HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_09/18/2007MINUTES
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jim Humpage at 5:00 p.m. A roll call was
taken by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. Present were: Mayor Jim Humpage, Vice
Mayor Pat Watkins, Council Member Amero, Council Member Tom Paterno, and
Council Member Calvin Turnquest. Also in attendance were: Manager Michael R.
Couzzo, Jr., and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams.
2. Review of Village Manager's Contract
Mayor Humpage explained the workshop was to review the Village Manager's contract
as requested during the September 13, 2007 Council Meeting. He noted the meeting
was initially scheduled as a budget meeting, if needed, and was requested during the
Council Meeting to instead be a workshop. He stated there was discussion about
reviewing the contract and consensus of Council agreed to discuss (Amero, Paterno,
Turnquest).
Council Member Amero stated as a new Council Member he felt it would be
irresponsible to not review a contract, any particular contract, which had a renewable
clause. He felt Council should want to review the contract since things change quickly
in five years and felt five years was a long contract period for any contract; be it either
contract management or a contract for disposal. He said to extend the contract another
five years without discussion was just unconscionable. He felt there would have been a
5-0 vote to review the contract and was surprised it was a 3-2 vote. He would like to
hear from the other Council Members and the public to see how they felt. He asked for
surveys and called and asked people questions and frankly was surprised at some of
the things in the contract as compared to other municipalities of our size. He stated he
did not regret requesting the review; he understood the Mayor and Vice-Mayor did not
want to review but could not understand why. He said that was why they renew
contracts and felt some of them were automatically renewed unless someone had a
problem with them. He believed Council had let this thing go for ten years without a
problem and did not believe that was right.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 2
Mayor Humpage explained the basic reason he did not want to get into contract
discussions was because Council did a review in January and felt this was an exercise
that both parties had to agree to change. He felt the key issue was if the contract was
or was not renewable.
Council Member Amero stated he did not know, however when he questioned other
municipalities and told them it was a five year contract with a five year renewal option
there was a lot of surprise with the term. He mentioned this was an aggressive contract
and an aggressive financial liability to the Village. He wanted to hear what his peers
had to say and if it was a majority vote then it did not matter what he thought, but
wanted to hear what others had to say.
Mayor Humpage reiterated the contract could not be changed without both parties
agreeing and Council Member Amero advised that was the problem because there was
an agreement that no one could reconsider.
Mayor Humpage stated it was his opinion that Council could not change the agreement
without both parties in agreement. Council Member Amero clarified the previous
Council reached a ten year contract and agreed to this deal; it could not be looked at
and stated that was his problem. He said frankly, he did know of anyone that had a ten
year deal for anything, whether it was in private practice or the government
environment.
Council Member Amero clarified that the Mayor was saying Council should not even be
holding this meeting and the Mayor concurred. Council Member Amero stated he
reviewed the contract and the changes since its inception, and frankly wondered who
was orchestrating the whole thing because it only got better as it went along. He
clarified the Mayor was telling him now that we really did not even have the legal
authority to review it and questioned why if that was the case they were sitting here.
Council Member Paterno stated Council's legal representation afforded them the ability
to receive the contract and that he was just going by what Mr. Hawkins said. Council
Member Amero did not want to pit each other against each other and that was not why
he brought this up. He said he felt responsible to at least have conversation to review it
to see if Council all felt that was what we wanted for the next five years.
Mayor Humpage said he was not saying that Council could not change items in the
contract, but was saying in order to do so would require both parties agreeing to the
changes.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 3
Council Member Amero asked to hear other input and would reserve his comments until
later.
Vice-Mayor Watkins asked what the goal was -was it to just determine whether or not
Council believed in the automatic renewal or if certain issues should be addressed.
Council Member Amero felt the whole contract should be addressed; from the
compensation package to the allowances to what actually went into his retirement,
including the car allowance and cell phone allowance. He said a lot had changed in the
Village in the last five years and Council needed to look at how things have tightened up
in the economy in the last couple years and believed it was a very rich contract.
Council Member Paterno stated he understood the Mayor's opinion, but at the same
time agreed with everything Council Member Amero said. He personally went around
and received a copy of every contract in this vicinity south of here -about five of them.
