That's what I mean. You guys about ready? Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to readjourn the September 17th town council meeting. Um, we are on item 5A.
I guess this was a consent agenda item that was pulled from the consent. Jeff, I guess you read the resolution for us. Um, I will. And um Uh this is resolution number 2574, a resolution of the town council of the
town of Lockache Groves, Florida, approving an employment agreement for the town manager with Francine Eleria and providing an effective date. Okay. Do I have You need to talk, please. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion
to approve 2025-74 with an end of day of 2026 and a base salary of 155 for discussion. Okay, Todd, can you repeat your motion? I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2025-74
with an effective date ending 2026 September 30th with a base salary of 155. I have a second. Wait a minute. We're making a motion. Typically you have a motion and a second then discussion
and public comment. Same same beginning and ends 2026. So one year. Okay. I second it. Okay. All right. Discussion. Uh let's have public comment I guess. And there have been a number of emails
that have been received. Um and we do not have a policy. We probably need to think about that at a future meeting as to what time things have to come in when there is a continuation of the the
meeting. Um my suggestion to you because the uh meeting was continued last night is that you have them read into the record regardless of when they came in. um
because arguably people couldn't have made the the meeting or were here or planning all those kind of things. Um and uh we'll try to figure out a policy for this so that people are clear on what they need to do to get things read in or not read in when there is a
continuation of the meeting. Not that I am hoping that we continue to have continuation of the meetings, but uh seeing seeing seeing it h how it's happened more than once, we should probably anticipate that now. So, we should put a put a some kind of a policy on our next agenda on our October
agenda. All right. Um, how many do we have? How do we have public comments for people that are here? We do. Okay. So, maybe we'll let the people that are here first and then you can read all of them into the record. Valerie, you've got all of them. Sure. Okay. Okay. Uh, the first one is um I guess Cassie Sushi on behalf of Tracy
Rafflewitz. Sure. No, we're going to do the public comments with the people who are here first and then she's going to read the emails into the record. It's an email. It's an email. Okay. U Miss Scrunchie, I'm going in order of how they received from yesterday.
Cynthia Scrunchy 15349 Collecting Canal. Uh before I get into the open and ongoing criminal investigations currently underway regarding the town manager Francine Regalia, I'd like to say that if anyone watched
the Mickey Mouse show that occurred here at the meeting last night, Francine would be fired immediately. For the town council to have been so illprepared for a budget meeting is inexcusable.
any corporation in the country would have immediately let her go. Now, the state's attorney public corruptions case number 25 P 10,18A99.
It's a perjury charge. It's an ongoing investigation. Mr. Curts, I'm in receipt of your email telling the council to ignore it, telling the council that it had no basis You know that's not true and it's
irresponsible. There's a second hostile workplace investigation case number 2025007-000017 that's also undergoing. council,
you haven't even had the time to go through her contract. As I spoke to council members prior to this meeting, and they're not even aware that in her contract, it states that this the town will pay and settle any judgment
resulting from legal actions arising from her duties. Now, given that there are 35 employees that have either been terminated or left in the most recent years and 57 since
her tenure as the assistant town manager started, I'd say that puts this town at an immense risk. But you know what? I spoke to a different council member earlier and
there's so much more going on in the big scheme of things. It makes a criminal investig investigation kind of seem trivial. I did speak to assistant district attorney Alan Johnson prior to this meeting and I emailed all of you.
Maybe you received that email, Mr. Curts. He said the most prudent thing for this town council to do would be to put this contract negotiation and review off for 3 to four weeks. He said his office has
been told to make it a priority to put this investigation at the top of their list and he's going to make that happen. He said he possibly could get it done in two weeks, but it be would be his suggestion that this entire negotiation
be put off for 3 to four weeks till we get a resolve to this ongoing investigation. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Miss Richards. All right. Hi and good evening, Madame Mayor, council members. My name is Lori Richards and I am a real person. At the
last meeting, the mayor shared um comparisons of town managers across roughly 30 different towns. But I believe it's important that we compare apples to apples. The majority of those towns have budgets and populations far larger than ours. For example, West
Palm, the town manager, makes 314,000. Their budget is $264 million. Wellington, town's manager, earns 2011, but their budget is 137 million. Royal Palm, town manager, 220 223,000 with a
budget of 31 million. Okay. Now look at looks at now let's look at the towns that are closer. We have South Palm Beach 2.6 million budget. Their manager gets 120,000. Highland Beach $18 million. The manager
is 145. Jupiter Inlet Colony 4.7 million manager earns 143. Well, okay, that's a little bit lower. Let's look at one of the towns that is offering 163,000 which is what is
proposed I believe closer is Lake Park. Their budget is 37 million. Their population is 9,000. Even at that level, their budget is more than three times as large as ours and their population three times as large. And they also
that should give us cause to pause. Our town has a budget of approximately I couldn't get the 8 million and a population of 3,000 yet they proposed a salary of 160. I figure that a large aligns with much larger towns than ours.
I do also like to raise a larger concern. Who has ever heard of a town manager writing their own employment terms? Especially the contract is approved by somebody who's been on a reference for their job applications. Finally, I propose that we do delay any
signing of the contract till the outcomes of the two investigations that are known. Um to minimize and overlook these investigations would be reckless and a disservice to our town. Thank you.
Miss McNicholas, please hold your applause till after I'm done. Good evening. I'm Mary McNicholas, 12845 Raymond Drive. First, I'd like to say shame on all of us. All of us. We
claim to be a nice rural town, but you know, I've lived in other nice rural towns and folks don't treat treat folks like this. Shame on us for allowing that horrible type of behavior to be expressed in this town hall last night
and at previous meetings. We do have a code of conduct. Your agenda clearly say states that behavior must be civil. It's not. With all due respect, Metadame mayor, if that gavel doesn't work,
replace it or someone else needs to use it. The separate until the separate meetings that are taking place in the back of the room and the nasty displays of name calling, jeering, and disrespect stop. We're better than this.
No one could possibly be expected to do their jobs in this room with the hyper toxic ad atmosphere that exists in here. Nobody's perfect. We all make mistakes.
Heck, I make mistakes all the time. I usually grow from it. Then why do we have these unreasonable expectations for our town manager and dedicated staff? The bullying has got to stop. We've lived in this town for over 20 years.
And the manner in which the public and residents have been allowed to treat speakers, not only from you all, council members and staff needs to stop. Our beautiful town keeps repeating the same repeating the same old same old tired
destructive cycle. Beat up the town staff, then beat up the town manager, no matter who it is. Before we had before we were incorporated, it was Clay Sier. The guy didn't stand a chance. Frank Spencer definitely didn't stand a chance. Matt Lipman, Bill Underwood,
Jamie Tickhome, and now it's Francine's turn. Please let them get their jobs done. We're on the cusp of doing really great things and protecting the rest of the town. But we need to stop this hateful
behavior. Let them get a chance to get caught up. It's darn near impossible to get projects done with all this fabricated complaints, hateful comments, and behavior. Notice, not one of these haters has contributed positively to
this community. Name one. I don't think so. I don't think so. Excuse me, I'm speaking. I along with these other wonderful folks who've always positively contributed to the town support the town manager. Many of
them couldn't make it in person or didn't want to put up with the bullying. They are Dave Browning, Sharon Browning, Jodie Swank, Darren Swank, Joseph Thomas, Ton Tanya Thomas, Rudith Menor, Mike Menor, Ana and Daniel Benjene
Benjinaro, Bill Yan, Jeff Slugged, Jane Cleveland, Lisa and Paul Cruz, and Joe Siliano. Most of the town doesn't wish to be put through this drama, bullying, and harassment. So, please have the courage of your convictions. support each other, our staff, including our town manager, and
let's protect this town we love. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Good evening, town council. Madame Mayor, can you please try to step forward? I can I know it's a little difficult for you or adjust the mic so we can all hear you. Thank you. Okay.
feel like I'm eating an ice cream con. You look a little like you're eating an ice cream con. the questions. Um, one, I think I myself and my wife
have done a lot in this community to support this community for the work that we've done without search team search and rescue. So I beg to pardon the previous speaker
that nobody helps here. We help. Um couple of quick questions. Do you have a system of quarterly reviews
on the town manager? They do a turn in I mean do you want to answer that question Jeff? Um there there is not a review per se of the town manager. There are quarterly
reports that the council receives um from all departments and all the outside consultants. and it's basically a review of the organization and where it stands on a um continuing basis.
So the answer is no. You don't have a review of the town manager. Does not the town manager work for you folks? I believe they do. I believe she does. So I I suggest
that we set up a quarterly review. Let her answer the questions. You review it. That's a part of this salary review. Review. I work for a company for 32 and a2 years.
We got reviewed. We either went up or we went out. Why are we doing such a thing? Second thing, I believe in pay raises if they merit it. Now,
I also believe in cost of living. In other words, if the cost of living, which you can find out from watching the news or or reading it in the paper or whatever,
if the person is not maybe doing the best job in the world, but cost of living affects them just like it does of all of us. So give them a cost of living
you up in their salary. Um I strongly feel that you need to have a quarterly review of the person's Thank you, M. Thank you,
Miss Dish. Virginia Standish North Road. For the record, I have served on the town's finance committee, the town's ULDC committee, and the town's charter committee. I have done my service to this town. I have also provided constructive criticism over the years
that has been uh responded to with negativity sometimes from staff and council. Um I see nothing wrong with constructive criticism. We all get that in our employment to improve what we are doing.
But public is also entitled to question government. Um I want to point out on the 51 special meeting that was brought uh for several issues the hostile work uh place issue and it was mentioned there would be investigations. We heard
some commentary about investigations which results are not in at this meeting on the 51 at the very end. Uh, the mayor suggested that she personally thinks affirming our confidence in the town manager and
renegotiating her contract is part of an appropriate response to the threats made. Again, this is without having an investigation. Uh, Councilwoman Herszog makes some comments. Mayor then says, "So, you'd
like to make a motion?" I have watched this video over and over. I do not hear Councilwoman Herzog saying yes. I hear the mayor saying what she thinks Miss Councilwoman Herszog wants. So my comment there is on rules and procedure
if you could review that. But here we are. Um in that same meeting we were told the community would have a month to review this contract. I don't believe the community has had a month. Um, I felt it would be more appropriate that this there should be a search, not to
eliminate the current town manager, but to do a comparison. The search could be done for free as Westlake is having done. I felt that would have been appropriate, would have relieved some issues. The concerns I have with uh problems that have happened in this town, and you've heard me say these
before, it's nothing new to you. the failed FPNL project in this town. It is not the pro it is not because of only land owners. It is a mutual issue between FPNL and the town and the town manager directs this and obviously
public works is involved but public works comes under the direction of the town manager. this has not been addressed and there are issues that have not been resolved on this and the town will lose this money and and the project will remain unfinished. To me, that's a negative.
Um, safety issues, a failing road. When our had the line run through it, the road was collapsing. We reported it. Larry Peters was public works at the time. Orange cone was placed. Some dirt came in, filled in. We repeatedly tried to work with the town. We were told our
culvert would be replaced. Time went by, nothing happened. Other culverts got done. There are many issues in this town that seem to be taking care of certain people and not and not others. That has not stopped. So, do not look to us as
the bad guys. Thank you, Miss Dailyy. Miss Dailyy. Hello again, Alli Dailyaly, 829C. Um, I just want to point out that our
country was founded with discourse and conflict. Impassionate arguments undoubtedly happen in the writing of our constitution and the forming of our government. The bottom line is there is a difference between right and wrong. Period. If the job is being done efficiently and correctly and responsibly, the town residents would
have no issues. We all contribute to our community. That's why we're all here tonight, because we care about the town and the direction that it's headed. We are not required to, nor will we be bullied into supporting someone we don't feel the has has the citizens best interest at the forefront of their mind
and their work ethic. To support an employee that is under investigation is unbelievable. Common sense dictates that it is not prudent nor responsible to rehire rehire someone that has multiple complaints and criminal investigations underway against her for potential
felonies. It's clear mismanagement of the town staff and budget have been a huge contributing factor to the financial issues our town is now facing. If someone in a company doesn't do an efficient job has legal action ensuing against them and multiple employee complaints, they're either fired but
certainly not given a pay raise. How can we possibly set ourselves taxpayers up to face potential huge financial burden if she is found guilty of what she's being investigated for that we would then have to pay out to her. She should not have her contract
renewed but perhaps may stay on salary monthtomonth until the investigation is finished and an outcome is determined. During that time we may have the opportunity to interview potential new candidates. Why would anyone in their right mind sign a long contract when these are the conditions at play? It's
irresponsible to do with our money and it would be neglectful by council. Thanks, Janet. Janet Ike Janet Ike 3481 B Road Box Sahhatche Florida
Hello everyone nice to see you all so I'm a little concerned about what is going on especially about Francine's litigation ations. I don't want to pay for it. I don't think we should pay for
it. And you as a council should not agree to it. I don't want to see a new contract. I'd love to make $165,000. I'm not going to do that. You know, it's not Do you guys make 165,000? I have a
great education and I don't get to make that. So, I do not believe in anyone getting a raise without some kind of um preemptive did you do
your job? No, you didn't. Well, then don't be here. I don't care about anything but locks the Hatchee Gross. You know, we all have to be here and we have to make sure that we look after our
town. Do you want to pay for things that her litigation? I don't. And I sure don't want to pay for it after she's gone if she is gone. So I implore you all of you that I would have voted for to say no to this.
And if you don't, well, I won't vote for you next time. And I'm sure there will be a lot of others. Miss Suchi Cassie. Yes. Cassie Suchi. All elected officials swear an oath to faithfully discharge
their duties. Willfully ignoring serious issues that currently are focused on this employee will be seen by the public as neglecting those duties that they swore to uphold. acting responsible. You the duty to
uphold to act responsibly for the public. It is wholly irresponsible to dismiss what you knowingly know is occurring and ignore it like it's not even there. Willfully neglecting your duties, violating public trust could be
grounds for a recall. I urge this council to do the right thing. Be responsible. Put a delay on this. However you want to work it out, put a delay on renewing or negot renegotiating a contract until all
of this stuff is cleared out and we have a clear idea of what's going on. Making reckless, decisive decisions and acting knowingly what is happening with criminal investigations could actually pierce your immunity clause. each and
every one of you. The state attorney, as it was suggested in an email and to the email that apparently Jeff had, suggested that we delay this. Be responsible. Uphold your oath to this town and do the
right thing. There is no reason to rush with everything going on. Make the right responsible decision and put this on hold. get the answers you need and then we can we can move forward after everything's clear.
