[00:00:01]
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY AND WELCOME TO
[CALL TO ORDER: ]
THIS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TAMARAC CITY COMMISSION.IT IS CURRENTLY 5:00 PM ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 31ST.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> VISE MAYOR ELVIN VILLALOBOS.
>> GOOD EVENING. IF EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE STAND AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> THANK YOU. BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY WHO WILL REVIEW THE RULES OF THE ROAD FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING, I AM GOING TO ASK EVERYBODY JUST TO TAKE A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR WHATEVER YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO TAKE THE MOMENT FOR.
WE ARE IN A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION HERE IN OUR CITY AND IN OUR COUNTRY AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF ANXIETY GOING ON.
IT'D BE GREAT IF EVERYONE JUST TAKE A MOMENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CITY ATTORNEY IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE READ THE RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THIS MEETING.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, AS THE MAYOR ALLUDED TO, WE HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE BEFORE YOU ALL TONIGHT.
I WANTED TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED ON A COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT MAY IMPACT YOUR DISCUSSION HERE THIS EVENING THAT SOME OF YOU ALREADY MAY KNOW, BUT OTHERS MAY NOT.
PRIMARILY, THEY DEAL WITH ISSUES IN THE CHARTER AND WHAT MAY COME ABOUT AFTER TONIGHT'S MEETING.
ONE COMMISSIONER HAD PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF POTENTIALLY HAVING AN AUDIT OF ACTIVITIES IN WHICH THE MANAGER MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN AS RESULT OF THE ISSUES THAT CAME TO LIGHT ON FRIDAY, WE JUST WANT TO INFORM YOU THAT UNDER SECTION 5.04H OF THE CHARTER, THERE IS A PROVISION THAT ALREADY DOES PROVIDE FOR SUCH AN AUTOMATIC AUDIT.
UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES DEPENDING UPON WHAT ACTIONS YOU DIRECT US TO TAKE THIS EVENING, STAFF WOULD GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH ENGAGING OUR OUTSIDE AUDITOR TO PERFORM THAT AUDIT AS REQUIRED AND PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE CHARTER.
THE SECOND ISSUE THAT I WANTED TO ISSUE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION IS THAT IN ONE OF MY EARLIER EMAILS ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON, I INDICATED THAT ON THE WAY THAT AT FIRST BLUSH, THE READING OF SOME OF THE CONDITIONS OF [INAUDIBLE] RESPOND, THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE THAT HE COULD RETURN TO CITY HALL.
I'VE SINCE SPOKEN TO THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE STATE AND CONFIRMED THAT THE REFERENCE IN THAT BOND CONDITION TO A LEVEL 2 SEPARATE SUPERVISION MEANS THAT THE MANAGER IS UNDER HOUSE ARREST AND THAT THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO HIS HOUSE ARREST IS A SET FORTH IN THAT BOND DOCUMENT THE ABILITY FOR HIM TO TRAVEL TO EITHER PICK UP OR RETRIEVE HIS CHILDREN FROM THEIR SCHOOL.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT MAY FACTOR INTO YOUR DECISION-MAKING PROCESS HERE THIS EVENING, HE IS UNDER HOUSE ARREST AND NOT ABLE TO COME TO CITY HALL.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THERE WAS ALSO SOME DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIALLY THE INTERVENTION OF THE GOVERNOR WITH REGARD TO THE SUSPENSION OF THE MANAGER FOR THE ACTIONS THAT WERE TAKEN AGAINST HIM IN THE INDICTMENT FILED AGAINST HIM.
I DID SPEAK WITH THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND THEY DID INFORM ME THAT THEY DO BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY UNDER CHAPTER 112 TO SUSPEND THE MANAGER, BUT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY PENDING THE OUTCOME OF TONIGHT'S MEETING AND WHAT YOU ALL MAY DECIDE.
IF THEY FEEL THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING ARE INSUFFICIENT THEN THEY WOULD EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY IN ALL LIKELIHOOD BASED UPON MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.
WITH THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
WE'RE ALL CLEAR, BOTH PUBLIC AND THE COMMISSION ON HOW WE INTEND ON PROCEEDING THIS EVENING.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2-29 OF THE CITY CODE, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY SPEAK AT TONIGHT'S MEETING ON THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA AS SPECIFIED BY THE MAYOR OR THE PRESIDING OFFICER DURING THE PERIOD SET ASIDE FOR THAT DISCUSSION.
[00:05:04]
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY SPEAK ONLY AT TIMES DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, AND THE SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES AND ALL REMARKS SHALL BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY COMMISSION AS A BODY THROUGH THE MAYOR AND NOT TO ANY MEMBER THEREOF.MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHALL ADDRESS ONLY THE TOPICS BEING DISCUSSED, DISRUPTIVE, BELLIGERENT, OR ABUSIVE CONDUCT BY ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IS PROHIBITED AND SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.
ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO VIOLATES THE SECTION MAY HAVE INSTRUCTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION TO REMOVE HIMSELF OR HERSELF FROM THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY.
UPON HIS OR HER FAILURE TO DO SO, A MEMBER THE BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE SHALL EJECT THE PERSON FROM THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS UPON INSTRUCTION BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON TO REFUSE TO LEAVE THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS VOLUNTARILY OR INVOLUNTARILY WHEN INSTRUCTED TO DO SO BY THE MAYOR OR PRESIDING OFFICER.
WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMISSION, SECTION 2-34 STATES THAT THE COMMISSION HAS TO FALLEN DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
RECOGNITION SHALL BE GIVEN BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER.
UPON BEING RECOGNIZED, THE MEMBER MAY PROCEED.
NO MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION MAY FILIBUSTER AND MAY NOT SPEAK MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES CONTINUOUSLY, EXCEPT BY LEAVE OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
DECISION OF THE CITY COMMISSION IS FINAL AS A GENERAL RULE.
BRIEF PRESENTATIONS BY CERTAIN COMMISSIONERS DO NOT COUNT AGAINST THE FIVE-MINUTE RULE HISTORICALLY. TIME LIMITATION.
A MEMBER MAY SPEAK A SECOND TIME ON ANY ONE QUESTION ONLY AFTER ALL MEMBERS HAVE BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND GENERALLY THIS IS LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES.
THE MAYOR SHALL REGULATE DEBATE IN ANY OTHER MANNER THAT HE OR SHE DEEMS NECESSARY PROVIDED THE RIGHTS OF ALL PERSONS EXPRESSED THEIR VIEWS ARE RESPECTED.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS BY MEMBERS OF CITY COMMISSION SHOULD BE RESERVED AND SO FAR AS POSSIBLE FOR THE END OF THE PRESENTATION TO AVOID INTERRUPTING THE SPEAKER, DISRUPTING TIMEKEEPING PROCESS AND DUPLICATING GROUND THE SPEAKER MAY COVER.
ALL MEMBERS OF CITY COMMISSION SHALL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK ON ANY MATTER AND SHOULD NOT BE RULED OUT OF ORDER BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER UNLESS THE MEMBER HAS MADE ABUSIVE, DEROGATORY, OR RUDE REMARKS.
NO MEMBER OF CITY COMMISSION SHALL BE LIMITED IN HIS OR HER DEBATE ON ANY ISSUE EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEARING UNLESS THE MEMBER ENGAGES IN ABUSIVE, DEROGATORY, RUDE COMMENT.
ALL MEMBERS OF CITY COMMISSION SHALL ACCORD UTMOST COURTESY TO EACH OTHER, TO CITY EMPLOYEES AND TO PUBLIC MEMBERS APPEARING BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION AND SHALL REFRAIN AT ALL TIMES FROM RUDE AND DEROGATORY REMARKS REFLECTIONS AS TO INTEGRITY, ABUSIVE COMMENTS AND STATEMENTS AS TO MATTERS OF PERSONALITIES.
THE ACTING CITY MANAGER MAY SPEAK IN ANY MANNER IN WHICH HE OR SHE HAS INFORMATION FOR THE CITY COMMISSION.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, IN THE EVENT THAT THE MAYOR PRESIDING OFFICER FAILS TO ACT, ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION MAY MOVE TO REQUIRE THE PRESIDING OFFICER TO ACT TO ENFORCE THE RULES AND THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THE MAJORITY CITY COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT AT THAT TIME SHALL REQUIRE THE PRESIDING OFFICER ACT.
OBVIOUSLY, THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DO NEED TO BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THIS EVENING.
THAT IS NOT ONLY A REQUIREMENT OF YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, BUT ALSO REQUIREMENTS STATE STATUTE.
THEN AS IT RELATES TO THE MATTERS, IN YOUR PACKET IS A COPY OF ARTICLE 5 OF YOUR CITY CHARTER, AS WELL AS THE AMENDED AND RESTATED UNEMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TAMARAC AND MICHAEL [INAUDIBLE] FOR YOUR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION.
IN PARTICULAR, SECTION 5.02B OF THE CHARTER STATES THAT, "THE COMMISSION MAY SUSPEND OR REMOVE THE MANAGER BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF ALL THE COMMISSIONERS UPON DEMAND BY THE MANAGER, A PUBLIC HEARING SHALL BE HELD PRIOR TO SUSPENSION OR REMOVAL. " THAT WOULD BE THE SECTION OF THE CHARTER THAT WE WOULD BE PROCEEDING HERE THIS EVENING.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS CERTAINLY HERE TO ANSWER THOSE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 1,
[1. Status of the City Manager Position ]
WHICH IS THE STATUS OF THE CITY MANAGER POSITION AND THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL PROVIDE US WITH THE OPTIONS.>> YES. AGAIN, MAYOR AND COMMISSION AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE, ON FRIDAY EVENING I INFORMED YOU THAT I'D LEARNED THAT MR. [INAUDIBLE] WAS FINDING HIMSELF TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE PRESENT TO AN INDICTMENT THAT HAD BEEN OR WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING FILED AGAINST HIM BY THE STATEWIDE PROSECUTOR.
I PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED A COPY OF THAT CHARGING DOCUMENT TO ALL OF YOU.
IN SUMMARY, IT CHARGED HIM WITH CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT RACKETEERING IN REGARD TO MATTERS INVOLVING A PRIOR DEVELOPMENT THAT'S TAKEN PLACE HERE ON THE CITY.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5.03, THE CITY MANAGER DID APPOINT MISS GUNN AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER.
THAT'S ALSO AN ITEM FOR YOU ALL TO DISCUSS AND TO DETERMINE, WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE GOING TO CONFIRM THAT DESIGNATION.
[00:10:08]
YOU ALL PRESUMPTIVELY, BASED UPON MY CONVERSATIONS WITH EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU, HAVE, IN FACT, READ THE CHARGING DOCUMENT, AS WELL AS THE PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT THAT I ALSO AFFORDED TO EACH OF YOU.THEN AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT'S FRANKLY OPEN FOR ANY MOTION OR DISCUSSION AS TO HOW YOU WISH TO PROCEED IN LIGHT OF THE EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY SAID, WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS TWO ITEMS FROM THE INSTANCE THAT AROSE APPROXIMATELY 96 HOURS AGO.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE TO US JUST YET.
