Kicking the Can down the Road - City of Lake Worth and Sunset Drive Holdings, land speculators

Comment Up
**The most important blog of today**
Under New Business D--Tolling agreement

A tolling agreement is an agreement to waive a right to claim that litigation should be dismissed due to the expiration of a statute of limitations. Its purpose is typically to allow a party additional time to assess and determine the legitimacy and viability of their claims and/or the amount of their damages without the necessity of filing an action. During this period, the parties waive any defense by way of any statute of limitations which would otherwise arise during such period.

Well, why in the hell not. This has been dragging on since 2005.  FLUEDRA is used as a stall tactic to the benefit of the property owners with the municipality picking up the tab.  Usually it is used to intimate a city to cave into unreasonable demands by owners who want their way or else threaten a law suit.  Public records will show that four years ago, the city went into a FLUEDRA process, hired a special magistrate because of a threat of a lawsuit by the owners under Bert J. Harris. FLUEDRA has a statute of limitations of 4 years which is up next month on Sunset. FLUEDRA requires the special magistrate to wear two hats: first, as a mediator, and second, as an administrative law judge issuing a recommended order, albeit one that is not binding on the local government.

What the city says:
Tolling Agreement between the City of Lake Worth and Sunset Drive Holdings, LLC
In September, 2009, as a result of various land use approvals and subsequent recessions of those approvals--
Sunset Drive Holdings, LLC (Sunset) initiated a Request for Relief under Florida Statues Sec. 70.51, The initiation of the Request for Relief under this statute results in a mediation procedure which involves the City, Sunset and interested parties who are various residents who have been participants in the process. Recently, there have been some productive discussions and compromises as a result of the mediation, however, there is more work to be done before we can all agree to a solution. to bring before the Commission for approval.

If an agreement ultimately cannot be reached, the statute provides that a hearing before the mediation/special magistrate would take place. The mediator would then make recommendations which would be taken to the commission for approval or denial. Although the statutes imply that the time to file a lawsuit is tolled during the mediation process, it is not completely clear and there is no case law to support the position.

Therefore, in order to avoid the expense to both the property owner to file a lawsuit, and the expense to the City to begin to answer and defend that lawsuit, I am recommending that the City approve the attached tolling agreement.
BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION: This agreement simply provides Sunset with the assurance that in the event that the mediation or recommendation of the mediator are not acceptable to the City or Sunset, then Sunset will not lose their right to file any appropriate litigation at the end of this process. The agreement does however limit the tolled period to sixty (60) days after the City takes an action on either an agreement reached by the parties, or the recommendation of the mediator.

**The facts of the matter:
Unfortunately, the city and the owner can continue to stall. No action has to be taken UNTIL THE CITY TAKES AN ACTION. In the meantime, legal bills keep mounting. FLUEDRA does not permit the special magistrate to make a formal recommendation to the governing body without first issuing findings against the local government. The special magistrate is, therefore, encouraged to find against the local government. Although the findings are not binding, they may embolden a property owner to continue to pursue a weak claim. Thus, rather than resolving matters, this aspect of FLUEDRA instead prolongs disputes and encourages unproductive litigation.

You know what Save Our Neighborhood, Inc. recommends.