Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 02 10 City Commission Special Minutes 92-93-9 . SPECIAL MEETING CITY COMMISSION FEBRUARY 10, 1993 The Special Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Philip A. Kulbes at 5:30 p.m. Present: Mayor Philip A. Kulbes Attorney Frank Kruppenbacher Acting City Manager John Govoruhk Commissioner John V. Torcaso Commissioner John Langellotti Commissioner Cindy Kaehler Mayor Kulbes explained the meeting was called to hear a settlement proposal on the Browning Lawsuit. Attorney Michael Roper with the law firm of Dean, Ringers, Morgan and Lawton in Orlando, counsel to the Florida League of Cities insurance, spoke to the Commission regarding the proposed settlement proposal. Attorney Roper said essentially what the settlement involves is the payment of a sum of money to be made by the Florida League of Cities. That amount of money would not involve any money coming directly from the City treasury or out of the City's pocket; however, he said, any payment of a settlement like that would ultimately effect the City's premium. . The second part would involve an agreement on the part of the City Commission to provide Mr. Browning with a hearing. The purpose would be to determine whether based on the evidence and facts of the case Mr. Browning was properly terminated or whether this was a case of wrongful termination. Mr. Browning has agreed to be bound by the determination of the City Commission on this issue. That if the City Commission determines that his termination was in fact correct, there will be no further appeals, no further legal action taken, and the only compensation that he would obtain from the settlement would be the monetary settlement that had been paid by the FLC. If on the other hand the City Commission, after hearing the facts and considering the evidence believes Mr. Browning was wrongfully terminated, and that his termination was the result of an improper motivation or for a pretextual reason, then the City Commission would have the opportunity to reinstate him if they felt that was appropriate. Also if they felt it appropriate award him monies in back pay also. Attorney Roper said the City Commission would remain free not to reinstate Mr. Browning if they so desired and also not to provide him with back pay even if they ordered reinstatement. Attorney Roper went on to explain initially when we discussed this settlement, the amount of the settlement was not disclosed to the City Commission. The amount of the money that would be paid to Mr. Browning by the FLC is $100,000. That money would be his regardless what decision would be made by the City. Attorney Roper said essentially that is the terms of the agreement that would be involved. As a result of that agreement the City would have a general release for any and all claims from Mr. Browning and that would be the end of the litigation. . The settlement would include any attorneys fees that Mr. Browning's attorney might be entitled to. Attorney Roper explained the purpose of his being here tonight is to lay out for the Commission the specifics of the settlement agreement and to make his . . . special Meeting, City Commission, Feb. 10, 1993 Page 2 92-93-9 recommendation to the Commission to authorize the settlement. He said the thing the City Commission needs to be concerned about is the potential for an excess verdict in this case. Attorney Kruppenbacher asked if Attorney Roper feels we have a bad case or a good case. Attorney Roper said we have a good case on certain aspects and there are some that are troublesome. Attorney Kruppenbacher explained on the issue of damages attorney fees and costs will probably cost $100,000 and any damages they decide to award in excess of that. Attorney Roper said we are here this evening to determine whether or not the City Commission is willing to give Mr. Browning a hearing. Motion was made by Commissioner Kaehler that we reject the settlement offer as presented by Attorney Roper. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote one the motion: Commissioner Langellotti, aye; Commissioner Kaehler, aye; Commissioner Torcaso, aye; motion carried. Discussion followed on the appointment of Chief John Govoruhk as Acting City Manager. Attorney Kruppenbacher said he conferred with the Attorney General's office and did his own research and as a result of that, Chief Govoruhk tendered a memo to the Commission vacating his position as Police Chief. Attorney Kruppenbacher explained there can be no express or implied guarantee by this Commission that Chief Govoruhk would be able to return as police chief upon expiration of this position; that will be up to the new manager or should Chief Govoruhk resign some time during his term and you all want to allow him to return to it. Attorney Kruppenbacher said the Commission has two other options: appoint no one, then Mayor Kulbes would assume those duties or the Commission could look to find someone else. Captain Charles Sexton has assumed the duties of managing the Police Department; he is not appointed acting police chief. Commissioner Kaehler said, since she made the motion to appoint Chief Govoruhk, she said she is sorry to put him in this position; however, she feels he is the best person for the job and would like it to remain the way it is. Attorney Kruppenbacher said he would bring to the Commission an appropriate pay grade for Mr. Govoruhk as he is stepping into a higher degree of responsibility. Attorney Kruppenbacher asked for the Commission's authority to bring back a consulting agreement with Mr. Rozansky to be used by either the Acting City Manager or himself when it is necessary to confer with Mr. Rozansky. Meeting was adjourned 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Approved: ~-r: lid: Mary T. Norton, City Clerk ,MAYOR ~L~ l~ .