City Updates on Brightline, FEMA Extreme Flood Maps and Presentations Dominate Council Mtg

As expected, Second Hearing on all of  the listed ordinances and their associated resolutions, as well as the Consent Agenda, were passed 5:0.

During Items of Resident Interest, Vice Mayor Litt described a meeting with PB State College, where students voiced concerns about the existing bus routes which drop off them off across from the campus on PGA Blvd and also on Campus Drive, forcing 400-800 students to cross these busy and dangerous thoroughfares daily. The City and Palm Tran will work to help and solve the issue.

The City Manager report included:

• Virgin/Brightline Train Crossing Update – City Engineer Todd Engle described the upcoming crossing closures for construction. The closures will begin in May, be staggered and are scheduled to be completed by July 3. The tentative dates can be found in this Palm Beach Post article, and updates will be published on the City website and on the Brightline website as well.  The representatives of the railroad were asked about the old FEC railroad ties which are the source of a lot of resident complaints. It was not clear that any direct action would be taken by Brightline. The fiber optic lines and cable lines (for all providers) will be located on the east side of the tracks. The second line of tracks will be built on the west side – until Kyoto Gardens Drive, where they will switch to the east side.
• FEMA Extreme Flood Maps – Mr. Engle continued with a report on FEMA flood zones. In 2017 the maps were updated and all units in PB Gardens were removed from the requirement of flood insurance. But in 2014 FEMA began a project to assess extreme floods – ‘500’ year floods where a worst case scenario with a ‘perfect storm’, king tides and other adverse conditions happen simulteously. In a recent public meeting on their new maps, 305 units in the City would once again would require flood insurance if there were mortgages on those units. The areas that would be affected are in Marina Gardens, Harbour Oaks, Nature’s Hideaway, The Meadows mobile homes and one road in Prosperity Oaks. The City will continue to monitor and be involved with the map changes, which will probably take several years to be approved.
• Litigation: City Attorney Max Lohman gave an update on the four different lawsuits brought forward by resident Sid Dinerstein on the City Charter.  Lohman wanted to address what he considered to be misinformation being spread on the subject. He said that the total cost to the City was less than $100K (although at a standard commercial rate it would have amounted to $250K). While the City prevailed in the last lawsuit appeal at the 4th DCA, Mr. Dinerstein plans to appeal to the FL Supreme Court. While Mr. Lohman would love to go before the FL Supreme Court, he didn’t think it likely that they would take the case. He proclaimed that Sid was representing himself, not the people, and it was in fact he, the City Attorney, who represents the ‘people’ in these cases as they passed the various amendments. As to the expense of the claimant – Mr. Lohman said that he understood that the attorney representing Mr. Dinerstein was working pro bono – so any misinformation one hears about what it cost to bring forward the suit was a lie by someone. Council Member Lane praised the City Attorney’s defense at the 4th DCA, but also defended Mr. Dinerstein as having good intentions in bringing forth the law suits. Mr. Lohman said he would update the Council on the status of the ongoing lawsuits with Forbes and TransformCo (the new Sears) in private.

Public Comment:

• 211 Helpline – Patrice Schroeder of the 211 Helpline out of Lantana publicized 211 Awareness Week from February 11 – February 17. She pointed out that as a crisis hotline, calls to the Veteran’s Crisis line roll over to 211, and that they have Veterans that can take those calls.
• Palm Beach County Library – Doug Crane – Dept Director for Palm Beach County Library gave a brief update: all late fines were dropped last year – if a book is lost then the person must pay for the book; the libraries will be a key resource in the Census as each branch has wifi as well as computers where people can complete their census forms; as in the past, the libraries will serve as early voting locations in the March, August and November elections.
• PGA Corridor – Steve Mathison, representing the PGA Corridor, voiced the organization’s support of the City’s Mobility Plan and related actions.

