Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Commission Meetillg <br />October 10,2005 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />and take over the supervisor position and hire additional help so that she is not on call twenty four hours a <br />day. Commissioner Cook recommended Option 1 and then allow the citizens to decide the issue on a <br />referendum. <br /> <br />Comm issioner Doerner stated thatthe Animal Control issue had been discussed numerous times by the City <br />Commission and it was not the job ofthe City Commission was to micro manage the employees and the City <br />Manager; that decisions should not be based upon personalities between some Commissioners and the staff. <br />She stated that it was not the job of governmentto provide jobs for people but rather to provide good service <br />and she was sure the Police Department would hire the most qualified person forthe job. She recommended <br />the City revisit looking at consolidating the Animal Control Service with Seminole County Services because <br />the City is paying twice for the service. The City could still retain its more restrictive codes and retain one <br />or two animal control positions. Commissioner Doerner also recommended this issue be addressed by the <br />citizens on referendum. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hufford stated that she was not opposed to nor necessarily for retaining Animal Control but <br />wanted to make the best business decision for the citizens of the City. She was concerned with getting <br />qualified and experienced employees in Animal Control to replace over forty years of service. She stated <br />that the City needed to revisit the issue, i.e. difference in codes and level of service, to determine whether <br />Animal Control could be administered more effectively at the County or the local level. She asked that the <br />staff survey the other cities in Seminole County to ascertain the level of service being received from the <br />County. She also asked that the issue be delayed until the arrival of the new City Manager. Commissioner <br />Hufford also recommended this issue be addressed by the citizens as a referendum issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Goff discussed the hiring status of the Animal Control positions, that he was opposed to the open end <br />application process but was satisfied that the staff and new City Manager would recruit the most highly <br />trained for the job. He also stated that in his experience with the citizens ofthe City of Casselberry, Animal <br />Control was one of the services that they would not do without. Mayor Goff recommended this issue be put <br />to referendum because it would give the citizens a chance to stand up and be counted and he believed that <br />they would support it even at twice the cost. Mayor Goff recommended Option I. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Moved by Commissioner Linda Hart to approve Option I, fill the vacant <br />positions and resume full Animal Control Services, issne to be readdressed <br />when the new City Manager comes aboard. The motion was seconded by <br />Commissioner Kathy L. Cook and carried on a 3 - 2 vote. Commissioners <br />Doerner and Hufford dissenting. <br /> <br />Deputy Chief Ruf will provide the Commission with documentation outlining the differences between <br />services provided by Seminole County does as opposed to services provided by Casselberry Animal Control. <br /> <br />C. Resolution 05-1621 - Engineering Construction Permit Fees <br /> <br />The City Clerk read Resolution 05-1621 by title as follows: <br /> <br />"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CASSELBERRY, FLORIDA, REVISING THE <br />FEE SCHEDULE FOR PERMITS FOR ROADWAY AND UTILITY <br />