Item P14
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date:
12/20106
Division: County Attorney
Bulk Item: Yes ~
No
Staff Contact /Phone #; Bob Shillinger x3470
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of settlement agreement in Lucy Ladd v. Monroe County,
CA K 06-952.
ITEM BACKGROUND: Ms. Ladd filed suit in September 2006 against Monroe County seeking a
writ of mandamus to compel the issuance of a market rate ROGO allocation and damages for an alleged
temporary taking. In 2004, she had purchased her Big Pine Key property (Bk 3, Lot 14 Pine Channel
Estates; RE 00248160 000000) which had been in the ROGO progress for an affordable housing
allocation since 1995. The lot is similarly situated to the Big Pine 21 which the County had initiated a
Beneficial Use Determination for.
Ms. Ladd was eligible at the time of purchase for an affordable allocation, Now that the allocation is
ready to be issued, she no longer meets the income eligibility, requirements for it. Under the proposed
settlement agreement, Ms. Ladd would assign the affordable housing allocation to Habitat for Humanity
and donate $50,000.00 to that organization to further its efforts to build work force housing. In
exchange, the County would issue her a market rate allocation. Ms. Ladd would pay all impact fees
associated with a market rate allocation. Each side would bear their own costs including attorney's
fees. Ms. Ladd would waive any claim for damages she might have as a result of the delay.
This matter is being added on because the details of the settlement agreement were not completed until
after the agenda deadline. Habitat reports that it has another donor who will match the $50,000
donation ifit is made by the end of2006.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: none,
CONTRACTIAGREEMENT CHANGES: n/a
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval.
TOTAL COST:
none
BUDGETED: nla
COST TO COUNTY:
none
SOURCE OF FUNDS: n/a
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No xx AMOUNTPERMONTH_ Year
nla
APPROVED BY: County Atty _ OMB/Purchasing _ Risk Management _
Suzanne A Hutton, County Attorney
Not Required_
DOCUMENTATION:
Included xxx
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM #
Dee 15 06 02:50p
Greenman!!.Manz
(305)743-6523
p. 1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
LUCY LADD,
Petitioner,
v.
CASE NO. 06-952~CA-K
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
A political subdivision of the
State of Florida,
Respondent.
I
^ REVISED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement entered into this _ day of
2006, by and between Lucy Ladd, Petitioner in the above-regard proceedings and
Monroe County, Florida, a political subdivision ofthe State of Florida, Respondent in the
above and foregoing proceedings, and
WHEREAS, an action for a Writ of Mandamus has been brought by Lucy Ladd,
Petitioner, in the Circuit Court in the Sixteenth Judicial in and for Monroe County,
Florida, in which Monroe County, Florida is named as Respondent, as. captioned above,
and
WHEREAS, The Petitioner is an owner of real property in Big Pine Key, Monroe
County, Florida, and
WHEREAS, The Petitioner is the owner of a legally platted lot in a residential
subdivision, lawfully platted by Respondent, Monroe County, to wit: Lot 14, Block 3,
Pine Channel Estat{~s, Section 2, as is recorded in the Public Records of Monroe County,
Florida at Plat Book 6, page 2, in Big Pine key, FIOlida, and
1
Dee 15 06 02:50p
Greenman&.Manz
(305)743-6523
p.2
WHEREAS, The Petitioner's properties are zoned "Improved Subdivision" by
Respondent Monroe County. The zoning designation t1Improved Subdivision" allows for
the construction, "As of Right" of "detached dwellings of all types" which definition
includes single family homes, pursuant to Section 9.5-242 of the Monroe County Land
Development Regulations, and
WHEREAS, The Petitioner's predecessor in title applied for a permit to build
"detached dwelling" to wit; a single family home, on the subject property in Big Pine
Key, Monroe County., Florida. The application for the 'penuit was in the form prescribed
by the Respondent County. The Petitioner's predecessor in title paid the required fee.
