Dear Editor: An important event took place at City Hall on April 15th that may go unnoticed, so, I thought it would prove informative to alert the citizens of Cedar Key about the event. Last year, the City Commissioners enacted an ordinance to provide for a hearing officer procedure to resolve disputes between the City and its citizens rather than continuing long, drawn out,and costly court actions. When the ordinance was proposed, it caused a considerable amount of debate pro and con about the merits of providing
for dispute resolution through the use of the hearing officer format. Yesterday, the first two hearings which used the hearing officer format to resolve disputes between the City`s Building Department and two Cedar Key property owners took place. Both cases were resolved in less than two hours each with minimal costs to the taxpayers of Cedar Key. In my opinion, the hearing officer format for dispute resolution worked perfectly. The first hearing dealt with a dispute between the City and Cedar Key resident, Tom Duggan concerning Mr. Duggan`s golf cart rental business and Mr. Duggan`s use of the common area of the condominium property of which Mr. Duggan is one of six owners. The City had issued Mr. Duggan a citation for not obtaining a development permit for what the City`s Building official felt was an illegal expansion of Mr. Duggan`s business. Robert Niffenegger, the City`s Building Administrator testified that he had issued Mr. Duggan a citation because Mr. Niffenegger had received several complaints from Cedar Key citizens who felt that Mr. Duggan had expanded his golf cart rental business onto the City`s right-of-way. Mr. Niffenegger felt that Mr. Duggan had violated the City`s development laws by expanding the scope of his business without obtaining a permit to do so from the City. After testimony from Mr. Niffenegger and cross examination by Mr. Duggan`s attorney, the hearing officer concluded that the City had not proven it`s case against Mr. Duggan, and the hearing officer ruled in favor of Mr. Duggan. The second hearing involved a long running dispute between the City and former City Commissioner, Pat Hibbits, the owner of Pat`s Red Luck. At issue was the status of a storage shed located on Mr. Hibbits` personal residence. The shed had been placed on Mr. Hibbits property in 1999. The City had issued Mr. Hibbits a notice of violation because the shed did not conform to the City`s flood protection ordinance. The City and Mr. Hibbits had wrangled over the issue at numerous court appearances in the Levy County courts at great expense to both the City and Mr. Hibbits. After approximately an hour of testimony from both Mr. Niffenegger and Mr. Hibbits, the hearing officer concluded that Mr. Hibbits was in violation of the City`s land use ordinances. The hearing officer granted Mr. Hibbits thirty days to employ a licensed building contractor and obtain a building permit or remove the shed from the property or properly elevate the shed or attach a portion of it to his mobile home. The hearing officer also granted Mr. Hibbits an additional thirty days to complete the work necessary to bring the placement of the shed into compliance with the City`s flood protection ordinance after he obtained a building permit. If Mr. Hibbits fails to comply with the hearing officer`s order, he faces a fine of $150.00 per day after sixty days. Mr. Hibbits is also responsible for reimbursing the City for the costs of the hearing officer and associated City costs relating to the violation.
It1s my opinion that the hearing officer format worked smoothly. The City was able to resolve two disputes within a matter of hours. The hearing officer handled the hearings professionally, and the taxpayers saved a huge amount of time and money. It was an important moment in the history of
dispute resolution in Cedar Key.
Sincerely, Jeff Dwyer | 