Hi everyone,
First, I would like to thank you all for the amazing turn-out and show of support at the February 13, 2023 city commissioner’s meeting.
What happened at the last meeting?
If you recall, my last newsletter highlighted that on January 25, 2023, our city administrator had solicited a vote from the city commission to approve the expenditure of $2200.00 for the removal of a concrete slab on a property owned by the city but slated to be leased to the Oak Hill Community Trust. In addition, she requested $2000.00 for clean-up work around city hall.
At the last meeting I pointed out to the commission that they had violated Florida’s Sunshine law by participating in a vote-by-email, solicited by our city administrator. Mayor Gibson interjected that as mayor he has $1000.00 of discretionary money that he can spend without prior approval from the commission. He went on to say that the city administrator also has $1000.00 of discretionary funds that she can spend without the approval of the commission. So, between them, they can spend up to $2000.00 without prior approval from the city commission. His explanation for the commission’s actions failed to address the fact that the commission, at the direction of the city administrator: held a vote by email outside of a properly noticed meeting, without public participation, without meaningful debate, and without minutes being taken. These rules are outlined in Florida Statute 286.011 and 286.0114.
The mayor’s explanation is also in conflict with Oak Hill ordinance Sec. 2-315. – Subdividing contracts to avoid compliance. No contract or purchase shall be subdivided to avoid the requirements of this article. Isn’t it interesting that our city’s previous lawmakers were able to anticipate that future city employees and elected officials would try and use this mechanism as an explanation for undermining our laws and avoiding public scrutiny? But even if the mayor was correct, one of the projects our city administrator had requested money for in the email vote was for the $2200.00. This is even outside of the mayor’s made-up limit.
Additionally, the mayor’s explanation does not support the notion that the city administrator’s action was made by error or mistake. In fact, his explanation indicates that the action the commission took was calculated and deliberate. FS 286.011 (3)(b) says that knowingly violating the statue has a consequence that is more severe than a simple oversight FS 775.082. State and local law is clear on this issue – the mayor’s explanation is not. His explanation fails on all levels and should concern the citizens of our community.
Despite being presented with irrefutable evidence that they had broken local and state law, and with brazen disregard for the will of the public, the commission went ahead and held a vote anyway, and voted in favor of approving the distribution of funds. Much like the mayor’s dubious explanation, this vote was a sham and denied the public their right to meaningful debate because the contract for the work our city administrator had requested the money for had already been executed. The work was already done. I do not believe that this presents a circumstance where debate could be considered meaningful.
During the meeting, Commissioner McGee stated that he did not participate in the improper email vote yet we have evidence confirming that he did. Click here to view his email vote. Click here to view Vice Mayor Lindlau’s email vote. Click here to view Mayor Gibson’s email vote. Click Here to view Commissioner Hyatt’s email vote.
According to our city attorney, state law requires that a duly elected commissioner must vote unless there’s a genuine conflict of interest preventing it. This means that the action taken by our city government requires a vote from all commissioners present and able to participate, not just a select few. The path taken by our city administrator and commission stands to disenfranchise the public by omitting the vote of a commissioner who was elected into office by the public. It also fails to provide a record of that vote for public review. I did not vote on this issue and asked that it be placed on the agenda of a regularly scheduled meeting as required by Florida’s Sunshine law. My response was not a vote. It served to inform our city administrator that her poling of the commissioners outside of a properly noticed meeting was in conflict with law. If the public is prevented from knowing an elected official’s voting record, they are denied the opportunity to cast an informed ballot during an election.
Please come to the February 27, 2023 City Commissioner’s Meeting, It’s at 6:00 PM at City Hall. Let the commission know that you stand in opposition to our city government conducting business outside of Florida’s Sunshine Laws. They were written to protect your interests.
As always, it’s my privilege to serve you.
Joe Catigano
Oak Hill City Commissioner
Seat 3