AS WE'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH VARIOUS PUBLIC, APPOINTED, AND ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT HAD BEEN IN THE NEWS RECENTLY, ONE THING THAT TIES THEM ALL TOGETHER, ALL ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
WE, THEREFORE, SHOULD NOT MAKE THIS POLITICAL, AND WE SHOULD NOT MAKE THIS PERSONAL.
THE WORST-CASE FROM MICHAEL CERNECH IS THAT HE IS GUILTY.
THE WORST-CASE FOR THE CITY IS THAT WE TREAT HIM AS IF HE IS, AND HE IS NOT.
I FEEL IT IS OUR OBLIGATION TO PROTECT OUR CITY AND THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.
WE NEED TO KEEP THE CITY MOVING FORWARD, AND IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF OUR RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES, AND EMPLOYEES.
TO OUR RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES, AND EMPLOYEES, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME NOR THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR.
THIS IS EVERYTHING WITH ENSURING THE CONTINUITY OF DELIVERING EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF TAMARAC THROUGH THE LEADERSHIP THAT OUR EXCELLENT EMPLOYEES ARE ACCUSTOMED TO.
WITH THAT, I AM SEEKING A MOTION TO SUSPEND MICHAEL C. CERNECH WITHOUT PAY.
IF I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> DO I HAVE A SECOND? SEEING NONE.
ACTUALLY, I COULD PASS THE GAVEL, BUT I PASS IT TO THE VICE MAYOR.
>> IT IS WHERE WE OPEN UP TO A PUBLIC DISCUSSION.
>> WELL, HAS THERE BEEN A SECOND?
>> YOU HAVE A SECOND. THE ITEM IS PROPERLY BEFORE YOU ALL FOR DISCUSSION.
YOU MAY DESIGNATE THIS POINT IN TIME AS A BODY.
IF YOU WISH TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM AT THIS POINT BEFORE YOU ALL ENTER INTO DISCUSSION, OR DISCUSS IT FIRST, THEN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT, IT'S UP TO YOU.
MY SUGGESTION IS THAT YOU TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.
[NOISE] ITEM NUMBER 1, THESE PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP.
ALL THE PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP FOR ITEM NUMBER 1.
>> WE'RE GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION.
ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK NOW ON THE STATUS OF THE CITY MANAGER POSITION, PLEASE COME UP.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM UP HERE? [NOISE]
I BASICALLY HAVE A STICK IN HERE.
>> IS IT REQUIRED TO DO NAME AND ADDRESS? BECAUSE I'VE HEARD OTHERWISE.
>> THE NAME SO WE KNOW WHO THE SPEAKER IS.
YES, THE CUSTOM HERE IN THE CITY IS THAT IF THE SPEAKER WISHES TO GIVE THEIR PHYSICAL ADDRESS, THEY CAN.
OTHERWISE, THEY SIMPLY HAVE TO STATE IF THEY ARE A RESIDENT OF TAMARAC OR OR SOME OTHER JURISDICTION IN THE AREA.
>> IT'S JUST A THING. JUST FOR THE RECORD, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, IF YOU WISH TO GIVE YOUR ADDRESS.
IF NOT, THE CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN.
>> MY NAME AND ADDRESS IS ON THE SHEET THAT I SIGNED, BUT I DON'T MIND.
MY NAME IS JOSEPHINE OROZCO. I AM A RESIDENT.
I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF TAMARAC FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS.
>> THANK YOU. BASICALLY, I HAVE A STATEMENT.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS ARE ENTRUSTED WITH THE TASK OF WORKING ON BEHALF OF AND TO BENEFIT THE PEOPLE.
FOR EXAMPLE, RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES, NOT THEIR OWN BANK ACCOUNTS, AND I HAVE NOT UNDERLINED.
WE, MEANING, THE RESIDENTS OF TAMARAC, DESERVE AND EXPECT MORE AND BETTER FROM OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
[00:15:08]
IT'S CRUCIAL THAT THERE IS TRUST, AND I UNDERLINE TRUST, IN OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THEIR EMPLOYEES, WHICH MUST, I HAVE MUST UNDERLINED, BE FOSTERED BY INTEGRITY, I HAVE INTEGRITY UNDERLINED, AND TRANSPARENCY, I HAVE TRANSPARENCY UNDERLINED AS WELL.SUCH BEHAVIORS, AS WE ARE FACING TODAY, CAUSES HARM TO THE PUBLIC GOOD.
WE, THE RESIDENTS OF TAMARAC, DESERVE TO BE FREE FROM PUBLIC CORRUPTION, WHICH DESTROYS RESIDENTS' TRUST.
RESIDENTS OF TAMARAC ARE DESERVING OF CLEAN, AND I HAVE CLEAN UNDERLINED, GOVERNMENT.
WE DESERVE TO SEE THAT JUSTICE DO RIGHT BY US.
TAMARAC CITY MAYOR MICHAEL CERNECH IS CHARGED WITH $3.4 MILLION CORRUPTION SCHEME.
BY THE WAY, HE WAS ENTRUSTED WITH MANAGING OR OVERSEEING A $200 PLUS MILLION BUDGET. AM I CORRECT? ALONG WITH CO-CONSPIRATORS AND FATHER AND SON, DYNAMIC DUO, BRUCE AND SHAWN CHAIT.
MY QUESTION IS, WHAT STEPS SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE TO CORRECT AREAS OF INEFFICIENCY AMONG OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS? THANK YOU.
MICHAEL CERNECH, THE CITY MANAGER, NOT THE MAYOR.
IF YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE DO SO, IF NOT, THE CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN.
>> CAROL MENDELSON, I AM IN DISTRICT 4 WOODMONT, TAMARAC. GOOD EVENING.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT TIME IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC.
I HAVE LIVED IN THIS CITY FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS AND NEVER FELT THE NEED TO INVOLVE MYSELF IN POLITICS OF THE CITY UNTIL NOW.
I HAVE ADDRESSED MANY IMPORTANT GROUPS IN MY CAREER AND SET A NUMEROUS HIGH-LEVEL BOARDS.
I MUST ADMIT THAT I HAVE NEVER BEEN WITNESSED TO THE OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR AS THAT WHICH IS REPEATEDLY EVIDENCED BY THE BOARD.
I'M EMBARRASSED TO BE PART OF THIS COMMUNITY WHERE THE ADULTS IN CHARGE BEHAVE WORSE THAN CHILDREN.
THE ANIMOSITY AMONG ALL THE COMMISSIONERS IS FIGHTING, AND BULLYING, AND FINGER-POINTING, AND ATTACKING EACH OF YOU WITH YOUR OWN PERSONAL AGENDAS, ONLY EXACERBATES THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE.
THERE ARE THOSE ON THIS DAIS WHO APPEAR TO ENJOY CALLING OUR COLLEAGUES UNNECESSARILY TO PETTY NONSENSE ONLY TO MAKE YOURSELF APPEAR TO BE MORE IMPORTANT, EVEN USING THE VOICE OF GOD AS A SHIELD.
IT ONLY MAKES YOU LOOK SMALLER.
SOME OF YOU APPEAR TO BE MAKING DISPARAGING COMMENTS, AND THEN THERE ARE THOSE WHO APPEAR AS IF THEY WERE AFRAID TO SPEAK.
THIS IS A TIME TO PUT YOUR INDIVIDUAL NEEDS ASIDE AND WORK TOGETHER.
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO DO SO, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MAYOR TO HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE AND HAVE YOU REMOVED, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU.
RESPECT AND DIGNITY NEEDS TO BE RESTORED TO THIS DAIS.
THE MAYOR CONTINUALLY STRIVES FOR THIS LEVEL OF DECORUM, IN SPITE OF YOUR MISBEHAVIOR.
IF YOU CAN NOT BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, THEN YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
IT IS TIME TO HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT POSITIONS AND FOR YOU TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THIS CITY.
YOU WERE ELECTED INTO THESE POSITIONS, WE BELIEVED IN YOU.
THIS MEETING TONIGHT SHOULD BE AN AUTOMATIC AGREEMENT AMONG ALL COMMISSIONERS TO TEMPORARILY REPLACE THE POSITION WHILE UNFORTUNATE ISSUES ARE DEALT WITH.
NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF THOSE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED.
THERE STILL EXIST A LAW IN THIS COUNTRY WHICH STATES ONE IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
[00:20:04]
THAT SHOULD PREVAIL HERE.NOT A REACTION TO ANY PRIOR INCIDENT OR INCIDENTS THAT MAY HAVE ANGERED ANY COMMISSIONER.
THAT HAS NO PLACE IN THIS DECISION.
TAMARAC'S MISSION, COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE.
WE DESERVE BETTER THAN THIS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MS. CAROL. UP NEXT, RON WASSERMAN.
FOR THE RECORD, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, IF YOU WISH SO, IF NOT, THE CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS RONALD WASSERMAN.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME.
I'LL JUST SPEAK ABOUT MICHAEL CERNECH.
SO MANY OF US ARE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO US.
MANY LONG-TERM RESIDENTS ARE JUST ASTOUNDED BY THE GRAFT, THE CORRUPTION, SAYING, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I GOT INTO, IT'S VERY TIRING.
I'VE PERSONALLY MET EVERY ONE OF YOU THAT'S ON THIS DAIS.
MANY OF YOU HAVE GOOD QUALITIES. KEEP IT UP.
BUT SOME OF THE STUFF THAT YOU'VE BEEN PULLING IS JUST HARD TO SWALLOW.
I'M NOT GOING TO DO A LONG SPEECH.
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, MANY OF YOU SITTING IN THIS ROOM TONIGHT, KNOW I'VE SPOKEN TO THIS COMMISSION MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES.
YOU HAVE FORCED MANY OF US TO STOP LISTENING TO YOU.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO MICHAEL CERNECH, THERE NEEDS TO BE A COMPLETE AUDIT OF MAJOR PROJECTS THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN.
MANY OF YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I CAN'T SAY IT'S HIDDEN STUFF, BUT YOU FEEL IT AND YOU KNOW IT.
THE SPECIAL INTEREST IN OUR CITY RUN BY THE SAME GROUP OF ATTORNEYS, BY THE WAY, IF YOU DON'T KNOW.
I'M PART OF THE [INAUDIBLE] AND I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING FOR FOUR YEARS.
I STILL WORK WITH MICHAEL CERNECH WEDNESDAY EVENING.
HE ALREADY KNEW HE WAS GOING IN JAIL, FRIDAY, AND SAID, "DON'T WORRY, RON.
I'LL HANDLE ANYTHING YOU NEED." THAT'S THE SAME RHETORIC THAT A LOT OF US HAVE HEARD.
MAYOR BEING INDICTED, NOT THIS MAYOR.
ALL OF YOU READ THE NEWSPAPERS.
