Minutes for September 26, 2006
Back to Home Page
DRAFT
Board of Trustees
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
7:00 p.m. – Building D&E
Madame Chairman Wilma Weglein called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
We live and we learn, but sadly at different rates. Ms. Weglein requested a moment of silent prayer for our servicemen where ever they may be serving. Amen
Ms. Weglein led the Pledge.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of August 11, 2006 be considered for approval. Ms. Howard made a motion to approve. Second Ms. Donahue. Ms. Weglein made a note that the second page of Exhibit A is missing. The minutes are approved as amended.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of August 22, 2006 be considered for approval. Ms. Donahue made a motion to approve. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of August 28, 2006 be considered for approval. Ms. Richards made a motion to approve. Second Mr. Smith. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of August 31, 2006 be considered for approval. Ms. Howard made a motion to approve. Second Ms. Donahue. Ms. Weglein noted August 31st is a workshop, not a regular meeting. The minutes are approved as amended.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of September 8, 2006 be postponed for approval until the Trustees meeting on October 13, 2006. The Board concurred.
Ms. Donahue presented the Treasurer’s report. [Exhibit A.]
Ms. McCahan commented when the Trustees received notice of Mr. Hunt’s resignation, she contacted Colin Baenziger of Colin Baenziger & Associates. Mr. Baenziger is the consultant who assisted in hiring Mr. Hunt and the author of the Baenziger Report. Mr. Baenziger presented a flow chart to the Board showing the mechanics of the District Manager Selection Process [Exhibit B] [We] want to get to know you as people because the candidates want to know what kind of people they’ll be working for, the strong points and the weak points of the community, a realistically fair picture. The compensation and benefits package. Typically, the process nets 30-50 resumes, which are reviewed for a good fit in the target community. Mr. Baenziger informs the candidates regarding references [elected officials, the district or city attorney, the external auditor, the local newspaper, the Chamber of Commerce, subordinate employees, colleagues] and initiates background checks. The goal is to build a “picture” of the candidate through the references. The “interview notebook” contains the candidate’s resume, interview notes, a summary of the background check (including a credit check, because if they’re not managing their own money well, they won’t manage yours, either), driving record, education, research the Internet, and verify employment for the last 15 years.
Mr. Baenziger would then meet with each of the Trustees and review the candidates’ material. There may be 8-10 to choose from. The Trustees pick the ones who would be the best fit for Barefoot Bay to interview. The candidates typically attend a reception on a Friday evening, before interviews on Saturday morning. Saturday afternoon, the candidates are invited to a public meeting and present themselves at the podium to gain experience in the working environment, and to let the resident audience take a look at the candidates. The Trustees should be prepared to select a candidate at a meeting the following Monday.
Mr. Baenziger commented his company also performs mediation should problems arise between the manager and the Board. Sometimes there are differing management styles that can be worked out in the transitional stages. It takes about 75 days to find a manager. Mr. Baenziger would charge the Bay $15,000 for his services if he were selected to conduct the employment search.
Mr. Keegan asked Mr. Baenziger to compare the pros and cons of an individual versus a management company. Mr. Baenziger commented if [you] have enough work for an individual, that individual reports to the Board. A management company has a larger resource base [financial management, daily operations]. However, there is corporate loyalty and client loyalty, and there can be a conflict. [They] are in business to make a profit. Mr. Carillion asked if the costs of a management company might mean assessment fees would rise, which would be a hardship for residents on fixed incomes. Mr. Baenziger responded that when his condominium association employed a company, the fees remained about the same. Indian Trail Improvement District recently switched from a manager to a company. Mr. Baenziger said he gave Mr. Keegan the names of some districts to contact. Ms. Donahue asked if a management company would eliminate the need for District employees. Mr. Baenziger replied it depends on how the new arrangement was set up, whether the company was brought in just to provide management or to “run the whole show”. Mr. Bailey asked how a company would assess the Bay. Mr. Baenziger said it would depend on what condition the facilities were in, and whether the company was being asked to be responsible for them. Maintaining facilities cuts into the profit. One positive aspect of a management company is that if the manager leaves, the company is under contract to fill the position. The Board of Trustees would maintain control even if a management company were hired.