Mr. Collins um thank you for the opportunity to speak. Um I've got 40 years of actually more than 40 years of experience in the private sector uh in healthcare technology. Um in those 40 years I've hired well over a
thousand people. Um fired quite a few as well. Um so I know something about what it takes to attract good talent and to reward them appropriately. Um I think most of what I'm going to point out has been said before. Um, but what what I will say is it appears to me that the
salary is not 155 160,000. It really seems to me that it's about 210. Um, if you add the base salary plus the $35,000 401k contribution, which I've never seen in the private sector, anything done like that. Um, plus $15,000 contribution
towards health care. So that adds up to 210,000. Um there's 5 and a half weeks of vacation planned per year. Um four and a half weeks just straight vacation plus one week of management leave which is unrestricted. That could be going to the
beach I guess. Um plus there could be up to nine weeks of carryover. So this is just extraordinary. This this simply doesn't happen in the private sector at all. Um typically you get two to four weeks of vacation. Use it or lose it. It
doesn't carry over anymore. Um and and it's been like that for decades now. Um so my recommendation anyways would be to stick with the current salary until the current um uh issues are resolved around
um the the legal cases um and change the $35,000 contribution to a 401k to the standard 3% match. Um if the employee chooses to set aside 3% of their salary, the town can match that. That would be well under
$4,000 instead of 35,000. Um again, 3 weeks of of vacation period, no carryover. Um and uh there's current currently no limit, I think, in the contract for um professional um uh
extensions. So, somebody could say, "I want to go get a PhD in, you know, public service um at Harvard." And that might be a $250,000 bill there. I don't see any limit in the contract uh for that. Um standard in the private sector
is if you're willing to invest in your employees, then you set aside some dollar amount. I I've been in very large companies at senior levels and $2 to $5,000 per employee per year is typically adequate. Um and even with
that there's usually um a caveat that if you leave within a year that's recoverable or a portion of it is recoverable. And these are all standard um and have been standard clauses in employment contracts now again in the private sector for many many years. Um and I think we really ought to or orient
ourselves in that direction. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Miles, Maryanne Miles. Um, I watched last night's meeting and I was really appalled at the behavior that went on.
All of you, except for one, have been on this council before. You've been into meetings and the water control district and the behavior that went on last night just wanted to make me puke. You guys
have a responsibility of looking at information. If you want facts, you go to somebody to get them. You get prepared for the meetings. not sit up there and try to be coerced or convinced
and say if well I don't do this, you don't do this, I'm not going to do that. You guys are responsibility responsible for bringing money into the town. Let's focus on that for a change. Find ways I know you don't want to subdivide. Okay,
I don't want zero lot line homes either, but we have a unique diverse community that would before we became a town, we have 1 acre, 2 acre, 4.9, 3.7, I can
go on and on up to 50 acre tracks out here. How you going to bring money into the town? We have commercial on Southern Boulevard, but yet things that want to come in, you guys say no, no, no, no, no. All right, but you want to squeeze
the penny out of the residents who are here year after year after year. You guys responsibility is to look at a budget. And I don't care if it's one month, two months out. You knew it was coming. Now, I'm going to tell you a little bit of backstory about Francine because I sat
where you sat. and Francine, we asked her, we did the capital plan in 2021 and we came up with items that we wanted to get done in roads and we said this is
the money that we need. How do we get it? What can we cut? What can we do without burdening the residents, without taking a loan? Francine went at that time from
assistant manager to manager. We said to her it was time for her contract. We can't do this. We want to take our suggestion was to take the assistant manager. She couldn't hire one. And we
were going to take that large amount and put it into the roads. That's what we did. We also asked her to find more money out of the budget because that's what she does. That's what any town staff does. That's their job.
Anita, you finally said it last night after what, an hour and a half of me listening. Can you find 5% of the budget? Cuz it's not up to you guys to tell her what it is. I'm going to end with this because I don't have a lot of time. You're going to scoot me out of here.
Your job tonight is to decide whether you want to keep Francine on or as a manager or not. I say you guys job is to find money. Quit spending money you don't have. You know it's coming. Look
for money to kin from this town to pay the town's expenses. She won't be the first and she's not the last that whether had bad reviews or something going on. This happens to be a
repetitive issue every three or four years when somebody's contract comes up. Quit trying to boot people out. This woman right here has a lot of knowledge in her head. And if you guys couldn't pull it out or couldn't ask questions
before a meeting, shame on you. Miss Collins. Hi again, Susan Collins. I'm not personally familiar with the town manager or her performance. It's clear that there are potentially some
issues involved here. Uh my observation is setting those issues aside, the proposed changes to the contract, um and I think I saw a version yesterday that sounds like it might have been
amended somewhat, but those changes are extraordinary. It reflected an increase in cash comp of something over $75,000 in addition to benefits that could only be described as extremely generous
that were not extended to the rest of the staff. That's a massive problem from a management perspective. Like my husband Kevin who spoke earlier um I've managed some very large organizations and some very large public companies. I've managed smaller
organizations and private companies. I've been doing this 30 years. I can tell you that the type of increase that's proposed in this contract would raise eyebrows at even the most wildly successful
companies I've worked at. It they're just extraordinary. I personally struggle to understand what type of performance would merit an increase of that magnitude in a town
of our size. Thank you. Yeah. See, do you want to go ahead and read Tracy's Good evening and thank you Cassie for reading my notes tonight while I'm on a plane. I sometimes wonder if our words Sorry Cassie, excuse me. Who are you reading for? I'm in here. Thank you.
Sorry. I sometimes wonder if our words still carry weight with this council. But I want you to know I won't stop trying. I'm simply trying to be a productive citizen of this community with the only the best interest of our residents at heart. Anita, did you negotiate this contract with our town
manager? If so, I must express my deep disappointment. This agreement does not reflect the best interest of our residents. A contract of this magnitude locking in three years of obl obligations with unusually generous terms should never have been handled by
just one person. To the rest of the council, there are five of you up there. How could you allow one person to negotiate a three-year contract with stipulations this costly? Allowing a single individual to negotiate such a
contract is not fair to the people of this town, and it raises serious serious qu concerns about process and accountability. Over the life of this agreement, the town could spend nearly a million dollars once severance liability is included. Instead of adding long-term
costs that magnify taxpayer exposure, we should be looking for ways to control spending. This proposal costs significantly more per capita than neighboring towns of similar size. I ask you directly, is this compensation truly in line with what other town managers
and similarsized towns are receiving? Has performance justified this level of investment? Is the council comfortable with the built-in flexibility and automatic raises? This contract locks the town into a series of major financial commitments. You must
carefully weigh whether the value delivered aligns with the cost. What is especially alarming is the severance clause. If she is terminated without cause, she still receives about 5 months of pay. That's a heavy burden for
taxpayers. And Francine, please understand, I have no vendetta against you personally. I respect your work, but I believe firmly that this contract does not align with the size, budget, and compensation practices of our town. The obligations it creates, higher base pay,
extra retirement contributions, cash insurance payouts, and severance go far beyond what's seen in comparable municipalities. For the sake of fiscal responsibility and fairness to our residents, I cannot support this contract in its current form. No matter
what happens tonight, it's important that we all stay engaged and aware. Whether we agree or disagree, we must remain civil neighbors. The people sitting in front of us have the power to shape the good, the bad, and the ugly in this town. That's why as a community, we must continue raising our voices even
when it feels like no one is listening because our voices matter and this town deserves our persistence. Thank you, Tracy Rapowitz. Okay, the rest are in writing. Okay, go ahead. Okay, the first one is from Mr. Sud and it says, "To the town council members,
please be advised if you vote yes on resolution number 202574 without first obtaining a written legal memorandum from the town attorney addressing the risks, you may expose yourselves to personal liability as well as the town to substantial financial and legal consequences. Please also note that
there is no defined budget or legal provision to pay for your individual legal defense or for the defense of the town attorney or town manager. Should claims arise for your individual liability or intentional misconduct. Approving a contract of this magnitude without documented legal analysis risk
breaching your oath of office and the public trust. And he references the Florida Constitution. For this reason, I respectfully urge you to require a written legal opinion from the town attorney before taking any vote and to make that opinion available to the public for transparency. He goes on to
um address the town attorney and he references um an email um from Miss Monica Weber. Um, well, the one from Monica Weber, we have it in already in a separate email. Do you want me to continue reading that
portion? I'm sorry, what? He then he then references to the town attorney. Do you want me to read that portion? Why wouldn't we? It's part of the email. Under the Florida bar rules of professional conduct, your fidiciary
fidiciary duty is owned to the organizational client here. The town council, not to the town manager, prohibits representation where there is a conflict of interest or divided loyalty. Yet, the draft contract appears to have been negotiated in a way that favors the town manager rather than
protecting the town council and residents. Therefore, I request that you answer the following questions in writing. If you will not, I urge council to ask them publicly at the hearing. One, legal risk memo. Have you provided a written legal memorandum to town council identifying the legal risk to
the town and to individual council members if they vote yes on resolution number 202574? Two, personal liability. Have you provided a written analysis of personal liability exposure for council members who approved this contract, including
potential claims for breach of fidiciary duty or misuse of public funds? Three. Miss Weber's memo. Have you specifically evaluated the risks identified in Miss Weber's attached memorandum attached? Public comments dated September 14th, including reference to ongoing or
potential investigations and litigation concerning the town manager. Number four, fidiciary duty. Negotiating and drafting this proposed contract. Did you act solely as fiduciary to the town council consistent with rule 4-13?
Or did you permit the town manager to influence your role? Five. Operational involvement. During these negotiations, were you still reporting to, compensated by, or involved in operational matters directed by the town manager? If so, does this not create a conflict
of interest under rule 4-1.7? Six. Investigations defense. Are you currently involved in the defense of the town manager in any investigation, allegation, or legal matter? If yes, please identify the matters. Seven, conflict and recusal. Given the
appearance of conflict, why did you not recuse yourself from advising on or drafting this contract? Eight, attorney client privilege. If you invoke attorney client privilege privilege to avoid answering any of the above, please state clearly why.
Privilege applies to each question given that your client is the town council as a body, not the town manager. Final note, Mr. Kurtz, this contract appears written as if you were representing the town manager, not the council. Your duty is to safeguard the council and by
extension the residents of Loxa Hatche Groves. Failure failure to do so could place your professional license at risk under the Florida's Florida Florida Bars rules of professional conduct. Just as approval of this contract without proper legal analysis could place individual
council members at risk of personal liability. The next email is from Christine St. John. Per our charter town manager, the town manager shall be the chief administrative officer of the town. As a chief administrative officer, the town
manager shall ensure that all laws provisions of this charter and acts of the council are faithfully executed consistent with the direction of the town council. So, it seems to be Miss Ramaya's fault that the contract between the town and sheriff's office was not signed by our town attorney. Better
check her contract, Kurt's contract, Mary McN McNicholas's contract, and all other similar contracts to make sure all have been signed by town's attorney. better get busy with the following legal and criminal consequences. Fines. Town
charters and state laws often specify civil penalties or fines for for officials who violate the charter. For example, a municipality may be able to impose fines for certain violations, misconduct in office. In some cases, a charter violation may also constitute a
criminal offense such as misconduct in office, which can be prosecuted in court. Civil lawsuits. Citizens or other government entities can file lawsuits against officials or the municipality itself for charter violations. The
lawsuit can seek an injunction to halt the illegal actions or other forms of relief. Loss of benefits. Violating a charter can potentially lead to the loss of an officials pension or other public benefits, especially if violation
involved misconduct or corruption. The next one is from Phyllis Manilia. Residents and land owner owners Lockxahhatchee Groves. Please read my statement into the record tonight at tonight's meeting. Phyllis Manilia. I lived I've lived in Lockxahhatche Grove
since 1989. I have been through every manager and Lockxahhatchee Grove's water control district supervisors, good and bad. Let's not talk about the bad as they are now gone. Since 2022, this town has visibly and financially improved under the management of Francine Ramalia
and her staff. She has heard our requests and has performed her duties with loyalty and efficiency. This mob has always been in opposition of improvements unless directly affecting them. Please continue to move this town in a positive direction. Approve
Francine Ramalia's contract. This next one is from Benny K. I have enjoyed living in Lockxa Hatchee Groves for many years and have been through a few town managers. Loxahech Groves has noticeably improved aesthetically and financially under the management of
Francine Raalia and her staff. Uh the next one is from Katherine Cus. I am not a regular at these town meetings like some of the other residents here in Locks Hahatchee Groves. It is because of this that I feel my experience is not clouded with other people's opinions but judged off
my own personal experiences. I am just out there in the community living living my life just like anyone else who is not sitting in this room arguing back and forth. There is a divide in our country that some of you are hellbent on
mimicking here in our town. I have seen the Facebook rants. I have read the defamation. We don't want this hate. We want peace. I have lived in this community for over 10 years. I sleep here. I am not a commuter. I have seen this ch I have seen changes in this town, including
different town managers. I spend the majority of my life next to people who dedicate their lives to bettering this community. Their efforts are not visible overnight, and it is not always obvious what all is accomplished over time. Much like watching your children grow up. One
day they are taller than you and you can't remember how they got there. That is how I view the past 10 years in regards to the progress of Lockxahhatche Groves. Is the town in a better position now with Francine Raalia as the town manager? We'll drive around town and you
know the answer. Yes, we are. That is why I wanted to share this message. This community needs some stability. Mark Spargo. Dear Lockahhatchee Groves Township Government, we are sending this letter to express our support of Francine Raala to continue as Lockx
Hache Groves town manager. Francine has continued demonstrating leadership and careful management of our township, which one of the reasons we chose purchase land and build our farm within Lockxa Hatche Grows. Thank you for your consideration of our support.
Paul Cruz. I have never been a ver verbal person in our town because I am usually too busy working. I have been to a few meetings and I think I have met Francine one or two times. I also recently tried to contact Paul Coleman to ask him his thoughts on this
situation because I figured he would be honest with me since we grew up together, but I never heard back. I also see some of the stuff on Facebook and all I can say is it seems like a witch hunt. I tried to watch a little of the meetings. I have to say from what I have
seen and read, Francine is doing a wonderful job and I think her contract should be renewed. That is really all I have to say. Lisa Cruz, I would like to I would like this read into the record if possible. I know that this was supposed to be handled last
night and I have written and made my feelings clear about Francine. Therefore, I did not see a reason to send in anything. However, after seeing last night's meeting and reading the lovely remarks by the lem lemmings mob on social media, I feel it necessary to reiterate that I think not renewing
Francine's contract would be a huge loss to our town. I believe she has done an excellent job with our town, especially dealing with bullies and naysayers. I do not pretend to know about the things that the town manager and town council do. and I would never want their
jobs. But some in this town are never happy with whoever is doing whatever job and have way too much time on their hands to stir the pot, anger the mob, backstab, bully, and threaten. It was Phyllis, then the RV resort, the soccer field, then commercial and Okachobee,
and now Francine is the latest target. Watch out, you could be next. I hear all the whining, but I do not hear anyone who is whining producing a solid solution to anything, least of all the town manager's position. Exactly. What does everyone think would
happen to our town without Francine? Certainly, none of the angry bullies are fit to be a manager or even a council person for that matter. We need a council that stands up for what is right and has the backbone of its own, not cowering and giving in to the loudest mouth. We need this as a well with our
town manager. Francine is that person has proven so repeatedly. I do not have an agenda, but there are plenty who do. Renew Francine's contract. give her the pay, raise, and benefits because she deserves them a lot more than PBSO and ill constructed roads. Just my opinion,
of course. Diana Babington, I am unable to attend the meeting tonight. However, I would like to state that Francine has been an excellent and responsive town manager for Lockxahhatchee. She has a she takes a personal interest in residents problems and does not and does what she
can regularly against all odds to resolve problems within her capabilities and job description. To lose her would be a loss to all. Uh this is another one from Christine St. John. I certainly am heartbroken when an animal is injured or killed.