WE HAVE A LOT OF FINE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR THE CITY, BUT A LOT OF THESE FINE PEOPLE JUST LOOK THE OTHER WAY WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN THINGS.
I'M AGGRAVATED, FOLKS, HAVE BEEN FOR A LONG TIME.
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, IF YOU DON'T WISH TO GIVE YOU AN ADDRESS, GIVE US CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN.
>> DARCY [INAUDIBLE] OF GRANVILLE KINGS POINT [NOISE].
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN, BUT I GUESS I'LL START WITH MR. BOLTON, I HAD BEEN READING YOUR POSTS AND I'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH INTO THE HISTORY OF TAMARACK, EVEN THOUGH I'VE LIVED HERE FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS ON AND OFF.
NEEDLESS TO SAY, YOU HAVE COME ACROSS AS A COMMUNITY CLOWN.
YOU POINTED AND PICTURED ON MISS.
PLACO, MR. VILLALOBOS, MS. GOMEZ AND MR.CERNECH WITH CLOWN FACES.
YOUR BUFFOONERY BEHAVIOR HAS TO STOP BECAUSE YOU ARE THE BUFFOON, NOT THE OTHER PEOPLE AND YET WE CONTINUE TO POINT FINGERS AT ALL OF THEM.
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO STOP ACTING LIKE A BUFFOON AND ACT LIKE A COMMISSIONER? THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION.
[00:25:01]
SECONDLY, I HOPE YOU KNOW WHAT THE WORD DEFLECTION MEANS, IF YOU DON'T, PLEASE LOOK IT UP BECAUSE YOU'RE DEFLECTING YOUR BEHAVIORS AS MR.CERNECH IMPLICATED YOU, WAIT TILL BOLTON CALLS YOU OR DON'T KNOW HIS EXACT QUOTE, BUT YOU TRIED TO GET MR. CERNECH REMOVED BY DELINEATING EVERY PENNY AND I HAVE TO WONDER IF THAT WAS YOUR WAY OF TRYING TO BLACKMAIL HIM INTO POSSIBLY GETTING MORE MONEY.THAT IS MY IDEA BASED ON NOTHING BUT MY IDEA BASED ON YOUR BEHAVIOR.
BUT YOU ARE DEFLECTING AND BLAMING THE MAYOR FOR EVERYTHING AND THE MAYOR DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BUT TRY TO RUN THIS CITY AND TRY TO CONTROL YOUR BUFFOONERY BEHAVIOR, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS.
PLEASE STOP DEFLECTING, PLEASE STOP PUTTING IT ON THE MAYOR, PLEASE GROW UP AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR BEHAVIOR.
MY LAST COMMENT, WHICH IS TO QUOTE TOM WATER, INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW, "WHAT SIZE DRESS DO YOU WEAR?" << THANK YOU MRS [INAUDIBLE].
<< MADAM MAYOR AND MR. VICE MAYOR I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU AND TO EVERYONE, IF I MAY, I READ THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
BUT JUST BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFICULT ISSUE FOR THIS COMMUNITY, AND FOR ALL THE PEOPLE UP HERE ON THIS DESK, AND ALL OF YOU AND SITTING OUT IN CHAMBERS, AND ALL OF YOU WHO ARE LISTENING OR WATCHING ON ZOOM DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO ENGAGE IN UNCIVIL BEHAVIOR ACROSS THE BOARD.
OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE SAY THAT WE TREAT EVERYONE PUBLIC AND MEMBERS OF THIS ELECTED BODY WITH COURTESY, DIGNITY, AND PROFESSIONALISM.
WE WILL ALL BE BETTER SERVED TONIGHT, AND MOVING FORWARD ON MAKING SURE THAT WE TRY AND OBSERVE THOSE RULES, SO AS YOU ALL ASK US TO DO OUR JOBS UP HERE, THAT WE KEEP ON TASK AND DOING SO.
>> WITH THAT, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED AND I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP NOW FOR DISCUSSION AND DISCUSSION WILL BE LIMITED IN ACCORDANCE TO WITH SECTION 2- 34H1B, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ALREADY ELABORATED ON THAT.
>> AS I TURNED OVER THE GAVEL BUT I STILL HAVE THE ONLY LIST THAT SHOWS WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO SPEAK, SO I WILL ASSIST ON THAT.
THAT WON'T BE A PROBLEM. COMMISSIONER GELIN HAS REQUESTED TO SPEAK. SO, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A PRESENTATION. THANK YOU, LEVENT.
WHILE I KNOW THIS IS A DIFFICULT DAY FOR SOME INDIVIDUALS HERE, IT'S NOT A DIFFICULT DAY FOR ME AND IT'S NOT A SURPRISE FOR ME.
IN MY DEALINGS WITH THE CITY MANAGER, I HAVE FOUND HIM TO BE DISHONEST, CONNIVING, AND DECEITFUL.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE THESE AGENDA REVIEW MEETINGS.
I NOTICED OVER TIME THAT IN THE COURSE OF WHAT SEEMS TO BE A REGULAR CONVERSATION, THE MAIN GOAL WAS TO LEARN HOW I WOULD VOTE AND I FELT LIKE THAT INFORMATION WAS TAKEN TO OTHER COMMISSIONERS TO CONVINCE OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON HOW TO VOTE.
I'M NOT SURPRISED AT THIS OUTCOME BECAUSE I TRIED TO MEASURE THE CHARACTER OF THE MAN WHO WAS IN FRONT OF ME.
I ALSO TRIED TO TEST THAT AMONG STAFF WHEN I WOULD ASK STAFF PERIODICALLY, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE MANAGER? WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE MANAGER? AND EVERYONE HAD POSITIVE THINGS TO SAY AND AT SOME POINT I DID QUESTION MYSELF AND THINK MAYBE I'M WRONG.
BUT THEN AS YOU KNOW, I HAVE ALWAYS ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COLONY WEST HOTEL WHERE I FEEL THERE PROBABLY WERE SOME UNSCRUPULOUS ACTIVITIES THERE.
MANY OF YOU HEARD ME COMPLAIN PUBLICLY ABOUT THE MANAGERS CONTRACT AND HOW EXORBITANT IT IS.
HOW CAN THE MANAGER OF A SMALL CITY LIKE TAMARACK BE THE HIGHEST PAID MANAGER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FROM A TOTAL COMPENSATION PERSPECTIVE, I EVEN CHALLENGED THE FORMER CITY ATTORNEY, SAM GOREN ON THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT.
ALTHOUGH THE CONTRACT SHOWS THAT I VOTED IN FAVOR OF THIS CONTRACT, I CHECKED TODAY AND MADAM CLERK, YOU WERE NOT AROUND AT THE TIME, BUT IT SHOWS THAT I VOTED, YES.
I REVIEWED IT TODAY AND AT THE ONE HOUR AND 33 SECOND,
[00:30:04]
11 SECOND MARK, IT SHOWS THAT I VOTED, NO ON THE CONTRACT.SO THAT COULD BE CORRECTED, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT I SAW A LOT OF INCONSISTENCIES AND I ASKED THE MAYOR IF WE COULD HAVE AN INDEPENDENT COMPENSATION CONSULTANT REVIEW THE CONTRACT, SHE DISAGREED AS THE REST OF THE COMMISSION.
I ALSO ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME, SAM GOREN, AND I'D CHALLENGE HIM ON THE FACT THAT THIS COMMISSION SINCE 2011, HAS NEVER, AS REQUIRED BY THIS CONTRACT, HAS NEVER PROVIDED THE CITY MANAGER WITH A WRITTEN REVIEW OF HIS ACTIVITIES.
SO HE WAS NEVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS ACTIONS AND THAT LEADS TO IRRESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY.
I KNOW MANY OF YOU READ THE PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF EVERYONE READ THE WORDS OF THE STATE ATTORNEY ASHLEY MOODY.
FIRST OF ALL, WHEN THE ITEM FIRST BECAME PUBLIC, WHEN I GOT THE CALL FROM JOHN HERON, THE FIRST THING I DID WAS I EMAILED JOHN TO ASK WHAT ARE THE STEPS TO ESTABLISH AN EMERGENCY MEETING NOT FOR PAYBACK BUT FOR THE FINANCIAL SECURITY OF THE CITY.
AS OF THIS MOMENT, THE CITY MANAGER STILL HAS ACCESS TO ALL RECORDS WITHIN THE CITY AND THAT SHOULD BE ELIMINATED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED ASAP.
>> I DIRECTED ON FRIDAY EVENING, I INSTRUCTED STAFF TO SEVER MR. CERNECH ACCESS TO THE CITY'S COMPUTER SYSTEM REMOTELY, AND THAT HAS BEEN DONE.
>> EXCELLENT. THAT WAS NOT SHARED WITH THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU.
THERE WAS SOME VERY CRITICAL STATEMENTS MADE BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING THE ACTIONS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY.
YES. EVIDENCE SHOWS VIA TEXT MESSAGES THAT HE WAS A CO-CONSPIRATOR.
HE CONSPIRED WITH CONVICTED FELONS, CONVICTED FELONS THAT HELP TO TAMARACK COMMISSIONERS GET CHARGED AND ARRESTED, ACTUALLY THREE, BUT ONE OF THEM PASSED AWAY.
BUT THE SAME DEVELOPERS I GOT THREE COMMISSIONERS CHARGED, HE DECIDED TO DEAL WITH.
HE USED HIS POSITION OF AUTHORITY TO RELAY FALSE INFORMATION TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF CITY GOVERNMENT TO FURTHER THIS MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR EXTORTION.
THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT, THAT MEANS ALL THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS IN THIS ROOM AND IN THIS COMMISSION AND COMMISSION EFFICIENT IN THIS ROOM WHEN SHE WAS ON THIS DAIS AND SHE SAID I WAS DISGRACEFUL AND IT IS.
THE VICTIM 13 FLOOR INVESTMENTS THAT'S TRYING TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY WAS CONSTANTLY HARASSED HIS BUSINESS AND LIVELIHOOD, THREATENED BY THE CHAITS AND THEY'RE ACCOMPLICE MICHAEL CERNECH.
THEIR ACTIONS WHERE FRIGHTENING AND APPALLING.
AGAIN, CITY MANAGER MICHAEL CERNECH, HARASSED, EXTORTED, AND THREATENED THE VICTIM OVER PROPERTY ACQUIRED AFTER CHAITS DEFAULTED ON A LOAN MORE THAN A DECADE AGO.
TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THE CITY MANAGER PUSHED THIS 13 FLOOR DEVELOPMENT SAYING IT WAS GOOD FOR THE CITY AND MAYBE HE BELIEVE IT WAS, BUT MAYBE ALSO HE HAD AN INTEREST IN THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER GELIN.
>> PLEASE CLARIFY. ATTORNEY HEROIN.
>> I DID INDICATE THAT AS A GENERAL RULE, THE PRESENTATION HAVE NOT BEEN COUNTED AGAINST THE FIVE MINUTES.
>> POINT OF CLARIFICATION IF I MAY LEAD TO DISCUSSION, WAS THE PRESENTATION WAS THOSE WHO WAS PRESENTING ITEM FOR DISCUSSION, NOT DURING THE FIVE MINUTES.