He went and personally picked every one up and reviewed them and could not find
where anybody for instance the renewal issues, it was renewed every year and the
Council votes yes or no just like with the water. He stated it was a ten year deal but it
was one year at a time and after one year if it worked out great if it did not Council
would decide. He agreed some of things in the contract were over the top. He referred
to a document showing the total compensation package valued at $189,000, which he
believed was excessive for our size town.
Mayor Humpage stated when he looked back at the original 2000 contract and referred
to the verbiage in the third WHEREAS clause, it read "the Village seeks to provide
inducement for Employee to remain in such employment and make possible full work
productivity by assuring Employee's morale and peace of mind with respect to future
security" and noted this verbiage was the same in every contract. He felt when the
Village first hired the Manager the Council was trying to ensure he would remain with
the Village.
Council Member Paterno asked the Manager to verify the exhibit being discussed was
the original contract and Mr. Couzzo replied that he believed it was a copy of the
original. Council Member Paterno stated he sees the signatures on the back were all
the Council people of 2000 and asked the Mayor to refer to page one, as you pointed
out since you brought the exhibit in, the last paragraph under "Terms". He referred to
the last sentence, and asked the Mayor to read this. He noted it referred to the Village
Charter that was updated in 2004 and questioned how Mayor Capretta could sign this
agreement when it was referring to a 2004 document. He stated in 2000 Council would
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 4
not know that they were going to change the Charter in 2004 and questioned how this
page got into the contract with these signatures.
Council Member Amero read the section Council Member Paterno was referring to "as
provided in Section 2.07 of the Village Charter dated in 2004" and noted this happened
in 2000. Council Member Paterno pointed out the signature page of the contract had
right data of who was on the Council at that time with Mayor Capretta; but he did not
understand how three years earlier Council knew there was going to be a Charter
change. Council Member Paterno stated he believed this was not the original contract
and that this signature page was put into it.
Vice-Mayor Watkins stated Council Member Paterno did not know that and Mayor
Humpage agreed. Vice-Mayor Watkins mentioned it could have been a typo to which
Mayor Humpage believed it could have been.
Council Member Paterno asked how it could have been signed in 2000 and Council
know about a Charter change in 2004 Mayor Humpage stated that was his
interpretation and Council Member Paterno noted the date said 2004 and it was signed
in 2000. Mayor Humpage asked Council Member Paterno if he was insinuating that
someone changed the information to which Council Member Paterno answered this was
not the original contract.
Mr. Couzzo advised this was the contract the Clerk provided and Council Member
Paterno stated he was just saying it was not the original one in his opinion. He said he
called Mr. Randolph's office and was told by his secretary that any original that they put
through at the time of the contract would not be a redlined contract and that a redlined
contract would never happen in their files.
Mayor Humpage asked the Manager to see if he could locate the original contract. He
clarified that Council Member Paterno was trying to determine if it was a real contract.
He pointed out two other Councils approved this contract. Council Member Paterno
said their approval was based on what they were told was the first contract because
they could not change it. Mayor Humpage noted Joann Manganiello was the Clerk at
the time.
Mayor Humpage mentioned the Manager had functioned under this contract for seven
years and it would be difficult to change.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 5
Council Member Amero stated nobody knew there would be a Village Charter change in
2004 and questioned how this phrase got in there.
Vice-Mayor Watkins stated the issue she had was she wanted Council to be very
careful. She pointed out there were several Councils, long before her time, that
reviewed and accepted the contract and Council just accepted another one in
December. She felt since the prior Councils had been operating under these auspices
then the contract was probably valid. She suggested asking the labor attorney for a
legal opinion but did not believe Council could alter or change it without the Manager's
approval. She said Council could discuss among them and they had the option to
terminate, but could not just change it unless he agreed. She voiced concern with
getting into litigation. She mentioned his allowance of a car and monthly expenses had
not been changed in seven years. She stated her theory was that there was a Manager
who was also the Utilities Director, who had experience with Public Works, and good
contacts with the community. She suggested looking at what Council had in one
person. She said Council could potentially hire a different Manager but would then
need more than one person. She questioned what the Manager's incentive was to stay
since he had been brow beaten for so long. She felt he did a great job and that Council
was constantly at him. She commented on his creativity and the history of why he was
given PRC's for doing a great job. She reiterated her concern of not wanting to get
involved in litigation.
