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.