THE PRESENTERS THAT DO THE PRESENTATIONS WERE THE ONES WHO WERE BRINGING UP AN ITEM FOR DISCUSSION AS IF IT WAS THEIR ITEM, FOR EXAMPLE, A PROCLAMATION OR A RESOLUTION IN WHICH SUCH AND SUCH WAS GOING TO BE DONE.
THAT WAS THE PRESENTATION THAT DIDN'T HAVE A FIVE MINUTE LIMIT.
BUT THE DISCUSSION DID HAVE A FIVE MINUTE LIMIT.
>> POINT OF ORDER MR. VICE MAYOR.
MR. HEROIN, THIS IS A PRESENTATION BY ALL THE CITY COMMISSIONERS.
I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT POINT.
SO TO THAT EFFECT, I THINK THAT THIS ITEM IS A PRESENTATION AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH BY EACH COMMISSIONER.
>> CAN WE GET CONSENSUS ON THAT?
>> WHEN IN DOUBT. OKAY. WHEN IN DOUBT.
THE RULES DO PROVIDE FOR A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION TO GRANT A COMMISSIONER ADDITIONAL TIME OR FOR THAT MATTER, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ADDITIONAL TIME.
NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT COMMISSIONER PLACKO,
[00:35:02]
BUT WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE TO HEAR THE PRESENTATION?>> CAN I ADD SOMETHING TO THAT, PLEASE? ISN'T IT ALSO HAS TO BE RELEVANT AND NOT REPETITIVE? WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS JUST REPETITIVE INFORMATION.
>> PRIOR TO THE MEETING, MR. [INAUDIBLE] YOU SAID THAT PRESENTATION DO NOT HAVE A TIME LIMIT.
>> I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT COMMISSIONER GELIN BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE IF THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE, NOT FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION.
I'M NOT JUST TO THIS, NOT GOING TO GO FOR 15 MINUTES, WHICH I DON'T THINK IT IS FROM MY CONVERSATIONS WITH COMMISSIONER GELIN.
BUT I THINK THAT COMMISSIONER GELIN SHOULD BE GIVEN PAST CONDUCT OF THIS COMMISSION THE OPPORTUNITY TO FINISH HIS PRESENTATION.
BUT CERTAINLY, IF YOU WISH TO PUT THAT TO VOTE, YOU CAN PUT THAT TO VOTE.
>> COMMISSIONER GELIN, PLEASE PROCEED.
>> THANK YOU. THIS CONTINUES ON WITH THE CONSPIRACY OF THE CITY ATTORNEY.
AGAIN, HE WAS AWARE THAT THIS WAS A CONSPIRACY AND HE WAS DEALING WITH EX-FELONS.
THE CITY ATTORNEY DID CONFIRM THAT HE'S ON HOUSE ARREST SO HE CAN NOT REPORT TO WORK WHICH NECESSITATES OUR DECISION TODAY.
SOME OF YOU HAVE READ THIS DOCUMENT AS WELL, SO I'M JUST GOING TO GO BY IT.
BUT THE PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT LISTS EXACTLY WHAT HE HAS DONE AND THIS IS ALSO A VIOLATION OF HIS CONTRACT.
I DID EXPECT MAYOR GOMEZ TO CALL AN EMERGENCY MEETING.
I'M GLAD FINALLY THAT A MEETING WAS STARTED AFTER I INITIALLY REQUESTED A MEETING, THEN COMMISSIONER BOLTON, AND FINALLY, THE THIRD CALL FROM MAYOR GOMEZ.
NOW I JUST WANT TO COME TO A CLOSE AND TALK ABOUT THE REASON WHY THE CITY MANAGER SHOULD IN FACT BE TERMINATED WITH CAUSE.
MALFEASANCE, MISFEASANCE, THE DEFINITIONS ARE THERE FOR YOU.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, NOW THIS IS RELATED MOSTLY TO THIS RECENT ARREST, BUT LOOKING OUTSIDE OF THE ARRESTS, WHY SHOULD THEY BE TERMINATED? ONE, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE COLONY WEST HOTEL.
IN NO WAY SHAPE, OR FORM SHOULD ANY DEVELOPER BE GIVEN A NO-BID CONTRACT FOR $7 MILLION.
ON TOP OF THAT, THERE WERE COSTS OVERRUNS AND NOW THAT PROJECT COSTS $11 MILLION.
WHERE DID THAT MONEY COME FROM? IT CAME FROM OUR BUDGET AND I HAD NO IDEA WHERE EXACTLY FROM THE BUDGET IT CAME FROM UNTIL I ASKED ABOUT IT RECENTLY AT A COMMISSION MEETING AND LEARNED THAT IT CAME FROM A STORMWATER FUND.
NOW I'D LIKE TO GET SOME UPDATES ON HOW MUCH WE OWE, WHAT'S LEFT.
THIS COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN EDUCATED ON THAT.
I BELIEVE THE CITY MANAGER USURPED THE COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY FOR AN EXTENSION OF A 180-DAY TIMEFRAME REQUIRING THE STATUTE, REQUIRED FOR A PUBLIC MEETING REGARDING A LAND USE DEVELOPMENT.
HE VIOLATED CITY POLICY AND ORDINANCE BY ALLOWING NON-RESIDENTS TO SERVE ON THE CITY PLANNING BOARD.
I PERSONALLY WENT TO THE HOMES OF TWO PEOPLE THAT WERE LISTED AS TAMARAC RESIDENTS CURRENTLY SERVING ON THE PLANNING BOARD AT THE TIME, AND THEY WERE NOT RESIDENTS OF THAT HOME ADDRESS.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER GELIN.
HERIN SAID THAT I COULD FINISH MY PRESENTATION.
>> I'M COMING TO A CLOSE. HE HAS NOT BEEN PROACTIVE IN SHARING CRITICAL INFORMATION WITH THE CITY COMMISSION REGARDING IMPORTANT ITEMS. HE HIRED AN INEXPERIENCED ATTORNEY TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION ON COMMISSIONER BOLTON, AND THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED BY OTHER AGENCIES INCLUDING THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, OR THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON ETHICS, WASTING $42,000 IN TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
HE ALSO DID NOT HAVE THE CITY'S BEST INTERESTS IN MIND WHEN HE SOLD A PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE SAME DEVELOPERS WHERE WE WERE SUPPOSED TO SPLIT THE PROCEEDS, 50/50.
APPARENTLY, WE DID NOT EVEN GET A 50 PERCENT CUT WITH THESE CONVICTED CRIMINALS GETTING ALMOST $900,0000 COMPARED TO OUR $750,000.
AGAIN, AS THE STATE ATTORNEY, ACTUALLY MOODY SAID, ATTORNEY GENERAL, HE HAD LIED TO ALL LEVELS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING THE COMMISSION AND POTENTIALLY STAFF.
I SPOKE TO MR. HOWARD ABOUT THAT TODAY.
IT'S THE MOST ONE-SIDED CONTRACT ANYONE HAS EVER SEEN.
[00:40:02]
THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS FOR THE CITY.IT'S A ONE-SIDED CONTRACT THAT PROTECTS THE CITY MANAGER.
SO MY QUESTION TO MR. HERIN IS, CAN THIS CONTRACT BE DEEMED ILLEGAL SINCE IT'S AGAINST THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY?
>> POSSIBLY. I THINK THOUGH THAT MAKING THAT JUDGMENT CALL AND HAVING AN ANSWER, MAYBE A BIT PREMATURE AND WE MAY END UP GETTING THERE ANYWAY DEPENDING UPON WHAT ACTIONS YOU ALL TAKE THIS EVENING AND WHAT ACTIONS YOU DIRECT ME TO TAKE.
THE ANSWER IS, POSSIBLY WE'D HAVE TO DO SOME MORE RESEARCH AND LOOK INTO IT.
BUT I THINK THAT REALLY IS A THRESHOLD ISSUE IS A DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT SUSPEND OR TERMINATE IS WHERE WE NEED TO START, SO TO SPEAK.
>> OKAY. FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE, HOW CAN THIS CONTRACT BEING ONE-SIDED WHERE IT FAVORS AN EMPLOYEE AND NOT THE EMPLOYER?
>> FRANKLY, I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, COMMISSIONER GELIN.
>> CAN WE GET A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
THE EMPLOYEE PART, IS HE A CONTRACT OR AN EMPLOYEE?
>> HE'S A CONTRACTED EMPLOYEE.
HE IS THE ONLY EMPLOYEE OTHER THAN ME THAT UNDER THE CHARTER, THE CITY COMMISSION HAS THE DIRECT AUTHORITY TO HIRE OR FIRE.
WITH REGARD TO MR. SIGNAGE, THE CITY ENTERED INTO AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH HIM.
WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU AND THIS PART OF THE AGENDA IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2011 WHEN I BELIEVE MR. CERNECH WAS ORIGINALLY ENGAGED AS THE CITY MANAGER AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
THERE'S NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HIS INITIAL CONTRACT FROM 2011 AND THE ONE THAT YOU WOULD BE THEORETICALLY BE TAKING ACTION ON TONIGHT.
>> A QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION, EXCLUDING THE VICE MAYOR.
DID THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME SIT DOWN AND EXPLAIN TO YOU THE RAMIFICATIONS AND THE MEANING OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS CONTRACT? COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> THE CITY ATTORNEY DID NOT DO THAT.
HOWEVER, I READ THE AGREEMENT OF MYSELF AND ALSO SOUGHT THE ADVICE OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL.
>> THE CITY ATTORNEY DID REVIEW IT WITH ME AND PLUS I ALSO READ IT MYSELF.
>> OKAY. I WAS SO DISTURBED WITH THIS CONTRACT [INAUDIBLE].
>> YES, YOU'RE ASKING EVERYBODY ELSE.
>> NO. I ACTUALLY CHALLENGED THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THIS.
MANY OF YOU WHO ARE EMPLOYEES HERE HEARD ME DEBATE ABOUT IT HERE.
AFTER THAT MEETING, I ACTUALLY FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AGAINST THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME AND THE CITY MANAGER.
I DON'T KNOW THE OUTCOME OF THAT INVESTIGATION, BUT TO QUOTE THE CITY ATTORNEY, IF I MAY, HE SAID, "IT'S A SHITTY CONTRACT."
>> WE'RE GOING TO TRANSITION. ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER BOLTON, COMMISSIONER PLACKO, MAYOR GOMEZ? I HAVE A COMMENT. IN 2019, THE PROPOSED CONTRACT FOR THE CITY MANAGER WAS THE RAISE THAT HE WAS REQUESTING WAS APPROVED BY A MAJORITY, CONSIDERING THAT IF ANYBODY WAS QUESTIONING AND STILL GAVE THE CITY MANAGER A RAISE DOES RAISE AN EYEBROW, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COMMISSIONER GELIN ON THE AMENDED PART OF THE CONTRACT WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT VOTED IN A DISSENTING MANNER VERSUS COMMISSIONER BOLTON, COMMISSIONER PLACKO, MAYOR GOMEZ, AND FORMER COMMISSIONER FISHMAN.
