Cape Coral City Council nixed a resolution that would have authorized the city manager and city attorney to approve indemnification and hold harmless agreements for property owners wanting to make certain improvements within easements.<\/p>\n
Councilmember Dr. Derrick Donnell was the lone dissent for the motion to deny.<\/p>\n
According to agenda documents, the city owns and maintains water, sewer, irrigation, and stormwater infrastructure within easements across the city. There are certain improvements \u2014 such as driveways, landscaping \u2014 that property owners are allowed to build, but under specific conditions. <\/p>\n
If the city needs to dig up, repair, or replace the infrastructure in that easement, damages or remove the property owner\u2019s improvement, the city bears no responsibility or cost and all the risk is assumed by the property owner.<\/p>\n
A formal hold harmless agreement is signed by the property owner before a permit is issued. The resolution, 115-26, would have streamlined \u201cthe process by allowing the city manager and city attorney to handle approvals administratively.\u201d<\/p>\n
Councilmember Keith Long called it a babysitting provision, and was being done because \u201cwe want to make sure it goes to your office to ensure staff is doing what they are supposed to be doing.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cJust sign the dang paper on staff level. I can\u2019t support,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
City Attorney Aleksandr Boksner said it is a mechanism of identifying who is responsible for ensuring compliance with these provisions.<\/p>\n
Mayor John Gunter said he did not understand the purpose of the resolution.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen you look at the resolution for some reason, we have incorporated the city manager and his staff for approval, and city attorney office for their approval, which we have never done before,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Gunter said he did not understand why they needed two different offices of government to approve \u2014 city manager and city attorney\u2019s office.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt sounds like a staff issue, if there is an issue. To bring the city attorney\u2019s office in to monitor and regulate what city staff is doing is outside the city charter,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Boksner said the best practice is that the receiving party executes the document as well.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat doesn\u2019t seem to have occurred on a consistent basis. It identifies who is legally responsible for executing this document,\u201d he said, adding that it seems that the best practices may not have been followed to the level that he would have been comfortable with. \u201cIn certain circumstances no one was signing on behalf of administration \u2013 only signed by the property owner.\u201d<\/p>\n
Gunter said they are adding additional steps that he does not think is needed. He said if the form needs to be revised to keep the process streamlined then let development services and the city manager handle that.<\/p>\n
Boksner said the best practice is to have both the recipient and giver executing a legally binding document.<\/p>\n
\u201cI am trying to identify uniformity and consistency moving forward, so no one at a later time can say they were not aware,\u201d he said. \u201cThis is nothing more than establishing a best practice.\u201d<\/p>\n