Mayor Humpage stated for the record Mr. Couzzo pulled the original contract from the
Clerk's files, and it was a redlined original. He explained Mr. Couzzo was calling Mr.
Randolph, who was the Village Attorney at the time, to see if he could shed light on the
subject. He asked what the purpose was here -were we here to change things in the
contract, and if so, what items; do we want Mr. Couzzo to have less money, do you
want to terminate him -what were the issues.
Council Member Paterno said he found out this past week, that in the Manager's
budget, the General Fund, he thought that that was all he was getting. He pointed out
half of his benefits were from water and half of his salary, his bonus, and car and felt
that in a sense it was being hidden from Council. He thought the $280,000 that was
coming over was to pay for the half but that was not true, it was on top of the half. He
said the way it was explained to him was the $280,000 was to cover his salary and
related expenses, but that was not true. They actually take it out of there on top of the
salary and benefits so it was $280,000 plus $90,000.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 6
Mayor Humpage asked what the $280,000 was and noted it was not earmarked for Mr.
Couzzo. Council Member Paterno stated it was going into the General Fund and Mayor
Humpage reiterated it was not earmarked for Mike Couzzo. Council Member Paterno
said the contract had contractual services for $96,000 and $69,000 for professional
services and that was $400,000 plus $90,000; and that was almost $500,000 that
Council was spending. He said Council could have a Utility Director do it for less
money.
Mayor Humpage asked Council Member Paterno what the professional services were
for, and noted it was for engineering, and pointed out Utility Directors did not do
engineering. Council Member Paterno felt the Village could hire an engineer to be the
Utility Director; that we had one previously and he was let go. Mayor Humpage stated
his guess was that Mike Estop was making about $100,000. Council Member Paterno
stated Council could reduce the budget by having a Utility Director. Mayor Humpage
advised the Village would not hire an engineer for $90,000 and noted the previous Utility
Director did not have the RO license that Mr. Fallon had.
Mayor Humpage noted that if the Village did not have Mr. Couzzo then they would have
to hire someone and Council Member Paterno agreed and said there would not be all
these extra benefits to which Mayor Humpage commented they would unless you hire
some creme de creme engineer to be the Utility Director. Mayor Humpage advised
special licenses were required and Council would not get that guy for $90,000. Council
Member Paterno disagreed and asked why the $248,000 transfers into the General
Fund. Mayor Humpage stated he did not know to which Council Member Paterno
responded he understood it was to help pay back for the time Mr. Couzzo and his
secretary puts into it. Vice-Mayor Watkins suggested it was administration fees. Mayor
Humpage suggested Mr. Paterno be careful what he wished for because he felt that
would happen. Council Member Paterno stated he might be wrong but was willing to
look at it.
Mayor Humpage suggested Council stay focused on the reason they were here, which
was to figure out what Council wanted with the Manager's contract. He asked do you
think he makes too much money -not enough money; do you want him to quit -what
are we talking about? Vice-Mayor Watkins agreed and asked what the goal was.
Council Member Paterno noted he had issues with the contract -some had to do with
money, some had to do with benefits as far as retirement. He said the Village was
paying 23% in retirement which he felt was exorbitant - 8.6% in Village retirement plus
15% so that's like 20%. He referenced an email from Ms. Forsythe which advised it
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 7
was 8% in the general pension and 12% into this other retirement which was 20% and
he felt it was excessive.
Mr. Couzzo explained Mr. Randolph was reviewing the contract which indicated on the
bottom of the signature page it was a redlined version and that might be what resulted
in the strike through. Village Clerk McWilliams pointed out the contract Mr. Couzzo had
in his hand was directly from the official files within her office.
Council Member Paterno referred to a blank unsigned contract in the same file that was
sent Council and noted it was different from the one that was signed.
Mayor Humpage referred to the original with the original signature which indicated it
was a redlined version. Council Member Paterno referred to page four and five where
there were no strike outs in the one that was presented to Council. Mayor Humpage
believed it was a valid contract because it was signed. Council Member Paterno
believed this was not the right contract attached to the last page.
Council Member Paterno voiced concern that Village contracts were not dated and
believed every contract should have the date. He commented it was very unusual and
there were too many things that were unusual.