Presentations included several charity related topics:

• The West Palm Beach Veterans’ Resource Center was presented with a check for $39,025.97 from the 2019 Mayor’s Veteran Golf Classic
• Closest to the Pin – Sandhill Crane’s Golf Club’s ‘Closest to the Pin’ for Charity is celebrating it’s first anniversary – donors give $5 collected at the golf course for the competition event for that month, and the winner receives 20% and the charity receives 80% of the proceeds.
• Police and Fire Rescue Foundation – In 2018, the Palm Beach Gardens Police Foundation’s mission was expanded to include the City’s Fire Rescue services whereupon the Palm Beach Gardens Police and Fire Rescue Foundation was formed.
• Operation 120 Inc – Empowering Female Veterans,  discussed the issues of female veterans and how they were often more reluctant to seek help than their male counterparts, because many times they are single parents and afraid that they could lose their children in the process. The organization has found acquired its first housing unit. See Operation120 for more information.

A discussion on a resolution regarding awareness and opposition to anti-semitism was postponed for more in-depth discussion next month.

When is a tax increase not a tax increase?

A lot of ground was covered in Thursday’s (9/6) City Council meeting.

We’ll start with the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Budget Hearing – the first hearing of two, the second of which is scheduled for 9/20/18 at 7pm. There was no public comment and the proposed budget and tax rate passed 5:0.

As usual, Finance Administrator Allan Owens presented a thorough, easy to understand presentation of the proposed budget. His presentation can be seen here. What was out of the ordinary, however was Mr. Owens’ exception to some headlines in the Palm Beach Post discussing the City’s budget as a tax increase.

He stated that the headlines were misleading and that they were confusing to the Budget Oversight Committee.

Equally perplexing is this line from the Budget Oversight Committee’s final report “The City has taken affirmative steps to avoid a tax increase for the FY 2019 Budget”.  When operational millage stays flat (as it has at 5.55 and in the proposed out years), and valuations rise – then taxes – the actual dollars taken in, and the actual costs to the tax-payers GO UP. The slight decrease in debt service millage has little influence on the taxes paid by the tax-payer. As former County Commissioner Jess Santemaria used to say ” It’s the dollars not the millage”. PBGWatch’s article entitled  $2.5 Million Tax Increase in 2019 Budget , as well as our agenda item note “(Note – this means that as property valuations increase, your property taxes will go up accordingly – at differing rates depending on whether or not you own a homesteaded property). ” are in full agreement with the Palm Beach Post’s headlines. We hope that the wording in the Budget Oversight Committee’s report is a typo and that it should read “……steps to avoid a tax rate increase’….

The Election Results were approved 5:0 and 3 of the Council chose to speak on the topic during Items of Resident Interest and Board and Committee Reports. Mayor Marino, Vice Mayor Woods and Council Member Marciano, all somewhat defensively, reiterated that it was right to place the charter questions on the ballot and letting the voters decide, even if it was the ‘unpopular’ thing to do. Marino stated that Matthew Lane also wanted to alter term limits to 2- 4 year terms. Yes – that was true during discussions on what, if anything, to place on the ballot. However Council Member Lane voted NO on placing each/any of the charter referendum questions on the ballot both in March and August. The other 4 council members voted YES on all. During Public Comment, Fred Scheibl noted that he’d never seen such uniformity of results, with almost every precinct in the city rejecting questions 1 and 3 by over 15 points, and suggested the Council never do this again. Sid Dinerstein also discussed his assessment of the Election results, and stated his objection to the “… city treasury being used as the Council’s campaign account”.

Two others made Public Comment: Gerald Richman – speaking for Sears regarding Dick’s Sporting Goods and continued issues with the Forbes Company (see Why There’s Still No Dick’s Store at the Gardens Mall ); Steen Ericksson, representing the Fire Chiefs Association of Palm Beach County inviting people to the 9/11 Remembrance Ceremony at Christ Fellowship Church in Boynton Beach at 7pm.

Allan Owens and the Finance Department were awarded the Government Finance Officers Association Distinguished Budget Award for the 21st Consecutive Year by Shannon Ramsey Chessman, Acting COO of the Palm Beach County Clerk and Comptroller’s Office. Mr. Owens thanked his team and specifically Mary Anderson-Pickle, Deputy Finance Administrator.

City Manager Ferris reported:

• The City’s Budget Department (Km! Ra) was awarded the Annual Achievement in Excellence Procurement Award
• Chief Frank Kitzerow of the Palm Beach County School District Police Department spoke on the outstanding support received from the City regarding the City’s supplying police for elementary school patrol and helping in the high schools as well.
• City Manager Ferris  also read many letters of Commendation and thank you letters from residents to the Police Department, Parks & Rec, Building Department, Tennis Center, Code Enforcement and the Fire/Rescue Open House.

