Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-03-05 - City Commission Special Meeting MinutesF r4� 9A V y n R1vP MAIL REPLY TO: P.O. BOX 25010 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320 5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900 March 4, 1986 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA There will be a Special City Council meeting on Wednesday, March 5, 1986, at 8:15 A.M. in the West Conference Room of City Hall, 5811 NW 88 Avenue, Tamarac. The purpose of the meeting is discussion and possible action on the following legal matters affecting the City: 1. Claim of John Taribo against the City of Tamarac. 2. Case of John Purdy vs. City of Tamarac. • 3. Status report of the Case of Peter Prior vs, the City of Tamarac seeking an injunction regarding certain Charter Amendments on the March 11, 1986 Ballot. 4. Authorization to pay the court reporter in the ESM matters. The public is invited to attend. Carol E. Barbuto Assistant City Clerk Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes 0 the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 5, 1986 Tape 1 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Kravitz called the meeting to order on Wednesday, March 5, 1986, at 8:15 A.M. in the West Conference Room of City Hall. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Philip B. Kravitz Vice Mayor Helen Massaro Councilman Arthur H. Gottesman Councilman Raymond J. Munitz Councilman Sydney M. Stein ALSO PRESENT• Larry Perretti, City Manager Jon M. Henning, City Attorney Patricia Marcurio, Secretary LEGAL AFFAIRS 2. Case of John Purdy vs. City of Tamarac - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Attorney was authorized to pursue this with John Gronda, Legal Counsel, in the courts at a cost up to $2,500.00. Mr. Henning said there was a lawsuit filed on 2/25/86 and both Mayor Kravitz and City Manager Perretti were served. He said the case regards John Purdy, a Police Officer, who had a heart attack and, though his doctors have stated that he can go back to work, the City doctors find that he is not ready to go back to work. He said the City is reluctant to put someone who is in less than top medical condition back on active duty in the Police Department. Mr. Henning said the City was pursuing either light duty or another department for Mr. Purdy to work in. He said Mr. Purdy is one year past the Police retirement age, which is 57, and is eligible for retirement. Mr. Henning said a complaint was filed in Circuit Court and he spoke with John Gronda, the City's Labor Attorney, and they feel there are several defenses to the action. He said he would like John Gronda to be authorized to represent the City to file Motions to Dismiss and to fight this case in Court at a maximum cost for legal fees of $2,500.00. He said the City will continue to negotiate, through the Personnel Department. V/M Massaro asked if the City's doctor examined Mr. Purdy and City Manager Perretti said Dr. Serrano, the City's physician, checked Mr. Purdy and, after a stress test was given through Mr. Purdy's own doctor at the hospital, the test showed he failed the requirements. He said, consequently, Dr. Serrano felt Mr. Purdy could not go on active duty as a Police Officer. Mr. Perretti said when this report was received, he requested Judy Deutsch, the Personnel Director, call Mr. Purdy into the office to discuss alternatives. He said the day after Mrs. Deutsch spoke to Mr. Purdy, the City received the summons. He said, therefore, there was no opportunity to discuss alterna- tives with Mr. Purdy. V/M Massaro MOVED to authorize John Gronda and the City Attorney to pursue this in the Courts at a cost up to $2,500.00. SECONDED by C/M Gottesman. r' 1 3/5/86 /pm C/M Gottesman asked if Mr. Purdy's salary would be less if he were given duties other than those of a Police Officer and Mr. Henning said Mr. Purdy could be retired from the Police Department and still have another job within City employment. 91 VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 3. Status Report of the Case of Peter Prior vs. the City of Tamarac seeking an iniunction regarding certain Charter Amendments on the March 11,_1986 Ballot - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Attorney gave a status report. Mayor Kravitz noted that when the original claim came in he was not listed at all but the second notice listed him as the Mayor. Mr. Henning said this document is a Notice of Hearing and is addressed to various people and is only addressed to Mayor Kravitz on behalf of the City. He said the Mayor is not named as a party. Mayor Kravitz said Mr. Prior filed this claim as a member and Vice Chairman of the Administrative Board for the Pension Plan and he asked by what authority Mr. Prior is representing the Administra- tive Board. Mr. Henning said at the February meeting of the Pension Board, Mr. Prior asked him if he would file the case and he told him he could not because of a conflict of interest. He 12 said it was dropped and there was never any action taken by the Board on that matter. He said these are some of the items that will come up at the Court hearing. Mr. Henning said there is a Notice of Hearing, as just discussed, for Friday, March 7, 1986 at 3:30 P.M. before Judge Garrett at the County Courthouse. He said he has asked that Alan Ruf, Consultant City Attorney, handle this case because of a conflict of interest. He said he may be called as a witness on the case since he has been before the Pension Board, Charter Board and City Council and has