Mr. Baenziger offers a guarantee. If the manager leaves within the first year, his company repeats the search “for nothing”. If the manager leaves in the second year, if the Board isn’t happy with him or her, or the manager isn’t happy and leaves, Mr. Baenziger performs the search for half price. After that it’s business as usual. He said his company has learned to avoid placing candidates in the same towns where they may have worked or lived for 20 or more years, although they may have developed a successful management strategy. Imposing their experience in the new position instead of adapting doesn’t seem to work.
Mr. Keegan asked who the Board would deal with if a company were hired, the manager or the company? Mr. Baenziger responded the Board would deal with the manager, and if there were problems, the Board would go to the company. Mr. Smith was concerned that candidates who knew the track record in Barefoot Bay might not want to come here. Mr. Baenziger said he had a couple of people in mind that he could send to Mr. Hunt [who would distribute them to the Trustees]. Ms. Weglein requested any background checks be presented to the Trustees before candidates are presented. Mr. Baenziger commented Mr. Hunt’s situation was different in that he came to the Bay as an interim manager, and then was asked to stay on after his superlative performance during the 2004 hurricanes. Mr. Keegan and Ms. Weglein desire to install an interim manager while the search process is going on. Mr. Baenziger said he could speak with the Florida League of Cities, and might know of someone who would work on a short term basis. Mr. Baenziger said he would not charge for finding an interim manager while the Board investigates its options.
Loretta Lynch wants a management company.
Bill Ferris commented the University of Florida has a program called “Educating Leaders”. Mr. Ferris feels the Board can get for free what Mr. Baenziger is offering for profit.
Jeanne Osborne pointed out the Trustees themselves had opted for a 5 member board, and to not receive a salary. She said there are only two or three really important issues in the charter amendments, and those could be “summarized” and given to the legislative delegation which will meet during the first week of December, and possibly not for a long time thereafter. There are other things in the charter that do not require the Legislature’s approval, that the Board could do themselves. She said it could be a one page request, and the Legislature could decide in March [2007] whether they would sponsor the charter revisions. The Legislature would then take them to Brevard County, and the county would bring it back to Barefoot Bay to vote on.
Vicky Rosso had gotten the impression Mr. Baenziger was hired to search for a new community manager. She questioned his qualifications. Ms. Rosso urged the Board to do its own searching and hiring. Ms. McCahan reasserted she had contacted Mr. Baenziger because of his previous experience in with the Bay. His presentation is merely the first round in the process of the investigation required to fill the pending vacancy.
Mr. Carillion commented that when Tibby Parker and Steve Lachenmyer left the Bay, the Trustees searched for a different method of hiring managers. Mr. Bolen suggested Mr. Baenziger. This turned out to be a good move because the process moved forward quickly. Then the hurricanes came, and [we] were glad to have Mr. Hunt at the helm. He did an excellent job, and the Trustees asked him to stay on.
Ms. Rosso insisted the Bay can find a manager on its own. Mr. Torpy pointed out that when Tibby Parker was hired, there had been very few candidates for the job. The Bay has used a lot of different methods to find managers, and the response has been “dismal”. The key is qualified candidates, and they’re not just hanging on trees. Mr. Torpy said he didn’t know if hiring a company to help with the search was the right thing to do, but numerous approaches have been tried in the past. Ms. Weglein said it seems the Board consensus is that several options need to be exercised. Mr. Torpy commented he has worked in homeowners’ associations that did not have employees when they hired management companies. Mr. Torpy urged the Board to schedule a workshop to “hash it out”. There are many implications involved in each option. Mr. Torpy commented the Board is considering a dramatic departure from historical practice and will need information. The Board must interview companies in a public meeting.