Ordinance 22, 2018 – The Bonnette Hunt Club PUD Site Plan Approval discussion resulted in some heated disagreements between Mayor Marino and Council Member Lane. At issue was the very high density and the number of waivers being approved for this very small (6.78 acres) parcel. Also making public comment was John Guastella, President of the Mirabella HOA representing 492 homes – and that this was the first time he was seeing these plans in the entirety and wished the HOA would have had the opportunity to see it. He also expressed concerns about the landscaping on the berm, the two-story homes impact on Mirabella property values. First reading of the ordinance passed 4:1 with Lane voting No.

The Consent Agenda and all other resolutions and ordinances passed 5:0.

There was no City Attorney Report so no status on the two outstanding Elections lawsuits regarding the Appeal to the 4th District Court on the March Election or the status of the lawsuit regarding the August Special Election. See Gardens Election Lawsuit Continues.

Save the date – Thursday September 20th at 7pm for the Second City Council Meeting and Final Reading and Approval of the FY 2018/2019 Budget.

Martino: Hear the Messages

For the voters and City Council of Palm Beach Gardens the August 28th election has come and gone. Again in a loud and certain voice the voters sent two succinct messages to the City Council and its Administration. Approximately, 70% of the participating voters in the August 28th election affirmatively communicated…

DO NOT MESS WITH OUR TERM LIMITS

And

DO NOT MESS WITH THE CITY MANAGER RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT

This City Council has been tone deaf when listening to the majority of the voters as it relates to these two issues. However, their hearing seems to be well tuned to the frequency of the developers and special interests whose money and attitudes are not in tune with the desires of the voters. The deceptive, political, and somewhat conspiratorial campaign that was waged against the above messages by the City Council bears witness to their deafness. To make matters worse the City Council used public tax money to support and pay for their crusade against existing term limits and City Manager residency requirements. Augmenting the City’s position in opposition to the messages above, a Political Action Committee, PAC, miraculously surfaced with an employee of the City’s public relations firm as its Treasurer, and lots of developer and special interest money underwriting it.

The reality of and results of the election apparently did nothing to improve the deafness of Mayor Marino. A City Council appointed Mayor, Marino’s comments in response to the results of the August 28th election suggest no improvement can be expected to her and the Council’s hearing. In a Palm Beach Post article she lamented “It looks like every five to six years, we’ll have a brand new council, so we’ll have a limited amount of institutional knowledge.” Marino blamed the term limit election results on a reaction to national politics. Apparently, Marino did not hear well the sounds of the election results concerning the City Manager residency either. She again opposed the voters’ desires as after some simplistic commentary she said, “That’s why it should be a contract item and not a charter item.”

My suggestion to the City Council is to listen and HEAR THE MESSAGES of the voters. Leave term limits alone, leave the City Manager residency as is, and quit messing with the City Charter. Enough is enough

City Council Meeting and 1st Budget Hearing on Sept 6th

• Resolution 50, 2018 – City applied for and received grant for $250K for Stormwater Maintenance, Repairs and Operation Program. 
• Purchase Award – Mowing and Landscaping Services – Streets and Parks – Openly competed – did not choose option to renew – 5 year contract with option to renew for another 5 years – total 5 year contract value $3.7 million.

City Manager Report:  Nothing listed

Public Hearings and Resolutions:

• Ordinance 21, 2018  – First hearing of Adopting the Budget for Fiscal Year 2018/2019.  The Operational millage remains flat at 5.55 and debt service millage is reduced .0503 for a total millage of 5.6003.  Property valuations are up 4.41% over last year.  It is the intention to maintain flat operational millage for several years.  (Note – this means that as property valuations increase, your property taxes will go up accordingly – at differing rates depending on whether or not you own a homesteaded property). 
• Resolution 56, 2018 – A request from Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management (PBCDERM) for a Major Conditional Use approval to allow various improvements for passive recreation activities and a small public parking lot within a portion of the Loxahatchee Slough Recreation Facility area located off of the Beeline Highway approximately one-mile north of the PGA Boulevard/Beeline Highway intersection.
• Resolution 57, 2018 –  A request from PGA Commons 2, LLC and PGA Commons 3, LLC for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment at PGA Commons PUD to allow a new outdoor bar for Spoto’s Restaurant
• Ordinance 20, 2018 – First Reading of a request from 11940 Highway One Realty, LLC for a Voluntary Annexation of a 5.74-acre parcel located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Juno Road and U.S. Highway One approximately 0.5 miles north of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and U.S. Highway One. Most of us know this as Carl’s Plaza; it is in the long-term annexation plan for the City and is currently vacant.
• Ordinance 22, 2018 – First reading of Bonnette Hunt Club – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezoning and PUD Site Plan Approval – The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD Site Plan to accommodate the development of a 24-unit single-family residential subdivision. The property is located on the south side of Hood Road, between Florida’s Turnpike and Jog Road. 

Items for Council Action/Discussion:   

• None listed

Check the agenda to see if any additional items have been added before the meeting here.

Gardens Election Lawsuit Continues

In response to the city’s expenditure of taxpayer money on a campaign to pass the three ballot amendments, thinly desguised as an “education” campaign, a lawsuit was filed in advance of the election.  It was triggered when the PAC “Voters in Control” started posting misleading signs at the early voting sites and hiring campaigners to wear tee-shirts with misleading information to wave them.

The lawsuit charges illegal use of taxpayer money and violations of the laws regarding government funding for advocacy of one side of a referendum question, and asked that the questions be thrown out, the vote not be tallied, and the PAC and the city be enjoined from continuing their illegal activity. The City of Palm Beach Gardens, the Supervisor of Election, the Canvassing Board and the “Voters in Control” PAC were all named as defendants.

The matter came before a judge in the final days before the election as an emergency pleading, but with early and absentee voting mostly done, the request to stop the canvassing was denied. Today, the parties agreed that SOE and the Canvassing Board would be dropped from the suit “without predjudice”, and Judge Peter Blanc would accept a motion to file a second amended complaint from the plaintiff in the next 20 days, the defendants would then have 30 days to respond, with a hearing within 45 days.

Some of this is moot as two of the three proposals have been soundly rejected by the voters. (See earlier article). What remains could include a challenge to the one that passed (Question 2), and the matter of a penalty for the City and PAC for illegal activity, depending on what the plaintiff, Sid Dinerstein decides to put in the amended complaint.

The whole exercise of a newly elected council trying to significantly weaken the term limits proposal passed by 80% of the voters was at least distasteful if not corrupt. Spending over $100K of taxpayer money to promote this flawed activity was outrageous. Thankfully, the voters are not stupid and let these 4 Council members know what they thought of it. (Council member Matthew Lane opposed placing it on the ballot).

It will be interesting to see how the lawsuit progresses.  Here is the Palm Beach Post summary of today’s hearing.

Palm Beach Gardens Results – Q1-NO; Q2-Yes; Q3-NO

The voters of Palm Beach Gardens, 28% of those registered, made their positions known. The turnout for the Primary/Special Election was certainly greater than we in PBGWatch expected. The results for all 3 questions were definitive. See the chart below. We will update the website with a more detailed analysis of the results by precinct when the information becomes available. Sarah Peters of the Palm Beach Post included comments from Mayor Marino and Sid Dinerstein in her article.

Legal action continues:

• “The questions are the subject of an unresolved lawsuit filed by Dinerstein days before the election alleging that city-produced flyers, robocalls and information on the city’s website wrongly advocated for the passage of the questions rather than educating the public”. There is a hearing on Friday, 8/31 on the lawsuit.
• Also unresolved is a second lawsuit by Mr. Dinerstein, currently in the 4th District Court of Appeals, regarding what was Question 3 in March – the ‘sit-out and run-again’ provision.

Summarizing:

• Palm Beach Gardens current and future council members can only serve for two-consecutive three year terms- unchanged – 65.5% NO
• Palm Beach Gardens City Managers must reside in the City, and must move there if not already a resident, within 1 year – unchanged – 70% NO
• Palm Beach Gardens Charter will be replaced by the one approved by the voters, meeting state statutes, removing outdated provisions and including other changes such as how vacancies are filled, definiton of a term, and other changes unrelated to statutes/updates. – 60% YES

Thanks to all the voters who did their research and voted on these issues.