Uh no different item. That's okay. Uh, lot of emails, you guys. Excuse me. Okay, this one's Cindy. Um, okay. Kathy Terrell, as a resident of Lockah Hatchee Grove since 1989, I
believe I have ample experience to give my opinion to our present manager. I find it utterly ridiculous that we are even discussing her contract renewal. She has done nothing to enhance our living standards during her time in office. The present manager has forgotten that she is an
The present manager has forgotten that she is an elected official. Lying under oath is illegal. This is one of the reasons she is presently being investigated by the state of Florida. I do not want any person representing me, a Lockahhatche resident, as a manager
while under investigation. Uh, this next one is from Steven Hoffman. I am not going to read this into the record because of um some choice words that were used, but he is not in favor of the manager's contract.
Uh, Janine will uh formally objecting to renewal of town manager contract, divisive behavior, callous dishonesty to citizens, unprofessional behavior all around, zero basis for renewal. Alternatives must be sought out.
Um, this one does not have a name. Uh, I would like to suggest not to renew the town manager's contract. She has abused spending and also hired an overqualified constituent when town was needing a code compliance officer. She also has ties to
the town attorney and finance officer. Also, she has in past one second. this point of order. I thought we didn't read public comments that don't have have it has an email on it, but it just they didn't sign it with their name. Do you want me to continue? Sure.
Also, she has in past made sure she demoted a manager due to her personal vendetta at her previous work. She is asking for too much for benefits and she has town employees complaining about her and hostile work environment. Please let her retire as she already she is already
in drop program. There's qualified personnel looking for her. Thanks, town council. Concerned resident in Lockachi Groves. Jennifer Stevens. I am writing as a concerned resident of the town of Lachi Groves to respect respectfully express
my opposition to the renewal of the town manager's contract, particular particularly in light of her request for a salary increase exceeding 30%. As someone who values the effective governance and community harmony that our town strives to maintain, I believe it is essential to address ongoing
issues that have undermined public trust and the manager's ability to serve impartially. My comments are offered in the spirit of constructive dialogue with the goal of supporting a leadership transition that benefits all residents. Of course, the course over the course of my interactions with town hall, I have
observed patterns of behavior that raise serious questions about the manager suitability for continued service. Reports indicate that she is currently sub subject to both criminal and civil investigations which naturally cast doubt on her capacity to lead with the integrity expected of such a pivotal
role. Additionally, there have been multiple documented instances where the manager has provided inaccurate information to residents, including myself and others in our community. While I understand the public service can involve complex decisions, these lapses have eroded
confidence in her transparency and reliability. Of particular concern to me is the manager's pattern of responding to residents concern with what appears to be retaliatory actions. I'm aware that several community members have experienced adverse consequences such as
escalated scrutiny of their property after voicing complaints or seeking resolution on legitimate issues. This approach not only discourages open communication but also cont uh contravenes the principles of equitable
treatment that our town upholds. On a personal note, I have been directly affected by the manager's failure to address agre aggregorous and persistent violations of a multitude of town ordinances involving my neighbor at 1032 Hyde Park Road. Despite submitting a
formal despite submitting formal complaints and following up through multiple channels over the past two plus years, the situation remains unresolved and has only worsened. This has resulted in ongoing disturbances, physical threats of violence, and environmental
hazards that impact my quality of life and that of my family without any meaningful intervention from the town. In my view, this represents a clear shortfall in the manager's duty to facilitate fair and timely resolutions for residents, especially when basic
enforcement of local ordinances could have sufficed. Given these circumstances, I strongly urge the council to decline the proposed contract renewal and the associated salary increase. Retaining the current manager risks further division within our
community and could expose the town to additional legal and reputational challenges. Instead, I encourage the pursuit of a fresh start with new leadership, one that prioritizes accountability, responsiveness, and a commitment to fostering trust among all residents. In
the strict strict alternative, I would propose only a six-month extension of her contract with no pay increase or increase of benefits as requested in order to allow the pending investigations to be completed. I am confident that the council's thoughtful consideration will lead to a decision
that strengthens Sahedigros for the long term. This is from Kevin Brennan. Please accept my email in regards to the contract with the current town manager. I have seen there are some issues legal that are under review with the current town manager. I also understand there is
a vote tonight to continue their contract or to let it lapse. I believe it would be best to let the contract lapse until the issues can be cleared. Once that is done and put away, the town can look into their services. I would like to let it be known I am not in favor
of renewing the contract. Uh this is from Mr. Gil Hyatt. We as property owners in the town are in favor of retaining Francine Ramaya as town manager. She has and will continue to do a great job for the residents of the town. Thanks, Gil and Patty.
Uh, this next one is from Bill Luda. Uh, renew Francine's contract. Good job. Make sure it's clear. Uh, Jim Sites, as a property owner in Lock Statue Groves, I would like to express my interest in retaining
Francine as town manager. Her dedication to our town business has been appreciated by many, and there is more work to be done. And that one, right? Um there was an email received from Tennis in the Sun.
The uh clerk reached out um and asked whether or not they want it read into the record. Um they did not respond is my understanding. Um, and this person
previously has indicated that it was uh she had she had sent another email uh some weeks ago and complained when it was um actually suggested that she wanted it read in the record. Therefore,
I think you have a copy of this. It's um Tennis in the Sun dated Sunday, September 14th, 2025. Um, and for reasons I just mentioned, I don't think it is a good idea to read it into the record because of our previous objections.
Okay. So, we're done with public comments. Okay. Um, if I could make Well, I was just going to say there's a couple of of issues that came up. I know that you spoke to the attorney general's office today, so I think it would be super important at this time for you to
elaborate on the multiple allegations of criminal investigation that were made. Please don't speak out of turn. Please don't speak. Um, Miss uh, Miss Succi apparently has an email
from Christine Carpenter that she would like to read into the record. Okay. And then you can Christine and Vance Carpenter. I give Cassie Suchi permission to read this letter to the council. I'm not complete completely familiar with all that is or isn't true regarding the town manager's
renewal and investigations. However, what is concerning to me is that when I read the contract of employment for this position, it appears as if it's written in favor of the person taking on the position rather than what's in the best interest of the town and our money. The clauses that allow her to resign, be
terminated with or without cause with what I would call an incredible walk away package is highly concerning. I attended last night's meeting and felt very disrespected by the fact that there was no consideration to the residents that came out specifically for the
budget and contract renewal. Yet, we had to sit through presentation and then got bumped until tonight. This shows lack of respect for those of us who gave up our time to come out and share our thoughts and concerns. Presentations could have been either at the end or scheduled for
another meeting. Was this the town manager's decision? and if so, why wouldn't the council who serves the people speak up and not allow that to happen? It also felt like a disorganized mess at times, such as the council not knowing how to make motions or amend a
motion. The town manager didn't even step in to help them realign, and it was almost comical at times to watch this unfold. Disheartening. This did not ensure a vote of confidence in our council and staff. I wonder if the news came and covered our town meeting like some other cities got last night, would
we have behaved with such silliness? We also came to the table to approve a budget that at a big line item, sheriff, without any facts, no prior information was collected by town attorney to be presented as to if we can even cancel or should we just pay it and let it run out
or resign. Yet, we were under a time crunch and had to approve it. This represents total mismanagement, our residents and town council's time. How can we make a decision without facts? Yet, we did. The decision that was made last night on whether to pull the double payment or not was based on what it
whatifs and without factual information. This is very concerning and makes me wonder who dropped the ball here. Bringing my thoughts back to the contract of the town manager as I cannot say with certainty if Francine is the person for the position as I don't have enough of my own facts to make a decision. But what I can speak to is
that the contract that is being presented is not in favor of the town at all. My suggestion would be to let her contract run out. Come up with a job description and employee contract that is made by the council, not the employee, and put it out for the public
applications, and Francine can reapply if she desires. This ensures that we don't have to pay unnecessary payouts when and if she quits or is terminated, if that ever comes into play. Please council, hear the voices of your town who elected you, Christine Carpenter.
So now Jeff, if you'd please address these things. What I'm going to do is I'm going to address um one particular issue that has come up and um speak louder please. Missing
Miss Crunchy uh indicated that she spoke to Alan Johnson um who's the chief assistant state attorney uh for the 15th judicial circuit. Um and it's interesting because I had a
conversation with Allan again today. uh it was about 3:30 to 4:00 something along those lines that that we talked about this issue and Allen once again reiterated to me that
the number that everyone is talking about with respect to a pending investigation is because they received a complaint the state attorney's office has made no
no determination with respect to criminality. Mr. Johnson did not tell me what the nature of the complaint was. He did not
tell me who the complainant was. And everything that I know about that complaint is through hearsay. And the specific person that I talked to
um about that that I gave credibility to was council personnel Remy. And she told me what she thought the investigation was about. She told me that she was not the complainant. I have heard from others that Miss
Scrunchie is not the complainant. Um, in my conversation with Alan Johnson, he indicated that he was going to talk to to Miss Scrunchie.
I would be highly highly surprised. Um, and I've known Mr. Johnson for about 20 years and I sent him an email after I heard what Mr. Miss Scrunchie said here. I'd be highly surprised if he gave her
any details with respect to the complaint that they had received. I am quite confident that he would not refer to it as a criminal investigation because he made that eminently clear to me that that is not what they consider
it because they have made no determination as to the criminality of the complaint. And I would be surprised if he gave her a deadline or an estimation on when this
investigation would be complete. Um my recollection of my conversation with uh council member El Remy was that uh she indicated that that complaint had been made about 10 months ago. In my
conversations with Allan Johnson, of which I have had three over the last um I guess week now, he has indicated that he would like to get it done sooner rather than later, but could provide me
with no time frame. I would also be very surprised if Mr. Johnson opined anything with respect to what this council should or should not do.
And I say that not only because he didn't give me any suggestion as to what you should or should not do. And as a good a lawyer as I know he is, I doubt he would have opined without
knowing the entirety of the facts. And one of those facts, as you all know, is that three to four weeks from now, the current contract has expired and you don't have a manager as of
September 30th or october 1st. So, um I would be very surprised if the conversation that Miss Scrunchy relayed to you occurred
in the manner that she said it occurred. I find that highly doubtful. Excuse me. And I will I will say with respect to to this matter, okay, and people are going, "Oh, there's something going on. There's something going on.
Here's what we have. We have someone who is probably a member of this community, maybe sitting out there right now, who made a complaint. Have they come to any of you directly
and said, "You've got a serious issue with one of your employees. This is what happened. You should look into it. Not an allegation or rumor as to what is out there. Has the complainant come
forward? We have an anonymous complaint at this point in time made to another agency and we have no details that we can rely on other than hearsay
as to what the nature of that complaint may be. in this business, all of you, all of us, and every employee of this town.
And Paul, you've got a double whammy because you're employed by um a public entity. And at any point in time, somebody can go to the state attorney's office,
the ethics commission, the OIG, and make a complaint about us. And obviously with respect to the alleged OIG
complaint which the I contacted them and they could neither affirm or deny whether there was a complaint. That's their exact words. That's their policy that they won't even tell the alleged
accused whether or not there's something there. The state attorney's office has not contacted anybody in this community in or I shouldn't say
in this community in this town as who is an employee or an officer or I suspect um a council member and told them there's an investigation and it's about this and that. I've had
direct conversations with Mr. Johnson and he has not indicated to me who is under investigation, what it's about, or anything else. So
if you were to make a determination, and this is why I told you you should ignore it at this point in time, because from a factual standpoint to us, from something that you can actually evaluate, other than hearsay and rumor,
there is absolutely nothing. And if you take the position that every time there is a alleged complaint with an other agency
um and you're going to take an action whether it's to suspend an employee, take away their rights, um fire them, whatever, or not hire them on that basis when you have nothing. That's ridiculous.
Now, um, if there was a complaint that was made to you, a complaint that was put into our records,
and there was something that was material to investigate, then that would be a different situation, and we could have an investigation, and you could have an opinion as to whether it was a problem
or not. But once again, an alleged complaint, a complaint that the state attorney's office says, "We have not determined whether there is any level of criminality. That's a bad bit of business to make
your decisions on." you all and with respect to everybody and emails, it's wonderful that the community has this much interest in what goes on here. You're active, you're passionate. It's a it's a great community in part
because of that. There's also problems because uh you guys can get a little nasty sometimes instead of acting like good neighbors. But you all work with us and I'm talking about the
collective us and specifically Francine on virtually a daily basis. You have access to her definitely on a daily basis including weekends. If you're going to listen to what people
who don't interact on a regular basis, don't see the work that's being done. Um, if you're going to listen to them rather than know what you know and make a decision based on what you know.
I think that's a problem. Um, because you all are highly competent people. You all are very intelligent me and you all and you all do know. Yeah, I am preaching. I am preaching
because I am No, you need to. You had your opportunity to public comment. He's speaking now. He just addressed me. He's speaking now. This isn't a debate. So, this is not a debate. You don't get to
come back up and debate him. That's not how it works. So anyway, if you have any questions for me, I'll be happy to take them. But I wanted to get that on on the record. And I am not I did not negotiate uh the terms of that contract as you all
know with respect to the um I was ask if you could address the legality and whether this is a standard public service contract because there seems to be a lot of comparisons to private sector contracts and maybe you could put some of our minds at ease
about the different standards that are applied in government as opposed to the private sector. Um the bulk of this contract uh comes from her current contract. Uh and that contract was drafted um by
the Tercivia Law Firm 3 years ago. Um it is relatively standard with respect to uh the severance. Um that is normal in a
uh town manager's contract. Um the amount of severance uh it varies. It is relatively standard that 20 weeks is is out there that you can check around and
that is not unusual by any means. Um the the benefits uh it is typical for um people to in in the public sector to get
retirement benefits to get health benefits. Um it is slightly unusual in this circumstance with respect to the health benefits that um the town manager
does not participate in the town's plan. Um I can tell you that if she did participate in the town's plan, which remains her option, it would cost the town more than $15,000 a year.
With respect to uh the um $35,000 contribution, um it is not unusual uh for public sector employees to uh get a um
contribution along those lines in addition to participating in whatever pension plan um uh they the uh entity offers. Um whether that's common to the public
sector um I'm not sure and I'm not going to comment on you know my public sector friends who have um better situations than the one that's described here. Uh but
uh the two provisions, if you will, that um are a little uh different and have been expanded expanded upon um in this contract versus her current contract. um are the issues with respect to duties
and responsibilities where there is a reiteration of um existing charter and existing ordinance language and it goes into a little bit more detail um with with
respect to the council manager form of government. Um and then there is a provision 9 um which uh is new to to this contract. Um and it calls for a
strategic plan um to be entered into and worked on um sort of setting the the first goal um under the contract uh and providing a basis for moving forward. Those are legal. the the contract is
legally sufficient. Um I think all of you had ha have had the opportunity to discuss those uh provisions with um the manager. Um uh but I do not think that those
provisions create any additional liability for the town. Um they are just setting a framework for operations. Um because as we have heard and as is evident
um there needs to be work on uh communications and uh the relationship um that exists. I think uh that's what we're we're learning in the in the swap that goes on. Um so
as to whether they're they are legally sufficient and um you can enter into it you can I'm confident in that. I don't see any um big liability with respect to those two new provisions and the rest of
the contract is um normal for public sector. And can you one more thing legally that I'd like you to address is the alleged personal liability that was alleged in several emails that we have as council members if we vote yes for this contract.
