional provision relating to access. • What are the requirements of the Sunshine law? The Sunshine law requires that 1) meetings of boards or commissions must be open to the public; 2) reasonable notice of such meetings must be given, and 3) minutes of the meeting must be taken. • What agencies are covered under the Sunshine Law? The Government -in -the -Sunshine Law applies to "any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision." Thus, it applies to public collegial bodies within the state at both the local as well as state level. It applies equally to elected or appointed boards or commissions. • Are federal agencies covered by the Sunshine law? Federal agencies operating in the state do not come under Florida's Sunshine law. • Does the Sunshine law apply to the Legislature? Florida's Constitution provides that meetings of the Legislature be open and noticed except those specifically exempted by the Legislature or specifically closed by the Constitution. Each house is responsible through its rules of procedures for interpreting, implementing and enforcing these provisions. Information on the rules governing openness in the Legislature can be obtained from the respective houses. • Does the Sunshine Law apply to members -elect? Members -elect of public boards or commissions are covered by the Sunshine law immediately upon their election to public off ice. • What qualifies as a meeting? The Sunshine law applies to all discussions or deliberations as well as the formal action taken by a board or commission. The law, in essence, is applicable to any gathering, whether formal or casual, of two or more members of the same board or commission to discuss some matter on which foreseeable action will betaken by the public board or commission. There is no requirement that a quorum be present for a meeting to be covered under the law. • Cana public agency hold closed meetings? There area limited number of exemptions which would allow a public agency to close a meeting. These include, but are not limited to, certain discussions with the board's attorney over pending litigation and portions of collective bargaining sessions. In addition, specific portions of meetings of some agencies (usually state agencies) may be closed when those agencies are making probable cause determinations or considering confidential records. • Does the law require that a public meeting be audio taped? There is no requirement under the Sunshine law that tape recordings be made by a public board or commission, but if they are made, they become public records. • Can a city restrict a citizen's right to speak at a meeting? Public agencies are allowed to adopt reasonable rules and regulations which ensure the orderly conduct of a public meeting and which require orderly behavior on the part of the public attending. This includes limiting the amount of time an individual can speak and, when a large number of people attend and wish to speak, requesting that a representative of each side of the issue speak rather than every one present. • As a private citizen, can I videotape a public meeting? A public board may not prohibit a citizen from videotaping a public meeting through the use of nondisruptive video recording devices. • Can a board vote by secret ballot? The Sunshine law requires that meetings of public boards or commissions be "open to the public at all times." Thus, use of preassigned numbers, codes or secret ballots would violate the law. • Can two members of a public board attend social functions together? Members of a public board are not prohibited under the Sunshine law from meeting together socially, provided that matters which may come before the board are not discussed at such gatherings. • What is a public record? The Florida Supreme Court has determined that public records are all materials made or received by an agency in connection with official business which are used to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge. They are not limited to traditional written documents. Tapes, photographs, films and sound recordings are also considered public records subject to inspection unless a statutory exemption exists. • Can I request public documents over the telephone and do I have to tell why I want them? Nothing in the public records law requires that a request for public records be in writing or in person, although Individuals may wish to make their request in writing to ensure they have an accurate record of what they requested. Unless otherwise exempted, a custodian of public records must honor a request for records, whether it is made in person, over the telephone, or in writing, provided the required fees are paid. In addition, nothing in the law requires the requestor to disclose the reason for the request. • How much can an agency charge for public documents? The law provides that the custodian shall furnish a copy of public records upon payment of the fee prescribed by law. If no fee is prescribed, an agency is normally allowed to charge up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for copies that are 14" x g 1/2" or less. A charge of up to $1 per copy may be assessed for a certified copy of a public record. If the nature and volume of the records to be copied requires extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance, or both, the agency may charge a reasonable service charge based on the actual cost incurred. • Does an agency have to explain why It denies access to public records? A custodian of a public record who contends that the record or part of a record is exempt from inspection must state the basis for that exemption, including