From: Marty Black, City Manager
To: Mayor and City Council
Date: 07/23/07 11:46 AM
As previously indicated, I
will not be available for most of the City
Council meeting tomorrow as a result of required meetings with
representatives of the EPA. The City Attorney and I have been in
discussion this morning regarding notice that he has received today
that Sarasota County intends to file for
court review of the JPA/ILSBA [Joint Planning Agreement] and
Bella Cita issues tomorrow morning unless we advise
today that the Bella
Cita rezone will not be heard by City Council tomorrow afternoon.
Since the rezone petition was
continued to a date and time certain by
City Council and I will not be available to
participate in the hearing,
I would recommend that you consider continuing the
hearing until your
August 14 meeting in order to allow for the City Attorney, Planning
Director and I to review the county's recent transmittal and all be
available to respond to any questions that may arise during the
course of the hearing regarding JPA/ILSBA
compliance.
From: Dan
Lobeck, attorney for Sorrento Ranches Homeowners
Association
To: Stephen DeMersh, attorney for Sarasota County
Date: 7/23/2007 3:51 PM
Thanks for what you and your office are doing in the important
effort to help the BCC
[board of county commissioners] enforce the Venice JPA
with regard to the incompatible
Bella Citta rezoning. As you may know, I represent the affected
neighborhood, Sorrento Ranches Homeowners Association, Inc.
[Above] is
an email this morning from Venice City Manager Marty Black
to the City Council
recommending that the rezoning be continued to the
August 14 City Council meeting, for the Council to
determine then whether the County has now
sufficiently triggered the dispute resolution
process under Paragraph 10 of the JPA.
The email mentions that the continuance is recommended because
of notice that City Attorney Bob Anderson "received
today that Sarasota County intends to file for court
review of the JPA/ILSBA and Bella Cita
issues tomorrow morning unless we advise today that the Bella Cita
rezone will not be heard by City Council tomorrow afternoon."
If that notice was provided by your office, thank you. If so
and it was in writing, this is to request a copy, by
email or by fax to 951-1469.
Neither Bob Anderson nor Marty Black will (or perhaps can) tell
me whether in fact the rezoning will be continued,
based on their discussions with Mayor Hammett or
otherwise. Bob says he considers
it "highly unlikely", although always
possible, that it will not be continued. Marty Black
simply gave me the message through his secretary,
"It's on the agenda. I'll see you there."
If you've received any more definitive indication from Venice
as to whether there will be a
continuance, I and my client would appreciate
knowing that.
Again, thank you for your good services to the County in this
matter.
From: Stephen DeMarsh
To: Dan Lobeck
Date: 07/23/07 5:22 PM
I have discussed the Bella Citta matter with [Sarasota
County Manager Jim] Ley throughout the day
today. Mr. Ley provided a written response to Mr. Black which he
has asked be placed in the record of the
proceeding tomorrow. We anticipate
that the public hearing will be continued for a few weeks. We will
not be filing an action seeking to stay the
decision on the land use determination given that
Mr. Black is recommending that the matter be
continued. I did inform Mr. Anderson that we were considering filing
a lawsuit in response to Mr. Black's July 20
letter to Mr. Ley. This may
have played some role in obtaining the recommendation for a short
continuance.
From: Dan
Lobeck
To: Stephen DeMersh
Date: 7/24/2007 9:53 AM
Thank you for the information, Steve.
If the City Council rejects its Manager's recommendation and
approves the rezoning today (which Bob Anderson told
me is "highly unlikely") I trust that the County
will seek court action for that violation of the abatement
requirement of the JPA.
Again, I and my client appreciate your good services to the BCC
in this matter.
From: Stephen DeMarsh
To: Dan Lobeck
Date: 07/24/07 10:27 AM
We will see how things develop from here.
From: Dan
Lobeck
To: Stephen DeMersh, County Manager Jim Ley
Date: 7/24/2007 11:52 AM
I'm reluctant to be critical, as the County has been so
proactive in seeking to compel Venice to comply with the JPA by applying the
County's neighborhood compatiblity principles to the
Bella Citta rezoning, as the BCC voted to do.
However, I have just reviewed Jim Ley's letter today to Marty Black and
unfortunately find it very unhelpful to that cause, perhaps fatally so.
Jim has now stated his agreement with Marty Black that the dispute is only an
interpretation of the neighborhood compatibility requirements of the JPA (a
dispute about "process and standards") and is "not about any particular
project", such as the application of those requirements to the Bella Citta
rezoning.
I would expect the City to seize upon this and declare that as such there is
no requirement under Paragraph 10 of the JPA to further abate the Bella Citta
rezoning or to apply the County's view of the JPA compatibility requirements
to the consideration and approval of that rezoning.