Um I can't fathom it. I have I I I don't understand I don't understand the uh the basis for
it. um I do not see it uh entering into contracts with managers um is normal and it is something under your charter you have to do and I'm sorry there's one more thing I'd
like you to just review and that was the process because a lot of things were that I somehow am the one who negotiated this contract which I know I did start the ball rolling but could could Could you please speak to what the proc the complete process was
so everybody understands that? Um my understanding of the and that there was a vote for me to do that. Yes. My my understanding of um the process uh was that
early on after the election um there was support for the manager to continue on in her um present position. Um, I specifically know that on May 1st,
uh, you had a a meeting and during that meeting, uh, there was a vote, um, in support of moving forward with the the contract and direction from the council
that the mayor enter into negotiations on behalf of the town to put together a contract that would be considered by uh the town council um as a whole.
Um from there uh there was discussions between uh the two of you as I understand it. Um there was a draft contract that um the town manager uh put together. I think and you can probably
speak to this better than I can. the business points, the the material um uh amounts of pay, compensation, and the rest of it. Uh those were all things that were set at that point in time, and
I believe that uh the numbers in this contract are consistent with those discussions. Uh and there was a draft agreement that uh you and the manager um looked at um
and and agreed to. You sent that contract or I'm should I shouldn't say you. I'm I believe the manager sent that contract um to Mr. Torcivia. Um this was somewhere around the time
that Mr. Cibia had decided um to resign or was contemplating resigning. Um my understanding of the purpose of the uh review was to get Mr.
Torcivia's comments with respect to the legal sufficiency of the agreement. Um it is my perception that uh Mr. Tors Civia
um jumped the the gun in sharing that document with the entirety of the council rather than getting back to the mayor and the manager
um with respect to the the the legal sufficiencies and any issues that may be out there. And so that was a draft contract that um you all saw. Um you have since then I know um I think all of
you have met with the manager with respect to the contract. Um, once I became the town attorney, um, I reviewed the the draft contract, um, had some comments and M. Ramalia and
I had, um, some discussions. We did review the comments um of prior council um and we made some uh revisions um
to the to the contract and you have the revised document before you. That's how it came about. It's been going on since May is basically what you're saying. Absolutely. More than Absolutely. Um, and my involvement, my direct involvement in it, um, you know,
began when I was the town attorney. Anybody else have any questions for Mr. Curts or for anyone? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Typically town employees, if they do something wrong on the job, the town's responsible, right? Somebody driving a greater, they run into a car, we're responsible for that employee.
We sure are. Right. So all of these potential mistakes that all the employees here make just like in the private industry, it's the responsibility of the employer. So it says that in the contract, but that's typical. Yeah, I I'm sorry I didn't address that. The indemnification language is
absolutely typical and in fact um it's contained in your ordinances. I am not 100% sure whether it's also um contained in your charter. Um but it is absolutely normal.
And and paid time off for all of our employees when we cut ties with them, no matter how they cut ties, they're entitled to that paid time off. Correct. Um, with respect to employees that have less than
two or three years of service, um, uh, that's not that's not true. Typically, um, if somebody came to, um, the HR department and their supervisor and said, "Hey, um, I'm planning on on
leaving. I want to to give notice." and they'd been a good employee, what you would do is you would sit down with them and um go over their uh acred PTO um and say, "Well, because of the the the
longevity, you're either entitled to um compensation for it after the fact or if you're uh if you haven't been us with us long enough, um the normal thing you would do with good employees always have advised them that you know if it doesn't
disrupt the um the the workflow too much um we'd encourage you to take the time off because time off is something that you have earned you acrew it um each paycheck
and there was a discussion about um educ education for the town manager that's restricted to what's in the budget for education right somebody she can't just decide she's going to be a neuros surgeons can go to go to college, right? Uh, absolutely. Okay.
Um Um, so I've got a couple other qu comments I want to make. Um, years ago, Anita and I were running for town council and next thing we know, we're under investigation for Sunshine Law, right? It's out there
and everybody puts it on Facebook. We're investigated for sunshine law. We weren't on the council. We were on two separate committees. literally impossible to be in violation of sunshine law. It was a political stunt by somebody, right? Is this a political stunt by somebody? I don't know. We don't know who that
somebody is. Lisa, can you share with us who it is? Because it sounds like you have intimate knowledge as to who it is. That's not up to me. But but you're aware of who it is. Yes, I am aware. And you won't share that with us. That's not up to me to divulge. and and frankly I I have been very cautious
about the information I've shared because I don't want to put the uh investigation in jeopardy. Okay. I can't speak to what other people have done, but I have been cautious in what I have provided. I've always heard I've always been told that getting stuff out in the open in the sunshine is a way to make things
heal and it would be nice to have all the information instead of speculation as to what's happening. So, because that's what we're doing is we're speculating as to what the investigation is about based on hearsay. Well, if you would like to invite the person that made the But you won't even tell me who it is.
Just invite them. I I cannot divulge it. That is not my place to How do I invite them? Ask the person who made the complaint. I don't know. I don't know who that is. That's I can't invite them if I don't know who it is. Ask for the person that made the complaint to speak if you'd like to hear from them. I I can't like here.
Yes. C. Is there anybody in the room that made the complaint and that could share what the complaint was? Are they here tonight? I suspect not. So that's what I mean. I don't know. We don't know what the complaint is. It's all speculation. And could you imagine if everybody in here
that had a complaint filed against them, they didn't have a job the next day until it was settled. So should we put her on administrative leave and have her get paid? She would have been on administrative pay for not, from my understanding, 10 months. Now, when I revealed at the meeting that this
was involving a a code enforcement case and the use of a policy that was never approved for a sitting council member, that is the case that now has a case number. That is not hearsay. Well, unless you made the complaint. I did not make the complaint. Well, then it's hearsay.
Okay, I see your point. But that is the nature of what that complaint and I shared with Mr. Curts when I was shared the case number when it was given to the complainant that was shared with me. I I cannot go for that. I do not want to jeopardize what the investigation is
going to reveal and that's I think why they keep a secretive nature around what they receive because they don't want evidence to disappear and other things like that. It's it's very serious and yes there there are political motivated things that go on in every community. in
this case. I don't believe that is the case. Uh so I I have lots to to ask about this what we're seeing tonight. So I yield the floor back to you. So if we didn't approve her contract and
the town manager need an attorney to fight this or whatever, is the town responsible for providing that legal service even if she's not an employee any longer? Are we indemnified for criminal action? I don't think so.
Um I don't I don't think so with respect to a criminal thing. And that would be the case whether she was an employee or not. Correct. Right. And if it's not criminal, if it's not criminal, it's civil in nature and she would be covered whether she was
an employee or not at that time. So there is no extra liability in regard to that. Then is that fair to say whether she's an employee or not when this gets finalized or whatever happens if it if it goes further? Correct. If there was if there was um a
criminal matter and it became known, that criminal matter could be the subject of termination with cause under the contract. With cause, right? And there would be no severance. There would be no 20 weeks of severance. If the if the council decided um that
the termination was with cause, there is no severance. And if there's termination without cause, then there is the 20we severance. But yes. Right. Okay. So, um, I I appreciate Maryann Miles coming up. Um, she's worked with Francine. She spoke she spoke at our
last meeting, talked about the good employees that we have and about, you know, trying to be, you know, stable here and with some kind of stability. Um, it's interesting that no other previous council members that have worked for Francine came tonight and said, "No, don't don't approve." Right. Actually, one sent in a letter to
one one did send in a letter. That's worker Francine. Um, I haven't been up here long working with her. I worked with Francine when she is assistant manager. Um, didn't have a lot of interactions with her. I've had some, you know, some limited interactions with her because I've haven't been here that long. Um, I know previously we've gone
through multiple town managers here and it seems like what was stated earlier is every three to four years they're the bad guy. Get rid of them. Three to four years and you lose a year or two of productivity, you know, and it's happened time and time again. Every single one of them has walked out of
here the bad guy. If you've been married six times in the past 15 or 20 years, maybe you should start self-reflecting as to either you're picking the wrong people, right? Or you're the problem. It's one or the other, right? So, has it been every council that's been here picking the
wrong people? Probably not, right? So, then you have to start wondering what is going on here? Is it us as a council? And is it us as a community that's doing this? I I don't know. Right. So, we we've had a lot of fires here in the
past couple months. Um, this is another fire, right? We've had the acreage assessment, the millage rate, the budget, raising your taxes, lowering your taxes. There was no happy way either way last night, right? Some people were clapping that their taxes were going to go up and people are upset that they're going down. We've had the
town attorney's contract come up. That was a fire. Right? The height of the hotel down the street, that was a fire. The RV resort's a fire. The potential soccer park is a fire. Too many employees here, not enough employees. 30% raise is too much. Somebody's not
getting a raise, is not enough. There's constant fires constantly. I mean, come on. Can Can we pick our battles? You know, we don't seem to pick our battles. It's everything is a battle moving around here every single day. Um,
it's just unbelievable how many battles there are. That's all it is is battle, battle, battle. Can we get together and find a common cause like Dwight Voci Boulevard trying to stop it? If we could all get together on a common cause like that, we could make a huge difference in this community. But it's always this
clash, you know, this craziness that's going on. I don't know. It gets it gets tiring. And I'm amazed that Francine even wants his contract. Um, and I was amazed when Bill Underwood wanted the contract and Jamie Tipcom walked into it
and wanted the contract. It's it's it's crazy. Um, you know, when when we hired Jamie, I was sitting on the council. I didn't want to get rid of Bill Underwood. I like Bill. A lot of people didn't like him, so we got rid of him, right? Just like what's being proposed tonight. Everybody came and said, "Get
rid of Bill Underwood." I thought he was doing a good job. You know, was he the, you know, did he rub people the wrong way? Sure he did. He wasn't perfect. I get it. But I can tell you what we're spending today from what that Underwood management contract is. Drastically more money. Why? Florida retirement, health
insurance, all these things that everybody gets. That wasn't happening under underwood management. We're probably spending three times the amount. So, you know, it's it's disheartening. Somebody recently brought up Glen Ridge. Maybe we could hire the town manager
from Glen Ridge. That manager makes $30,000 a year, not 50. Like what was said, they have 217 residents, right? You calculate that out, it's $138 per resident is what they're paying their town manager. We
have $3,559 residents. So if you take that cost per resident, she would be entitled to $42,000, right? And everybody says, well, you can't you can't look at us compared to Wellington because they have a lot more, right? A lot more people. So then if you start calculating it by stock based on
the amount of people those are the calculations you come up with. Wellington has multiple assistant town managers and employees when Francine was here before or I'm sorry Francine was the assistant manager we had a manager and an assistant manager here right so she took on the
role of two when she switched over like what was stated and those costs were saved every year those costs were saved. So, I I don't know. It's just it's disheartening to see the destruction of people that are love this town or at least they say they love this town and
they constantly want to take it down and destroy it. It's sad to see that. So, I'll yell back. Okay. I don't but I I'm waiting for Paul. My light's not on. Oh, first last night. Ladies first.
Okay. So before diving into page by page of my concerns, some of the language in this contract is policy. And when I spoke with Mr. Curts regarding policy
appearing in the contract, my concerns were if we change the policy and now we have a conflicting contract policy issue. There's also two parts in here where one, if the charter or the state statute, I believe, and I'm
paraphrasing, changes the the duties or scope of the manager's job, she can resign or something. I don't I don't remember the language, but it's it's in here. We have to go by what page it's on. But then so that she doesn't want to
align with the charter if that gets changed. But then she wants her contract to stay with the supermajority if the charter gets changed. My concern is the the language in the contract is more binding than some of our founding
documents or policies. So I I would be worried about moving forward with some of that. Um, as far as the $50,000 that we will be on the hook for within 15 days of the beginning of the fiscal year, I asked Mr. Curts if there was any
um way, say in December, she's fired with cause for whatever multitude of reasons may exist. Can we get that money back 15 days after fiscal year? There is no way to get that money back for this contract. Um, I had
multiple concerns when I was uh sat down and negotiated with uh the manager and those concerns were in alignment with everything I have stated from the time I said I would run and that is we need performance targeted
standards around the manager's performance. I still see a lot of um wiggle room, right, for those to be like this attached to the strategic plan and organizational reviews, which I still
haven't gotten a definition of. Uh so again, serious concerns. But going back to my point, February 1st, Todd, you asked to have a meeting in my home. Mayor Kane, you were at that meeting. Todd, Paul, you were at the meeting. You were presented at the
time by a resident who was targeted by this manager and utilized this the force of the sheriff's department and our IT department to investigate that resident. I have the proof tonight of this. I also have a list I previously gave out of
concerns that I had around breach of contract um violation of the charter and some other things. In addition, in this packet that I'm going to ask the clerk to print and accept into the record is a
former employees employers um review of this manager when she was an assistant manager in their town. And you'll see that there is a consistency in the concerns that were exposed in the SWAT with what we're seeing today here. And we've been asked
to invest if we keep her on with executive training. So I see something that is a repeating pattern going back to your marriage analogy. Um and then also I think the concern that if she's let go with cause, we're not on the
hook. Well, this actually will show that that's not the case because a settlement agreement was reached with this prior employment that she was able to retroactively resign after being terminated with cause and negotiated money out of that
resignation. So again, at my home, you guys were in I I would say you were in denial that that was actually happening. And you can smirk if you'd like, but this was a serious issue issue. I I mean, you're saying it's in denial.
I have a different interpretation of what happened, and I also was intimately involved in what happened. So, you're you're free to have your say of what you want to say. Okay. Well, I actually have the incident report that was was put in by the manager to the sheriff. Yes. A crime was reported to the town
manager and the town manager, as is her obligation, reported that crime to the sheriff's office. That's what happened. Well, I I think that uh the crime is the town manager if a if a resident of the town reports a crime against them to the town manager, is the town manager obligated by statute to
report that to the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office? Mr. occur. the way you if if someone came to the town manager um and said there has been a crime
committed against me um there is not an obligation that I'm aware of under any state statute um for the manager to forward
that information on to uh the police uh or the sheriff's department. At the same time, um if someone makes it known that a crime has been committed, uh there's nothing wrong with
information being forwarded uh to the sheriff and say, "This was what I was told." I guess, you know, there's nothing there's nothing prohibiting that. Okay. Thank you. Well, in addition to that, the use of the IT department to go back and
investigate complaints made by this person to code enforcement because uh the manager believed that she was con she was actually committing a crime. So again, it's in here receive and file. Uh so
we we sit up here and since I started in this position on March 18th, I have reported multiple times my concerns to the council regarding the job performance of this manager. We have seen six employees quit since March 18th. Two written claims of
hostile workplace. residents standing at the podium stating their personal negative experiences with this manager and the manager sending out emails while they are speaking to contradict what they are saying on the podium while stating she won't comment to the public.