Mayor Humpage stated he was okay with the contract as it was written and believed
that the words "shall automatically" meant what it said. He felt it needed to be decided
was if Council could amend the contract with Mr. Couzzo's approval. That being said,
he asked if there were specific amendments that Council wanted.
Council Member Amero stated his interpretation based on Mr. Hawkins comments was
that Council had the right to make a change and noted he would have liked to have had
a municipal attorney present.
Mayor Humpage felt this whole process was premature and money would be spent to
do this. He noted Attorney Hawkins stated you could and the labor attorney said you
could not. Council Member Amero stated if changes could not be made they were
wasting their time.
Mr. Couzzo suggested having Mr. Randolph, a municipal attorney, take a look at all this
and at the file and provide a legal opinion. Council Member Amero asked if Mr. Couzzo
was okay with it either way to which Mr. Couzzo responded his personal opinion was
that Council should not be having this conversation without a legal advisor who
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 8
understood municipal and contract law and Mr. Randolph could do this; this was his
suggestion at this stage. Mr. Randolph could provide the entire file and give Council
advice both individually and collectively.
Council Member Paterno stated If Mr. Randolph said everything was good with the
contract and that everything had been done exactly perfect that he still had a problem
with the contract. He stated if the first contract that they were seeing was not the right
contract by some chance it got mixed up or whatever, but that it was not the right
contract potentially. The question was is it or it isn't. He stated the second question
was could Council change the contract if Mr. Couzzo agreed. He stated either way they
still could request a change and should continue and see what everyone thought.
Mayor Humpage stated that was what he previously asked. Vice-Mayor Watkins asked
what Council wanted to change.
Council Member Paterno stated salary and retirement; and that all the contracts he
reviewed such as Jupiter, the contract was at will and increases were given each year -
just like the old contract was prior to this contract. He found the retirement to be
excessive at 20% as compared to other municipalities.
He referred to his findings and said Jupiter had 46,000 residents, $100 million budget
and the Manager received $166,000, $550 month for a car and 7.2% or $12,000 for
retirement; North Palm Beach had 12,500 residents, a $23 million budget, Manager
salary of $135,000, $575 car allowance and 15% fora 401 K; Juno had 3,600 residents,
a 6.7 million budget, Manager salary of $108,000, $400 car allowance, $75 cell
allowance and nothing was said about retirement so it must be the same as the rest of
the employees.
Vice-Mayor Watkins asked if these municipalities had police, fire and water and
suggested an apples to apples comparison.
Council Member Paterno stated he was comparing numbers and the responsibility level.
He noted Jupiter had 411 employees; North Palm 184 full time and a bunch of part time;
Juno 71; and Lake Park was in the 70's.
Mayor Humpage clarified Mr. Paterno wanted to address salary and retirement issues.
Council Member Paterno voiced concern the Manager could take his severance and
walk if he felt like it. Mr. Couzzo stated that was not the intent of that clause. Council
Member Paterno stated that was what it said and Mr. Couzzo explained it said if a
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 9
majority of the Council should choose either formally or informally to request his
resignation, then he could opt to resign. Council Member Paterno noted three people,
but it took four to hire or fire the Manager.
Couzzo stated the supermajority was a Charter provision and the other was a
resignation provision which really provided the Village the opportunity, hopefully not in
this situation, but with some dignity if they were not hitting it with their Manager and they
could not get the fourth vote but the majority of the Council wanted to make a change,
they could then elect to allow the Manager to resign if there was not a supermajority.
He noted this was negotiated into the contract and whether it was something that you
wanted or not was certainly up for discussion. He stated to make it clear it did not mean
that the Manager could at his discretion choose to say he was resigning and that he
was eligible for the severance.
Mayor Humpage noted they were trying to give another avenue to fire the Manager
without a supermajority and Council Member Amero mentioned the Charter required a
supermajority. Mayor Humpage stated the Charter required a supermajority, but the
contract clause allowed three members of Council to approach the Manager and say
this was not working out and it would be better for the Village if he resigned; which
would not require the supermajority.
Mr. Couzzo noted it did not require the Manager to take that suggestion and move upon
it and Mayor Humpage agreed the Manager could say no and the Council would have to
have a supermajority; it was not the Manager's call. Council Member Paterno stated it
was in there he could deem to be terminated and Mr. Couzzo responded it meant the
Manager could elect to choose that option. Mayor Humpage noted Council Member
Paterno had said the Manager could just walk away and that was not the case.