>> FINAL CLARIFICATION, IF I MAY, PLEASE?
>> CITY ATTORNEY, WASN'T THE CHANGE IN THE CONTRACT ACTUALLY PUT STATUTORY LANGUAGE WITHIN IT?
>> IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT THE MAXIMUM PAYOUT THAT THE MANAGER WOULD BE ENTITLED TO IF HE WERE TERMINATED UNDER SECTION 10.1 OF THE CONTRACT,
[00:45:03]
YES, THE STATUTE WAS CHANGED TO PROVIDE THAT THE MAXIMUM PAYOUT COULD BE NO GREATER THAN 20 WEEKS, AND THAT'S WHAT IS REFLECTED IN THE CONTRACT THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR.>> POINT OF ORDER, THAT WAS NOT THE ONLY CHANGE.
HE ALSO ADDED AN ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT, A 401A, AND YOU CAN WATCH THE MEETING.
>> COMMISSIONER GELIN, I ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M GLAD [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M CLARIFYING. TO THE CHAIR CITY ATTORNEY, MAY I CLARIFY? HE ADDED AN ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT.
WE'RE ALREADY MAXIMIZING HIS MULTIPLE PENSION PLANS AND RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS.
HE ADDED AN ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT.
THERE WAS A TERMINATION CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT.
HE REMOVED THE TERMINATION CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT.
THE CONTRACT WAS ALREADY ONE-SIDED.
HE MADE IT EVEN MORE ONE-SIDED.
>> THANK YOU FOR ADDING THAT. THAT IS TRUE.
I DID HEAR THE MEETING BUT CONSIDERING THAT FOUR OF YOU STILL VOTED IN FAVOR OF THAT CONTRACT.
>> WITHOUT PROPER LEGAL COUNSEL.
>> FOUR OF YOU VOTED IN FAVOR FOR THAT CONTRACT.
TO SAY HYPOCRISY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT ODD CONSIDERING THE RAISE WAS GIVEN AND THE AMENDED CONTRACT WAS PROVED.
CONSIDERING THERE IS NO FURTHER COMMENTS, ARE WE PUTTING THIS TO MOTION?
>> MOTION CURRENTLY PENDING TO SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY.
>> CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR VILLALOBOS. MAYOR GOMEZ.
>> THE MOTION IS TO SUSPEND THE CITY MANAGER WITHOUT PAY. SORRY.
>> WHEN WOULD IT BE [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THE MOTION WOULD BE MADE ESSENTIALLY RETROACTIVE FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THE DATE OF HIS ARREST.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, WHEN WOULD IT BE A PROPER TIME TO ADD MORE CONTEXT TO THIS OR MORE CONDITIONS?
>> YOU CERTAINLY CAN DISCUSS THEM NOW. I THINK THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> POINT OF ORDER, CITY ATTORNEY, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF ROLL-CALL.
>> I TAKE THAT BACK, MARY, YOU ARE CORRECT.
I THINK THAT THE ISSUE IS THAT WE CAN, AT YOUR REQUEST, ALWAYS BRING IT BACK.
ONCE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO POTENTIALLY YOUR DECISION-MAKING HERE TONIGHT IS MADE PUBLIC AND THAT WE BECOME AWARE OF IT, CERTAINLY, THAT IS MY PROMISE TO YOU ALL THAT IS, AS I BECOME AWARE OF INFORMATION THAT I BELIEVE IS RELEVANT TO THIS SITUATION, I'M GOING TO INFORM EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU AS SOON AS I CAN.
THEN AT THAT POINT, WHETHER ONE OR MORE OF YOU JUST GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO PUT IT ON A FUTURE AGENDA, WE WILL.
>> I WOULD NEED TO KNOW THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT.
VERY CLEARLY, THERE ARE RAMIFICATIONS TO THAT FROM A FINANCIAL ASPECT, FROM AN ASPECT OF ACTING VERSUS PERMANENT.
>> WELL, I THINK AS I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION, AT LEAST FOR NOW, IT WOULD BE FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME.
>> THERE WOULD BE, MOVING FORWARD, NO FINANCIAL OBLIGATION.
IF WE DECIDE TO GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE, WE CAN THEN TALK ABOUT WHAT THE POTENTIAL FINANCIAL RAMIFICATIONS ARE.
>> THANK YOU. THAT CLEARED IT UP FOR ME. NO.
>> MOTION 2, TERMINATE WITH CAUSE.
>> JUST A QUESTION, DO I GET THE GAVEL BACK OR DOES THE VICE MAYOR [OVERLAPPING]?
>> WE HAVE A NEW MOTION, [INAUDIBLE] I'LL TAKE THAT SHEET, TOO, PLEASE.
VICE MAYOR, CAN I HAVE A SHEET, TOO, PLEASE? [NOISE] IT WAS JUST THE PUBLIC SIGN-IN SHEET.
I HAVE A MOTION TO TERMINATE WITH CAUSE.
>> THIS IS YOURS. NOT SEEING ANY SECONDS IF I CAN HEAR THAT CORRECTLY.
>> I'M SORRY. I WAS PAYING ATTENTION OVER HERE.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TERMINATE WITH CAUSE AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER GALLON, ARE YOU NEWLY LIT?
[00:50:03]
>> CITY CLERK, ARE YOU NEWLY LIT?
>> OKAY. YOUR CLOCK IS RUNNING.
ALL RIGHT, I SEE THAT NO ONE ELSE WISHES TO SAY ANYTHING.
I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE IS THE REQUEST FOR TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE.
>> I'M ASSUMING AT THIS POINT IN TIME, YOU ARE INQUIRING ABOUT WHAT YOUR OPTIONS AND WHAT THOSE POTENTIAL LIABILITIES OR OBLIGATIONS MAY ENTAIL.
>> LET'S START WITH THE EASY ONE, WHICH IS IF YOU WERE TO JUST SIMPLY TERMINATE HIM FOR CONVENIENCE.
I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT'S ON THE TABLE, BUT I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL LIABILITY THERE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO KEEP IN CONTEXT WHAT THE CURRENT MOTION IS.
UNDER SECTION 10.1 OF THE MANAGER'S CONTRACT THAT SPECIFIES WHAT THE MANAGER WOULD BE ENTITLED TO BASED UPON STAFF'S RESEARCH OF THOSE NUMBERS, THE [NOISE] MANAGER WOULD BE ENTITLED TO A POUND OF UP TO 800 HOURS OF ACCUMULATED SICK LEAVE, 800 HOURS OF VACATION LEAVE, WHICH BOTH OF THOSE TOTAL $232,600.
HE WOULD ALSO BE ENTITLED TO THE 20-WEEK PAYOUT OF HIS SALARY, WHICH COMES TO $109,270.
THERE'S ALSO PROVISION WITHIN 10.1 THAT OBLIGATES THE CITY TO PAY FOR HIS INSURANCE FOR UP TO A YEAR, WHICH WOULD BE $24,556.20.
THOSE THREE NUMBERS TOTALED COME TO $366,426.20.
IF YOU TERMINATE HIM WITH CAUSE AND HIS CONTRACT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR DEFINITION OF CAUSE, WE WOULD HAVE TO RESORT TO COMMON LAW DEFINITIONS AND COMMON LAW ARGUMENTS, THEN YOU WOULD NOT OWE HIM ANY OF THE SEVERANCE NUMBERS THAT I JUST MENTIONED.
CERTAINLY, I WOULD SUSPECT THAT THERE WOULD BE A RESULTING DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THE CITY AND, POTENTIALLY, MR. CERNECH AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S VALID BASIS TO TERMINATE HIM WITH CAUSE, AND ULTIMATELY, THAT MAY END UP IN A COURT OF LAW.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME OF THAT LITIGATION WOULD BE.
I CERTAINLY KNOW I'M OF THE OPINION THAT THERE ARE LOTS OF ARGUMENTS THAT WE WOULD ASSERT VIGOROUSLY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY IF SUCH LITIGATIONS ENSUE, BUT HASN'T, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE TO DISCUSS WHAT THOSE MAY BE BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL LITIGATION THAT I WOULD ANTICIPATE WOULD OCCUR.
TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD AND THERE'S AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE TO TERMINATE THE MANAGER WITH CAUSE, I WOULD NOT BE DOING MY JOB IF I INFORM YOU THAT I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT WE WOULD THEN END UP IN A DISPUTE WITH MR. CERNECH OVER THAT TERMINATION.
[NOISE] COMMISSIONER GELIN, ARE YOU BACK AROUND OR ARE YOU JUST HAVING YOUR LIGHT LIT?
>> I'M BACK. I ALLOW MARLON TO GO FIRST.
I JUST WANT TO GET THAT NUMBER ON THE INSURANCE AGAIN, 24,000 WHAT? [BACKGROUND] $24,556.20.
THAT'S 12 MONTHS OF COBRA WITH, OPTION FOR SIX ADDITIONAL MONTHS THAT WOULD BE, INCURRED ON HIS BEHALF.
>> I HAD TO THINK ABOUT THIS OVERNIGHT AND TALKED TO A COUPLE OF RESIDENTS AS WELL AND REALLY AND TRULY, SUSPENDING MR. CERNECH WOULD BE PROBABLY A TEMPORARY IDEA OF SOME SORT.
HOWEVER, WILL THE RESIDENTS WANT HIM OR TRUST HIM TO BE BACK AT CITY HALL?
[00:55:05]
I DON'T THINK SO.AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHATEVER HAPPENS, I DON'T THINK THAT THE RESIDENTS WOULD TRUST HIM TO GOVERN THIS CITY.
I WOULD NOT TRUST THEM TO GOVERN THIS CITY.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE ON THIS DAIS SHOULD TRUST MR. CERNECH TO GOVERN THE FINANCES OF THIS CITY.
SO, THAT IS WHY I'M MOVING NOW FOR HIS IMMEDIATE TERMINATION.
WE WERE TOLD MANY TIMES THAT THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRUPT AND SHAME ON US FOR HAVING HIM CONTINUE FOR SO LONG IN THE CITY.
THERE MUST BE AN INVESTIGATION SOMEWHERE THERE.
SO, I'M GOOD WITH TERMINATING HIM TONIGHT.
>> COMMISSIONER GELIN THEN COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
>> NO. I JUST CLARIFIED THE COST.
YEAH. SO OF COURSE, FIRST ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COMMISSION, I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO THE EMPLOYEES, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T TAKE ACTION WHEN I FELT THAT WE NEEDED TO, AND THAT WE SHOULD.
I KNOW I WAS ON THE SAME PAGE WITH COMMISSIONER BOLTON IN TERMS OF TERMINATING, THE CITY MANAGER.
