City Attorney Tom Hogan presented the Brooksville City Council a copy of the transcript from the second Conflict Assessment Meeting on 07/19/16. Hogan discussed the meeting at length, stating he had expected the County to drop the offending “count seven” or paragraph once County Attorney Garth Coller met with County Commissioners. “We’re not the ones who started this litigation,” Hogan said. “We’re not litigious, but we have to participate once we get sued.” As noted in this publication previously, the City and County remain at an impasse.
Hogan stated that when attorneys attend these meetings, they “fish” for information from the other side while withholding information themselves. For example, he knew the meaning of “municipal underbounding” but asked Coller for the definition.
The annexations took place in November and December 2015. According to Hogan, the County had 30 days to object to the annexations, but they responded with “no comment”, and the time frame for objecting to the annexations expired. In January 2016, the County sued the City, stating that the lawsuit was filed because “they ran out of time.”
The County needed the transcript of the December 2015 City Council meeting. Hogan stated the minutes showed no discussion of any racial discrimination, and the County’s amended complaint included the City’s actions in 1925 and concerns for municipal underbounding. That was added to get the attention of the City, according to statements from Coller.
After the first conflict assessment meeting, both attorneys were to meet with their respective clients. Coller advised that the BOCC reflected Coller’s concern about “potential federal liabilities” if there is discrimination, whether intentional or not. “I find that to be disingenuous as well,” Hogan stated.
He believes the County has another motive. The annexation of several properties by the City were not discussed in the lawsuit, only these five: St. Anthony the Abbot Catholic Church, Grace World Outreach Church, Brooksville Christian Church, Hernando County Housing Authority, and property belonging to Samuel and Kellie Griffin. Hogan stated the City’s position is that they will annex any property whose owner wants to bring it into the city limits, regardless of any criteria.
The reason Hogan approached the City Council? So that his statements about the meeting could be on the record. He explained that mediation was suggested, and while he is not opposed to mediation, did not believe it would be the best use of time or resources. Without “count seven” removed, any result of the mediation would reflect that the City was guilty of racial discrimination.
Hogan believes “the administration…is driving the bus…and not the County Commission.” The County may be at risk of being sued for not providing services at the same time they are expending resources to improve the Kass Circle area.
The question Hogan posed to the City Council consisted of two parts. First, did the council want to proceed to mediation, realizing that it could be expensive? Second, did the council want another resolution meeting? Knowing that the County is not likely to drop “count seven”, Hogan stated that it might be better to take a map to the next hearing with the judge so he can determine whether the annexation of the church (meaning the Catholic church) creates an enclave.
There is no merit to the accusations or objections from the County, Hogan believes. He also believes that the entire lawsuit revolves around the Catholic church. If the City were to “de-annex” the church, then the issue might be resolved.
Council Member Kemmerer stated the distinction may have been that when the property owners signed the power of attorney, they gave consent to annexation “when the time was right.” The annexations were based on utilities contracts, not discrimination.
Community Development Director Bill Geiger advised that by annexing some properties, it made others contiguous. Kemmerer stated that in the contested South Brooksville section, there are no properties available that meet that criteria, and that is why “count seven” is invalid.
Hogan stated the lawsuit includes the allegation that the City is expanding around those areas and deliberately avoiding them, leaving them as an enclave. Municipal underbounding then results, which is when the responsibility for utilities is not met for the properties of the enclave.
Kemmerer stated if the lawsuit is simply to recover that one property, then the process is a waste of time and resources, including the cost of the county attorneys involved, who are paid by taxpayers. The best option is to have the court decide, a position Vice-Mayor Robert Battista takes as well. “I think for them, mediation is just another dog and pony show,” said Kemmerer.
Mayor Natalie Kahler agreed that by not dropping “count seven”, the County has not acted in good faith and has engaged in intimidation tactics. Mediation would not resolve the issue. “We should not be settling in a way that makes it look like we are conceding to racial charges,” Kahler said.
Council Member Frankie Burnett stated his recommendation has always been to proceed to a court hearing because of his previous experiences with the BOCC. “They are trying to get the City of Brooksville to inherit a blighted area that they never did anything with.” Burnett stated the County has “duck and dodged” their responsibilities in that area for over 200 years, beginning with the reason those residents are in that location. Burnett also believes that the court should decide the matter. “It’s just so sad when governments have to use taxpayer money to fight each other.”
With all the council members in agreement to proceed to a hearing, Hogan stated the process will take time, and that months from now they will need to remember, “Nobody ever knows how a judge is going to rule…I can’t guarantee you that we are going to win everything.” Hogan will advise the judge that there will be no more mediations. He will file a motion to dismiss and then the responsive pleadings, prior to having a court hearing to decide the matter.