the statutory citation. Additionally, when asked, the custodian must state in writing the reasons for concluding the record is exempt. • When does a document sent to a public agency become a public document? As soon as a document is received by a public agency, it becomes a public record, unless there is a legislatively created exemption which makes it confidential and not subject to disclosure. • Are public employee personnel records considered public records? The rule on personnel records is the same as for other public documents ... unless the Legislature has specifically exempted an agency's personnel records or authorized the agency to adopt rules limiting public access to the records, personnel records are open to public inspection. There are, however, numerous statutory exemptions that apply to personnel records. • Can an agency refuse to allow public records to be Inspected or copied if requested to do so by the maker or sender of the documents? No. To allow the maker or sender of documents to dictate the circumstances under which documents are deemed confidential would permit private parties instead of the Legislature to determine which public records are public and which are not. • Are arrest records public documents? Arrest reports prepared by a law enforcement agency after the arrest of a subject are generally considered to be open for public inspection. At the same time, however, certain Information such as the identity of a sexual battery victim is exempt. • Is an agency required to give out information from public records or produce public records in a particular form as requested by an individual? The Sunshine Law provides for a right of access to inspect and copy existing public records. It does not mandate that the custodian give out information from the records nor does it mandate that an agency create new records to accommodate a request for information. • What agency can prosecute violators? The local state attorney has the statutory authority to prosecute alleged criminal violations of the open meetings and public records law. Certain civil remedies are also available. • What is the difference between the Sunshine Amendment and the Sunshine Law? The Sunshine Amendment was added to Florida's Constitution in 1976 and provides for full and public disclosure of the financial interests of all public officers, candidates and employees. The Sunshine Law provides for open meetings for governmental boards • How can I find out more about the open meetings and public records laws? Probably the most comprehensive guide to understanding the requirements and exemptions to Florida's open government laws is the Government -in -the -Sunshine manual compiled by the Attorney General's Office. The manual is updated each year and is available for purchase through the First Amendment Foundation in Tallahassee. For information on obtaining a copy, contact the First Amendment Foundation at (8S0) 224-4555. 286.011 Public meetings and records; public inspection; criminal and civil penalties (1) All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, including meetings with or attended by any person elected to such board or commission, but who has not yet taken office, at which official acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and no resolution, rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such meeting. The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all such meetings. (2) The minutes of a meeting of any such board or commission of any such state agency or authority shall be promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to public inspection. The circuit courts of this state shall have jurisdiction to issue injunctions to enforce the purposes of this section upon application by any citizen of this state. (3)(a) Any public officer who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable by fine not exceeding $500. (b) Any person who is a member of aboard or commission or of any state agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision who knowingly violates the provisions of this section by attending a meeting not held in accordance with the provisions hereof is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775082 or s. 775.083. (c) Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing violation of this section is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775082 or S. 775083. (4) Whenever an action has been filed against any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision to enforce the provisions of this section or to invalidate the actions of any such board, commission, agency, or authority, which action was taken in violation of this section, and the court determines that the defendant or defendants to such action acted in violation of this section, the court shall assess a reasonable attorney's fee against such agency, and may assess a reasonable attorneys fee against the individual filing such an action if the court finds it was filed in bad faith or was frivolous. Any fees so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of such board or commission; provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed against the individual member or members of the board or commission. However, this subsection shall not apply to a state attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or any officer charged with enforcing the provisions of this section. (5) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision appeals any court order which has found said board, commission, agency, or authority to have violated this section, and such order is affirmed, the