Mr. Torpy urged the Board to review its history. Barefoot Bay has been autonomous for only 6 years, which is a relatively short time as a new government system. The Board, as a governing body, desires to have a lot of input into day to day activities in Barefoot Bay. That provides unique challenges to selecting a manager. With 9 “folks” that have a very personal interest, and whose personal interests vary dramatically and it is difficult to find one person (the manager) to satisfy all those personal interests. Compile a checklist of what [you’ve] liked in your managers and what [you] haven’t liked in your managers, what’s worked and what hasn’t worked. Conducting a search without identifying those points would be a mistake.
Ms. Weglein urged the Board members to consider all the options in the light of what will be good for Barefoot Bay. Mr. Carillion commented an interim manager is a good first step toward finding and selecting a permanent manager. However, the interim manager should not be interested in becoming permanent. Ms. Howard expressed a concern regarding a lack of background checks on interim candidates. Mr. Baenziger responded each candidate has participated in other searches and all have completed background checks.
Richard Bleau commented on the remainder of Mr. Hunt’s tenure as community manager, and urged the Board to request a full audit.
Al Glashauser urged the Board to employ Mr. Baenziger to immediately begin searching for an interim manager.
Unfinished Business
Mr. Hunt commented that at the employee handbook workshop the Board instructed him to prepare a severance pay matrix establishing parameters based on years of service and reason for termination to be placed in the employee handbook Ms. McCahan made a motion to include the matrix in the employees’ handbook. Second Mr. Keegan and Ms. Richards. Motion carried unanimously.
The Charter workshop is scheduled on Tuesday, October 24th, to begin at 5 p.m., two hours before the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees, in Building D&E.**
Mr. Torpy explained to Ms. Weglein and Ms. Howard that the changes to the Charter amendments initiated in the previous workshop had been forwarded to Mr. Hunt. He urged the Board to become thoroughly familiar with the Charter, the proposed changes in language, and the difference between that and the ballot questions which reflect only a small part of the body of the charter document.
Mr. Carillion asked if there could be just one question dealing with the Board’s reducing to 5 members. Mr. Torpy explained the question could be phrased as “Should we reduce the Board from 9 to 5 by November 2009?” the meat of that is going to be an amendment to the Charter that is actually describes how that is accomplished. Interested residents would have to read the long form ahead of time to find out what was being discussed.
Ms. Weglein reiterated that if the issues can be resolved and concluded in the workshop on October 24th, voted on in the meeting afterwards, the essential ballot questions and amendments can be presented to the legislative delegation in December.
Ms. Weglein asked if the Board was supposed to make a resolution to cover a loan transfer from the Shopping Center fund to pay for the weirs. Mr. Hunt responded a resolution was not required in this instance because approval for the transaction was given in 2005.
Ms. Weglein commented Resolution 2006-05 was misnumbered and will henceforth appear as Resolution 2006-04. Mr. Carillion made a motion to read Resolution 2006-04 by title only. Second Ms. Donahue. Motion carried. Ms. McCahan read the resolution by title only.
A resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Barefoot Bay Recreation District providing for a statement of policy requiring strict adherence to the minimum requirements of the Deed of Restrictions of the Barefoot Bay Recreation District; providing for the process by which the DOR enforcement staff shall forward cases to the Violations Committee as well as recommendations to be made by the DOR enforcement staff to the Violations Committee; providing for conflicts, and providing for an effective date.
Mr. Carillion made a motion to accept Resolution 2006-04. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Richards commented that on page 3 of 3 of the Resolution it seems an invasion of privacy to ask residents for a full disclosure of their financial status. Mr. Torpy clarified that what is being asked for are a current signed contract for completion of compliance repairs, and evidence of the property owner’s ability to pay for the contract. This requirement forestalls cancellation of the contract to gain more time. Mr. Torpy pointed out that by the time the resident who did not comply had been through the Code Enforcement system, it would be the end of January 2007. The Board of Trustees has placed in the resolution a recommendation that the Violations Committee should not impose fines in these cases in excess of $50 per day. Staff recommendation is that if a resident needs more time than that, the resident should request it, not to exceed more than 120 days from the Violations Committee hearing.