WANTED TO DO THAT FROM DAY ONE IN 2018 WHEN MAYOR DEAN TRANTALIS TOOK OVER, THE CITY COMMISSIONER IN FORT LAUDERDALE, HIS FIRST MOVE WAS TO TERMINATE THE CITY MANAGER, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR OWN PEOPLE TO RUN THE CITY AND ACHIEVE THE GOALS THAT YOU WANT.
AND I THINK WE, AS A COMMISSION FAILED THE EMPLOYEES HERE, BY NOT MAKING THAT MOVE AT THE TIME, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE.
FIRST IN 2018, WHEN COMMISSIONER BOLTON AND I WANTED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, AND THEN AGAIN, RECENTLY, WHEN VICE MAYOR VILLALOBOS CAME ON BOARD.
HE WAS ABLE TO WORK HIS MAGIC AND GET TO THE BOATS THAT HE NEEDED.
HIS GOAL WAS TO COUNT TO THREE AND HE DID.
BUT WE NEED TO ESTABLISH A PRECEDENT, AND SAY WHEN THESE TYPE OF ACTIONS ARE DONE, WHEN MONEY IS STOLEN FROM TAXPAYERS, WHEN DECISIONS ARE MADE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT FINANCIAL DEALINGS, WHAT SECRET LLCS ARE SETUP, WHERE HE'S GETTING FUNDING FROM BACK-END DEALS FROM COLONY WEST OR SOME OTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENED.
ACCORDING TO ASHLEY MOODY THEY'D BEEN TRACKING HIM SINCE 2010, AND I'M NO POLICE EXPERT, BUT I WATCHED ENOUGH SHOWS ON ID TO KNOW, THAT THEY ISSUE A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION UP FRONT, AND THEY EXPECT PEOPLE RELATED TO THE CRIME TO EITHER SHOW UP, AND SHARE INFORMATION AND OR TURN THEMSELVES IN, BUT THE INVESTIGATION IS CERTAINLY ONGOING.
I UNDERSTAND THERE MIGHT BE A COST TO FIRING HIM WITH CAUSE, THERE'S PLENTY OF CAUSE, BUT, WE CAN ALSO WALK AWAY NOT PAYING A DIME, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THIS CONTRACT IN MY BELIEF, IS NOT VALID.
IT WAS NOT DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE CITY.
IT WAS DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE CITY MANAGER, AND THERE PROBABLY SHOULD BE A BAR COMPLAINT AGAINST THE ATTORNEY AT THE TIME, SAM GORDON.
THIS IS COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE.
ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I DID, WHEN PRIOR ATTORNEY HANS AND I CAME ON BOARD, I SAID, ''TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CONTRACT, BECAUSE I TALKED THE SAM ABOUT IT AND I DISAGREED WITH HIM.
THEN I SAID, TO JOHN HERRING, WHEN THIS CAME UP, "TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CONTRACT." THERE'S NO PROTECTION IN THE CITY.
I READ THE CITY MANAGER CONTRACT FOR CORAL SPRINGS, SUNRISE, FORT LAUDERDALE, THOUGH, THE FORT LAUDERDALE CITY MANAGER WHEN HE GOT FIRED, HE GOT A BETTER JOB.
HE'S NOW THE CITY MANAGER IN GAINESVILLE.
NONE OF THEM GET PAID MORE THAN THIS CITY MANAGER, AND THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THOSE CONTRACTS THAT PROTECT THOSE CITIES, AND WE DID NOT HAVE THOSE PROVISIONS.
SO, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY HE SHOULD BE TERMINATED, IS TO GET RID OF THIS BAD CONTRACT.
WE NEED TO GET RID OF THIS BAD CONTRACT.
ANOTHER REASON WHY, IS, HE WAS GROSSLY OVERPAID.
WHEN I LOOK AT THE CITY MANAGER CONTRACTS, OAKLAND PARK JUST DID A COMPENSATION STUDY OF THEIR CITY MANAGER.
NOBODY HAS AN AUTOMATIC THREE PERCENT ESCALATOR.
PEOPLE THAT MAKE OVER $200 THOUSAND DON'T GET THREE PERCENT ESCALATORS.
THAT GOES TO OTHER LOWER-LEVEL EMPLOYEES.
THAT'S WHY HIS CONTRACT BLEW UP, IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
BECAUSE THREE PERCENT OF $250,000 IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THREE PERCENT OF $47,000.
SO, WE NEED TO GET RID OF THIS CONTRACT AND WE NEED TO SET A PRECEDENT AND THINK ABOUT THE RECENT PRECEDENT AND WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF BROWARD SCHOOLS.
[01:00:01]
AND HE WAS ESSENTIALLY FIRED.WE NEED TO SEND A DECISION, MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR, THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.
IT TARNISHES EVERY, HIGH LEVEL EMPLOYEE HERE.
IF YOU'RE A MANAGEMENT LEVEL EMPLOYEE AND YOU WANT TO GO TO ANOTHER JOB, SOMEWHERE ACROSS FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE AND YOU SAY, "I'M COMING FROM TAMARAC." "OH, WERE YOU THERE WHEN THE CITY MANAGER WAS THERE, COMMITTING SOME CRIMES?" AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE IS GOING TO COME OUT.
SO, IT TARNISHES EVERY EMPLOYEE HERE, THAT'S A MANAGEMENT LEVEL DIRECTOR OR SOMETHING AND WANTS TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
IT TARNISHES YOUR REPUTATION, BECAUSE YOU WERE HERE UNDER A POOR ADMINISTRATION OR AN ADMINISTRATION WHERE A CITY LEADER, IS CHARGED.
SO, WE NEED TO SEND A CLEAR AND DIRECT MESSAGE AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS POORLY WRITTEN CONTRACT, WHICH IS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY, WILL NOT STAND IN COURT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME DID NOT WALK THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT WITH EVERYONE, SO THEY FULLY UNDERSTOOD IT.
SO, I STAND BY THAT DECISION AND CITY MANAGER, MICHAEL CERNECH SHOULD BE TERMINATED WITH CAUSE.
AND I WILL BE VERY HONEST WITH EVERYONE.
I HAVE AGONIZED OVER THERE FOR MANY, MANY DAYS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
AND AFTER MANY DAYS, I HAD TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND SAY, YOU NEED TO SEPARATE PERSONAL FROM PROFESSIONAL AND WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY AND OTHER RESIDENTS.
THAT WAS A DIFFICULT DECISION.
BUT WALKING AROUND CITY HALL YESTERDAY AND SEEING THE EMPLOYEES LOOKING LIKE THE DEERS AND THE HEADLIGHTS.
WE ARE AT SUCH A LOW POINT RIGHT NOW AND WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO BRING IT ALL BACK.
I'M REQUESTING EACH AND EVERY ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, NOW'S THE TIME.
WE'VE GOT TO PULL TOGETHER THE FIVE OF US.
WE DON'T HAVE TO LIKE EACH OTHER, BUT WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER COLLEGIALLY TO PULL THIS BACK TOGETHER.
OUR CITY ONCE AGAIN HAS MADE THE NEWS AND NOT FOR GOOD REASONS.
WE HAVE TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
THAT'S WHAT THE FIVE OF US NEED TO DO.
I WILL NOT JUDGE MR. SEARCH, GUILTY OR INNOCENT.
WE ARE HERE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITY.
UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A CLEAN BREAK SO OUR CITY CAN MOVE FORWARD.
WE CAN'T HAVE SOMEONE ON SUSPENSION.
I'M MAKING AN EDUCATED GUESS THAT THIS COURT CASE IS GOING TO GO ON FOR A COUPLE YEARS.
WE CANNOT DO THAT TO OUR CITY.
WE CAN'T RUN ON AN INTERIM BASIS.
WE NEED TO GET BACK ON TRACK AND RUN THE CITY CORRECTLY, AND THE FIVE OF US NEED TO DO THAT, AND WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW.
I'M ASKING ALL MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THAT WITH ME, AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEES WE'RE GOING TO GET IT TOGETHER.
I KNOW YOU'RE WALKING AROUND IN A DAZE.
UNFORTUNATELY, MY DECISION HAS TO BE TO FIRE HIM BECAUSE IT'S IN WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY.
IT'S A AGONIZING DECISION TO MAKE.
MY HEART GOES OUT, BUT I FIRMLY BELIEVE IT'S IN THE RIGHT INTEREST OF THE CITY. THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER PLACKO, IT WAS TERMINATION WITH CAUSE, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL UNDERSTAND AS WELL THAT IF WE SEE SOMETHING WRONG IN ANY GIVEN CONTRACT, IN ANY GIVEN EMPLOYEE DECISION, THAT WE RAISE THAT FLAG, BECAUSE FOR THREE YEARS EVERYONE HERE HAS BEEN THE COMMISSION, THEY COULD HAVE RAISED THAT FLAG AND DONE SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
IF WE CAN JUST BE MINDFUL THAT WHEN WE SEE SOMETHING WRONG, THAT WE TAKE ACTION ON IT AND NOT SIT ON IT, NOT DWELL ON IT.
I JUST WANT TO ADD TO THAT AND I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH EVERYONE'S COMMENTS HERE.
I DO BELIEVE THAT WE DO HAVE A STRONG LEADERSHIP TEAM, AN EXECUTIVE TEAM, AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO DO WELL.
WITH THAT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.
>> THANK YOU. YOU CAN START THE CLOCK FOR ME.
IT'S OKAY. I'VE LISTENED TO MY COLLEAGUES.
I LOOK AT IT AS I SHOWED IN THE VERY BEGINNING,
[01:05:01]
A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.TO OUR EMPLOYEES, WE'VE HAD GREAT LEADERSHIP, WE HAVE GREAT EMPLOYEES, WE HAVE A GREAT STRATEGIC PLAN.
WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS SINCE 2010 IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AND WE HAVE GOTTEN THROUGH IT.
WE'VE GOT GREAT LEADERSHIP, WE'VE GOT GREAT, AS SOME SAY, WHO EXPLORES, WE'VE GOT AT THE PLAYING FIELD.
MY CONCERN WITH A TERMINATION FOR CAUSE IS THAT THERE WILL BE A LOT MORE OF US IN THE NEWS.
FORGIVE ME, TO THE NEWS THAT IS HERE AND THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING THAT HAS NO DISRESPECT.
BUT WE NEED TO MOVE THE CITY FORWARD WITHOUT US BEING THE CENTER SHOW.
WE NEED TO MOVE THIS CITY FORWARD AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY NOT BE SUPPORT FOR THE CITY MANAGER WHEN HE'S ACQUITTED, IF HE'S ACQUITTED AND HE WANTS TO COME BACK, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO COME BACK.
THAT'S NOT OUR PURPOSE FOR TONIGHT.
THAT IS NOT OUR DECISION TO MAKE.
OUR DECISIONS TO MAKE RIGHT NOW IS WHAT TO DO THE CITY MANAGER ROLE AND THEN FILL IT WITH OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER.
THERE WAS A REFERENCE TO MR. RONSE'S SITUATION.
MR. RONSE WAS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A SETTLEMENT AND A BIG SETTLEMENT HE DID HAVE.