court shall assess a reasonable attorneys fee for the appeal against such board, commission, agency, or authority. Any fees so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of such board or commission; provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed against the individual member or members of the board or commission. (6) All persons subject to subsection (1) are prohibited from holding meetings at any facility or location which discriminates on the basis of sex, age, race, creed, color, origin, or economic status or which operates In such a manner as to unreasonably restrict public access to such a facility. (7) Whenever any member of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision is charged with a violation of this section and Is subsequently acquitted, the board or commission is authorized to reimburse said member for any portion of his or her reasonable attorney's fees. (8) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, and the chief administrative or executive officer of the governmental entity, may meet in private with the entity's attorney to discuss pending litigation to which the entity is presently a party before a court or administrative agency, provided that the following conditions are met: (a) The entity's attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or she desires advice concerning the litigation. (b) The subject matter of the meeting shall be confined to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures. (c) The entire session shall be recorded by a certified court reporter. The reporter shall record the times of commencement and termination of the session, all discussion and proceedings, the names of all persons present at any time, and the names of all persons speaking. No portion of the session shall be off the record. The court reporters notes shall be fully transcribed and filed with the entity's clerk within a reasonable time after the meeting. (d) The entity shall give reasonable public notice of the time and date of the attorney -client session and the names of persons who will be attending the session. The session shall commence at an open meeting at which the persons chairing the meeting shall announce the commencement and estimated length of the attorney -client session and the names of the persons attending. At the conclusion of the attorney -client session, the meeting shall be reopened, and the person chairing the meeting shall announce the termination of the session. (e) The transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of the litigation. History.—s. 1, ch. 67.356; s. 159, ch. 71-136; s. 1, ch. 78-365; s. 6, ch. 85-301; s. 33, ch. 91-224; s. 1, ch. 93-232; s. 210, ch. 95-148; s. 1, ch. 95-353; s. 2, ch. 2012-25. 286.0115 Access to local public officials; quasi-judicial proceedings on local government land use matters.— (1)(a) A county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution removing the presumption of prejudice from ex parte communications with local public officials by establishing a process to disclose ex parte communications with such officials pursuant to this subsection or by adopting an aiternative process for such disclosure. However, this subsection does not require a county or municipality to adopt any ordinance or resolution establishing a disclosure process. (b) As used in this subsection, the term "local public official" means any elected or appointed public official holding a county or municipal office who recommends or takes quasi-judicial action as a member of aboard or commission. The term does not Include a member of the board or commission of any state agency or authority. (c) Any person not otherwise prohibited by statute, charter provision, or ordinance may discuss with any local public official the merits of any matter on which action may be taken by any board or commission on which the ]on[ public official is a member. If adopted by county or municipal ordinance or resolution, adherence to the following procedures shall remove the presumption of prejudice arising from ex parte communications with local public officials. 1. The substance of any ex pa rte communication with a local public official which relates to quasi- judicial action pending before the official is not presumed prejudicial to the action if the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the record before final action on the matter. 2. A local public official may read a written communication from any person. However, a written communication that relates to quasi-judicial action pending before a local public official shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action, and such written communication shall be made a part of the record before final action on the matter. 3. Local public officials may conduct investigations and site visits and may receive expert opinions regarding quasi-judicial action pending before them. Such activities shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action if the existence of the investigation, site visit, or expert opinion is made a part of the record before final action on the matter. 