Mayor Humpage requested everyone's input on the issues they had with the contract
and then contact Mr. Randolph for a legal opinion. He said If someone had an issue
with the contract he wanted to know what the issue was. He clarified Council Member
Paterno's other issue was the termination portion and asked if he had any additional
issues to which Council Member Paterno recalled the indemnification clause was
removed.
Vice-Mayor Watkins stated the indemnification clause was removed at the attorney's
suggestion because it was covered by state statute. Mayor Humpage noted there was
a letter in the package from Mr. Randolph explaining the reason for removal and that it
was not at Mr. Couzzo's suggestion.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 10
Council Member Paterno felt as Councils were elected in the future they should have
the option of who worked for them and it should not automatically be a five year term
and felt it was not fair to the Councils coming forth.
Mayor Humpage again clarified Council Member Paterno's concerns were salary,
retirement, termination and length of contract.
Council Member Amero stated he sent a letter to Mr. Couzzo and told him this was not
an assault on him even though it seemed like that, but this was one of the things that
had to be done in a public forum; which he never liked. He said it was not fun for
Council or the Manager. He felt for his conscious to be clear he believed it was his duty
as a Council Member to review a contract when it was time to be reviewed and when
they had an option to review it, as he believed they did, then they should review it. He
had a lot of the same concerns as Council Member Paterno -salary and retirement. He
stated he looked through all the surveys and felt this was a rich contract. He felt the
pension provision was a serious hit over a ten year period. Additionally, his issues were
the term and did not like the five year and felt it was ambiguous and as discovered this
evening did not even know if it was supposed to be in the contract, the termination of a
six month aggregate - he guesses he could live with that. Council Member Paterno
stated most of the contracts he reviewed were for six months with no additional
provision's.
Mr. Couzzo stated the contract was the will of the Council at the time and agreed it was
an unusual contract, but that was what the Council wanted.
Council Member Amero asked if the Manager received a COLA when the employees
did and Mr. Couzzo concurred, but noted nothing more in that aspect except the
Performance Recognition Compensation. Mayor Humpage clarified that if employees
received more than 5% then he would not receive this and he concurred.
Council Member Amero noted most Managers received a car or allowance, but he felt
his life insurance was on the high end and asked what the general expense of the $200
covered. Mr. Couzzo stated it included the cell phone which was his personally.
Mayor Humpage clarified Council Member Amero's issues were salary, retirement and
contract term.
Council Member Turnquest stated his only issue was with the term of the contract. He
agreed five years was a long time and suggested a two year renewal. He said he had
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 11
no issues with the salary. He asked to put this in perspective and felt when compared
to what the Town Manager of Belle Glade received compared to Mr. Couzzo -our
Manager only received $3,000 more than Belle Glade Manager. He commented that
this was not the Town of Belle Glade and it was not run like Belle Glade. Additionally,
he reviewed the PEPIE salary survey for 2007, which had 15 towns in it from Palm
Beach County of which Mr. Couzzo's salary ranked 14th out of 15; the only one lower
was Lantana. He was trying to compare apples to apples, but could not because he
doubted the other Managers acted as Utility Managers. He noted the Manager wore
two or more hats and to say he was overpaid for the work he did was an injustice to the
work that he was doing.
He explained the reason he agreed to review the contract was twofold. He interviewed
the Department Heads and asked them to give him a professional opinion of Mr.
Couzzo's work, and all had high opinions of his work. They all agreed Couzzo was
stretched thin and needed help, but they all held him in high regard and respected him
professionally.
He commented on the retirement and other compensation benefits and did not believe
they were excessive if his position was compared to positions in corporate America. He
pointed out Mr. Couzzo was the CEO of Tequesta and asked Council to tell him that
other CEO's did not have perks that run their corporations effectively. He did not
believe you could expect the CEO of a company to have the same compensation,
benefits and retirement plans as other employees in their companies because the other
employees did not have the same responsibilities as the CEO. He stated when things
go well, he gets a pat on the back but if someone inside the company errs and it affects
the financial stability of the company then the CEO's head rolls. He stated it was up to
Council, as the Board of Directors, to hire the best person for the position. He has not
seen anyone who could do the job better than the manger was doing. He disagreed
that it would cost less to hire a Utility Director and a Manager. He reiterated his only
problem with the contract was the five year renewable term.