**Richard Bleau presented as a point of order the Board needed to make a motion regarding the October 24th workshop addition to the regular meeting. Mr. Torpy confirmed this, and urged that it be a light agenda that day as there will be no public input in the workshop, and residents will comment at the regular meeting. Mr. Carillion made a motion to hold a workshop prior to the regularly advertised Trustees meeting at 5 p.m. on October 24, 2006. Second Mr. Smith. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. McCahan made a motion to retain Mr. Baenziger to assist the District to find an interim manager until [we] come up with a solution to [our] current dilemma. Second Mr. Bailey.
Ms. McCahan amended her motion to include “at no charge to the District” according to Mr. Baenziger, and for a term of 3 months. Mr. Bailey amended his second. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Weglein directed Mr. Hunt to notify Mr. Baenziger of the decision.
Mr. Hunt commented he would write the specifications for the greenhouse bid. Although the greenhouse is 18th on the priority list, there is FEMA money to cover it. Mr. Hunt said it would be written before he leaves. Mr. Hunt commented there are no other projects on the priority list that FEMA money has been designated to pay for.
The District currently owns 2 sets of CPR equipment. Staff recommends the Board purchase 1-4 additional sets in order to cover the outlying pools. The equipment costs $1,600 apiece. Mr. Carillion asked if employees trained on the old equipment would be able to effectively use the newer versions. Mr. Hunt responded if there were significant changes in the new equipment, the employees would receive further training.
Ms. McCahan made a motion to purchase 2 CPR machines at $1,600 apiece. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Hunt requested permission to go out to bid on a golf course maintenance building. Mr. Hunt would write specifications for a 4,000 square foot building to replace the 3,274 square foot building that was there. It includes 2 ADA approved bathrooms, which is a law now, which explains the difference between the 3,274 square feet and the 4,000 square feet. [You] have set up a budget for it of approximately $150,000. [You] see from Frazier Engineering the site work and preparation is approximately $51,000. That leaves approximately $100,000 in order to purchase a building and contract with someone to put it up. Staff recommends the District go ahead and purchase the building. Steel buildings, Butler Buildings, are normally available through the mail, delivered here, and contractor built. This procedure saves money.
Mr. Bailey made a motion to incorporate Mr. Hunt’s language in order to purchase the golf maintenance building, have it delivered, and installed. Second Ms. Donahue. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Hunt commented on the significant vandalism that occurred at Pool 2. Mr. Hunt said he would come back to the Board with a proposal regarding how to replace damaged equipment. Cameras at Pool 1 are under consideration, and the Board may want to consider incorporating some of the security measures at Pool 2 that are being done at Pool 1.
Mr. Raff expects to have the pier completed by Christmas. Canal cleaning has been essentially completed. Mr. Keegan asked to accompany Mr. Hunt on his inspection ride Thursday or Friday. The Shopping Center painting looks good. Nothing to report on the golf course tent. On the insurance front, the District’s property and liability insurance has approximately doubled. Health insurance rose 17%, or approximately $30,000. Mr. Hunt felt the budget could accommodate the insurance increases, but urged the Board to monitor those expenses during the course of the year.
Ms. Weglein asked about the EZ-Go equipment. Mr. Hunt commented the leases are up on two machines. The leasing company has offered them for sale at $1,600 for one and $2,000 for the other. The machines are routinely serviced at Property Services.
Mr. Keegan made a motion to purchase the machines at the prices quoted. Second Ms. Richards. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Richards asked if the issue at 257 Dolphin Circle had been resolved. Mr. Hunt agreed to have Mr. Austin telephone Ms. Richards with a progress report. Mr. Carillion asked about 200 Calico Court. Mr. Torpy commented the owner is deceased, and the heirs have no intention of dealing with the $300,000 IRS lien on the property that has been in place for 9 years. After 10 years, that lien will disappear under Florida law. The house, even damaged, is the only thing that has value. The heirs do not wish to attract the attention of the IRS by giving permission to tear it down. Mr. Torpy said the lien is problematic in that Barefoot Bay does not intend to pay it off. Mr. Torpy commented the task is to get IRS’s attention and attempt to secure their permission to tear down the building in order to return the property to productivity.