4. Disclosure made pursuant to subparagraphs 1., 2., and 3. must be made before or during the public meeting at which a vote is taken on such matters, so that persons who have opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. This subsection does not subject local public officials to part III of chapter 112 for not complying with this paragraph. (2)(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), a county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution establishing the procedures and provisions of this subsection for quasi-judicial proceedings on local government land use matters. The ordinance or resolution shall provide procedures and provisions identical to this subsection. However, this subsection does not require a county or municipality to adopt such an ordinance or resolution. (b) Ina quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person who appears before the decisionmaking body who is not a party or party -intervenor shall be allowed to testify before the decisionmaking body, subject to control by the decisionmaking body, and may be requested to respond to questions from the decisionmaking body, but need not be sworn as a witness, is not required to be subject to cross-ewmination, and is not required to be qualified as an expert witness. The decisionmaking body shall assign weight and credibility to such testimony as it deems appropriate. A party or party -intervenor in a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, upon request by another parry or party -Intervenor, shall be sworn as a witness, shall be subject to cross-examination by other parties or party -intervenors, and shall be required to be qualified as an expert witness, as appropriate. (c) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person may not be precluded from communicating directly with a member of the decisionmaking body by application of ex parte communication prohibitions. Disclosure of such communications by a member of the decisionmaking body is not required, and such nondisclosure shall nut be presumed prejudicial to the decision of the decisionmaking body. All decisions of the decisionmaking body in a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters must be supported by substantial, competent evidence in the record pertinent to the proceeding, irrespective of such communications. (3) This section does not restrict the authority of any board or commission to establish Mies or procedures governing public hearings or contacts with local public officials. History.—s. 1, ch. 95-352; s. 31, ch. 96-324. Manny Anon, Jr City Aaomey HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND 1225 Main Street I Sebastian, Fbnda 32958 Tel. (T72) 3BB-8201 I email: manon@cityohebastien.org To: City of Sebastian Council Member and Appointed Board Members From: Manny Anon, Jr., City Attorney Date: December 9, 2020 Subject Quasi -Judicial Hearings This Memorandum is intended to provide Board Members with an explanation of quasi-judicial hearings. If you have any questions, or would like to discuss quasi-judicial matters in more detail individually, please contact me directly to schedule a meeting. 1. Why Do We Have Procedures? Quasi-judicial procedures are designed to provide notice and guidance to all parties (and the public) who appear before the City Council or other City Boards (like the Planning and Zoning Board), that meetings wherein quasi-judicial decisions are required will be governed by predictable and consistent rules. This ensures that all parties and interested persons are given an opportunity to be heard in an equitable and efficient manner. 2. Overview of Quasi -Judicial Hearings At a Quasi -Judicial Hearing, the Board, acting like a judge. am ies existine oolicv or law to a set of facts to determine the outcome. For example, at a quasi-judicial hearing on a variance application, the Board should apply the City's current policy or code on variances to the specific variance application at issue and determine whether the application meets the requirements outlined in the existing variance policy or code. Notably, in a Quasi -Judicial Hearing, the question is whether the application at issue complies with existing requirements, not whether the Board likes the project proposed in the application. Members of the Board must go into the quasi-judicial hearing with an open mind and base their decisions on the comoetent substantial evidence and the law nresented at the hearine. 3. Due Process Generally, a party to a Quasi -Judicial Hearing should be provided procedural due process, which consists of I. Provide notice of the hearing; 2. Opportunity to be heard at the hearing; 3. Present evidence at the hearing; and 4. Opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. The breadth of procedural due process varies depending on the nature of the proceeding and interests involved. Quasi-judicial hearings require procedural due process; however, the procedural due process requirements for a quasi-judicial hearing are less stringent than a judicial hearing. Manny Anon, Jr., City Attorney Re: Quasi -Judicial Hearings 09 December 20M Page 2 of 4 4. Competent Substantial Evidence In deciding whether the application does or does not meet the standards, the Board must base its decision on what is known as "rompetent substantial evidence." Substantial evidence is such evidence that a fact at issue can reasonably be inferred from. Competent evidence means legally sufficient evidence. In a Quasi -Judicial hearing, the applicant has the initial burden to prove that its application meets the applicable standards by competent substantial evidence. If the applicant meets its initial burden, the burden shifts to those opposing the application to provide competent substantial evidence that the application does not meet the standards. In any instance, the Board's ultimate decision must be su000rted by competent substantial evidence presented at the ouasi- iudicial hearing. Competent substantial evidence should be based in fact, be reliable and tend to Drove a noint such that a reasonable mind would accent it as sufficient to su000rt the conclusion reached. Competent substantial evidence should not be speculative. hvoothetical or coniecture. Instead, it must 6e relevant. material and within [he nurview of knowledge of the witness offering the evidence. Typically, professional planning staff and non -staff professionals' opinions and comments constitute competent substantial evidence. Lay testimony from everyday citizens may be considered competent substantial evidence depending on the circumstances. For example, the opinion of non -experts on a highly technical or scientific matter would probably not constitute competent substantial evidence. However, fact -based testimony from a lay person that does not require scientific or technical expertise likely would. Also, argument of attorneys who represents the parties at the hearings does not constitute evidence. 