~~ la;l~ (a~() bb~-~343 . -------~-l=l. 2 -. . iE~TkE~N1' J\GRB~MFJ:rr (FOR CITY COMMISSION) Plaintiff, HOWARD BROWNING, and Defendant, CITY OF . WINTER SPRlNGS t individually and by and through their . ' authorized repre~entatives, who ars;all the partiG8 to that litigation styled HOW~O BROWNING vs~ CI1Y OF WINT~R S~~+~GS~ A--muni9inal cor~or~~~2n, Case No. ~1-934~CIV-ORL-18~ currently pending in united State.. Ditstric1: court,. Middle District of F19rid&, O~lanc1o 'Div~.ion, hereby aqree to. resolve all ditf~rences between them which are the subject of the above-styled liti9~tion upon the fOllowing terms and conditions: 1. Lump-sum payment pursuant to sep~~at.'a9t'eement wi th Florida League o.f Cl t~es, I~o., ll"lorlda' MUh!c~pal . Liability Self-Insurers P~o9ram. 2. BROWNING shall~eeeiv~ a hea.rin(jberore the ci tycol'rtlDission of the CITY OF WIN'rER SPRINGS to determine . . whether or not he should be reinstated to his' employment ~ The hearing will be held as Soon as praoticable subsequent to execution of this agre,e:rnent, at the mutual convenience ot the parties. 3. The only issue presented to the Couission for determination shall be .whether or not proper cause existed for Howard BrowniJl9' s termination troll 'employment: 8S ~tated in the Notice ot Termination dat.d March 18, 1988. It ~ot~. . PAGE 1 OF FOUR PAGES . . . r c..o J.t.J ~~ ~~.~~ ,~~f I VUU U~~~ what is the appropriate remedy7N 4. The City's attorneys shall not recommend against reinstate~ent, but may present and argue the city'. competing v~rsion ot the facts conc.~n1nq the conduct fQrm1nq the stated basis tor the termination. 5.. All arguments and facts shall be presented exclusively by Tho1'\\as: 'J. Pilacek and Michael Roper; and no . presentation nor comment shall be made by the city's attorney, Frank Kruppenbacher (or his designee). 6. BROWNING remains, free to take the position; th~t his tennination was the result of a political vendetta by, ci ty . Z,lanager Richard Rozansky; and, was not for the r~aso!1. officially stated. 7. At the oOholusion of the hearing, without any" other advice or input, the Commission would then vote on the I , ' is::!Iue. e. The commt'ssiQn will be advised only that . . BROWNING has received an unspecitied'sum of money paid by the League o~ cities in settlement ot only the non-wage atJd benefit aspects of BROWNING's olai~. The Commission shell not be advised as to the amount, but shall be advised that it is their exclusive province to determine the amount due to BROWNING for payment ot lost wages and benefits, should;th@y determine that the. termination was improper. 9. '!'he Commission is entitled to establish: the amount of back pay, if any, to be received by BROWNING :upon PAGE 2 OF FOUR,PAGES . reinstate~ent in its discretion. 10. The commission may be advised that any amounts awarded tor back pay would be paid in addition to the payment made by the Laague otcities exolusive from CITY tunds. 11. While the Commission'shall b. advised that ,it 1s their exolusive provinoe to determine BROWNING's entitlement to back pay, it any, neverthaless, Michael Roper, Esq. (or his designee) shall be permitted to argus that BROWNING Should recGive no more money. 12. Subsequent to exeoution of this agreement, ~nd in reliance hereon, counsel tor the parties may adv,ise the United States Distriot Court that the controversy haa been , , . settled and m~y be removed from the trial docket. 13. All parties shall exeoute standard form mutual releases which apply to all olaims whioh were or could ha~e been made the subjeot of litigation or administ~ative action by BROWNING pertaining to bis employment and/or termination from employment by the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS up to ~nd includinq date of execution of ,this settlement a.greement. Mutual releases m~y contain non-admission clauses at the option ot either party. 14. By execution of this agreement under oath BROWNING represents, stipulates and agrees that he ha. executed this agreement voluntarily with ~ull advice of counsel, and that his attorney Of~ecord, ThOMas J. Pilacek, . PAGE 3 OF FOUR PAGES FEB 10 '93 14:14 (407) &50-8343 r-.~ - it., . .. . Esq., is hereby authorized to execute this settlement in reliance upon tha terms hereof and on his behalf. DATED this HOWARD BROWNING Plaintift 3 day of ~A<J;:r ,1993. CITY OF WINT SPRINGS Defendant By' ~~ owar B own nq : . BYl Michael J.Roper, Esq. Counsel tor Defendan~ By: Thomas J. Pilacek, Esq. Counsel for Pl~intift . STATE OF PLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE PERSONALLY APPEARED bafore the undersigned, HOWARD BROWNING, who is personally known to me, and who hereby acknowledged his understandin9 and exeoution of the foregoing instrument this day of , 1993. By: Notary Public, state of FL Cart.. No. My Commission Expires: . PAGE 4 OF FOUR PAGES