ATTORNEY/CLIENT SESSION CITY OF LAKE WORTH- Part V - NOVEMBER 14, 2012

ATTORNEY/CLIENT SESSION

CITY OF LAKE WORTH

CITY OF LAKE WORTH

CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE

7 NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY

LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2012

4:52 p.m. - 6:15 p.m.

IN ATTENDANCE: 

Pam Triolo, Mayor

Scott Maxwell, Vice Mayor

Christopher McVoy, Commissioner

Andy Amoroso, Commissioner

Michael Bornstein, City Manager

Glen Torciva, Esquire, Interim City Attorney

Brian Joslyn, Esquire, Outside Counsel

[FORWARD TO PAGE 53, LINE 3]

[People mentioned, other than listed "In Attendance", in order of mention: Peter Willard, Mr. McNamara, Ms Anderson.]

COMMISSIONER MCVOY: [...] Did the person get elected partly on that, that was what they campaigned on? So it's normal that they would vote differently than whoever was previously on, and they were presumably representing the will of the people because they got elected so it's appropriate. But can somebody make a case that this is somehow smelly? Apparently the feeling is they can. So I understand that. Go ahead.

MR. BORNSTEIN: I like the argument of this is democracy in action. Someone got elected on a platform and they did morally what they wanted to do. But on the other side I say well and good, but there's a cost to me. That's Greater Bay's argument. They can make that political decision but they have to pay for that political decision because we had a contract that was going to generate so much. 

MR. JOSLYN: Especially when you have the Mayor and City Manager saying no, we can't get out of the contract, we'll be sued for millions of dollars. 

MR. BORNSTEIN: Right.

COMMISSIONER MCVOY: I don't fully understand that, but that makes sense. 

     The piece that I want to bring into the discussion, I don't know that it affects the risk analysis. I agree with your risk analysis that we do not want to wander forward into a 50 percent, a 60 percent chance or 40 percent chance of losing and the cost of losing is multiple millions we don't have and it's tax payer money that shouldn't be sailing off to someone in Rochester. I totally get that. But let me add in a sort of philosophical part and I'd be looking for everybody's response on. What if the true situation is that Willard's outfit, which is Willard who has a very dubious reputation in a bunch of states, doesn't really do stuff, talks a good streak and hooks up with somebody who has actually built some things but it's kind of this loose organization. What if his intent from the get go was never to build a building but was to put us in exactly this situation that we're in now, put us at a point where we're at risk of losing and it's an extortion scheme to get public money into his pocket? What is our responsibility?

MR. BORNSTEIN: How do you prove that?

COMMISSIONER MCVOY:  I'm not asking it as how do you prove it.

MR. JOSLYN: Let me say as the person who has looked at all the documents and I've looked at them a couple of times, there's no evidence that that occurred.

COMMISSIONER MCVOY: That's not what you said in the last meeting.

MR. JOSLYN: Hold on a minute now. There's no evidence that that occurred at front end. It's very clear to me that these guys were taking steps to set the City up by October of 2008, because I have a memo from Peter Willard to himself of a list of talking points where he says just that. Okay? I showed that to the mediator and it didn't sway him all that much. So my view of this is they tried to do this on a shoe string. They came into town talking a big game. They surely did. And they tried to do it on the cheap. And then because things got slowed up with the lawsuits and with the challenges to the zoning also filed by Mr. McNamara up in Tallahassee that stopped the zoning cold for a year that, pardon me, that because they were so tight were running into trouble. 2008 was not the smoothest year as we all know and by that point I'm sure it was clear to them that they weren't going to be able to get financing for this deal and they adopted a new strategy. I think that is potentially demonstrable. I don't believe that they came into this with that as a concept. I really don't believe that. 

MAYOR TRIOLO: Question for you. What is the process, our public meeting is less than a half an hour, our public meeting, what can we discuss and not discuss?

MR. BORNSTEIN: Well publicly you're not supposed to talk about what happened at mediation, but you can certainly talk about the fact that the risk analysis. If you'd like we can lay out the risk analysis.

COMMISSIONER AMOROSO: I would personally -- I thought you gave a very clear layout of it and I agree with it. 

MR. BORNSTEIN: To me it's dispassionate. It's facts. This is the risk.

MR. JOSLYN: And I'd be happy to answer any questions that anybody has I guess.

MR. BORNSTEIN: In terms of commissioners I think your conversation is very appropriate in terms of what's best for the City weighing all these different factors, weighing all these risk factors in particular. 

MAYOR TRIOLO: Can we discuss the mock trials?

MR. BORNSTEIN: Sure. Yes.

COMMISSIONER AMOROSO: We can talk about past commission and how we got to where we are now?

MR. BORNSTEIN: Yes. I think that's what Brian -- I think you have to have that context.

MR. JOSLYN: No doubt. 

MR. BORNSTEIN: Go ahead.

COMMISSIONER AMOROSO: And do we make the decision here or there? 

MR. TORCIVIA: There. It has to be public.

MAYOR TRIOLO: Vice Mayor?

VICE MAYOR MAXWELL: I got a phone call yesterday from a resident who was apparently made aware of this meeting and was told that we were going to be talking about this. Apparently an elected official reached out and was talking to folks about this. 

MR. JOSLYN: Were numbers discussed?

VICE MAYOR MAXWELL: Yes. My concern is that there's going to be push back saying don't you settle, don't you settle, because there are people in this community that are involved with the very players we've talked about in this meeting here today who are going to want us to go to the mat.

MR. JOSLYN: For them. 

VICE MAYOR MAXWELL: For them.

MR. JOSLYN: Well --

VICE MAYOR MAXWELL: We've got a problem here.

MAYOR TRIOLO: Already I have the blogs saying --

COMMISSIONER MCVOY: Wasn't the meeting noticed as a closed door meeting on Greater Bay?

MAYOR TRIOLO: Yes.

COMMISSIONER MCVOY: So that's public information. 

MR. BORNSTEIN: Look, I parked the car yesterday and Ms. Anderson came up to me and said don't give Greater Bay a penny. So there are people in this community who feel very strongly about this matter.

VICE MAYOR MAXWELL: How would anybody deduce from a notice that says closed door attorney-client session for the purpose of discussing the pending litigation, how would they deduce there's a settlement pending, that we were going to talk about a settlement? My point is that information had been sent and circulated and I as specifically told I don't want you to settle. Okay?

MR. JOSLYN: Are those people going to pay by way of special assessment if we get hit?

[ENDED TRANSCRIPTION AT PAGE 59, LINE 2]