5. The Law Presented at the Quasi -Judicial Hearing Quasi-judicial proceedings involve the application of established standards, policy or laws to individual facts set forth in an application. For this reason, when deciding a quasi-judicial matter, the Board is restrained to consider the criteria set forth in the applicable Code section at issue. For example, if the Board is considering a variance, it is limited to applying the competent substantial evidence to the factors outlined in section 54-I-2.5 (c) (2) of the Code, which reads as follows: In order to authorize any variance from the terms of this code, the board of adjustment must find the following: a. Existence of special conditions or circumstances. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district. b. Conditions not created by applicant. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Manny Anon, Jr., City Attorney Re: Quasi-judicial Hearings 09 December 2020 Page 3 of 4 c. Special privileees not conferred. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. Hardship conditions exist. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would create unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. Only the minimum variance eranted. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. Not injurious to the nublic welfare or intent of ordinance. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan and this code, and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. g. Conditions and safeguards may be imposed. In granting any variance, the board of adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with chapter 163 F.S., the comprehensive plan, and any ordinance enacted under its authority. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the ordinance. h. rime limit may be imposed. The board of adjustment may prescribe a reasonable time limit during which the applicant shall commence and/or complete the subject actions and conditions approved by the board. i. No use variance nermitted in specified instances. Under no circumstances shall the board of adjustment grant a variance to permit a use not generally permitted in the zoning district involved or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of the ordinance in the zoning district. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district and no permitted use of lands, structures, or buildings; in other zoning districts shall be considered grounds for the authorization of a variance. See Section 54-1-2.1 General Procedure for legislative and Quasi -Judicial Action attached as Exhibit "A". A Board decision based on a factor not specifically outlined in section 54-1-2.5 (c) (2) would be improper. 6. Ex Parte Communications An ex parte communication is any communication, oral or written, between members serving on the Board and the public, other than those made on the record at the public hearing. Pursuant to section 286.0115(I)(a), "a county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution removing the presumption of prejudice from ex parte communications with local public officials by establishing a process to disclose ex parte communications with such officials pursuant to this subsection or by adopting an alternative process for such disclosure." See Section 286.0115, Florida Statue attached as Exhibit'B". LAW 286.01 15 (c), "if adopted by Manny Anon, Jr., City Attorney Re: Quasi -Judicial Hearings 09 December 2020 Page 4 of 4 county or municipal ordinance or resolution, adherence to the following procedures shall remove the presumption of prejudice arising from as forte communications with local public officials. a. The substance of any ex pane communication with a local public official which relates to quasi-judicial action pending before the official is not presumed prejudicial to the action if the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the record before final action on the matter. b. A local public official may read a written communication from any person. However, a written communication that relates to quasi-judicial action pending before a local public official shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action, and such written communication shall be made a part of the record before final action on the matter. c. Local public officials may conduct investigations and site visits and may receive expert opinions regarding quasi-judicial action pending before them. Such activities shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action if the existence of the investigation, site visit, or expert opinion is made a part of the record before final action on the matter. d. Disclosure made pursuant to subparagraphs a., b., and c. must be made before or during the public meeting at which a vote is taken on such matters, so that persons who have opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. 