We have received email from a former resident where the town manager states perhaps the folks buying up the properties will be less hateful than their predecessors. End quote. SWAT analysis has revealed twothirds of employees at town hall say this is not a
good place to work. I have sat here while residents have spoken and listened to whispering between council members and staff about the person speaking and watched council members receiving text. I don't know about you, but when I hear words about being respectful and kind and the behavior contradicts us, I have
a hard time believing those stating the words actually believe them. We have an obligation as the elected officials of this town to protect the resident's interest and entering into a new contract at this time is reckless and a dereliction of our duty. If we want to continue this, I will happily go page by
page with my concerns in this contract. But Paul, would you like to comment at this time? Well, I I'll say that yeah, I was there and and I've said to that person multiple times that, you know, you do
what you got to do. that's this is how you feel, etc. Then you pursue it and that's what you do. I' I've never discounted what the person said. I never, you know, I've heard both sides of the story, but I wasn't there. I don't know what happened. Um, I will say that I I, you know, and I've made this
known already. I I don't agree with the contract. I don't agree with the amount. um you know, some of the some of the I I get what you're saying about the the statutory or the excuse me, the ordinance driven or the charter driven verbiage that's here. Um because I think
it does have somewhat of a conflict if something was to change because we are getting ready to go into charter review and we could have some changes coming, right? Um you know, I I I but you know, I the indemnity clause was in there previously. I mean, I think it's been in
every stinking contract I've seen come across over over the years. Um, but yeah, I I don't I don't agree with the amount. Um, I I you know, I I proposed I said, "Well, everybody else is getting five, five, and I you know, I was it was
not received." So, um, you know, I I can't and again, I have some concerns after, you know, we, like you said, the SWAT analysis briefing and I have some concerns um there was a large number of of individuals who did not want to answer
um because they were not um confident that it was an independent study, which we all know it was an independent study because we got a list of people. Yeah. But but they didn't share that with me. Yeah, they it was it was a large number
of individuals. Yeah. A large number of individuals. I think it was out of the outside crew um did not because they were, you know, they they didn't feel that it was independent or whatever. They were Yeah, I believe that's a personal believed it wasn't going to be anonymous. Yeah, that's that was the belief. They
that's where I was going. Thank you. Potential retaliation. Um, you know, they they were afraid of that, which, you know, you're going to get that, I think, sometimes with us. But, uh, you know, um, listen, I I I've had, you know, good dealings with Francine over over the years. I mean, I, you know,
whatever I needed help when I wasn't on counsel. Uh, she's been she's assisted me and whatever. I just don't, you know, I I can't knowing. My big thing is knowing where we're where we're sitting and and the amount of um
I would say prepared discussion or argument we had over a position last night, right? Um not illprepared, but you know, I think you knew where you were going. I knew where I was going. It's just a matter of us coming to some kind Exactly. Um I wouldn't say it wasn't
prepared. Um, but I I think knowing where we are and what what needs to happen in this town and and even last night with you you requesting, you know, find 5% to cut somewhere, you know, you make a recommendation for
$5,000 less. I I I can't get behind that. You know, I I I I do tend to uh stand on the side of it's not a it's not it's not a it's not a charge until it's a charge, you know. Um I think it's correct me if I'm wrong
some I'm not going to quote the amendments but yeah you know there's between the between two amendments it's it's we're pro we're innocent till we're proven guilty right um I don't think that it's it's right to make a decision determination based on that um and as we've stated you know there's some stuff
in there uh that covers us in the case that there's a criminal action etc so I mean but I I just can't get behind the dollars and cents and I can't get past what I've heard from SWAT Um I I you know look forward to the written report
that's coming. But I I just yeah I come from an environment uh predating what I do now that was built on servant leadership. And if you know anything about servant leadership um it's an inverted pyramid. Um and and and that's
how things are done. And I you know so I'm I'll be honest it pains me. I I mean I personally and then the I enjoy Francine I you know but this isn't personal. It's
I don't see how we can go and say listen we're going to do this cut 5% and we're still going to keep only going to cut $5,000. I just I can't and and and I made a promise to her I wasn't going to sit up here and and because she don't want to you know do like we did with Jeff and bargain money over the over the
table. So I I just that's how I feel. Um, I think that, um, if we table it, we table it. If we, you know, if it runs out, there's avenues. I don't think we're going to be two years building back. I don't think, you know, I I I
really don't. We have a capable staff here that Francine has assembled. Now, I give her credit. She's assembled the staff that's here. We have a very capable staff. Um, and I I think that, you know, they're poised to to continue
what we're trying. Um, and like I said last night, we have some work as well. Not that this is everything that's going on today that from the SWAT analysis that the leadership I got. No, I got that. Trust me, it was more than Brady. It was the first thing, but you know, we
have work as well. But I I got to say it it what's what came out of the SWAT analysis didn't start in March. It didn't start in June, right? As far as when you talk about account, there's there's been, you know, I I Yes, there
was a large vast strategic plan that was made with all these different items and it was on whiteboards and the whiteboards were hanging out here for years, but we accomplished like one thing, and I keep bringing it up, but I'm going to bring up again, $4.2 billion to pay to improperly paved roads
and put in drainage afterwards and stuff like that. So, I think we have a big job to do and and I forget who said it, but listen, you said it. We, you know, we've been putting out fires all summer. Um, we're going to keep putting out fires. We're going to have fires are going to come up, but we we need to and that's why we back in I think it was was it
May, April or May, we said, let's do a second meeting like a workshop so we can get through some of this stuff. So, we we can do a May meeting to deal with the regular business and we can and we have yet to do that. We have one scheduled in October. I I know. But my point is we went all summer and we have yet to do that. We
said let's do it. Right. I don't think anybody said let's wait till October. No, we had one scheduled for April 15th. Right. My point is I think we've said we we willing to do this. We want to do this. We want to get the strategic plan in place. But I think
the best time to get a strategic plan in place is with the five of us together. And unfortunately we can only do it right here, right? we can't, you know, so I mean, unless we're going to pay for a a court reporter and this and that and others, so we can be, you know, so yeah, I just I can't, you know, again, it's
it's no can't I Are you done? I'm I'm done. Thank you. You have anything to say? Yeah. Um, in the last few years, uh, the town has made many advancements because
of programs developed by the manager, staff, and the town lobbyist, uh, through grant funding and attention to things going on around us. We all need to step back and realize that challenges
will keep getting in the way of our town growing into the rural town that we want unless we all try to civily try to come uh to more mutual understandings. Hopefully the one uh the once a month
gathering of the council and the residents uh to discuss town concerns will help establish more trust and understanding. Okay, everybody has you have something else? Sure. Go ahead. So, when we were
talking about Jeff, um, and you guys had assigned me to work on a contract with him, and I said this before with Jamie, I I don't think there should be special contracts like that. I don't like that. I think the upper echelon should have the same benefits and whatnot as all the
employees or vice versa. So, please, please. So, and that's how I went at it with Jeff. And I told him that, you know, I said, "If if we got to pay an extra $10,000 instead of having all this hidden benefits, I rather do that. It's out in the open. That way when when the
upper echelon is negotiating payraises for everybody, it's across the board for everybody. Health insurance, everybody gets the same. There's things in this contract like, you know, she's not getting health insurance, but she wants to get paid for it." When the rest of our employees don't have that opportunity, and I think they should. I
think all the employees should have that opportunity. That way, if they're getting, you know, health insurance through their spouse or some other means, if we're going to pay $15,000 a year for their health insurance, we might as well give that to them directly and bump their pay up because they're getting it somewhere else. So, you know,
the same thing with paytime off. You know, if the manager thinks that everybody's entitled certain amount of pay time off, it applies to everybody. So, I don't like this contract for those reasons. However, for stability reasons, and I didn't sign the original contract with her, right? It was a different council.
So, it's kind of like we've hired her on under that contract and to pull those things back. And I know it's a new contract and all that, but you've kind of set this path moving forward with a special contract. I didn't want a special contract with Jeff. And then, Lisa, you insisted that we have a
contract. So, there was an end date, and it put us at a higher liability by entering into a contract with him. And I didn't like that. But, I did it to try to meet you halfway, right? so we could get this done and it would satisfy some of your wants, but then you voted against it. It was like, why did I meet
you halfway and then you spit in my face and didn't vote for it? I didn't understand that. You know, it's about compromise and trying to come to a middle and I came to a compromise and you still voted no for it. And it's kind of like, you know, you know, Paul talked about he didn't like the dollar amount.
Is it that if the dollar amount came down to $100,000 a year or if he would approve it still? I I didn't mean just the overall dollar amount. I I I don't agree with you with the if if if all of our if if all of our employees we offer health insurance and they don't need to
get it through us, but we would pay this out, but they get it through their employer that we should compensate that that what we would be paying into insurance. Where does that happen? Google. They ride skateboards in the lobby. I mean, I know, but if but if we're going to
have to if there's a benefit for health insurance for for employee A and it's going to cost town $15,000 a year and that employee gets health insurance somewhere else, well, that's instead of maybe we give them 80% of that $15,000, you know, something to that effect because they're saving the town $15,000.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understood it was that she could opt in or opt out, right? I mean, she she so the only option is for her to just take our health insurance, not get the $15,000, and that will cost us more money.
So, no, I understand that. I mean, I'm sure she's willing to do that. I'm sure if you asked her to do that, she'd be willing to do that. So, so my point is, well, but in the in his example, hold on. In youram in his example, the the idea is is if if I am employed somewhere
and my spouse already has health insurance, I don't get health insurance here. I get it with the spouse. So it says and you don't get extra pay because you know that's just Yeah. So I mean to say I've never heard of that and maybe that's somewhere but I've never heard of that. It's saving the town $15. I understand what you're saying is
saving town $15,000 but you know that's not a thing I guess is my point. I've never heard of that. Maybe it's out there in the in the ether. I don't know. Yeah. Sorry interruption. So, another thing that I don't like is the fact that she's in the drop program and we're having to
spend $35,000 to pay into that FRS to no benefit to her. There's no benefit. So, we're paying in that 22%. To to FRS for her and we get nothing out of that. And I discussed this with her at some point if she was to remain on or
something happens with this contract to to try to go to a a situation where she has an LLC, Francine LLC, and instead of having a contract employee, we would have a contract with kind of like we did with Underwood. So, we wouldn't have to pay that 22% to FRS because what a waste
of money we're having to spend this 22 22% into FRS. No benefit to us, no benefit to her. So, I mean, I have an issue with that. you know, a lot of things with this contract. So, I want to keep Francines and I have
to figure out and weigh those things. How much is it worth? So, so, so may I speak to that? So, I did not demand a contract. It was the previous town attorney who said there had to be a contract. Well, but you wanted an end date. That
way, you had the three to get rid of. Remember that? We got to that point where if it was a contract and an end date, well, then it took three to renew it. and I gave you and I said I'll be along with you be the fourth vote and you still wanted the contract. Okay. Uh but he said there had to be a
contract. It couldn't be by resolution. There had to be we what was on the agenda was a resolution and he said that would make meet requirements and we didn't have to have a contract. But then when questioned further he said contract. So that's why I went with the contract. As far as voting against it, I still have concerns about the
independent operation of the town attorney under the circumstances that we have here and the conflict of interest that potentially exists because of the previous relationship under an employee manager relationship that was prior to
him becoming the town attorney. So, I don't think we had any real good answer with what we were presented. So, unfortunately, I also disagree with the um we're going to not have leadership or we're not going to have um you know,
assistance moving forward. As you said, the staff is is very dedicated. We heard that from the SWAT. Um I find it very interesting that Paul and I seem to have gleaned some of the negative aspects of the SWAT while we can appreciate the positive as well. Um, I would like to
hear what the three of you also heard from the SWAT analysis. And without it being in writing, I mean, we're both all relying on our our memories, right? Um, and I think a lot of words have passed since Monday for me. So, that's that's a lot to remember, but um,
it was my understanding that it was an incomplete and unfinished confidential report and they didn't really want us discussing it. That was actually stated, was it not, Valerie? It was also stated that the SWAT analysis was part of negotiating this contract. So, how do how do we keep it confidential?
Well, it's public record. They also said that they had to add what transpired uh with each individual when they reported. Correct. That it was an incomplete report. Right. Right. and that they weren't reporting out on it yet, but they wanted to the
benefit of having some of the information for I guess this decision-making process because you felt it was very important and you stated that and so I think that's why they were asked to come in and meet with us each individually to provide us with that what we individually I I mean I think we
all have to acknowledge one thing we're all different you know and that's what makes the world go around that's democracy right we all think a little bit differently and that's that's you know a great benefit to the community we all love this community. There's no question about that. Um, and we're all doing the best job that we can up here
to make what we think is the best decision for the town. Um, I'm sure that we all heard very different things from there. Um, and I'm sure that even when the report is released and people read it, sure that just like we had, I don't
know, one percentage, I'm not going to try to put a percentage on it, of people who want the town manager gone tonight and another percentage of people who live in the town who who very much appreciate the town manager want her here. So, you know, I don't necessarily see that as what my
interpretation was it or your interpretation of it or Paul's. no offense poll or Todd's interpretation of it um was is what we individually have to use to make a judgment. Sure. You asked Valerie a question
though. So um I doubt the SWOT will change from what happened on our individual meetings, but Valerie, you would know more. Uh you want me to respond to the confident confidentiality? Yes. Question. Okay. So, I know that
throughout the report or throughout the process, she kept referring to it as confidential um and there was intentions of passing out the report. However, because the town attorney did determine that it is a public record and she did need to make
some modifications to it, uh the actual report was not handed out so that way it wasn't out there publicly, but it but again, as the attorney determined, it was not a confidential record. So, so it was it was confidential at the time it was happening and then once the
report is made the yes she I guess my point is the confidentiality part kind of after the briefing started. I don't think I think it was confidential what you what you what the meeting that you have.
Yeah. So I mean just to just to clarify what we were um talking about with respect to uh the issue was that um the Shakri wanted the document to remain confidential
um pending her revisions because she was going to to make revisions based on the discussions that she had had with um the executive uh staff and also uh with each of you um what I said to to her is that
document if you pass it out there is it's not um it is not exempt from public records law because you've shared it with uh people. So, I think she went to a system of reading the um the
provisions to you with the intent that this is a draft and that she's working on it. Still remains her work product. Yeah. And I I I didn't take it as a it was can't talk about it, not secret, you know, that's I I didn't speak in specific either kind of generalities.
confidentiality necessarily with respect to um the communications that were made. Uh but that document is under review. Um it is being revised is our understanding. Um she's making changes
to it based on the discussions that she had with all of you um and the senior staff. Lisa, uh, going back to your statement about the drop. So, I don't know if council was previously consulted that
she was going into the drop. And the way the drop works is I understand. Okay. That was her choice. Was the previous council notified that she was choosing to go into the drop? Right. That's a thing.
it perhaps. But now now the request is to make up the difference of the money, right? So the way the drop is working is once you're in the drop, you're receiving your pension payment to put in a trust fund, right? You can't touch it.