been involved in several aspects of this. Mr. Henning said there is no one on the City Council that must attend this hearing and they will ask the City Clerk's office to help with records for preparation of this. He said they are addressing one or two questions on the ballot regarding the Pension Plan and investments for the Pension Plan. He said they are seeking to have the Court throw the question off the ballot. He said the ballot has been printed and they cannot change the ballot but there is a question as to whether they can affect the results of the election. Mr. Perretti said Peter Prior is receiving money from the I.A.F.F. to pursue this and there is interest in this throughout the Count because they feel it may have an affect on some of the other Pension Plans throughout the County. Mr. Henning said at the last Pension Board meeting on 2/27/86, the Actuary gave a report and the Pension Plan is doing very well. He said the City's contributions are projected to be reduced by about half of what they have been and the City is projected to save approximately $300,000.00 if investments continue as they are presently. 2 3/5/86 /pm V/M Massaro said she understood that the issue did come before the Pension Board and Mr. Prior was Denied the right to do this and Mr. Henning said he will check the Minutes but he does not believe there was authorization either way. V/M Massaro said that is a very important question. V/M Massaro asked if Mr. Prior was not authorized to do this, is it too late for this to be meaningful at the hearing and Mr. Henning said no, that would be some of the defenses that would be brought up at the hearing. 4. Authorization to - pay the court reporter in the ESM matters - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Authorization was given for payment up to $500.00. Mr. Henning said one of the bills distributed at the last meeting was for approximately $400.00 and there are several bills to be presented at the next Council meeting. He said he would ask authorization to pay the court reporter up to $500.00 because they are threatening that they will not show up any longer. He said he will get the actual invoice to the Finance Department. Mayor Kravitz asked if it is not normal procedure for the attor- neys to include that in their bill and Mr. Henning said this is coming through on English, McCaughan letterhead, which is the billing for the public body group. He said the City is only paying 8% of these bills. V/M Massaro questioned whether this was the whole bill or 8% another bill. Mr. Henning said it was an interim bill up to the date of the bill and it was 8% of the whole bill. He said, in fact, there is a discount because the attorneys explained there would be several court transcripts needed and they received a discount on the normal rate. Mr. Henning said they called him yesterday and said if the court reporter does not get paid, she is threatening to quit. He said this affects all of the public body group. Mr. Henning said he is requesting authorization for payment up to $500.00 and he will get Council copies of all invoices and checks. C/M Stein so MOVED, SECONDED by C/M Munitz. _YQTE• ALL VOTED AYE 1. Claim of_ John Taribo-against the City of Tamarac - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Attorney is to notify Mr. Taribo and his attorneys that the City prefers to go through the grievance procedure. Mr. Henning said John Taribo was in middle management of Tamarac Utilities West. He said the Utilities Director/City Engineer has worked in City Hall for many years and several months ago the Utility Director's office was moved to the Utility plant in the new modular building. 3 3/5/86 /pm Mr. Henning said the Utility Director now has closer contact with his workers and some things that came to his attention caused him some concern. He said because of this he requested the dismissa of John Taribo. It Mr. Henning said Mr. Greenwood requested this dismissal through the City Manager's office and it was approved. He said Mr. Taribo was given a few days notice, was dismissed and hired a lawyer and he is asking for a hearing, to be reinstated and retained on the payroll. Mr. Henning said at a Council meeting a few weeks ago, the Council authorized John Gronda, the City's Labor Attorney, to work in defense of this case for an amount not to exceed $3,000.00. He said they tried to reach a negotiation with a bottom line figure requested of 6 weeks severance pay. He said the Personnel Manual authorizes 2 weeks severance pay for someone in Mr. Taribo's position payable with the authorization of the City Manager. He said since this is a request of an additional 4 weeks, it would require Council approval. Mr. Henning said settlement, therefore, could be made with payment of 6 weeks severance pay, which is approximately $4,500.00. He said an alternative would be to authorize Mr. Gronda to give guidance to the City to regroup on this case and correct any mistakes. Mayor Kravitz expressed concern that a precedent could be set wi discharged employees suing the City and, based on the high cost legal fees, settlements are made. Mr. Henning said after negotia tions with Mr. Taribo, this appears to be the bottom line figure for which he will settle. Mayor Kravitz asked the City Manager whether or not he feels this settlement has merit and how he feels about the Personnel Manual. Mr. Perretti said it is a matter of economics vs. what could happen with other employees pursuing this same course. He said there could be lengthy Court action and would cost