7. City Ordinance on Quasi -Judicial Procedures The City, through Resolution 99-12, has adopted Procedures for Quasi -Judicial Proceedings. Please familiarize yourself with this Resolution, which is attached to this Memorandum as Exhibit "C". Notably, the Resolution provides the following guidelines for the order of presentation of quasi-judicial matters: a. After the Mayor opens the Hearing; b. City Council Members disclose ex-parte communication; c. City Attorney reads resolution title; d. The Applicant will make its presentation; e. Staff presents finding, analysis and recommendations; f. Council asks questions of applicant and staff; g. Mayor opens the floor for anyone in favor of the request; It. Mayor opens the floor for anyone against the request; i. Applicant provided opportunity to respond to issues raised by staff or public; j. City Council deliberation and questions; k. Mayor calls for a motion; I. City Council action. Sec. 54-1-2.1. - General procedure for legislative and quasi-judicial actions. The general procedures for review of legislative and quasi-judicial rulings as explained below shall be established by resolution of the city council. (a) Classification of legislative and quasi-judicial rulings. The following table "Classification of Legislative and Quasi -Judicial Rulings" defines the nature of city rulings affecting land use, planning and zoning. CLASSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE AND QUASI-JUDICIAL RULINGS (1) TYPE OF RULING LEGISLATIVE (Creates Uniform Policy) QUASI-JUDICIAL (Effectuates or Applies Adopted Policy) Comprehensive Plan Adoption ;check; (Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan ;check; l Change in Future Land Use Map Designation ;check;. Adoption of Land Development Code ;check; Amendment of Land Development Code ;check; IGeneric Change in Zoning Districts ;check; ;check; ;check; ;check; ;check; ;check; ;check; ;check; Rezoning for a SpeciRc Slte Conditional Use Special Use Planned Unit Development Variance Subdivision Plat Approval Site or Site plan Approval Appeal of Administrative Decisions Vesting Determination check; Concurrency Management Determination ;check; Removal Permit Sign Permit Building Permit Footnote (1): Current as of the effective date of this ordinance. This table shall automatically be revised to conform to changes In the laws affecting legislative and quasi-judicial decisions of local governments in Florida. (b) Legislative or quasi -legislative actions and proceedings. Legislative or quasi -legislative actions result in formulation of a general public rule or policy that is uniformly applicable to a large area or a large number of individuals, interests, or activities. Sec. 54-3-2.6. -City council's role. (a) Legislative intent. The legislative Intent of the land development code is to provide the city council of the City of Sebastian regulatory powers necessary to implement the comprehensive plan consistent with enabling legislation of chapter 163, F.S. (b) Powers and duties of the city council. (1) Enact or amend land development code. The city council shall adopt a land development code consistent with section 163.3202, F.S. Following receipt of a written report from the city planning and zoning commission, the city council may amend or supplement the regulations and districts fixed by the adopted city land development code. The city council shall hold a public hearing on such matters, as required by Florida Statutes, if any change is to be considered, and shall act on the proposed change after such hearing. In cases where the recommendation of the city planning and zoning commission is adverse to the proposed change, such change shall not become effective except by an affirmative vote of a majority of four members of the city council, after due process. (2) Establish fees and appropriate funds. The city council may, by resolution, establish fees, charges, and expenses imposed by the adopted land development code. (3) Consider and act on development issues as required. The city council shall consider and act on development and growth management Issues pursuant to this code, chapter 163, F.S., and other applicable laws and regulations. (4) Enforce land development code. The city council shall enforce the land development code, including carrying out appropdate legislative actions. (5) Appoint and confirm members of requisite boards and commissions. The city council shall appoint and confirm members of the planning and zoning commission, the board of adjustment, and any other board, commission or committee as may be deemed necessary by the city council or applicable laws. (6) Take other actions necessary to implement the land development code. The city council may take such other action not delegated to the planning and zoning commission, board of adjustment, code enforcement board, or other entities as the city council may deem desirable and necessary to implement the provisions of the comprehensive plan and the land development code. Sec. 54-1-2.8. - Procedures for public hearings. The following notice requirements are in addition to the requirements as established by Florida Statutes, The notice provisions contained herein regarding notice by mailing are directory only and failure to mall such notice shall not affect any action taken on the application. The planning and growth management director shall establish procedures for the processing of all applications including setting required application filing deadlines to meet the requirements of this section. (a) Public hearing. A proceeding requiring a