Ms. Donahue commented neighbors are complaining about the condition of the canal “near the weir”. This location is “towards Egret”. Mr. Hunt made a note of it.
Mr. Torpy commented a property [918 Laurel Circle] that had a $54,000 Code Enforcement lien attached was sold at a tax deed sale. Currently the Bay’s actual costs in the lien are about $3,700. The new owner has offered $4,500 to effect removal of the lien, plus removal of the house that is on the property.
Mr. Carillion made a motion to accept $4,500, to require the house be removed and the lot cleaned up prior to release of the lien. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Donahue commented Pool 3 will be closed October 2, 3, 4 (Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday of next week). Ms. Donahue commented on the items vandalized at Pool 2 and how everything that could be was thrown in the pool. She presented pictures of the damage to the Board members. Officer Doyle of the Sheriff’s office was the investigating officer. Ms. Donahue urged residents who might have knowledge of the incident to please contact the Sheriff’s department.
Ms. McCahan requested approval from the Board to spend $35,000 on the most important items on the replacement list for Food & Beverage. Ms. Richards did not receive an original bound copy of Ms. McCahan’s proposal. Mr. Hunt agreed to make sure she got one. The Board members agreed to review Ms. McCahan’s proposal. She reminded them each item requested was illustrated with a corresponding cost to purchase from the catalog. A discussion is slated for the October 24th meeting. Ms. McCahan suggested Mr. Armstrong, the Food and Beverage manager, attend the meeting to explain his priorities.
Ms. McCahan said she is “so sick” of misinformation that she decided to reply to “a couple of things.” In response to comments about the Lounge, Ms. McCahan said in order to make the dance floor bigger, to improve the rest room situation, and to expand the foot print of the building itself takes money. Ms. McCahan pointed out Ms. Rosso opposed fee raises, which is the only way to pay for improvements. Ms. McCahan challenged Ms. Rosso to come up with real ways to effect what she says she wants in the next couple of months. Stephen Rice, a resident, has telephoned Mr. Santos, the painting contractor at this home, to ask for his license number. Ms. McCahan pointed out this information is available at Brevard County, and also in the Barefoot Bay Recreation District office. Mr. Santos has insurance, which is not available without a license. Therefore, Ms. McCahan respectfully requests that Mr. Rice stay away from Mr. Santos. Ms. McCahan’s understanding is that Mr. Bleau has accosted Mr. Santos on several occasions for half an hour at a time to discuss Ray Macht and the 2002 Restaurant, and Mr. Hunt. Mr. Santos has nothing to do with our politics and he doesn’t wish to spend his time being nice to people who he doesn’t know concerning subjects that have nothing to do with him. He’s the painting contractor. Ms. McCahan said, “I assume you know that Mr. Santos is not a registered voter in Brevard County, and I would respectfully ask you to stop bothering him.” On the twentieth of September, Mr. Rice wrote a letter to the office of the Attorney General. Mr. Rice wants Mr. Crist from the State of Florida to discuss the on/off button on Barefoot Bay lamp posts. The letter states that “we the residents of Barefoot Bay voted in a recent certified ballot to not require our lights on our lamp posts to be turned on at night”. Ms. McCahan stated that 2,370 residents voted to have the lights turned on, and only 428 voted no. Unfortunately that’s only 84.7 percent. It had to be 90 votes more to effect change. At the homeowners meeting last week, Mr. Rice said he was in favor of the lights being on. Ms. McCahan related that directly after that, she reminded Mr. Rice he was the guy who handed out the brochures 6 months ago criticizing having the lights on. Ms. McCahan pointed out practically everything passed that was asked for, except it didn’t receive 50 plus 1.
