At the January 9, 2023 meeting, I stated that a planner our city was seeking a new contract with had lied to the commission during a hearing back on April 26, 2021.

Vice Mayor Lindlau stated that by reporting my finding, I was abusing my power as a city commissioner. What this reveals to us is that he believes a commissioner who acts to protect our city’s integrity by reporting instances of impropriety from businesses and persons the city conducts business with, is violating the law.

During the meeting, Vice Mayor Lindlau asserted: “To me, this is nothing more than you, Joe, using your position to try and get back at Kimley Horn because they provided the information that we used to approve the Garden Street project. And you’ve got an axe to grind with them, and so you’re trying to get back at them by stopping this and taking money out of their pocket.”

Here’s the Florida State Law that our Vice Mayor accuses me of violating.

112.313 Standards of conduct for public officers, employees of agencies, and local government attorneys.

(6) MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.—No public officer, employee of an agency, or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others. This section shall not be construed to conflict with s. 104.31.

Click here for a complete transcript of the 8-minute exchange and click here for the official video record of the 8-minute exchange.
At that meeting, Mayor Gibson also went on the record to state that: “My biggest concern, Commissioner, is if you were concerned back on 8-25, and I realize you were working with the attorney back then, that this wasn’t an issue, knowing that for one year we dealt with that firm and Mr. Keppler. I have an issue with that.”

We need to review a little background to help clarify how concerning the mayor’s statement really is. At the April 26, 2020 commissioner’s meeting, a planner acting on behalf of our city responded to this question from an attorney representing a group of Oak Hill citizens opposed to a zoning change. The Attorney asked: “By chance did he stand by his analysis when you reached out to him today.” The city’s planner responded with: “Open space, no,” and with that declaration, he had counseled the commission that the competent and substantial evidence provided to them in a report that our own city had chartered was not valid because the expert “no longer stood behind his analysis.” Click here for the complete transcript, comments are on page 53, lines 13 thru 15.

Back on August 26, 2021, I wrote an email to the planner who wrote the report in question. Click here to view the email. The purpose of my email was to verify our city planner’s testimony for a report I was preparing for the citizens opposed to the zoning change. I shared our city planner’s testimony and asked if he: “…did in-fact retract any of the comments you made in your report and if there was an amended report generated indicating your retraction.” His response was stunning. He wrote: “I never changed my opinion. I stand behind my interpretation. I do not recall any conversation with this planner.” On September 14, 2021, I published my finding in a document titled, Report for Residents of North Gaines Street and other Concerned Parties. Click here to view the report.

Nearly four months had passed by the time I discovered this impropriety and at that time my responsibility was to report to the citizens opposing the zoning change. To believe the mayor’s assertion, one would have to embrace the notion that a lie ages well or somehow gets better with time.

After I was elected, my responsibility is to all the citizens of our city, and I reported the indiscretion I found at my very first meeting, acting as a commissioner. You should know that despite my objection to the city signing a $20,000 contract with the planner who apparently lied, and the evidence I provided, Commissioner Hyatt, Commissioner Mcgee, Vice Mayor Lindlau, and Mayor Gibson, all voted in favor of continuing business as usual.

It is my honor to represent you and perform the duties that you elected me to do. I will continue to fight for you and restore integrity and trust to our city. It is unsettling to think that with all the options available to our city for planning services they cannot choose one who provides reliable and accurate testimony.

Remember, when making decisions affecting our city in a quasi-judicial proceeding, a certified city planner’s testimony is considered competent and substantial evidence and must be given weight by the commission. By discrediting the report, our city planner swayed the weight of the evidence in favor of the zoning change. This is incompatible with good governance, and our elected officials and city staff should stand in opposition. The voting record indicates otherwise.                            

The next meeting is Monday January 23, at 6:00 PM, City Hall. I look forward to seeing you all and urge you to ask your commissioners to explain their vote. Hold them accountable. Another good question is: why didn’t our city seek bids from other planners and weigh the cost verses benefits to make the best choice for our city? It should do that for all contracts.

Thank you,

Joe Catigano

Oak Hill City Commission, Seat 3