That check is not coming to you every month, but while you're working every month, you're getting a chunk of money based on I believe it is the salary at the time you enter the drop. So that money is accumulating on her behalf in a
trust fund. So I may be using wrong language, so forgive me, but that money is accumulating. So to cut a check for an individual IRA in addition to money that is accumulating on her behalf in that thing while we're continuing to pay into
the FRS, albeit a smaller rate, 22.4 versus I think 34.2 35,000. It doesn't matter what the dollar amount is is we're continuing to pay and she's receiving a benefit behind the scenes that's accumulating on her behalf in the
drop every month from the time she entered it. I don't know when she entered it. I don't know if it was previously discussed with council that that's was an option she was going to take, but that is how the drop works. And for us to be expected to make up a difference for a personal financial
choice of hers is very concerning to me. And if we're going to go through this contract item by item, it's our opportunity to have this conversation. She doesn't want to discuss it in public. I say we go through it. We talk
about what we would like to have removed. Let her decide if she wants to come back with the retort and go from there. But there's things in the contract that are very concerning. Are you ready to take a vip? Well, I got a question regarding that. Um,
so you want to keep Francine is the contract you have the issue with. No, I don't want to keep this man. Then what would be the point of going through the contract? Because there's things in the contract that are disagreeable. No, I understand. If you're a flat no, no matter what the contract is, then
what is the point? You follow what I'm saying? Yeah, I'm following what you're saying. And Paul, are you the same way? No, I I I don't I I don't follow what you're saying because you have issues with the money.
I I have issues with a lot of just like Lisa. I'm not going to go She already went through a lot of it. I'm not going to reiterate as we've sat and reiterated a bunch of stuff tonight. I'm not going to do that. Um you know what I'm saying is is is listen, as I may known multiple times, we hardly
ever see each other anymore, right? So we haven't had a conversation. So I don't know where you're going. I mean, I I I know where you're going because you've already made the motion. You know, my point is I don't know how this is going to work out. So, if we have issues and we you know, all it takes is
three. Correct. Correct. We've had this conversation multiple times, right? So, I to Lisa's point, you know, there's some issues there, you know, and if that's, you know, what happens and if it doesn't, it doesn't, you know, but at least we've, you know,
because right now I don't feel comfortable with it. So, I mean, you do what you're going to do. And I think what Todd's asking you is, are there things that you would that if you discussed them, this is what I'm hearing. Correct me if I'm wrong. Are there things that if we discussed them
and did make changes tonight would change your vote to yes, that you would be a yes or are you just a hard no matter what? Lisa's a hard no. He does not want to retain Francine as the manager. No, I'm I'm I'm Listen, I'm on the fence and I made my I It's not just the money. It's it's the analysis. I won't go into
detail because that whatever, you know, it's the whole thing. It's it's the analysis. This I don't think that we're, you know, the whole tip for tat with Tivia over the past however long. It's just it's all snowballing and I, you know, may
maybe it's time, but if you I might be in the minority. I don't know. My point is we Yes, Francine has done a job getting us this far. I she's built a great staff. You know, maybe this is not may maybe maybe it's time for somebody else to take it over the over the the threshold.
I don't know. You know, again, I'm not going to go into specifics because, you know, we want the report, but you know, where what I gleaned aside from needing work up here, I will mention that as many times as possible, you know, so everybody knows it's not a one-sided
thing, but you know, I I you know, so that's where I am. So what would be the plan from the two of you if this didn't get approved tonight? So so the hard no response, right? And that's partly because of my negotiation with the manager. There were things that I wanted job performance rails put
around regarding the severance package and payouts of things and that was a hard no for her. That's a hard no for me, right? Because I have said it's about performance and about council being able to hold accountability to whoever's name is on that door. I will
say that over and over and over. So, what it looks like to me is this contract that we currently have ends on September 30th. It's the cleanest break we could possibly make. And I don't know if our town has ever had a really clean break, right? This is a chance to take
on no more financial uh liability regarding that particular contract, which for us would be a godsend. I'm I just don't know how you could say that any other way. I think that we appoint an intram manager. I know there are options out there for intram managers
and I have said from the beginning we've been a employee model only now for six years and I think all of us have enough government experience up here and exposure to how our town has operated in the past and and currently that we would have a better idea of how to
design the controls around that model that have not to this date been under the purview of council. It's been dictated to us the way I see it, right? This is what you need. This is what we need. And now I think that we have seen
through the past few years that getting the basics done solidly. Seeing code enforcement done, every box is checked. Every time the magistrate gets a case in front of them, there's not a loophole that was created because a a particular form wasn't used or something wasn't
done right. I think we heard from the building manager uh department guy. I think Jake Jack is doing a great job. I think that what they proposed is great. And so I think those things are running really smoothly. So for me, it's a point in an interim manager. The council steps
back. We use our time in these workshops to really really work out what it is we want to see moving forward and defining the job and then opening it up for for application. if this manager would like to come back and apply that that
opportunity is there because it's a clean break, no harm, no foul. We have no financial liability moving forward and we do our job to to really decide what it is this town can do under the structure we now have.
Paul, I'm going to nod my head. Okay. Yeah. I mean, there's other things. I mean, ask questions as the past few months as I've been here. Do we have a policy for that? No, we got to do this. No, maybe it's just my opinion how that maybe it shouldn't way, but I mean to to think that, you know,
certain things we don't have policies for. And and listen, I I I know I I've I've been on the the other side yelling at this side. I've you've done it. You've done it. You've done We've all done it, you know. And I know that a lot of when Jamie, somebody said something
to me the other day said, "Oh, well, nobody was ever mad at Jamie." I said, "You're wrong." I said, "You're wrong." Lots of people were mad at Jamie. Lots of people were mad at Bill. You know, I think the last person I knew that nobody was mad at was was the guy who was running the water control district when I was this big. Uh Sam Edwards. I think
I was last guy know because everybody loves Sam. Um but you know, I you know, I just think that, you know, again, it's it this five years. I know not the manager for the full five years,
but you know, from what I saw and hear others talk, you know, it's been five years. She's been she's been she's been is it five or seven? Seven at this time. Seven. My bad. I'm sorry. So, but I think from the giddy up, she's been
doing the job. Um, so but I think, you know, just maybe it's one of those things like, you know, I built the boat, but somebody needs to drive it because I I'm from and it's just my perspective. You know, there's there's again policies
and I Yeah, I I get it. I don't want a performance review either. They came to me tomorrow and said they're initiating a performance review. I'm like, "Oh crap." I've had those before. They're not fun. You know, they're not always what you think they are. Um, but you know, it's a good tool. It's a good tool. I mean, I get I get quarterly reports. We know we're doing quarterly
reports, but you know what about the day-to-day quarterly reports say, "Oh, you know, uh, you know, copper's up and this is down. It's great, right? You know, we're doing great over here. We're not doing great over here." But doesn't really get in the nitty-gritty. So, I think, you know, that's kind of where Lisa's going
with that. And um you know I are you suggesting a like that each council member meet into I just want to be clear on what you're suggesting about a I honestly don't we haven't we haven't discussed it. I I don't I don't know what that looks like. So if we added if we asked for the addition of a performance review, would
that be something that would would change your mind for this one-year contract and then use that time to perhaps do a nationwide search? I don't I don't know. I I don't know what that looks like. So I don't know. I mean it's an idea. It might we all might hash it out and decide that's not the
thing to do, you know, but I mean strategic plan in in the contract, you know, we all know there needs to be strategic plan, but strategic plan in the contract when it's constantly thrown in, well, no, we got to do this. Oh, we got to table this because of this. It we've been asking for a second meeting
since Matt. Can you all please be quiet? You know what I'm saying? So, I Thank you. Listen. All right. Well, when we discussed the second meeting, the workshop that we were talking about, you weren't here when we discussed it. I'm talking about the workshop. We discussed it talking about the
workshop that I proposed at the last meeting, right? How we're going to have a community workshop, right? It it was put off so long because of our schedules, right? One person couldn't be here. It wasn't because of stad because all of us couldn't
We sat here. We sat here. All right. before you were sitting there and we said, you know, we got a lot to do. I think I even looked at the end and said, "We got a lot to do. Maybe we need to have a second meeting." You're like, "Yeah, maybe we need to have a second." And you're like, "Yeah, second meeting." Like, nobody wants a second meeting. We really don't. You want to come back
twice, three times a month. And we we we beat poor Jeff to death. We're beating this whole thing to death. You know, I mean, it's just Would you like to reake your motion? Well, hold on. What's in the contract
that wouldn't transfer over to uh a new person coming in? I mean, are we going to save anything if we don't bring Francine back? I there's stuff in there to save, but I that the dollar amount of the I mean,
the benefit package, I just I'm not on board with it. Well, it just seemed like Jeff was saying most of the stuff in here is some of it is boilerplate. Yeah, absolutely. I'm I'm not I don't know about required anything by changing. I'm not saying tear it up and throw it
out. I you know I think we to Lisa's point. We we design the job description how we want it. We design you know how we think it should be and it's just you know that's I mean I just you know that's where I'm at. I you have something to say Mr. Kurt. You
look like you're No, I was just at at some point in time and I've said this before. Um I don't know that you are convincing each other, right? Anything. Um so
I have another Yeah. And I agree with that. Um you asked Paul about a performance review. I think the only way a performance review is fair to both the council and the manager or the attorney is that there are actual parameters in
place agree to parameters that are measurable. For example, employee retention. We talked about how loss productivity and time and the cost of losing an employee every time for whatever reason, right? Uh that's something that we would be able to set a
measurable metric to. uh some of this other stuff is very hard because we have a hurricane that money's lost and then oh nobody's responsible for that it's an act of God and so I think that having a performance review that is structured
around actual measurable goals like the gentleman who spoke earlier about in the private sector I think that we can only do that if we identify those goals set reasonable hurdles to clear And we
understand that's a a process in time that's not obviously going to happen overnight. So I think that a performance review or evaluation should be in here, but it should also be very structured because I believe Marjorie, were you here when we did the review of Jamie
takehome? No, I don't think you were up here yet. Thanks. So when I was the mayor, you were here when I was the mayor. So, when I was the mayor, it was the only time we've ever had an actual review of a manager under contract because that was part of that whole Underwood debacle of having to pay
after the contract. Um, so that was really unstructured, too. It was like nine vague sort of categories and we were given numbers to rate with this being the best. I don't think that's fair. I don't think that was fair at the time. and it some of the council members
didn't even do every item or every category because they didn't feel that was under the manager's purview. So again, I think that is is important and um and that would be important with any contract that we move forward with. Well, I mean that's how performance
contracts work though or performance. Yeah, that's how they're general that was requested. All right. How long? Five minutes. Okay. I don't know whether it was five minutes. I don't know how long I don't know how long it took me to give, but I'm ready. If you guys are ready. You ready?
Ready. Okay, we're coming back to order. Todd, you have a new motion to make. Is that what you we're saying? No, same motion. Okay, go ahead. Are we doing it? Yeah. Do you want to repeat your motion or you want to The motion was to approve the contract
at 155 with a end date of 2026? That's September 30th, 2026. September 30th, 2026. Okay. And I seconded it. Okay. All in favor? I I oppose. Opposed? Passes through two.
Okay. On to item number six from the regular agenda. Item number six with respect to the agenda um was the charter review committee. Um you all have you all have made your
selections for who's to be on the charter review committee. Um have those all been vetted and everything that's all good right? We have enough. I defer to the clerk with respect to I mean just to make sure everybody's really lives here and all the things that you were saying were important. I
want to make sure that we don't have any snapos. Um the clerk has informed me that it's uh still in process. Okay. Um but with respect to the charter review committee, if you have any hope of
getting it on the March ballot, um we need to get to work and get to work really quickly. Um because ordinances would have to be ready for first reading in November. Um second reading at your
first meeting in December um in order to in all likelihood to uh to get it onto the the ballot. At this point in time, the supervisor of election doesn't tell us exactly uh what the date is. Um but
typically it is an early December date. Um, and if you have something that's in the works, uh, they will give you some flexibility, but that's the the time frame. So, what is there for us to do? Is it it do we need to review this list? Make sure this is everything that we want on
the list. Weren't there some other things that came up? I I was reading this list and something was niggling in the back of my head that there was something else that we had said we wanted them to look at that was inconsistent, an inconsistency with something. Does anybody remember?
I'm not sure that this is the this is the list that I uh called through. Um and the first thing is do you want to go forward with each of these four and then if there's anything else we can um add
on uh that's fine. Um and is it is it clear enough what I'm talking about or do you want me to review them with you? Um it the there the first item was the super supermajority voting requirements in the charter. Um there are basically
two that is that there is a 4 to one um requirement in order for you to terminate um either the town manager or the town um attorney.
and and by terminate I mean uh uh removed from employment. The uh the other supermajority has to do with um land use matters and it's inconsistent now with what we have in our codes. Is that correct
or incorrect? I think we I thought we had looked at there is a there is a separate there is a separate provision in your uldc with respect to the four votes that are land um not inconsistent it's an addition to
okay all right okay but that you wouldn't need a a a vote to change on so uh that would be the subject of of that discussion um and then the second item has to do with
uh terms of office and basically it goes to the idea of whether it's really efficient for the town to have elections every year. Um if you decided you want the the charter committee to look at that and they agreed to make a
recommendation, the exact formulation as how as to how you would get away from an every year uh election would have to be proposed. Um uh but you do run into a situation that unlike
at least some communities uh and in my experience most communities there's no downtime for that consistency as you all know um in the December through March time if
you have an election coming up a lot of time and energy by the council is devoted to electioneering. Um and in sometimes that makes it difficult to get
things accomplished. Um then you face a situation where um you might have new people or at least a a new um group of people there and they have to get used to each other and so that takes a little
bit of time. Then you're into budget season. um you finish the budget and you breathe a little bit and whoa, we're back into election season. So that's the that's the that's the downside to having
an election every year. It's difficult to get momentum, get um get folks to uh together. On the other hand, um this community's been going on for, you know, 20 years and elections every year and
you're still standing. So, um that that's that's what that issue has to deal with if you want to address it. Um and then we've got the u the language with respect to the town attorney signing off on every other con on every
contract and whether it really is signing and those kind of things. Um whether or not uh you want to have that as a charter provision. Um and uh then uh you have the issue of the current
limitation on borrowing uh without a referendum. Um that's limited to three months. Um the argument uh there's one argument that it's very fiscally responsible. Um, and there's another argument that why
are you paying off a a piece of equipment in three years that you're going to be using for 15 years? Um, and so those are the those are the four things that I identified. Um, and it was also based on some of your prior
discussion and uh some information uh that you and discussions you had with um the Taribia law firm at previous meetings. Okay. Um Marge had a question for you. Yeah. Will you be providing the um the names
of towns that have multiple year elections? I can we can certainly do that. Yeah. Yeah. because um when I was at the literacy uh coalition, we got talking uh at the table and some of them had four
an election every four years because they said two years was not much different than what we already have. So, you know, it would be beneficial to feel out the experience of other towns.
