Commissioners Tackle Safety at Neighborhood Information Meetings

A recent Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) prompted county commissioners to ask staff to bring options for an ordinance on meetings, specifically on how to handle disruptions.

Commissioner Solis brought the issue forward after receiving a video of a NIM meeting that was held Monday, June 13th at the Paradise Sports Complex. A Neighborhood Information Meeting is required when a developer asks for a rezone. The only parameters for a NIM is that it must be held within a nine-month period before the hearing with the planning commission. NIM’s are for the neighborhood in question to hear the developer’s proposed plans. County staff attends NIM’s so they can record any commitments made by the developer. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director said, “the intent (of a NIM) is to try and promote dialogue, for the neighborhood to let the developer know where their concerns are so the developers can make modifications, improvements, and compatibility issues.” The NIM meeting in question was for the Vanderbilt-Collier Planned Unit Development Rezone (PUDZ) and Small Scale Growth Management Planned Amendment (SSGMPA). A developer is requesting a rezone from Estates to PUD to permit multi-family development, inclusive of housing affordability, on +/- 20 acres. This NIM had been rescheduled so it could be held in a larger facility.

After confirming that the video was scrubbed of foul language, the two-minute clip showed a highly disruptive and uncomfortable scene. From the vantage point of the recording, most of the disruption stemmed from a small group that were screaming insults, expletives and racial slurs towards the developers while banging their feet against the bleacher floors. Another audience member tried to reason with the individuals to allow the presentation to continue and were aggressively told to “back off.”

Commissioner Solis said he wanted to play the clip for a couple reasons: “There seems to be an idea that if a NIM is disrupted that somehow that is going to stop the process. I don’t think that it is fair that we have a process that can be intentionally disrupted like that.” But his main point was an issue of safety. “I am concerned that we don’t have any control. We don’t have any parameters, we don’t even have any requirements that security be provided. I am concerned because what you saw at the end of that video, the protestors and some of the people there that wanted to hear the presentation (were) getting into an altercation.” He goes on to say “my gut feeling is that somebody is going to get hurt. And the future of this seems to be getting worse and there are no parameters about how they are supposed to be conducted.” 

Commissioners all agreed they support a citizen’s ability to exercise their first amendment right and to object to whatever is going on but that this is a public safety issue. “From what I understand, there were guns present at this meeting,” said Solis. 

Commissioner LoCastro points out that “NIM’s are here for the citizens to hear and be heard professionally.” He said, “I am all for free speech, and it doesn’t mean you can’t raise your voice, but the opportunity last night was for the citizens and they threw it away, which was unfortunate.”

Commissioner Taylor commented “I had an opportunity to speak with the attorney that was presenting last night and verbal, direct threats were levied at him but also at our staff. There was a metal counter at the stadium for a reason.”

Commissioner Saunders said “I agree completely that we are living in some interesting times. There is extreme partisanship. There were even screams from the audience about ‘go home liberals’… that has nothing to do with the meeting.” Saunders also said “I don’t want the folks that disrupted that meeting to think that they had a victory. Because that victory would be that the NIM didn’t go forward and therefore there is no project. I think that in this particular case, they had the NIM and the matter should move forward. They shouldn’t be required to have another NIM because people in the audience became disruptive and shut it down. Because if we make that determination that the NIM did not occur because it shut down because of what transpired there, that is going to encourage people to disrupt NIM’s in the future.” Saunders said “I am not suggesting any of us support the project. It’s just that the process has to move forward.”

County Attorney Jeffrey Klatzkow agreed with Saunders, saying that it will require a board motion to further waive the NIM requirement for this particular case. Commissioner Solis made a motion to consider the NIM meeting on June 13th held as conducted and if the applicant wants to move forward to the next process, they could. The motion passed unanimously.

An important component to an ordinance on meetings, NIM or otherwise, involves the Sheriff’s office. Klatzkow said “this is becoming a sheriff’s issue more than anything else. Whatever comes back (from staff), I would like to talk with the sheriff counsel to bring back any ordinance or change the sheriff is willing to support.” He goes on to say “we’ll give you an enforceable ordinance. I just have to make sure that the sheriff, ultimately, is comfortable with it.” 

Solis also believes the meeting parameters should extend beyond NIM meetings to those held at the Commission Chambers. “I believe we will be seeing that kind conduct here during a meeting for the sole purpose of disrupting the process,” he said. “I am all in support of people having the ability to assert their first amendment rights and object to whatever is going on but there is a public safety issue. There’s the issue that government needs to do what we are supposed to do.” He pointed out that Lee County already has an ordinance in place that handles decorum and what their sheriff department will and will not do.

The motion to direct staff to come back to the board with a policy passed unanimously.

The video clip mentioned can be found at the County Website under Meetings and Information Video on Demand, Recent Shows, Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting – June 14, 2022.