THAT IS WHY I DO NOT SUPPORT TERMINATION FOR CAUSE, I FEEL WE WILL BE MORE IN THE LITIGATION SITUATION.
I THINK THAT IF WE WANT TO HAVE IT BE A SETTLEMENT SITUATION WHERE THERE IS A MANDATORY TRANSITION, MAYBE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED, BUT I THINK THAT FOR CAUSE WOULD CREATE A BIGGER FINANCIAL SITUATION FOR THE CITY THAN ONE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BLOCK.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS BELIEF THAT THIS IS A BREECH OF CONTRACT OR THAT THERE IS A ILLEGAL CONTRACT BUT THESE ARE ALL LEGAL SUPPOSITIONS THAT WILL BE ARGUED IN COURT BY OUR VERY COMPETENT, YET EXPENSIVE ATTORNEYS FROM ALL SIDES.
IN THE END, WHO PAYS? WE PAY AS RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES OF THE CITY.
IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS IN A FISCAL SITUATION, I BELIEVE A SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATION IS THE WAY TO DO THINGS.
I'M NOT IN FAVOR FOR TERMINATION FOR CAUSE.
I ALSO WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND OUR COMMISSION DISPARAGING REMARKS JUST BECAUSE SAID FROM THE DAYS DO NOT PROTECT US AND THE OUTSIDE WORLD.
I BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER GELIN, YOU WANTED YOUR ONE MORE ROUND, HOWEVER YOU HAVE SPOKEN QUITE- YOU'RE DONE?
>> NO. THE FIRST TIME I SPOKE WAS ONLY TO GET CLARIFICATION ON-
>> BUT YOU SPOKE FOR VERY CLOSE TO FIVE MINUTES.
>> SO WE GET FIVE MINUTES THEN WE GET TWO MINUTES.
>> IT'S ON A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING YOU.
YOU'RE ON A POINT FOR CLARIFICATION TO WHAT YOU SAID.
>> YEAH. NO. I JUST WANTED TO FIRST FURTHER EXTEND AND APOLOGY TO- I'M TRYING TO FIND THE GUY'S NAME.
BUT 13TH FLOOR INVESTMENTS, THE ONLY 13TH FLOOR INVESTMENTS.
I BELIEVE HIS NAME IS ARNAUD KARSENTI.
THEY ALSO PUT A STATEMENT OUT.
THEY BELIEVED THEY WERE WORKING IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE CITY MANAGER NOT KNOWING THAT HE WAS TRYING TO SCREW THEM ON THE OTHER SIDE.
ALLEGEDLY WHAT ALSO DISTURBED ME MOST ABOUT THE PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT WHERE THE REFERENCES TO THE TWO COMMISSIONERS ON THESE DAYS, THERE WAS A REFERENCE MADE TO COMMISSIONER BOLTON AND A REFERENCE MADE TO MAYOR GOMEZ.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ACTUALLY MOODY SAID THAT THE CITY MANAGER LIED TO MAYOR GOMEZ AND HE EVENTUALLY HE SET MAYOR GOMEZ UP TO TALK TO 13TH FLOOR ABOUT DOING THIS DEAL TO MAKE SURE THEY PAID OFF THIS BRIBE.
SEE TO ME MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT HE WAS TRYING TO SET UP COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
THAT'S A VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.
IT LEADS ME TO BELIEVE, ALTHOUGH MAYOR BETH TALABISCO AND COMMISSIONER PATTE ATKINS-GRAD WERE BOTH FOUND NOT GUILTY.
THEY WERE BOTH ARRESTED, THEY WERE BOTH CHARGED, THEY BOTH GOT MUG SHOTS.
I JUST WONDER IF THERE WERE TEXT MESSAGES.
WE WOULD LEARN THAT HE ACTUALLY SET THEM UP AS WELL.
IT JUST SHOWS A LEVEL OF SELFISHNESS THAT YOU WOULD PUT THE PEOPLE WHO PAY YOUR HIGH SALARY IN DANGER OF BEING ARRESTED, CHARGED, AND SENT TO JAIL FOR YOUR GREED.
I THINK THAT'S ALSO A VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.
[01:10:02]
WE'D CERTAINLY NEED TO CUT THAT OFF.I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I EXTENDED APOLOGY TO THE FOLKS AT 13TH FLOOR INVESTMENTS.
>> COMMISSIONER PLACKO. THANK YOU.
MAYOR, YOU MADE MENTION SOMETHING OF A SETTLEMENT OR NEGOTIATION, AND I THINK I'LL DIRECT THIS TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY OR MAYBE TO MY COLLEAGUES.
I DON'T KNOW. WOULD WE OFFER HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESIGN? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE ROUNDING TO.
>> MADAM MAYOR. I'VE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU PRIOR TO THIS MEETING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
THE PROS AND CONS OF VARIOUS ACTIONS HERE.
WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY TO YOU IS, REITERATION OF WHAT I SAID JUST ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE MINUTES AGO, WHICH IS AS NEW INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE, I WILL BRING IT TO YOU.
WHAT HAPPENS TONIGHT MAY LEAD TO A SERIES OF EVENTS THAT I HAVE A DUTY TO RESPOND AND REPORT BACK TO YOU, AND I WILL DO SO.
ALL YOU ARE ALL DOING TONIGHT IS TAKING AN ACTION THAT IS LIKELY TO HAVE A REACTION.
UNTIL THAT REACTION TAKES PLACE, I CAN'T TELL YOU, NOR DO I WANT TO SPECULATE BEYOND WHAT I'VE ALREADY SAID AS TO WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE ALL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE MOTION THAT IS BEFORE YOU, I SUGGEST YOU DO SO.
>> IS THIS AN ITEM THAT IS NEW FOR THE TOPIC?
>> YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE ON CONSIDERING THE LAST COMMENT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] THE QUESTION, SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED IF THIS IS NEW.
CALL THE QUESTION, PLEASE. CALL THE ROLL.
>> ON THE MOTION TO TERMINATE FOR CAUSE, NO.
>> THE MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ONE.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE SECOND ITEM.
[2. Appointment of Kathleen Gunn as Interim City Manager ]
IT IS THE APPOINTMENT OF KATHLEEN GUNN AS INTERIM CITY MANAGER.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOUR ITEM.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. AS I MENTIONED IN MY INTRODUCTORY REMARKS JUST OVERALL TONIGHT.
THE SECOND ITEM IS THAT UNDER ARTICLE 5 OF THE CITY CHARTER, SECTION 5.03, IT DOES STATE THAT THE MANAGER SHOULD SELF-DESIGNATE, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSION, A QUALIFIED CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER TO EXERCISE THE POWERS AND PERFORM THE DUTIES OF MANAGER DURING HIS TEMPORARY ABSENCE OR DISABILITY.
DURING SUCH ABSENCE OR DISABILITY, THE COMMISSION MAY REVOKE SUCH DESIGNATION ANYTIME AND APPOINT ANOTHER QUALIFIED OFFICER OF THE CITY TO SERVE UNTIL THE MANAGER SHALL RETURN TO HIS DUTIES.
NOW, OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY APPLY BASED UPON THE VOTE THAT YOU JUST TOOK, BUT AS I SAID TO YOU AT THE BEGINNING, PRIOR TO MR. CERNECH'S ARREST, HE DID DESIGNATE MISS GUNN AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER, AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 5.03, THAT ISSUE FOR RATIFICATION IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> WHO WANTS TO BE A SECOND? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON HAS A SECOND. AT THIS TIME.
I WILL OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND I HAVE RON WASSERMAN WHO HAS SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM AS WELL. YOU KNOW THE DRILL.
>> MY NAME IS RONALD WASSERMAN, I LIVE IN TAMARAC.
AGAIN, WE'RE IN A DIFFICULT POSITION.
WE'RE GOING TO LOOK TO MISS GUNN TEMPORARILY TO HELP US.
I JUST WANT TO WISH FROM OUR FAMILY, AND OUR CITY HAS HELPED US A LOT IN MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES.
[01:15:02]
SO I HOPE THE CONSISTENCY CONTINUES.WISHING YOU THE BEST OF LUCK, KATHLEEN.
I HOPE YOU'LL BRING A FRESH ATTITUDE, A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON WHERE WE ARE.
I'VE HEARD MANY DIFFERENT THINGS.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON HAD ONE TIME SPOKE ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT KATHLEEN GUNN HAD PROPOSED.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PECKING ORDER IS AT THIS POINT, BUT PLEASE AS A COMMUNITY, LET'S GIVE HER A CHANCE.
MAYBE SHE'LL BE OUR PERMANENT CITY MANAGER AT ONE POINT.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT'S SHOWN UP.
NO? NO COMMENTS ON THIS? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER WHO HAS NOT HAD A CHANCE TO SIGN UP AND WISHES TO SPEAK? SAY NON-PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
[NOISE] WE WILL NOW TURN IT TO THE COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER GELIN. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
>> I KNOW. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THE CITY MANAGER RECEIVED A JOB OFFER FROM THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH.
I WAS HOPING THEY WOULD TAKE HIM OFF OUR HANDS, BUT THEY DID NOT, BUT WHEN HE DID GET THE OFFER.
>> EXCUSE ME MAYOR, POINT OF CLARIFICATION HERE.
I THOUGHT WE WERE BEING RESPECTFUL AND WE CONTINUE WITH THIS NONSENSE OF THROWING THINGS OUT THERE.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SPEAKING AND TALKING LIKE ADULTS [OVERLAPPING] COMMISSIONER GELIN.
THIS IS A WARNING, COMMISSIONER GELIN.
THE NEXT ONE IS TO REMOVE YOU FROM THIS DIAS
>> GENTLEMEN, AT ANY POINT IF IT CONTINUES, THERE IS A WARNING FROM THE COMMISSION WHERE ANY COMMISSIONER CAN ASK FOR ANOTHER COMMISSIONER TO BE REMOVED ON A VOTE FOR DISRESPECT PURSUANT TO THE RULES.
IT HAS BEEN ASKED AND IT'S BEEN STATED SEVERAL TIMES TO KEEP THE PERSONAL COMMENTS OUT OF IT, JUST SAY WHATEVER YOU NEED TO SAY FOR YOURSELF WITHOUT ATTACK FOR OTHER PEOPLE.
PLEASE PROCEED, COMMISSIONER GELIN.
>> THANK YOU. SO I REACHED OUT TO ONE OF THE CANDIDATES WHO APPLY TO DELRAY BEACH.
HE WAS THE CITY MANAGER FOR HOMESTEAD AND ASKED HIM HE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN APPLYING FOR THE TAMARAC JOB SINCE MICHAEL CERNECH WAS IN THE PROCESS OF NEGOTIATING WITH DELRAY BEACH AND HE SAID HE WASN'T INTERESTED.
HE SAID HE WANTED TO GO TO A BEACH SETTING.
HE WAS IN FORT LAUDERDALE BEACH.
HE DID SOME OTHER CITIES AND SO HE DID RECOMMEND KATHLEEN GUNN.