Yeah. If you want us to review that, if you want the charter committee, because the charter committee in this case, you can do you can do one of two things. And if we're going to try to get something on the uh the ballot um for this March,
I would suggest that you limit the things that you want the charter review committee to uh to look at because we really don't have a lot of time to to um focus on it. Um the other thing that you can do is you can say charter committee
look at everything you come up with your recommendations and then bring it to us and you're not limited to the items that we're suggesting to you. Can we could suggest that these are a priority and if you see anything else he's looking at because they only meet
what every five isn't every five years. Well, it it's there's a there's a mandate that you um I think it uh I think it's every 10 years that you um have to have it it's spec specified in the contract, but this
charter review committee is not falling within that. And you can have a charter committee anytime but I remember there was a lot of public outcry when we called for this one because it's not with the 10 years. But if you're only looking at something every 10 years, that's not really giving you an effort to keep it timely. So, right,
when things come up, right? and and you could you know you can keep the charter re committee in place longer if you want to but what I am suggesting is right now in order to get this done
in I'm envisioning um contacting the the folks and asking them them if they can meet every nine or 10 days and that's going to put a lot of strain on uh them and and me and whoever is going to Help me with this.
Marge, are you done? Yeah. Okay, Todd. Yeah. I mean, some of these like the supermajority voting for the charter officers, I think it's a mistake to go down to three because you're going to have even more of a revolving door than what we have had. Um the elections, I'm
fine with leaving it the way it is. I don't think that should be changed. That's just where I'm at. The number three, I'm fully in support of that because it's crazy that the town attorney has to sign off on a $20 contract. um the the 36-month um
repayment. I'm fine with leaving that because I don't think the town should be going into debt. So, only one that I that I see as a priority is the number three. So, so you wouldn't even want them to look at the other ones? They can look at them, but So, you're okay that they're looking at them as long as number three is the
priority. I'm just want to be clear on what you're saying. Um I don't Lisa was I think you were before Paul. I think Paul come to as far as the election changing the structure of that. I I think what it was was look at multiple options whether that's
um creating zones in the town, you know, not just changing, you know, when people get elected or expanding something, but um I I'm for not only if we're going to not make it a simple majority or consider a simple
majority for firing as part of our our new look at the uh employment model, if that's going to pay, it should be the same for for hiring as well. It shouldn't take a a simple majority to hire as well because I think we see tonight that you know a lot of evidence
was presented and uh the compromise was minimal that was achieved. That was my struggle is I don't think we I I have an issue with that with with three hiring and four hiring. I make it the same. I agree. So I guess I guess the only issue with that is we've seen some of the candidates
have come in here and you know some of these town managers that have come and I don't think you'll get four to vote to vote. I I would agree and I think that that has a lot more to do with being a young town and not really knowing what we needed in a manager skill set. And I
think that as we move forward and I look forward to those workshops continuing to actually build the structure around the employment model of of what we expect from a manager. Well, I can tell you part of the SWAT analysis is we're a mess here up here and over there we're a mess. And any
town manager that's worth their weight didn't come in here. That's your claim. A lot of people like a challenge, Todd, I'm one of them. So Francine, um, go ahead, Paul. Uh, no. I just want to make sure. So, these are
recommendations, correct? Right. It's not it's not it's not Can I ask my question? Oh, these are issues. No, that No, no, no. My They're issues. I That's all. No, no. When the committee gets done with this,
they will will have recommendations to whether to it will be a recommendation whether to put it on the ballot or yes or no. And then we have to make the decision as to whether to put it on the ballot. Absolutely correct. Thank you. And then also are going to look at things like a creative, you know, we're
trying to use 15 minds to come up like like Lisa said with a potentially creative way to change the absolutely verify voting structure or say forget it, leave it how it is. Whatever they say, whatever these and they're, you know, 15 pretty involved people.
I just wanted to clarify that we have the veto power I guess is it. Oh, you will have the final word in case whatever. Yeah, we we have to come to a consensus that we like it. It's not just the committee says what's that consensus supermajority or no? It's a 32.
Okay. Just it's a three to put it on the ballot to put it on the ballot and then on the ballot it's a plus one. Okay. Marge, do you have another question before public comments? We still have uh the issue with the uh increasing the salary um as an ordinance
or a resolution whichever. Um the increase in salary you can do by ordinance. Um and that's why I didn't include it in the list of things to to consider. If you wanted to put something in there in in the charter with respect
to um council salaries, you could do so. Um the way the ordinance is set up right now, uh the council can pass an pass uh a raise for themselves, but the increase
won't be effective until after the following election. Well, maybe that's something that we would rather have the charter review committee look at. Council salary to raise or lower whatever they think. Maybe maybe you can you can put that you can put
that question to them if you want to because it is in the charter, right? No, it's not in the charter. That is an ordinance. Oh, it's an ordinance for the the salary. Okay. Just says she'll receive a salary, right? Doesn't say they shall receive says they can can receive a salary.
It's got it's actually it's actually got a specific amount for your salaries in there. Not in the charter though. Not in the charter. in the charter but it's the ordinance that sets the sets the amount the end that Marge is suggesting that we have them look at that do we want to put
that in or not I I I think leave it where it is but I'm fine with where it's at Lisa what's that do you do you want to Margie's suggesting put the salaries in for something for them council salaries for something for
them to look at whether it should be raised lowered if it's deleted do by ordinance So it's kind of we're okay but I'm just getting consensus that's also no. Okay. All right. So Marge no consensus on that.
Okay. Um do we have public comment on this item? Yes. Miss Miles. No just future future councils may wish that you had done it. Maryanne Miles. Um, I sat on the charter
review committee. There was 15 of us to start. It was long. Um, it was grueling to go piece by piece, item by item to understand everything that was going on. And to have
15 people to make that commitment to get the meetings done uh was rather difficult. I mean, we got through it, but it it took a long time. So, to assume that, you know, you're going to put 15 people there and you're
going to have it done in a couple weeks. Nope. Ain't going to happen unless you're just looking specifically at at one or two items. And if you're going to do that and they're going to take recommendations, my recommendation is don't do it. You guys look at it. you
decide if you want to put those items if they're the items are to be to go out to public and get public's opinion, then do that depending on the item. But to have 15 people look at 10 items, 12 items on there, you're not
going to get it done anytime soon. And you guys, I think your plate is is up to here right now. Um I would like to make a suggestion though to if you are going to change uh look at the elections
on the charter. I would suggest if if cuz we have two two and one that that come up when somebody when you have two seats coming up the person unless uh it
can't be done this way the two people don't run for the specific 1 2 3 4 5. They run for a seat on council. That way you're not pinning the voter one against the other. You're f you're fighting for
a position. And if you have five people that want to get on council and there's two seats available, the person that gets the number one amount of votes gets a seat and the second one that gets the most votes gets
the second seat. Not, you know, I'm running against Todd and the slanderous cup comes out for him and me. No, that's not what this is about. If you want to unify a town, you say you're running for a position on the council and let the
voters say who's going to get that position by the amount of votes that that person gets. Not I'm running for seat one. I'm running for seat two. You guys up here decide the position of the mayor and the vice mayor. We don't do
that because yes, you guys run the meeting, but you're all equal, you know. So that's why I'm saying if it can be done, why have a specific vote uh seat that you're running for? Thank you. Sounds like Maryann's volunteering to be
on the new charter charter review committee again. She slogged through it before. Um so I think that's an interesting point, Maryann. Um how is it structured now? Is it does it say you ha Valerie? Does it say you run for a specific seat?
And so that's all structured in the charter. Correct. Yeah. So, she doesn't remember. She didn't have to run last time. I guess the best best play would be to hold on to that because I also think that was a very interesting suggestion. See what the recommendation is that comes back from the committee and then
perhaps add that in ourselves because we can change because I know we threw what other kind of good ideas they might come up with because that that that may as long as it's not ranked voting. I understand that's really bad. So, but that may be a version of that. I don't
know. that may start some solve some of the problem because I think ranked voting you have to get more than a certain percentile of something and I heard they're going to do it on a curb next time is hey that's my whole college days are you kidding um so what are you are you looking for
some kind of instruction from us to get going because you've got it get going there well there's a there there is there is a resolution it is resolution 202573 a resolution of the town council of the town of Lock Oxachi Groves, Florida. Establishing a charter review committee,
assigning its duties, providing for providing authority for expenditures, providing for public meetings, providing for staff support and for the committee, and providing an effective date and a date for the termination of activities. Um, so we've got the resolution uh in
front of you. It indicates that they're going to look at those four items. Um and and as I understand it, um the the discussion tonight with respect to the
maybe we should increase the things that need four votes. Um the the hiring that can be considered by them. Um it falls within that super majority voting requirements within the charter. Um and
uh we can have a free and open discussion about the entire issue of uh election of terms of office and and consider suggestions such as um uh Ms. Miles. Yeah, I mean I think you I I I mean I agree with Todd. You could probably pull
the borrowing. I don't know if anybody else disagrees with me, but I don't think any of us wants to have the town get into a situation where it's borrowing money from within three years. I'm fine with that. leasing our Yeah, leaving it where it is that can be removed. I think you can pull that because I
think even if somebody made a recommendation, we're not we're not going to vote for it anymore. I think we may even have come to that conclusion prior. Right. Exactly. Well, I think you can pull that one. Going to need to to consider uh if we have to do something with the water control district.
We can do it. We can do it. Water district already has borrowing capacity. They're limited to three years. Yeah, everybody's on however. However, we can do a referendum. Great. Because they're dependent under our under us. It's limited to Well, we discussed this recently and
that was the determination because I know when we talk about the water control plan, we'll have fine on that. And but yeah, that's the lawyers have told us before that we're limited to the 36 month even for the dependent district. But anyway, um
I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2025-73, but removing item number four. Second. All in favor? I. All right. Opposed? Passes five to zero. All right. We'll contact the committee members and try to get started on that
probably around September. You need nine for a quorum, right? Yeah. Okay. Um All right. Closing comments. Francine, congratulations. Thank you. Any closing comments? Thank you.
Okay, Mr. Curts. None tonight. Okay, town clerk. No, no report. Okay. Uh Karen is not here. Richard, I have a couple brief comments. Uh yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the municipal emergency
management meeting at the Palm Beach County Emergency Operations Center where several items were brought up that I believe that you're you should at least be aware of. Um, so when this actually comes down to fruition, you'll, um, know what's going on. So, um, this part of
SB80 that was passed recently added a few also emergency management functions to, um, the local jurisdictions. Um, the Florida, so the state of Florida now has requirements for training for anybody
involved with anything to do with emergency management. And there the wording um says uh uh FDM will specifically require minimum number of training hours that a county municipal administrators, county city managers, county municipal
emergency management directors and county or municipal public works directors or other officials responsible with the construction or maintenance of public infrastructure must complete a bannual in addition to the training required pursuant to Florida statute 252.38. Um so they have established the first
three trainings. One of those trainings is required for all elected officials. It's called the Florida Senior Elected Officials Course. Um Mary Blakeley, the emergency management director for Palm Beach County is working with Kevin Guthrie to actually do the first course
here in Palm Beach County probably somewhere between November and January. Um they're trying to get it before the end of the the hurricane season, but they're not sure if they're going to be able to pull that off. um they're still trying to identify dates, locations, etc., but it will be required that all
um elected officials have to attend it. They're going to have multiple ones. So, obviously, if they have it on a date and you're not around to do it, you know, they'll do it again. One of the questions was asked um you know, what happens if our elected officials all decide to go to the same
one? Now, they're all in the same building at the same time. And the response was is the clerk just has to has to put a notice out to saying that our elected officials are attending this training together. So to for sunshine laws and stuff like that. Um there's also going to be it's called the local
coordinating officers course which will pretty much be for your managers, emergency management directors, public works directors. Um I actually asked the question because the law states that uh it specifically says or others responsible for the construction or maintenance of public infrastructure.
Um, well, that would include all of our public works employees and everybody else. And so, they're actually going to get back with me on whether they have to comply with these this law as well. And then they're doing a third training. It's called when the world descends. That all we know is that's the name of the that's the title. So, we're not sure
who's supposed to be taking that or or whatever. But, um, the next thing is Crisis Track, which uh Mr. Coleman knows all about. Uh crisis track is a uh real time damage assessment for uh
municipalities, government entities. The it's free to the town, so it won't cost the town anything. Uh the building the Palm Beach County building, thank Mr. Coleman because he's paying for it. Um thank but the Palm Beach County building department is actually paying for it out
of their building funds. Um and also that's what's paying for also the 39 municipalities. So, um while it is not a requirement that every municipality um participates, it is strongly encouraged because that way and that was
another thing that came up with the uh with the FEMA reimbursements and the damage assessments uh using crisis track staff would go out with the iPads we already have um and literally go around the town do the damage assessment. It automatically assesses all the there's
very I mean Paul could probably opine more on it than I could because I've only what I've been told he's actually played with it or supposedly played with it. Yeah. Um but essentially what it is they just go around they find a structure click they take a picture of it. It's already tied with Palm Beach County Property
Appraisers office. they put in there whatever the categories and whatever and then it automatically sends uh it it um figures out what the the dollar amount of damage is and because it's all based on property value and sends it off to to EOC immediately. So there's no more
delay, there's no more and and she one thing she did say was, you know, if you if a town decides to not participate for whatever reason, like they have their own or whatever they want to do, um the demands of getting that information from
that municipality will be greater because they have to get that information within 48 hours to the state and the state has to report it to the feds in order to get a declaration. Um that's the other thing that came up was local declarations of uh or county declarations because obviously the
county gets the declaration and it's based on everybody in all the municipalities as well as the damage in the county. So, um, one of the things she had indicated, you know, the the movement of FEMA and the way, you know, FE Kevin Guthrie happens to be on the
FEMA, um, review committee to review what FEMA is going to do moving forward nationwide. So, um, one of the things they were talking about was, you know, you know, trying to get these declarations faster. Um, the state of Florida is doing the same thing. Another thing that came up
is that, you know, like debris clearing. They they want to they're actually talking about um either making a policy or doing something with because they're actually going to do an SB80 u they're talking about doing a um a bill next year to kind of modify and tweak SBA 180
because there's been a lot of complaints from municipalities about various parts parts of it. A glitch bill I think they called it. Um and so you know one of the things they're talking about doing is they want all dam all debris constru all debris clearing to be done within 90 days. They
used to do allow you within 180 days to have all debris cleared that now the state's going to is coming down saying it has to be done in 90 days period. Um, in Milton, I don't know if you guys remember from we fortunately enough did not have to deal with this because our debris count wasn't high enough, but there were mis there were county
governments that had to operate their dumps 24 hours a day and they had haul debris 24 hours a day because if you had over a certain 100,000 cubic yards or anticipated over 100,000 cubic yards of debris, you had to run your dump 24 hours a day. the state um you know the
the the executive director of pal of the state division of emergency management and the governor um are serious about getting normal operations going again. Um and so they you know they want all the debris cleared, they want all the
roads cleared. They want you know you know everything fixed quicker. Uh, one of the things they were talking about doing is um direct funding of damages. So that's why the damage assessment is so important, especially for the public assistance. Um, they haven't come down
with a specifically what they're going to do yet because obviously these recommendations have to go to before the president. The president has to approve them so they can integrate them into FEMA, but they're talking about doing direct uh funding of of all the damage damage improvements. So, if you're, you know, if your debris counts are off, if
your um damage is off, if your estimates are off for everything you're that you need to fix or whatever to make your town, you just lose that money. So, it's going to it's going to be emergency management the next year is going to be definitely very interesting. Um, another thing that they did is they
they actually f they defined they redid the um the preliminary damage assessment guidance. And one of the things they did is they actually redefined on conventionally built homes what's considered affected, minor, major or destroyed uh based on water elevations and your electrical outlets in your
house. Uh but the other thing that they did is redefined RVs. And so this is our RV ordinance going to become kind of important and um with damage assessment find an RV. Well see LA last year. Yeah. So, so how
last year when we did our damage assessment, our damage assessment numbers were low because we couldn't count any of the RVs. Oh, okay. Now, they just changed the guidance and for your preliminary damage assessment. If an RV is on a property for 6 months
or more or the occupant is receiving mail, it's considered a structure and so it can be counted toward your damage assessment when you're when so that's something that's going to be key when they're doing them. And also they redefined the major and destroyed for uh
RVs. Is there a distinction between RV and travel trailer? No idea. And is it only one that's like if you have an RV that you own and it gets destroyed, no one's living. Nobody's living in it. It's not counted. Fun fact. Well, because fun fact and
FYIP weird. My RV is insured. It's weird. Yeah, mine's insured. Well, most people's houses are insured, too. But this is just for the damage assessment because in order to get an emergency declaration out of out of the the feds, you have to
a determination has to be made that there was x amount of damage done to residential commercial structures but not necessarily not necessarily reimbured. Right? Your house could be completely destroyed. Um and we'll come by, we'll take a picture of it and say, "Yep, it's
destroyed." They'll look at the property appraiser. and the property appraiser says your house is worth 100 grand and so we just heard it decided it was destroyed so now that's the dollar amount that they assigned to it um it has nothing to do with insurance or not insured insured or whatever it'll actually help us because like like I
said last year when the tornado went through there there had to have been 30 RVs that I personally saw that were destroyed and we couldn't count any well the preliminary number came back way crazy to that's a whole other story is this a property loss value. That's
just estimated property loss to get it's part of the damage assessment to get the emergency declaration from FEMA so we can apply for public assistance because that's one of the problems in general with public assistance is if let's say you know FEMA decides that the total damage has to be
$50 million and the county's total damage is $45 million then FEMA doesn't declare give declare an act declare the the county as part of that de emergency declaration. And then but everything still has to be cleaned up.