more money than $4,500.00 to pursue it. He said it is possible the City could win, however, recently the Courts have ruled in favor of the employee with the burden on the employer to prove that they have done everything correctly. Mr. Perretti said this is an ideal case of a long --term employee, who worked for a boss in the past, Larry Keating, who gave him excellent evaluations and now there is a new boss, Bill Greenwood, who has reverse thoughts about this employee. He said if Personnel evaluation forms were shown on John Taribo, the case for the City would not look good because of the different evaluations involved. He said it is basically a judgment call as to who is right and who is wrong on this case. C/M Gottesman asked what the City's chances are if the case is lost in Court and Mr. Perretti said Mr. Taribo has the very prestigous law firm of Finley, Kumble. Mr. Henning noted that Tom Tew, Trustee for the ESM litigation of the City, is with this law firm as well. He said he will sue for more than $5,000.00 because that is the minimum amount of a case that can be handled in Circuit Court. Mr. Henning said it is very possible Council would be in a position to have a grievance procedure hearing for this case. 4 3/5/86 /pm v/M Massaro said if the City is following proper procedures in terminating employees teen this type -of litigation should be stopped. C/M Stein said if the City should lose this case, it could set a precedent by having Mr. Taribo not only win what he wanted but more than that. He said the City's legal fees will certainly be much more than $4,500.00 since they will probably not quit at the Circuit Court with this particular firm. He said the City has already authorized up to $3,000.00 in legal fees for this case as well. He said because of the difference in the evaluations from one supervisor to another, it could be viewed by the ,judge as a personality conflict rather than a qualificaton conflict. He said he would like to go on record as favoring the settlement with Mr. Taribo. C/M Munitz asked if they would agree to the G weeks severance pay and Mr. Henning said yes, as a matter of fact, one of the reasons this is being discussed today, is because they would not wait until the next regular Council meeting. v/M Massaro said there must be a problem somewhere and she felt the proper things are not being put into the employees' records. She said when an employee has done something, it should go into the records. She said she is tired of having people terminated and being paid a severance pay on top of that. C/M Gottesman asked if part of the problem is not caused by lack of -proper procedures in the Personnel Manual for severance, lay offs.or firings. He said it would be advisable for the Personnel Maria der to correct the Personnel Manual concerning this. -P-erretti said many municipalities have questions when an eAlpl-loyee in long standing is of excellent standards and then �urMdenly changes. He said as an example, in the contract of filly Johnson, former City Manager, Council specifically had a stipulation that if he was to leave in a specified amount of time he would only get a specified amount of money. v/M Massaro said this is already in the Manual and Mr. Perretti said it is not the same. C/M Stein said he agreed that it should be stipulated, for instance, "If a man works 5 years, the maximum amount he can claim is _ He said if the employee accepts the job under those terms than his stature in the Court is different. Mr. Henning said there is a difference between what is termed a "vested employee", who has what is called property rights to his job once he has passed probation and an employee at will such as the City Attorney or City Manager, who are working at the pleasure of the City Council and are not vested. Barry Eden, resident, said each case should be reviewed on an individual basis. He said this employee was with the City over 5 years and could be a difficult case to win in Court. He said for the amount they are agreeing to as settlement, this would be the economical way to go. C/M Munitz asked Mr. Henning if he would recommend a grievance hearing on this case and Mr. Henning said one alternative that Mr. Gronda is discussing with Mr. Taribo's Attorney is whether it goes through a grievance procedure. 5 3/5/86 /pm I V/M Massaro said she feels any option which would bring this to a reasonable solution is the answer. She said Council does not know the basis of Mr. Taribo's termination at this moment. C/M Munitz said since Council does not have the facts, a grievanc hearing should be held for all the facts to be reviewed fully. Mr. Henning said there is some documentation that there was some problem with the biofilter maintenance and this could be consider- ed as well. C/M Stein MOVED that Mr. Taribo be notified that Council prefers to go through the grievance procedure and V/M Massaro SECONDED. V/M Massaro said this will set some procedures as what should be happening with the Department Heads, the Departments, the Per- sonnel records. Someone should be held to task if there is a problem with an employee and that Personnel record does not reflect it; the person who should have done it should be fired. VOTE: ALL _VOTED AYE Mayor Kravitz adjourned the meeting at 9:00 A.M. !�_O-M OR ATEST: C TY CLER J r - This public document was promulgated at a cost of $40.46 or $1.12 per copy to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the City Council of the City of Tamarac. CITY OF TAMARALC APPROVED AT MEETING OF City Cle r. 3/5/86 /pm J