Laserfiche WebLink
? <br /> <br />Ownership – who owns property found by metal detector users? <br />Just because someone loses their property does not divest them of ownership. Fla. Stat. 705.102 <br />provides that when a person finds lost property, such person shall report the description/location <br />to a police officer, and it is unlawful for that person to take property. If the person takes the <br />property, it is a theft. The person turning in lost property can request that the property be given <br />to him/her if the owner is not found, but the finder will need to pay a deposit to cover the City’s <br />costs for transportation, storage, and publication of notice. The title to the lost property is vested <br />in the finder at the end of 90 days, provided a reasonable attempt has been made to ascertain the <br />owner. If the finder does not pay the deposit, then the property could be kept by the City, <br />donated, given to the finder, sold, etc. <br /> <br />At this time there is an Ordinance that does not allowed metal detectors in any of the City parks. <br /> <br />Marianne Kappel stated that she still feels that issuing a permit to metal detector users should <br />help the situation, this can be done on-line and no staff support would be needed. <br /> <br />Phyllis Sheppard disagreed based on the fact that someone from the Park staff will need to <br />inspect the parks in a regular basis and this time should be allocated to other duties that will <br />benefit the City and all residents. <br /> <br />Liz Torres expressed that she did not feel comfortable with the statement of “the City could be <br />liable if a dangerous hole is dug and not fill within a reasonable time” because how does any <br />one know what does “reasonable” mean in court. She supports Phyllis in not changing the <br />Ordinance to allow metal detectors. <br /> <br />Butch Spence explained that even though he has nothing against the use of metal detectors, he <br />felt that changing the ordinance will create liability to the City. Also, because the staff for the <br />parks is already shorthanded it will create more responsibility and will take the staff away from <br />working on projects that project and improve the parks. <br /> <br />Butch Spence moved to keep the Ordinance the way it is today, seconded by Phyllis. Vote <br />recorded 3-1; Marianne Kappel voted “No”. <br /> <br />North Shore Neighborhood Grant Update: <br />The North Shore association communicated to Julie Dross in the Parks & Recreation Department <br />that it was decided in their last meeting to revise the project and they felt they could meet the <br />th <br />deadline to finish the improvements. This past Monday, May 17 the President of North Shore <br />association called to inform Julie that they will be sending a check for the amount requested of <br />$2,010.50. <br /> <br />Mr. Fortini explained that this is not uncommon for communities not to be able to accomplish <br />their projects because these projects are all run by volunteers and not everyone has the same <br />commitments. <br /> <br />Mr. Fortini announced that for the 2008 budget it was decided that there will not be a <br />Neighborhood Grant Program due to budget cuts that have been imposed by the tax cuts coming <br />from Tallahassee. But the City Manager is looking to revise the program and hopefully bring <br />back the “community relations” position. But this will be decided for the next budget year. <br />More updates to follow… <br /> <br /> 2 <br /> <br />