I mean all the tree debris still has to be cleaned up. All the stuff has to still has to be done. And so what happens is you is the town's on the hook. So it's very important that when the damage the preliminary damage assessment is done that it's very thorough and and so using this crisis track software will help greatly with
that. And they're also looking at right now it's only for the governmental side. Um, so it's only for municipal employees. The county, um, you know, the building department, they do all the damage assessment for the unincorporated areas. Um, eventually they're going to roll it out. They're talking about
rolling it out to the residents so that the residents can do their own, like if they if they're at their own house, they can take a picture. That's the dream. That's the goal. That's the dream. And there's also a financial component to this as well that will help track the hours of the people doing the damage
assessment. So, and from what I was told because I guess Palm Beach uses it now as well. I was waiting. You want me? You said that they go in because Palm Beach County said that they're not going to they're not planning on using the financial side of it. Not this season, right?
Where it's a You want me to? Yeah. Go. All right. So, basically, like like Richard said, you you you know, you're driving, you got a somebody with you, you drive by and it's it's a windshield inspection. You're not out walking the property. Uh there's some criteria uh
currently right now I believe but with us um inspectors and stuff do residential um code enforcement will break off to to commercial things like that. Um but this is a multiaceted tool. I think we we'll see it expand. They use
it out out west and stuff like that already. Um but it has the ability to track equipment. Um, we can track down to uh public's works folks with with chainsaws and stuff. I mean, you get real dial it way in for the assets and
stuff and that all helps when you go to to, you know, eval when you go to get the money back from disaster. Yeah. So, I think you know, yeah, it's it's I happen to be on the the leadership team for that. And that'll be great. It's going to be like in the next month or two is when they're planning on I'm waiting. They're
supposed to send Mary to send an email to all of us on how we can get so we can actually get can start getting get into it like in literally in the next couple weeks hopefully. Yeah, there's some certain tweaks that you're going to want to Yeah. Get with me along. So, did you have a question or we just I have a couple questions.
Controlling with the light. Okay. Sometimes we do that. Short questions. Um did in all this FEMA new information I know that the previous attorney had cautioned um FEMA not being so willing to pay on cooperative
purchase agreements. That's something that wasn't competitively bid on the cleanup stuff. It's piggybacks that they have a problem with. Cooperative purchase agreements are they're different. Okay. Don't ask me how you opt as long as long as we're not putting
ourselves in jeopardy of being reimbured. Our current Ashbrate, our current Ashbrit and Thompson contracts are both piggybacks and they have no problem with it. They're actually I think um I have to go back and look at my record. They're piggybacks or they're cooperative purchasing agreements. The town they're cooperative purchasing
agreements that the town did a piggyback with, but because Salt Waste Authority calls it cooperative purchase calls it a cooperative purchase agreement, they're not overly concerned with what we call it. Okay. Because the initial intent was it for it to be a cooperative purchase. Just just making sure. I thought we
and they were stuck. So, yeah, problems. We aren't supposed to use the term piggyback anymore. Anyhow, is what I I remember being cautioned on. Yeah. Okay. And then on a different note, um lots of people asking about ERO and collecting canal covert and any updates
for them. Um yeah, so we're having a bit of an issue with the contractor. Um Oh my god. Um, so yeah, Jeff and I actually need to sit down and and uh draft a letter to them because
they were supposed to be scheduling a meeting. Yeah. So we currently they are their their substantial their final completion date was August 28th for the whole job. Um the prog is they started at Bunny. They
ran into an FPL line that wasn't marked. It wasn't on any maps or anything else. So we sent them over to Falsam. They did Falsam. There's some issues over there. So then they moved their way back. As soon as they were done with Falsome, they went back to Bunny. Then at Bunny, they were supposed to go from Bunny to
Carrie. Well, the problem at Bunny is they decided to put the culvert 15 foot north of where it's supposed to be. Yeah. And so right now we're like, okay. And I've already I Lori sent an email. They said pay F5 last week and I immediately responded saying per all my other emails
and our conversations, you are not getting paid for this because you put it in the wrong spot and you haven't completed the work. We'll be discussing the contract with them, right? We're going to be discussing the contract with them and um you know the goal is to is to hopefully figure something out to where they can get that
get that work done because we need to get that done. So So for the public, we don't have a a definitive date. No date at this time. No date. The the work to be done in August is definitely that ship is sailed. Sailed. Okay.
Not the cheapest bidder, right? Absolutely. Yeah. That Well, that's the problem with, you know, when I worked for the school district, u the painters used to always have a problem with us using the lowest bidder. It's the law. Because Yeah. Because what would happen is, you know, they would do they build
we'd go build a school and we get all bids in and here's, you know, here's your bid. This is your lowest bid. And the painters especially were always the ones, why do you always take the lowest bid? Every time you take the lowest bid, yeah, five years later, we have to go repaint the school. But if you took the
next lowest bid, we could wait 20 years and paint that start getting a better product. It's the Paul, did you have another question? Yeah. Yeah. Do do uh does staff currently use the the REIT app on all old town phones?
Um, that helps countywide as well, even though they don't live they don't live in the town. Are you the only ones with I mean the only people that have town phones? They can do it on their personal phone as well. It's it's an app that you can have on your personal phone. I mean, it's called RI A RIAT. RI A T and
basically it's a snapshot of right outside your door. And what it helps it's actually a countywide thing that that you know and what it does it helps direct stuff EOC as to what needs to go you know assets especially if we had
something big but like with Milton we were looking and very few you know a lot of firefighters have it stuff like that but you know you go outside your door you take a picture oh that's clear right there okay we don't need to address that just yet we don't need to you know we're going to go this way instead so it's it's yeah it's
r iat Yeah. So, um I just said one final thing. So, last year, you may remember, we had a resolution that came forward to change our zoning to allow um debris management sites in the town on Southern Boulevard. It was very restrictive. And
then 6 months later, we had Milton. So, part of SBA 180 um states that each county and municipality must apply for authorization of at least one debris management site and must annually seek pre-authorization for any previously approved debris management sites. Municipalities are authorized to apply
jointly with the county or adjacent municipalities for authorization uh of a debris management site if the parties have a memorandum understanding outlining the capacity and location of site relative to each party such as anou approved annually as part of their pre-authorization process. So right now
technically we don't have a debris management site even though we have one that's there and if it needed to be could be used again. Um I did talk to Francine a month or so ago about when this passed and all this came to light um is the possibility of of trying to figure out where we could do a debris
management site in the town if not the same location um that would actually be like on the record and authorized and approved. So we wouldn't have to rely on the county or or another municipality. So, just to make you guys aware that it would have to be an agenda.
It would definitely have to be put it on the next agenda because Yep. Sure. We have a lot on there already. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Councilman McClendon, I wish this was as easy as people out there think it is. It's not near as
easy. And the majority of the people out there couldn't put up with themselves, how they treat us, how they treat the town manager. It's horrendous. The the texts that I get from people that go online and talk about praying to
God and then the texts you get from them, it's like, what is going on here? Right? It's insanity. Um, you know, like I said, I have issues with the contract that was approved. Um, I would not support it next year if I was here or if
I was sitting there to approve it again. Um, not because of the person, because I think she's doing a good job. I have a lot of issues with the contract and I've talked to Francine about doing things like the F FRS. So, the town's not paying into that and wasting that
$35,000 a year. Um, you know, whatever the policy is for um whatever we decide, if we decide to leave the policy for health insurance, then everybody should be entitled to that same thing. Um, whatever that may be. So, we we've got a
lot ahead of us. Um it's going to be a struggling year financially. Um no doubt about it. There's going to be a lot of projects that aren't going to get done. Um you know where we three or $4 million less than last year and we're going to lose even more moving forward. It's
going to be tough. Um so it's not easy. Thank you. Uh Council Member El Remy. Uh yeah, I I agree. Um, I look forward to the workshops. I think that we can
really start to to bang out some of the stuff again that probably has fallen by the wayside. Um, couple things that we agreed to um, bring forward was wildlife lighting and um, the FEMA standards around
agriculture, I think, is something that we talked about doing. I'd like to see that come back. I I'd also like to find out what the uh status is of my public records request on the accounting firms that were were uh vetted before projected point was brought forward to
council. And um I appreciate um Anita that you clarified why you get a text, but we've all been told and cautioned that anything that we're doing up here on the DES becomes public record. So just make sure you're cautious about that.
That's it. Thank you. Would you like to see the text for my granddaughter? Happy to show it to you. Soon to be a great grand. Soon to be Well, she's carrying my great granddaughter. Oh, grandson, I believe it is. Yeah. Um,
Councilman Coleman, I said a mouthful last night. Um, coffee. Yeah. Yeah. You know, I'm drinking water tonight. of capping out. So, um, no, I I just reiterate
I'm I'm here for the town and what I feel is why I got elected and, you know, what I think is going to be best for the town moving forward. I'm not here as a politician. I'm not here. I'm just here to try and help. So,
um, and I've said it since we since I showed up here, you know, April, we just need to keep we need to push forward somehow. We got to figure this out, you know. I mean, that's our biggest focus. So,
um, but yeah, I said it all last night. So, thank you all very much. And thank God. Yes. Um, is there any way that we can have a cap
on salary raises um on uh on the budget um you know so that we don't wind up with another situation where we have 33% for some and less for others.
Mr. Kurts, do you want to answer that? like council apply. The the simple answer is yes you can. Okay. And so you would what prepare ahead of time uh in your discussion?
That might be something that we could discuss at our informal discussions whether we wanted to and you're discussing the management when you're discussing the budget. Um and uh you can say that This is the limit of the the salary
increases. Okay. All right. Um also at the um grand opening of the um Palm Beach State College, uh Anita gave me a copy of the
um hygiene, dental hygiene. They're going to do uh dental hygiene appointments, oral health assessments, oral cancer screening, x-rays, fluoride application, preventive dental dental
sealants, and oral health uh education. Uh 18 year olds and higher are $50 and children are $25, 17 and under. Uh if you're a student or an employee of
the college, it's $20 and they do not accept cash. Okay. Um the other thing is um I had the the honor of going to the 20th anniversary of the um joining of the
mayors of the city today represent Anita. Um it was for mayors and vice mayors. Didn't think I should go on an airboat with my That's a bad idea. So, this probably won't. I I have a banner that uh shows it uh
but I forgot to bring it. And uh I had the honor of meeting Mr. Berser on who who I had met in 1965. I met that man in a restaurant called The Hitching Post in Davy, Florida. Oh my gosh.
So, I I got a picture uh with him and uh um he did do or his company did do the road maintenance here in our town. Correct. for quite a few years. Really a nice man. They had a big
building he has. He's got quite a few big buildings. He spends most of his time making Instagram videos and and uh Alligator Ron's uh bar. Oh my god, that is so it's it's a big meeting
hall. He's done very well for a guy with a truck done well for himself. Yeah. And he's a busy man yet, too. I mean, he's on all kinds of water control um committees for the state of Florida.
Wow. Was he about 80 now? No, I I'm just thinking because I went Yeah, Ronnie said in his 80s. Yeah. Well, he he he was my age back in 65. So, let's leave it at that.
Oh. Uh oh. Okay, that's it. That's all you got. Okay, a couple things. Um, I had the honor of representing the town at the ribbon cutting the other night. Um, and it was a very nice event. Um, thank you Councilman Coleman and
McClendon for joining me there. Um, and Marge again, and I apologize. This week was hard for me to get around with my foot. Um but uh Marge uh filled in filled in at several events for me that
one and also the uh literacy coalition read. It's that time again. So anybody of you council members if you can please let Valerie know if you are willing to volunteer to go and read at the elementary school on the designated day which I believe is October 10th. So, um,
if you can let her know, Valerie, if you can confirm that date and then maybe send us all out an email and we can let you know. So, what we do is we go and they assign you a classroom and you read this little book, which we'll make sure we have copies of um to a class and uh
it's just a way to promote literacy. And then what we did last year was we brought the copies back to I think we we donated those copies to the classrooms actually last year. Yes, we did. Then then we bought some additional copies to have here in town hall in case people wanted to come in and read them to their kids or whatever. So, it's just a nice
way to promote literacy um in Palm Beach County. On on the tables at that meeting, they had uh great big glass containers and they were filled with um hydroponically grown plants and they let
you use those scissors that were in the in the bag there to snip the plants off. I'm going to use them for my needle work. So, and they they gave you a bottle that you could stick the the part that you cut off in it and take it home.
That's cool. They're always very nice events. I I I enjoy them very much. I'm sad that I missed it, but glad that Thank you for representing us there. Um, and I know a lot of things are contentious. Um, and you know, uh, one of the things that I ran on was to try
to bring unity. So, I'm really pleased that we're trying to come up with some ideas moving forward of trying to bring some unity and move the town forward. Um, I think that Maryann's suggestion again about the election cycle is a really great one because that is one of the things that brings out a lot of the
ugliness. Um, and uh, so I think it's a good idea and we'll see what the um, charter review committee says about that. And with that, can I have a motion to all in favor? I