Mr. Bailey commented Mr. Rice had written him a letter regarding licensed electricians, plumbers, and A/C technicians. Mr. Bailey said the tone of the letter indicated Mr. Rice’s belief that the District doesn’t know what its doing. Mr. Bailey commented Mr. Rice’s tactics amount to nothing more than harassment. The information Mr. Rice says he’s seeking is in the Administration office during working hours.
Mr. Smith said he had received a report that Mr. Bleau told the workers doing the sandblasting at the Shopping Center they weren’t going to get paid and they shouldn’t be there. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Bleau if this report was true. There was no response from the audience, and it was ascertained that Mr. Bleau had left the room.
Mr. Carillion wishes to “set the record straight” that he does not vote at the ARCC meetings. His vote is used as a tie breaker only. Mr. Carillion stated he would not stand for anyone harassing Thelma Gruseck, the Code Enforcement clerk. Mr. Carillion recounted the amount of effort and organization that goes into bringing the meetings together, that Ms. Gruseck meets with residents when they come to the Code Enforcement office, and as the clerk, is allowed to have informational input into the ARCC meeting.
Ms. Weglein requested that Mr. Carillion consult with the Board in order to designate the next person “in command” when he is going to be absent from the ARCC meetings.
Mr. Carillion made a motion that Lillian Richards be the alternate when he is absent from the ARCC meetings, and if Ms. Richards is not available, Sue McCahan is next in line. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Torpy commented that while no two Trustees could be sitting “at the table” as part of the ARCC meeting, a private citizen who happens to be a trustee could sit in the audience, or go there to present a permit application for work on their home without becoming subject to Sunshine Law requirements. Mr. Torpy said “you do not give up your rights as citizens just because you are Board members.” The Sunshine Law only prohibits you from being in the same room discussing topics that may come up before you as a Board.
Ms. Weglein commented on a memo from Mr. Carillion regarding propane tanks that certain residents are installing to run generators and the vinyl fencing being placed around then to shield them from view. True Gas Company is burying some of the tanks.
Mr. Keegan commented the Veterans’ building is in the process. He will have more information at the next meeting. He thanked Dave McAllister for his article about the veterans in the Tattler.
Mr. Smith asked Mr. Torpy what defines a “public meeting”. Mr. Torpy responded two Trustees could not be present with a large group and call it a public meeting. Two or more trustees eating lunch at the 19th Hole discussing issues they might vote on are breaking the Sunshine Law. An advertised public meeting tells the residents they’re going to have that discussion. Mr. Carillion asked if a candidate running for Trustee and a Trustee are talking, can they talk about anything they want? Mr. Torpy replied, “Sure.”
Ms. Howard put forth that Ms. Donahue’s interest in the work Mr. Santos is doing at the Shopping Center amounts to a conflict of interest. Ms. Howard included Ms. McCahan in her comment. Ms. Donahue responded the painting contract had nothing to do with the Trustees. It had to do with the tenants in the building. Ms. Donahue put together the color coordinating with the other tenants.
Ms. Howard: So, since I was put on the Board, and I am the liaison, when I got on the Board there wasn’t one because I took the guy’s place that was on it. So now, just because you did that, that means that you just go ahead and do all that now.
Ms. Donahue: No, it was never a decision of the Board. We brought the colors to the Board as tenants to show them what the colors were. The colors were never voted on by the Board, so it wasn’t a Board issue.
Mr. Carillion clarified the tenants brought the color suggestions to the Board, then the tenants could paint their trim as they chose. Mr. Hunt concurred. Ms. Donahue commented her partner Gabrielle had conversed with Mr. Helmerich when he was on the Board, and he indicated the matter was up to the tenants. Mr. Carillion related Mr. Helmerich had made a motion to that effect, and Mr. Carillion remembered he had seconded it. Ms. Howard appealed to Ms. Weglein. Ms. Weglein commented the issue represents a “gray area” : Ms. Donahue has acted from a tenant’s position, and Ms. Howard is the liaison. Mr. Torpy commented to Ms. Howard that she should definitely perform her duties as the liaison with the Shopping Center members. However, she may not have a conversation with Ms. Donahue because she is a Trustee. This does not preclude a conversation with her partner and the painting contractor. Mr. Torpy commented both capacities are appropriate.