Martino: Propaganda and Deception – Vote NO NO NO

The twin spigots of propaganda and deception surrounding the City Council of Palm Beach Gardens unrelenting march to change term limits to match the craving of the incumbents and developers while dwarfing the desires of 80% of the 2014 voters have again sparked controversy that has led to the Courthouse for resolution. The August 28, 2018 three question City Charter Referendum election has been legally challenged by a private citizen of Palm Beach Gardens.

The basis for the challenge, as I understand it to be, is misuse of public funds to pay for a public information campaign deceptively disguised as a solicitation campaign for votes to support approval to push for the passage of three City Charter questions. A local government cannot use public funds for vote solicitation.

In analyzing the three propaganda brochures sent to our homes and the City’s “information” materials on its website it is obvious that the City Council is using their appointed Charter Review Committee as a foil and their recommendations as a shield to justify these three City Charter questions. They are hiding the facts that their appointed appointed Citizens Charter Review Committee was less than representative of the entire City and had two City lobbyists from the business and development communities as members, one of whom is not a city resident. The City Council has not stipulated as information that recommendations from appointed committees are not mandates to the City Council or its constituents and that it is not a requirement, legal or otherwise, to present a ballot question on any or all of the Charter Committee recommendations.

The question than is why is a City Council that has yet to complete a single term in office so obsessed with these Charter change questions. More particularly, what inspires their obsession with changing the 2014 Term Limit Law that was passed by 80% of those 2014 voters who came to the polls to mandate term limits as then presented. Could it be because the advantage of the changes, particularly to the Term Limits, inure to their benefit and the desires of the developers whose monies are fueling a PAC that is allegedly sponsoring a campaign of confusion and deception concerning these Charter change questions? This same Political Action Committee is alleged to be in collusion and cooperation with the City and its hired Public Relations firm.

Under the developing circumstances the argument of being above personal considerations and purity on the part of the City Council members is difficult to accept. The points of order that the City Council may use to argue for underpinning their contention that it has presented an information campaign and not a political campaign for votes has been debated, exposed, and found to be wanting.

Please vote on August 28, 2018. My recommendation has not changed. Its vote NO, NO, and NO!

Martino: Vote NO, NO, and NO!

On Tuesday, August 28, 2018, Election Day, Vote NO to Charter Question #1! Vote NO to Charter Question #2! Vote NO to Charter Question #3! That’s how “TOGETHER WE CAN FIX OUR CHARTER”. The City Council has again sent “slick” campaign-style brochures to our homes deceptively asking for our vote to “fix” a charter that is not broken, particularly, in the areas they suggest.

NO to Question #1! It changes existing City Council members’ term limits of two consecutive 3-year terms that approximately 16,000 registered voters, or 80% of those that cast ballots, approved in 2014 to three consecutive 3-year terms. Why? How is that a “fix”? Council members need more time to do what? If you can’t do what in 6 years is it worth doing? These five Council members were very well aware of the existing Term Limit Law when they asked for the voters trust and have not even completed one 3-year term. And they want more time!

NO to Question #2! It is a consortium of changes some of which are minor but others that could obviate City employee rights. It is an unhealthy menu of confusion dressed up to appear as a “fix”.

NO to Question #3! It is farcical to suggest that this question will “fix the City Manager contract process”. There is no contract process to “fix” per se and annual reviews of the City Manager are routine. It simply is another attempt to eliminate residency requirements for the City Manager. Leaving the residency requirement in the Charter is not a detriment but offers clarity to the people and to the employee under consideration

In case you did not know it is against the law for the City Council to solicit votes. They are allowed to authorize and/or provide basic election information to the public and nothing more. The City is spending over $100,000 to “educate” the electorate on why our City Charter needs a “fix”. None of that $100,000 expenditure was approved at a regular advertised Council meeting to my knowledge. The City’s contract vendor who is creating this “fix” illusion has been linked with a Political Action Committee, a PAC, which has reportedly received $13,750 mostly from City developers and landowners. An employee of this same City contract vendor is listed as the Treasurer of this PAC. Volunteers for this PAC were passing out City sponsored election guides and erecting misleading election signs encouraging a Yes vote on the Charter questions. Yet the City, the contract vendor, and the PAC, incredibly claim no affiliation and/or coordination exists between them. Further, we should recall that the Courts threw out two of four similar Charter questions in March 2018. One of the surviving March questions is before the Fourth District Court of Appeals for adjudication. How can we be sure that these new questions have judicial validity?