Vice-Mayor Watkins stated her issue was that she did not believe Council had the right
to interfere with the contract and felt Council needed to honor the legally binding
agreement. She asked that a labor attorney review this issue. She felt Council would
be hard pressed to find someone to do what the Manager was doing. She believed he
was creative in what he brought to the Village and agreed he was stretched too thin for
what he was asked to do and did not believe he was appreciated enough. She
suggested instead of getting kudos he received everything but. She said she had no
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 12
issues with the contract and felt Mr. Couzzo did an excellent job and was probably not
paid enough and believed the Council needed to be careful.
Mayor Humpage advised Mr. Hawkins thought this could be done this evening but he
did not agree. As such, he contacted Chris Kurtz and Leonard Carson for their opinions
on if the contract was self renewing and if the changes had to be made with the
concessions of both parties. He felt Council needed to get the opinion from a couple of
municipal attorneys and bring this back.
Council Member Turnquest asked Mr. Couzzo when the last time he had a performance
evaluation by Council and Mr. Couzzo advised last year Council did a review. Council
Member Turnquest noted the contract stated it should be done annually at least 30 days
prior to Oct 1 and asked if he had one this year and asked how the performance
evaluation compensation was provided. He questioned how Council could sit here
tearing his contract apart when he had not received a performance evaluation for the
work he had done over the past year.
Mr. Couzzo clarified the evaluation was specifically to provide a performance
recognition compensation and stated he withdrew the PRC consideration for this year.
Council Member Turnquest asked if Mr. Couzzo was voluntarily giving up a
performance evaluation that could potentially provide him additional funds of $15,000 -
$17,000. Mr. Couzzo concurred and stated last year was the first year that the
language was voluntarily amended because it was a net bonus in prior years, He
agreed those were the numbers and he was voluntarily withdrawing the PRC review in
consideration of the fact there would be difficult times with the contract negotiations and
compensation for the employees and did not feel it would be appropriate for himself to
take that kind of compensation at this time.
Council Member Turnquest referred to the third WHEREAS clause in the contract and
urged Council to pay close attention to this because it did not only affect the Village
Manager but all the village employees. He read, "the Village seeks to provide
inducements for Michael R. Couzzo, Jr. to remain in such employment and make
possible full work productivity by assuring Michael R. Couzzo's moral and peace of
mind with respect to future security." He reiterated that this did not just affect Mr.
Couzzo but affected his Department Heads because if he was not in good spirits the
ball would roll down hill and the Department Heads would not be in good spirits. He
believed this affected the morale of the entire Village's employees. He said you could
not beat down the Manager and expect the entire -all of our employees to feel the
effects of it. If he was in a bad mood it would roll down hill and everyone was going to
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 13
feel the effects. If Council was able to, under the advisement of counsel, review the
contract and make changes rather or not with or without his approval, need to be careful
what they do because the morale of the Village employees was already at an all time
low. He urged Council to be careful because some might feel if Council could affect the
Village Manager this way, then they were not going to feel secure in their position and
we would lose a lot of good people.
Ms. Geraldine Genco Dube, 7 Country Club Circle, stated as a taxpayer and former
Mayor, Council Member, and Vice-Mayor and a person who reviewed a lot of legal
items, it upsets her to feel that a contract might have been tainted and was potentially
fraudulent. She said other Council Members used the same document for the basis of
making decisions. As a taxpayer, it also bothered her that that the Village paid someone
to serve as the Utility Director, yet between engineering fees and consulting fees it was
costing an additional quarter million dollars in addition to the salary of the person that
acted as the Utility Director. She further stated, as a resident of the Village, she found
that a compensation for pension of 20% was incredible. She stated as far as renewing -
that to deprive future Councils the opportunity of having input into the person that they
have to relate with as well as compensation which affected our taxes was totally unfair.
Ms. Dorothy Campbell, 30 Eastwinds Circle, voiced frustration with not being able to
hear Council and said the Village had a bad public address system.
Geraldine Genco apologized and said she had an appointment and had to leave.