If that is not what was intended, is there any way to correct this prior to
this afternoon's scheduled City Council hearing on Bella Citta?
Thank you very much for your continuing considerations.
From: James Ley
To: Dan Lobeck, Stephen DeMarsh
Cc: Stephen DeMersh; County Commissioners Joe
Barbetta and Jon Thaxton;
Robert S. Burrus of Sorrento Ranches Homeowners Association
Date: 07/24/07 1:45 PM
I do appreciate that you are looking through your advocates
lenses and would like to see something that assists you more directly. I think
that my letter was very clear and the JPA is very clear. Once a dispute has
been declared and a resolution meeting requested, the City is to defer action
on the matter at hand and schedule a dispute resolution meeting. I do not
excuse the City from this action or the fact that they have not complied with
the County Commission's request as yet. Everything else is obfuscation. In
that vein I did also in fact raise the question as to how a two week
continuance serves the requirement to delay the action if no dispute
resolution meeting is scheduled. The JPA never anticipated/directed nor did
the Board direct that we become a party of interest in any particular case,
quasi judicial or otherwise, that might produce a dispute. The Board has
further options should this course continue to be pursued by the City, but it
has not given the County Atty or the Administrator any further direction.
From: Dan Lobeck
To: James Ley and Stephen DeMarsh
Cc: Joe Barbetta ; Jon Thaxton ; Jr. Ph.D. Robert S. Burrus
Date: 07/24/07 2:53 PM [city
council meeting started at 1:30 PM]
Unfortunately, as we speak Jeff Boone is addressing the Venice City Council,
citing your July 23 letter as stating that the dispute which the County has
asserted under the JPA does not include the Bella Citta rezoning and as such
that rezoning is not abated under the JPA.
This is exactly as I feared would happen, as expressed in my email to you this
morning.
If it can't somehow be done now it is essential that the County make it clear
as soon as possible that the dispute does include the Bella Citta rezoning and
as such it must be abated and considered in the dispute resolution process,
together with the broader issue of how the County's neighborhood compatibility
principles should be applied on an ongoing basis.
It was clearly the BCC's intent to dispute the City's approval of Bella Citta
as a violation of the JPA due to the City's failure to apply the County's
neighborhood compatibility principles as required by the JPA. While, as you
point out, the BCC did not direct that the County become a party to the
quasijudicial procedings, it nevertheless directed that the County seek to
affect the outcome of the rezoning otherwise, that is through enforcement of
the JPA.
It really does seem that something needs to be done to rescue this situation,
through a clarifying letter from you or, if the City fails to abate the
rezoning and approves it, by legal action.
From: Dan Lobeck
To: James Ley and Stephen DeMarsh
Cc: Joe Barbetta ; Jon Thaxton ; Jr. Ph.D. Robert S. Burrus
Date: 07/24/07 3:46 PM
Whew -- The Venice City Council just rejected Jeff Boone's plea
that your July 23 letter removes the Bella Citta rezoning from the JPA dispute
and voted to continue the rezoning until their meeting of August 14.
However, Jeff Boone stated that he would vigorously object to any additional
continuance beyond that date and is sticking with his position that in light
of your July 23 letter, the County is not invoking the JPA dispute resolution
process over the Bella Citta rezoning and as such there is no basis to abate
it.
Several City Council members seemed anxious to approve the rezoning without
any compatibility change and stated that they were making this particular
continuance only because of the County's threat of a lawsuit if they did not.
Also of course, they did not have the City Manager there to guide them as to
whether Paragraph 10 of the JPA has been invoked by the County over the
rezoning.
They will, however, have Mr. Black there when they take up the rezoning again
on August 14. Fully expect him to agree with Jeff Boone that your July 23
letter removes the rezoning from any required JPA abatement, unless you send
another letter to undo the statements you made in that letter to that end.
Jim, without question the Board of County Commissioners voted to invoke the
JPA dispute resolution process specifically over the Venice City Council's
approval of the Bella Citta rezoning on first reading in violation of the JPA
requirement that the City apply the County's neighborhood compatibility
principles (including the policies cited in your previous letter to the City)
to that rezoning. That is the dispute. As such, it is not accurate to state
that this is about "process and standards" and "not any particular project",
as stated in your July 23 letter.
Perhaps the clarification you might make is that what you intended to say is
that while the dispute does include approval of the Bella Citta rezoning, it
is not only about that particular project but also extends to the process and
standards the City must apply in considering all rezonings of unincorporated
property adjacent to Joint Planning Areas under the JPA.
Thank you for your continuing considerations in this matter.
P.S. I realize that this will make it onto the County email web
site because I have copied the entire BCC. However, the substance of the
matter is already there since our earlier exchange was posted there this
afternoon, when you responded to my email of this morning.