Before voting on these “fix” questions please consider the above. However, the real and basic questions to consider are why this “fix” now, and who benefits from this “fix”. It appears to me that the current City Council members would be big beneficiaries. They get to keep collecting their approximately $30,000 part-time salaries for 9 years which equals $270,000 which does not include their yearly automatic raises. They also would continue to receive their approximately $30,000 benefit package which is another $270,000 for a total of $540,000. If they sit-out 3 years and get elected again that gravy train keeps on rolling for another 9 years and they bank another $540,000 salary and benefit package. How does 18 years and $1,080,000 comport with term limits? It doesn’t! And the current City Council members can continue with their perceived power while carousing with and satisfying the developers and landowners who contribute large sums to their campaigns, as exampled above.

I see no benefit or “fix” for the people whose home rule rights are guaranteed in the City Charter. Rather those home rule rights would be diminished and some would disappear.

Preserve Your Home Rule Rights; Vote NO, NO, and NO on Tuesday, August 28, 2018.

Misleading Signage Says Vote YES – Keep Term Limits

Palm Beach Gardens voters may be confused by signs paid for by the Political Committee “Voters in Control“, on their way to the polls…. how can Vote Yes mean Keep Term Limits?

The City already has term limits passed in 2014 by over 16,000 voters, about 80% of the vote – for 2 3-year terms.

Voting YES would CHANGE  term limits by adding a 3rd term.

A NO vote KEEPS term limits the way the voters passed them!!!!!

So who is Voters in Control?

A look at the FEC campaign treasurer reports listed on the City’s website shows that the Treasurer is Kim Lee Bove.  Interestingly enough Kim Lee Bove is Director of Operations at Cornerstone Solutions, LLC – which is the same company that the City hired to ‘market’ the proposed charter changes.

One can review the listed donors in the March and April 2018 reports – the fairly short list includes mostly developers with business before the city. Why would they want council people to serve longer or not have term limits at all?  We can think of lots of reasons…..

Who benefits by misleading the voter?  You decide.

There is nothing wrong with donating to a PAC or having one – but their signage is highly misleading and we think that the voters should know.

Police Life-Saving Action and 12% Salary Increase Bookends Council Meeting

The August 2nd Council Meeting began with an update by Sherri Pla (the City’s Head PGA Professional) on the Junior Ryder Cup Challenge Trip to Scotland. Also covered during Announcements and Presentations were the Florida Law Enforcement Traffic Safety Award (where the Gardens won first place in the category for departments with 101-200 officers) and American Heart Association’s Mission Life Gold Plus Award to Fire/Rescue for the 4th year in a row. Throughout the beginning of the meeting the exclamations of a young child could be heard. Thus Mayor Marino segued to an early City Manager Report.

Quick action by Officer Robert Ayala saved the life of young Lucia Graham while Officer Rafael Guadalupe called for Fire/Rescue and comforted her mother. See Gardens Cops who Saved Choking Baby…. for details and watch the segment of the Council Meeting recounting the event and honoring of these two officers here.

The last item on the Agenda was Resolution 45, 2018 approving and ratifying an agreement with the Police Benevolent Association granting an immediate 12% increase across the board and bringing the City to 2nd in salary only to Boca Raton among the local municipalities. This was presented to the Council as a ‘Fait Accompli’ and it was interesting that none on the Council even questioned the agreement nor addressed the implication on future labor negotiations. The only comments addressed impact on the budget, and then only as a done deal.  See details from the Palm Beach Post here.

All resolutions passed 5:0 including Adoption of 2018-2019 Fees and Charges, the Annual Community Development Block Grant Action Plan, and the first of many to come presentations before the Council on Avenir. City Attorney Lohman also gave an update on the Rustic Lakes Annexation lawsuit, where Rustic Lakes has 20 days to respond to the latest ruling against their suit.

There will be two Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget Hearings on September 6th and 20th.

Please vote on the three Charter Amendments on the ballot on August 28th!

Next Page »