The Petitioner's predecessor in title was advised by the Respondent County that their
building application was in compliance with the requisite permit procedure, and
WHEREAS, upon the receipt of the notification of their compliance with the
building petmit application, the petitioner's predecessor in title then made application
under the Dwelling Unit Allocation System (hereinafter referred to as ROGO) pursuant
to Section 9.5-120 d seq. of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations. In
order to comply with the requirements of the ROGO Act, in addition to having obtained
compliance with the building permit application, the Petitioner is expended substantial
funds, as a condition of obtaining a ROGO, and
WHEREAS, at the time of the filing of the application for the Building Permit,
and the ROGO allocation, the Petitioner's predecessor in title was qualified under the
then applicable Monroe County Code of Ordinances for an affordable housing ROGO
allocation. The Petitioner's predecessor in title's application for a ROGO allocation was
found insufficient tor the years 1995, 1996, and 1997. In 1997, a member of the
2
Dee 15 06 02:51p
Greenman8.Manz
(305)743-6523
p.3
Respondent County stMf advised the Petitioner's predecessor in title if the application for
a ROGD allocation were amended to request a deed restricted affordable home that
amendment would insure the issuance of the ROGO allocation, and accelerate and
expedite the processing necessary for the issuance of the pennit to build a single-family
home, and
WHEREAS, a.cting in reliance on the Respondent County's employee's advice,
the Petitioner's predecessor in title amended their application to request a construction of
an affordable home, which, at that time, the Petitioner's predecessor in title was eligible
to receive, and
WHEREAS, as a direct result of the Petitioner's predecessor in title's
amendment to its building application for an affordable home, the RaGa allocation was
approved and issued by the Respondent County and Petitioner's predecessor was issued a
ROGO Allocation for the construction of a single family affordable home on the subject
property. Pursuant to Section 9.5~122(c)(3), of the Land Development Regulations, the
Petitioner's predecessor in title received notification of their successful completion and
entitlement to an ROGO Allocation Award. The Petitioner's predecessor in title
requested the issuance, and delivery, of a building permit for their single family homes,
and
WHEREAS, the pennit issued was given the number 95-1-743 by the Respondent
County but was not issued, and
WHEREAS: in March of 2002, the Respondent County initiated Beneficial Right
proceedings for properties similarly situated to that owned by the Petitioner, pursuant to
Section 9.2-171 of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations; and
3
Dee 15 06 02:51p
Greenman8.Manz
(305)743-6523
p.4
WHEREAS, thereafter, A Beneficial Use hearing was held which resulted in a
Proposed Beneficial Use Determination issued by Special Master J, Jefferson Overby on
28 May, 2002, and
WHEREAS, thereafter, on 19 June, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners
for Respondent Monroe County unanimously passed Resolution No. 263-2002 approving
the Proposed Beneficial Use Determination issued by Special Master J. Jefferson Overby,
and
WHEREAS, the parties after due consideratio~ have agreed to resolve all issues
between them as memorialized in this Settlement Agreement,
NOW THEREFORE, it is AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The recitations named above are incorporated herein as if fully set forth
and to which the accuracy thereofthe parties hereby agree.
2. Petitioner will transfer her affordable housing permit, Numbered 95-1-743
to the Florida Keys Chapter of Habitat for Humanity. The County deems
Pennit Number 95-1-743 to be a viable permit suspended only due to
administrative action and for which a new period for the commencement
of construction will be detennined upon tendering to Habitat for Humanity
the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000).
3. Petitioner will donate to the Florida Keys Chapter of Habitat for Humanity
the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) upon the issuance of the
market permit to the Ladds to assist in the construction of tbe home using
the above-reference affordable housing permit.
4
Dee 15 06 02:51p
GreenmanB.Manz
(3051743-6523
p.5
4. Monroe County will issue a market rate building permit for Lot 14, Bock
3, Pine'Channel Estates, Section 2, Monroe County, FLorida, to Petitioner
within ninety (90) days of the date of the approval of this Agreement by
the Court. If a market rate ROGO allocation is needed for this issuance, it
will be tendered fi."om the next available quarterly allocation for Big Pine
Key.
5. Petitioner will pay all permitting and impact fees required for the issuance
of this market rate building permit.
6. Petitioner will be required to submit plans for approval for the issuance of
the market rate building permit to the Planning Department, which plans
will be required to be acceptable and otherwise in compliance with
standard approvals by the Planning and Building Departments.
7. Each party will bear its own attorney's fees.
8. By execution of this Settlement Agreement Petitioner acknowledges this
is in full satisfaction of all claims which Petitioner makes against the
Respondent and releases Respondent from any claim alleged in her
petition other than for the relief and pIivileges which are set forth in this
Settle:ment Agreement.
WITNESS all the parties appear and set their hands and seal this the day and year
first above written.
PETrrrONER
M
Jl~ }~J
5
Dee 15 06 02:52p
Greenman&Manz
Lucy Ladd
Read and approved by:
ra !in D. Greenman, Esq.
Attorney for Petitioner
Danny L. Kolhage
County Clerk
By:
Deputy Clerk
Approved for foml:
Robert B. Shillinger, FBN: 058262
Chief Assistant County Attorney
Attomey for Respondent
l305l743-6523
p.6
Witness
M 8P1'J \ f: S'TlP1tN \ Of S
Printed Name of Witness
For Respondent Monroe County
Mario Di Genarro, Mayor
6