public hearing shall be conducted only after a notice has been published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, the first publication of which shall be at least 15 days before the hearing. However, nothing contained herein shall be inconsistent with Florida Statues goveming notices. The public notice shall contain all information required by Florida Statutes and include at least the following items: (1) The date, time and place of meeting; (2) The titre of the board conducting such meeting; (3) A brief description of the matter to be considered; and (4) A legal description of the property and other appropriate information identifying the property involved. The giving of public notice of hearing shall be deemed sufficient when a notice has satisfied the requirements as established by Florida Statutes. In addition, a copy of such notice shall be mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the outer boundary of the property Involved in the application including contiguous property under the same ownership, as shown in the records of the county property appraiser. If the property involved in the application is a condominium, then the required notice shall be by certified mail to the condominium association and by regular mail to the individual owners. The applicant shall provide the list of the required property owners to the planning and growth management department with the application for the proposed action at least 20 days before the hearing and shall pay for the mailing costs. RESOLUTION NO. R-99-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REVISING PROCEDURES FOR QUASI- JUDICIAL HEARINGS; DETERNEWING APPLICABUM; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City finds that it is in the public interest to revise the procedures employed in the conduct of quasi-judicial hearings in any matter in which the Council or other board of the City acts as a tribunal; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, as follows: Section I. CONDUCT OF HEARINGS. The City Council of the City of Sebastian recognizes the need to observe fundamental due process in the determination of all quasi-judicial matters. In furtherance of this obligation, the following guidelines are to be substantially adhered to in the conduct of such hearings: A. Swearine of witnesses. Any person presenting factual information to the Tribunal during the hearing shall be swom. The administration of the oath or affirmation shall be done by the Clerk of the Tribunal on the record at the time the person comes to the podium. Citizens wishing to merely express an opinion in favor or opposition to the matter at hand, and agents of the applicant (such as an attorney) merely advocating the applicant's position, need not be nvorn. B. Admissrbilty of Evidence. The City Attorney, upon an objection raised or upon his own accord, shall determine if any evidence sought to be presented is inadmissible. This determination may be over -ruled by a majority of the Tribunal upon a motion by any member thereof. Otherwise, the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal shall for the record receive any evidence presented and the same shall be maintained in the custody of the City Clerk C. Time Limitations. The traditional practices of the Chair in presiding over the smooth conduct of the hearing, encouraging precise and relevant presentations, shall provide guidance as to limitations on the length of presentations and the redundancy of witnesses. However, as appropriate, the Tribunal by majority vote may set limits on the length of presentations and the number of witnesses on a case -by -case basis. D. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communication. At the time the Presiding Officer opens the hearing, members of the Tribunal shall disclose ex -pane communications in accordance with law- E. Order of Presentation. After the Presiding Officer opens the hearing the matter shall proceed in the following order: 1. The applicant or his agent shall make a presentation in favor of the request. 2. The staff shall present its findings and analysis. 3. The Tribunal shall ask questions of the applicant and staff as it sees fit. 4. The floor shall be opened to anyone in favor of the request who wishes to speak or ask questions. 5. The floor shall be opened to anyone opposed to the request who wishes to speak or ask questions. 6. The applicant is provided an opportunity to respond to any of the issues raised by staff or the public. 7. Staff is provided an opportunity to summarize its position. S. The Tribunal deliberates the request, asking such questions as it sees St. 9. The presiding Officer then entertains a motion and the Tribunal acts. Section 2. APPLICATION. Due to the evolving nature of this area of the law, these procedures shall be utilized in the conduct of hearings on matters that are determined to be quasi-judicial under the laws of the State of Florida Section 3. CONFLICT. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution was moved for raadd�/ry to�ptio�n by Coouncilmember The motion was seconded by Councilmember I,GJLeo and, upon beingputinto a vote, the vote was m follows: Mayor Ruth Sullivan t1wa Vice -Mayor Martha Wninger P Councibnember Louise Cartwright Councibnember Lary Paul Councilmember Chuck Neuberger The Mayor thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted this 24th day of February, 1999. CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA By: GG R: Su va yor ATTEST: / a OTIalloran, CMCIAAE City Clerk Approved as to form and legality for rreli(/annccy 7e by the City of Sebastian only-. Rt hger, City5�,mey