SO I SPOKE TO HIM ABOUT KATHLEEN GUNN AND TALKED ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE WORKING TOGETHER IN NEW YORK AND AT THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE.
I ALSO WORKED AS A CONSULTANT FOR A SHORT TIME.
AT THE TIME, THE CITY MAYOR MA AND I SAW KATHLEEN GUNN THERE EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T REALLY INTERACT.
SO I REACHED OUT TO ANOTHER LADY WHO WAS THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER OF MAYOR MARR, NAMED ALLISON LOVE, AND SHE ALSO SPOKE HIGHLY OF KATHLEEN GUNN AND GAVE HER A GLOWING RECOMMENDATION.
HOWEVER, I DO THINK THAT WHEN WE SAY WE NEED A CLEAN BREAK, WE REALLY NEED A CLEAN BREAK.
SHE WAS THE NUMBER TWO TO MICHAEL CERNECH.
AGAIN, THAT'S NOT REALLY A GOOD LOOK.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD WORK WITH A DIFFERENT ACTING CITY MANAGER, SOMEONE WITHIN THE CITY OF TAMARAC, BUT THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
THEN THERE SHOULD BE A TIME CERTAIN OF 60-90 DAYS WHILE THE COMMISSION GOES THROUGH A PROCESS, COULD EVEN BE SIX MONTHS AND FINDS A OUTSIDE CITY MANAGER TO REALLY EVALUATE THE ENTIRE CITY, EVALUATE ALL THE DIRECTORS, AND MAKE A DECISION, SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
>> THANK YOU. I TRULY BELIEVE AT THIS POINT WE NEED SOME CONTINUITY HERE.
I THINK WE NEED SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN HERE, SOMEONE WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON, SOMEONE WHO IS AVAILABLE TO EMPLOYEES.
AT THIS TIME, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE NO ONE AT THE HELM WHO IS NEW AND DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT US OR THE CITY.
[01:20:05]
IT'S TIME TO CALM THINGS DOWN FOR A MINUTE AND THIS IS THE WAY WE DO IT.MISS GUNN IS MORE THAN QUALIFIED TO HANDLE THIS.
SHE HAS PROVEN HERSELF AND I THOROUGHLY BACK HER IN THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> MS. GUNN COMES WITH THE PACKAGE, SO TO SPEAK [LAUGHTER].
SHE WAS WITH THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE FOR SIX YEARS, I SERVED THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE ON THE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT BOARD.
THEY HAVE NOTHING BUT WONDERFUL THINGS TO SAY ABOUT MS. GUNN.
MS. GUNN WORKED WITH THE CITY OF MIRAMAR FOR TWO YEARS AND HAS BEEN WITH THE CITY OF TAMARAC FOR FOUR YEARS.
I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO MASTERS DEGREES, ONE FROM ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY AND THE OTHER ONE FROM PACE UNIVERSITY IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.
I'VE WATCHED MS. GUNN GROW AS AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.
I REMEMBER TOURING MY DISTRICT WITH MS. GUNN AND SHE HAD A LOT OF IDEAS FOR DISTRICT 1.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STUCK OUT TO ME AND IMPRESSED ME ABOUT MS. GUNN IS THAT SHE KNEW THE NAME OF THE STREETS AND SHE ACTUALLY KNEW WHERE THINGS WERE AND THE NAMES OF THE COMMUNITIES AND SO FORTH.
I BELIEVE THAT SHE POSSESS THE RIGHT ACUMEN FOR THE JOB, AND I WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO GIVE MS. GUNN A TRY ON AN INTERIM BASIS.
I FEEL THAT THE CITY DOES MEAN SOME CONTINUITY, SOMEBODY WHO HAS THE SMARTS AND THE SKILL SET AS A MS. GUNN.
OBVIOUSLY, I HAVE SOME RESERVATIONS BECAUSE MS. GUNN WAS WORKING WITH MR. CERNICH AND MR. CERNICH CAN BE VERY CONVINCING SOMETIMES.
I'VE SAID ON THIS DAY AS MANY TIMES THAT I STOPPED MEETING WITH MR. CERNICH A YEAR INTO BEING A CITY COMMISSIONER, CITY STAFF CAN ATTEST TO THAT.
FOR THE PAST ALMOST FOUR YEARS, DID NOT HAVE ONE MEETING WITH HIM, AND MY REASON FOR THAT IS THAT I SAID IT PUBLICLY AND UNDER SUNSHINE, IS THAT HE WOULD TELL YOU WHAT TO DO AND NOT ASK YOU WHAT YOUR OPINION IS.
QUITE FRANKLY, I DIDN'T LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE ARE THE POLICYMAKERS AND THE ONES WHO ARE TO SET THE VISION FOR THE CITY AND THE TONE FOR THE CITY.
AS HE WOULD TRY TO CONVINCE ME TO DO, GO ONE WAY, THAT DIDN'T SIT WELL.
BUT MS. GUNN HAD A DIFFERENT VIBE TO HER.
SHE WOULD GO BACK AND RESEARCH AND COME BACK WITH HER FINDINGS.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS? WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? CAN WE DO IT THIS WAY? THERE'S ALWAYS A COMPROMISE AND I THINK THAT SHE WILL HAVE SOME LEVEL OF FAIRNESS AND WE JUST HAVE TO GIVE HER A TRY.
I'M ABSOLUTELY 100 PERCENT ON BOARD WITH MS. GUNN TAKING OVER ON AN INTERIM BASIS.
THANK GOD. IT'S NOT MS. CALLOWAY.
MS. GUNN TAKING OVER, SO GOOD JOB.
>> EVERYONE HAS HAD SOMETHING FAIRLY WELL TO SAY ABOUT MS. GUNN, THE CITY ATTORNEY,
[01:25:03]
HOW DOES IT WORK IF WE CHOOSE TO GO THE INTERIM WAY OR KEEP HER AS THIS? SHE WAS APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER, ACTING CITY MANAGER.>> I THINK THAT GIVEN, I'M SORRY, I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND GLIB.
GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE ALL HAVE EXPERIENCED OVER THE LAST THREE DAYS, I THINK MS. GUNN HAS PERFORMED ADMIRABLY.
BUT WITH THAT SAID, IT IS NOW UP TO YOU ALL AND TO HER TO GO BEYOND TODAY'S DATE.
TO SOME DEGREE, IT DEPENDS UPON MS. GUNN WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT THE APPOINTMENT.
I HAVE SEEN IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE, TO USE THE TERM IN OUR CHARTER, THE ACTING CITY MANAGER REQUESTS TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT INVOLVE AN INCREASE IN A TEMPORARY INCREASE IN OUR COMPENSATION TO REFLECT THE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES, AND TO SOME DEGREE ALSO, I'VE SEEN VERY COMMON SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE IN THE AGREEMENT, MS. GUNN OR SOMEONE IN HER POSITION WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVERT BACK TO HER CURRENT POSITION.
IF IT IS THE INCLINATION OF THIS BODY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DESIGNATING HER FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER, THEN I WOULD ALSO EXPECT YOU ALL TO DIRECT ME TO PUT TOGETHER AN AGREEMENT THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO MS. GUNN AS WELL AND BRING IT TO YOU ALL FOR YOUR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
>> IS THAT AGREEMENT GOING TO BE ON CONSENSUS TODAY?
>> NO. I WOULD BRING IT BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING AND IT WOULD APPLY RETROACTIVELY TO TODAY'S DATE.
IF YOU DECIDE TO DESIGNATE HER AS THE ACTING MANAGER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION OF THE CHARTER, ANY AGREEMENT THAT WE WOULD BRING BACK TO YOU WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AS OF THIS DATE.
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, MR. SHANNON SHOULD NEVER PERSUADE ME IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM AS TO HOW I SHOULD BE VOTING.
I ALWAYS CHOSE TO VOTE THE WAY I WANTED TO VOTE AND WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR, AND I INSTRUCTED THE CITY MANAGER TO SPECIFIC ROLES AND THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SEE DONE AND THAT'S THE WAY HE DID IT.
I WAS NEVER CONVINCED BY ANY OF HIS WORDS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
THANK YOU MS. GUNN, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ALSO SUPPORTING YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK WE'RE VERY LUCKY TO HAVE MS. GUNN, AND HOPEFULLY SHE WILL ACCEPT THE POSITION IF IT IS OFFERED TO HER BECAUSE LET'S KEEP IN MIND RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT OFFERED AND SHE HAS NOT YET SAID SHE WILL ACCEPT IT.
I THINK THAT MS. GUNN SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE THE SINS OF THE FATHER PRESSED UPON HER.
SHE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB FOR OUR CITY.
I AM LOOKING AT OUR WONDERFUL CITY EXECUTIVE TEAM AND SOME STAFFS THAT ARE HERE.
THERE'S SOME ALSO ON THE SIDE, AND I KNOW THAT THEY RESPECT HER AND SHE RESPECTS THEM.
I KNOW OUR CITY STAFF AND EMPLOYEES RESPECT HER AND SHE RESPECTS THEM.
IN ORDER TO KEEP THE CONTINUITY AND THE GOOD MOVING FORWARD THAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE EXPRESSED, SHE IS THE BEST PERSON TO BE OUR CITY MANAGER.
I KNOW AT THIS TIME WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT ACTING CITY MANAGER.
WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT BRIDGE WHEN WE GET THERE.
I THINK TO USE LOGIC OF SAYING THAT WE SHOULD NOT TRUST HER BECAUSE THERE'S SOMEONE ELSE, THAT MEANS I THINK MOST OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES WILL NOT BE HERE THEN, AND I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THAT.
I AM HOPING THAT ALL OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES KNOW THAT WE SUPPORT YOU, MS. GUNN SUPPORTS YOU, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THE GREAT WORK OF THE CITY.
TO OUR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES OUT THERE, YOU'RE FINE.
WHEN WE LEAVE FOR TONIGHT, EVERYTHING WILL BE CONTINUING TO GO SMOOTHLY.
I DEFINITELY SUPPORT MS. GUNN IN THAT NEW POSITION.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. MAYOR GOMEZ?
>> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.
WE WILL HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY SPEAK WITH MS. GUNN, MS. GUNN DO YOU [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DO ACCEPT, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE AS THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC.
[01:30:02]
IT'S A GREAT HONOR.I'M HUMBLED BY THE PRIVILEGE AND I, ALONG WITH OUR INFINITELY CAPABLE EXECUTIVE TEAM AND STAFF, WILL CONTINUE OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE IN SERVING YOU, OUR RESIDENTS, AND OUR STAKEHOLDERS.
WE WILL KEEP WORKING HARD ON YOUR BEHALF TO ACHIEVE YOUR VISION AND GOALS FOR THE CITY.
I'M GRATEFUL FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND VOTE OF CONFIDENCE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS.
ON THAT WONDERFUL HIGH NOTE, WE WISH EVERYBODY A GREAT WEEK, AND WE'LL SEE YOU SEPTEMBER 9TH FOR OUR COMMISSION MEETING STARTING AT 7:00 PM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.