Ms. Howard objected, saying that every time she asks a question, “it gets beaten around the bush.” Ms. Howard maintains that if Ms. Donahue spoke with Mr. Helmerich, then she has acknowledged the liaison position previously, and is not now. Ms. Howard commented Mr. Santos stated to her that Ms. Donahue was telling him what to do.
Mr. Torpy: I guess I don’t understand what question you’re asking.
Ms. Howard: I don’t want to ask you. I’m asking the Board here. They’re the ones that made me . . . . I was appointed. Now I want to know who’s handling it, Michele or myself. And I don’t want to talk to Michele about it because I also know about a Sunshine Law.
Mr. Torpy: Right. So you’re asking who is administering the contract . . . . . .
Ms. Howard: And I think Ms. Weglein needs to tell me.
Ms. McCahan: George has had the color chart down in his office for four months. And I do believe [you] asked about it and we told you it was down there, right? [Ms. Howard’s reply is not audible on the tape.] Ok. Apparently your toes were stepped on. I’m sorry that that happened, but all of this transpired a long time ago before you became the liaison person.
Ms. Weglein: You are the liaison for the Shopping Center, and as Mr. Torpy said, you can go in and talk to any of those people, to the contractor, just stay away from Michele, talk to her partner. Any questions you have about how things are going, you go to them, ok? You’re the liaison for that. Then you report back here with anything that’s going on there.
This discussion continued; Ms. Howard did not feel she had been vindicated. Ms. McCahan stated she had been there only once to introduce herself to Mr. Santos when he was sandblasting the post office. She said, “Isn’t this a fun job? By the way, my name is Sue McCahan and I’m a Board member. I’m so glad you’re here. That was the extent of the conversation.” Ms. McCahan commented when the opportunity came up that the post office could be painted the like the rest of the shopping center, mango instead of baby blue, Mr. Hunt and Ms. Donahue agreed all the buildings should be the same color.
Ms. Howard: Also, should it have been brought back to the Board to change that color?
Ms. Donahue: No. No one on this Board voted on the colors. It was left up to the tenants to choose the color. We all agreed. It was not a Board decision.
Ms. Weglein: Did the water company say anything? Did anyone ask the water company?
Ms. Weglein reiterated the liaison parameters, and ended the discussion.
Ms. Richards presented a report from the Homeowners’ meeting. Mr. Torpy spoke there regarding the DOR and the compliance issues the Bay is facing. Nancy Eisele spoke about groups that might be willing to help residents come into compliance. The Charter amendments were mentioned; they are up to the residents and not a legal question. Chris Hill from Ms. Voltz’ office spoke on the fire assessment tax. There will be a candidate forum October 15th in Building A from 2-5 p.m.
Ms. McCahan commented the first Starlight Saturday brought out 137 people. The bar made $500-600, and served 60 hot dogs. The second Saturday bought out about 30-40 people.
Loretta Lynch commented that in July she had submitted a list of questions she wanted answered. Ms. Lynch said Mr. Malek told her he drafted the answers to her questions and gave them to Mr. Hunt. Ms. Lynch suggested that if the District did not maintain two managers for Food and Beverage the money saved would to a long way towards paying the attorney.
John Barry commented that the house at 1198 Barefoot circle has a ragged blue tarp on the roof, the grass gets cut, and the A/C is on. No one has been in the house since before Hurricane Wilma. Mr. Barry would like someone to look into it. Mr. Carillion promised to phone Mr. Barry the next day with an answer. Mr. Barry commented on the storm drains. Ms. Weglein agreed to phone Chris Hill in Ms. Voltz’ office. Mr. Barry asked what happened to the discussions about police security at night. Mr. Hunt responded the District is waiting on an answer from the Sheriff to a letter we sent him.
