Loading...
Jensen's response to Commissioner Woods from 1-23-12RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER WOODS 1/23/12 MOTION TO TERMINATE CITY ATORNEY CONTRACT WITH CAUSE At the city commission meeting on 1/23/12, Commissioner Woods handed out a written motion to terminate the city attorney's contract for cause, with attachments, the first 2 pages of which were her examples of causes for termination. In order to correct the record, the following are responses to those examples: In stating that I had "inadequately performed duties as required of him by the Commission," she states: 1. Conduct that is disloyal to the City a. Mr. Jensen inappropriately approved payment of $140,000 before obtaining insurance as required by the city commission. The city commission approved this payment. I do not have the authority to approve such a payment. Title insurance was ordered by my suggestion in the amount which the city paid for the easement. b. Mr. Jensen failure to obtain appropriate insurance as requested by the Commission, the policy he negotiated to cover the $140,000 tree mitigation payment specifically excludes the basis of the ongoing lawsuit, i.e. the reverter clause. I did not negotiate the title policy, I merely ordered it from a title insurance company. The policy was not to cover $140,000 tree mitigation payment, but to cover the city's payment of $140,000 for the easement. The "claim of reverter" recorded by someone on behalf of the RCBS corporation happened after the title policy had been ordered, and I forwarded it to the title company. Any title company would exclude such an undetermined claim on the properoJ from coverage. C. Mr. Jensen failed to represent all Commissioners fully and equally. i. Mr. Jensen gave a defended a legal opinion concerning committee formation methodology that broadens the Mayor's powers beyond the powers vested by the Charter. My opinion on appointment of committees merely stated what is setforth in the Charter and in the Code of Ordinances, and in no way broadens the powers of the Mayor. The Mayor is given certain powers by the Charter above and beyond those of other commissioners. Those powers have been regularly exercised consistent with my opinion by the current and past mayors, at times when Commissioner Woods sat on the commission and expressed no objection to the appointment of committees and their members by the Mayor. 2. Negotiation, preparation, and approval of unsatisfactory contract a. Mr. Jensen negotiated, prepared, wrote, and approved the Easement Agreement that led to Commission and Community prolonged discourse, ill will and an ongoing lawsuit. I neither negotiated nor approved the Easement Agreement. I assisted in preparation of the Agreement with input from the city commission, city manager, and the attorneys for EAB. The "prolonged discourse and ill will" was created by another, and the `ongoing lawsuit" resulted from Bull family members attempting to reclaim an interest in property outside of Atlantic Beach, and who were funded in part by neighboring property owners who reside in Atlantic Beach. 1. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote and approved entering into a contract for use of property when the property had and still has a clouded title. This led to an ongoing lawsuit. Again, I neither negotiated nor approved any contract. There was no "clouded title" according to the title insurance policy owned by EAB, and the "declaration of reversion" by ROBS was not executed and recorded in the public records of Duval County until May, 2010. The original Easement from EAB to COAB and Agreement between EAB and COAB were approved by the city commission and signed in September, 2009. 2. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote, and approved a contract requiring the city to clear -cut a long and wide swath of Mature Oak Hammock to create a road that had been denied permits twice. Again, I neither negotiated nor approved any contract. The requirements of the city under its contract with EAB are not as setforth above, but are as set forth in the contract. 3. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote, and approved the tree mitigation payment of $140,000 for the city to pay for removing trees that could not be permitted for removal. Again., I neither negotiated nor approved a tree mitigation payment. I am unaware of any application to COJfor a permit to remove trees on EAB property, which would trigger mitigation costs. 4. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote, and approved this contract, which was unclear and ambiguous enough on many points to cause cantankerous and acrimonious debate between the commissioners and the community. Again, I neither negotiated nor approved any contract. Negotiation was done by others in the city, and approval was by the city commission. The "cantankerous and acrimonious debate between the commissioners and the community" was created by another, beginning with the letter to the State Attorney's Office. 5. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote, and approved the Agreement, which obligated the city to perpetual financial obligation without preparing a resolution as required by Article II Sect. 17 of the Charter. Again, I neither negotiated nor approved the Agreement. Sec. 17 of the Charter addresses ordinances, and has nothing to do with resolutions. Sec. 17 of the Charter does not appear to apply to this situation. 6. Mr. Jensen negotiated, wrote, and approved this Agreement, which required $140,000 payment for tree removal that would require $0 if permits were approved. Again, I neither negotiated nor approved the Agreement. Payment of $140,000 as ultimately approved by the city commission was for acquisition of the easement on EAB's property. I believe COJ had indicated mitigation payment would be required if trees were removed Af Q Xfw� ^ ill E I I " . 6L. mom d -, fLl 11 .41 oil