Ms. Campbell stated she had been here since 1970 and a resident through the years of
Bob Harp, Tom Bradford and Michael Couzzo. She said as a taxpayer she thought she
paid more taxes than anybody in town between residential and commercial. She said
she was pleased to pay every cent because the Village, right now, was in the best
condition it had ever been in. She had the joy of working on Tequesta's Golden Tribute
this year and spent a lot of fun hours working not only with her great committee but with
the employees of this Village; with the exception of one, who would remain nameless.
She felt the Village had the highest caliber of Department Heads and the highest caliber
of newly hired Police Officers; and under this man's direction the Village had really
improved. She reminded Council we were a Village and not the Town of Jupiter and
that residents were here because we were a Village. She asked how many were at the
hearings with the applicants and stated she was. She said there was one guy that was
cuter than he was but certainly not any one that was as well qualified for this job. If you
had been here during the tension years of the Bradford administration, all of the
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 14
employees or probably 90% of them had hesitations and problems with their positions.
She mentioned it was the niftiest thing about working on the Golden Tribute was the
wonderful spirit that our people have and it has to do with this man's leadership. She
noted she had a management consultant company which she inherited in 1962 and
under her stewardship she now had over 900 employees. She said one of the things
that she found in providing services to smaller and medium sized businesses was that
some of the most important things were not black and white words on paper; it was the
feeling the esprit de corps - it was the whole essence of the organization. She
commented on standing in a building that was paid for before it was built and suggested
Council pick out some of these other towns and tell her that they were all in that same
situation. She encouraged Council to support Mr. Couzzo's leadership; she did not care
if it was a five year or ten year renewal. She stated we were the Village of Tequesta
and not somebody else -we're us and let's keep on doing what we have been doing
and not lose it. She suggested the Village might lose if they kept on doing this sort of
thing.
Council Member Paterno thanked the residents for coming and appreciated the
Manager and Council for coming and wanted to let everyone know that he appreciated
that. He knew there were a lot of things going on, but wanted to let everyone know he
appreciated them coming.
Mayor Humpage stated he was distressed that Ms. Genco left since she brought up this
possible fraudulent contract. He advised those were serious allegations. He mentioned
the Village Manger was instructed to pursue this through Mr. Randolph and again
suggested it was an error or scrivener's error. He said he did not like the word
fraudulent and believed that was a very dangerous position to take. He wanted to get to
the bottom of this and wanted to treat everyone equally to get their two cents in, but
urged Council to be guarded about the remarks made.
Vice-Mayor Watkins asked Council to keep in mind this was a Council of five, the
Manager and attorneys at the time that crafted this document was agreed to. She
reminded Council that Ms. Genco was on the Council at the time the document was
approved and noted this was an agreed upon worked out document. She urged all to
keep that in mind.
Mayor Humpage stated everyone would get a copy of the interpretations and Council
would have to reconvene.
Village Council Workshop Meeting
September 18, 2007
Page 15
Mr. Couzzo stated obviously he took great indifference to the suggestion that the
administration and all previous Council Members had done something fraudulent. He
said if in fact that was a suggestion that someone would like to make, then he
suggested they make it and he would have it investigated. As Councilman Turnquest
said before, the negativity that flowed from these types of comments regarding
individuals that were extremely dedicated and committed employees of this community,
that worked excessive hours; it was just inappropriate in his opinion. In regards to
Councilman Amero's comment about it being difficult - he certainly agreed. He told the
Village Clerk today that performance reviews for Managers were nothing short of being
in an audience of people and the only one without trousers was the Manager; that was
how uncomfortable this was. He stated this was a wonderful Village that people have
dedicated themselves to and he was pleased to have served for the past seven years.
He suggested looking at some of the other communities; find out the longevity of some
of those Managers, find out how long they have been there, and find out what they have
done for those communities. He mentioned he was very pleased with what Mr.
Turnquest said last week that Tequesta was not like any other community in this county
and if this was to be the premiere community, we did not want to have himself or any
employee at the bottom of the totem pole. He commented that Council Member
Paterno and he have had this conversation more than once -you get what you pay for
and if you want quality and performance you need to make that investment.
Council Member Amero moved to adjourn at 6:15 p.m.; Vice-Mayor Watkins seconded;
the motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Eye. (Y1 e~ ~c~
Lori McWilliams, CMC
Village Clerk