Ron Witt objected that the District had charged him with lot mowing. He asked Mr. Torpy why Code Enforcement had not telephoned him before the charges were applied. Mr. Torpy responded a telephone call is not a legal notice. A legal notice is registered mail, return receipt requested. Mr. Torpy pointed out that a notice of violation had been tendered, and Mr. Witt given 30 days to comply. Mr. Witt replied he had been out of town on an emergency, and challenged Mr. Torpy saying, “I can’t get mail if I’m out of town, right?” Mr. Torpy responded, “I have no idea, Sir.” Mr. Witt continued to argue for the telephone call, and Mr. Torpy continued to advise him of routine Code Enforcement procedures that apply to all residents impartially. Mr. Hunt agreed to meet with Mr. Witt and Mr. Austin in his office.
Nancy Eisele held up a copy of a plat map showing proposed building East of I-95. Palm Bay is going to apply for multi-unit, single unit, and commercial property development. Nine thousand units are proposed. Ms. Eisele urged Barefoot Bay residents to attend the Citizens Coalition of South Mainland at 7 p.m. on the 3rd Tuesday (October 17) at the Micco Community Center. Ms. Eisele commented Mr. Torpy had volunteered his time to attend the Homeowners’ meeting.
Ms. Weglein asked Mr. Torpy what liability would be incurred if a contractor volunteered his time to help residents repair their homes. Mr. Torpy responded that as long as his assistance was within his licensed expertise, there is no problem with donating his services.
Ms. Weglein entertained a motion to adjourn. Mr. Carillion made the motion. Ms. Howard made a motion to have a thorough, all inclusive audit before Mr. Hunt leaves. Mr. Carillion said “We’ve just had and audit.” Ms. Weglein responded, “Yes, but I think she means an in-depth or forensic type of audit.” Ms. Howard replied, “Yes.”
Mr. Carillion commented since the District is starting another audit “next month” , the District could make that one an in-depth audit. Ms. Howard wants a “clean audit” for the incoming manager. Second Ms. Weglein.
Mr. Torpy suggested the Board ask the auditor to attend the next Board meeting. A full forensic audit can be a “$100,000 thing”. Mr. Torpy commented he did understand that the concern was the next manager get a clean audit. His concern is that the Board consider all the options and costs, and if that kind of audit would serve the purpose the Board is seeking.
Ms. Weglein suggested Ms. Claiborne be asked for a written proposal concerning a forensic audit. Mr. Torpy commented the suggestion was not a bad one; he wanted to ensure the Board gave clear direction to the auditor in that instance. Mr. Bailey asked if the Board were questioning the integrity of the audit that was just done? That [Bray Beck and Koetter] were not doing a good job for us? That [we] don’t trust them now?
The discussion became heated; Ms. Weglein requested Ms. Howard rescind her motion in favor of contacting Ms. Claiborne for information. Mr. Torpy, with respect to the Board, asked the Board to bring Ms. Claiborne in, find out what she has done, and if that is not sufficient, tell her what the Board would like. The Board can then make a decision as to what it wants, and hire someone else if it so chooses. Ms. Howard responded, “But I’m not asking you, I ‘m making a motion for our Board. I don’t understand all this. Every time I ask a question the lawyer has to get into it, and these guys aren’t even answering me!”
Ms. McCahan moved the question. Ms. Weglein asked for a vote on the motion. The recording secretary asked for the floor and reiterated the proceedings from the point the original motion was made. Ms. Weglein again asked if Ms. Howard would rescind her motion. Ms. Howard refused.
Ms. Weglein asked “All those in favor of going ahead with the in-depth audit?”
Ms. Howard and Ms. Weglein voted yes. Ms. Richards, Mr. Keegan, Mr. Carillion, Mr. Smith, Mr. Bailey, Ms. McCahan, and Ms. Donahue voted no. The motion failed.
Ms. Weglein entertained a motion to adjourn. Mr. Carillion made the motion. Second Mr. Bailey. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
PHONE: (772) 664-3141
FAX: (772) 664-1928