No Bull, No Fluff, No Smudges
Your news source for
Flagler, Florida and Beyond

Palm Coast Cancels Special Meeting as Conflict With Elections Supervisor Again Flares

| March 24, 2014

They have their enigma, we have ours. (© AFP and FlaglerLive)

They have their enigma, we have ours. (© AFP and FlaglerLive)

For the last few weeks the world has been captivated, not quite gladly, by the enigma that is Vladimir Putin. For the last few months, Palm Coast and its 2014 elections have been held captive by the enigma that is Kimberle Weeks.

Click On:


What appeared two weeks ago as a thaw between the Flagler County Supervisor of Elections and the city government may have been an illusion. Mayor Jon Netts had called a special meeting of the city council for Monday afternoon to discuss terms between the city and Weeks on the way Weeks will run the city’s  primary and general elections this year. Two council seats are up.

But today, the city cancelled the meeting after Weeks sent an email to local media—but not to city officials—lambasting the city for setting the special meeting.

“No other city in the county discusses and negotiates their Interlocal Agreement with the Supervisor of Elections in a Workshop, and I will not entertain the practice of the City of Palm Coast doing so to allow the city [to] manipulate the requirements.,” Weeks wrote in her Sunday afternoon email. “The city must cooperate by being team players and fulfill what is required of them in order for the elections to be a success.  The mayor was also reminded that the practice established is the very practice that the other municipalities follow and have followed, and there will be no exception for the City of Palm Coast.”

It was a puzzling email, suggesting that an interlocal agreement is, in fact, a one-way edict issued by the supervisor and commanding the city’s ratification, without amendments or discussion. But that’s not how interlocal agreements are reached. By definition, such agreements entail agreement to the terms therein from both sides. Both sides have free rein to add, delete or propose wording on the way to an agreement both sides can then sign off on.

There is no question that state law and the supervisor’s own procedures dictate how most of the municipal election may be conducted, and Palm Coast is not contesting many such terms. But it would be unusual for a city to sign off on an agreement without its own input, particularly given the nature of the proposed agreement Weeks submitted on March 17—an agreement that appears to make certain demands that exceed the supervisor’s authority, and infringe on Palm Coast’s.

The supervisor, for example, may request, but not demand, that the city place election information on the city’s website, in the city’s newsletter and in city utility billings—something the city would, under normal circumstances, likely and happily do, but not under a mandate to do so. The supervisor also demands that her office “shall be permitted, without cost, to immediately use any city owned or city managed facility that the supervisor deems to be adequate” if a polling location not managed by the city suddenly turns out to be unavailable. That’s the sort of open-ended demand that the city would have a difficult time approving, as it would expose city properties to potentially vastly disruptive changes at the supervisor’s whims.

The agreement also makes hectoring statements that appear out of place in such a document (“the city understands voters in the city will not receive preferential treatment, and will be treated the same as other voters throughout the county”). And it states that if the city were to make changes, Weeks reserves the right to run those changes by her attorneys—and bill the city for attorneys’ costs. That, too, is an unusually hostile maneuver between local government agencies, especially in this case.

Monday afternoon, the city issued a statement by way of its chief spokesperson, Cindi Lane, expressing dismay at the supervisor’s latest moves.

“The city has requested the supervisor to meet with the city clerk and city attorney several times to work out details of agreement, but she has declined,” the statement read. “The city then received the SOE’s proposed Interlocal Agreement at 2 p.m. March 17, and there simply wasn’t enough time for the City Council and city administration to read it, the city attorney to review it, and allow council members to ask questions and receive answers in time for the council meeting that began 9 a.m. March 18. In addition, the Interlocal Agreement was not on Council’s agenda for that meeting. The SOE was in attendance, and she could have addressed the City Council at the meeting if she’d wanted to do so.


“The City Council had hoped to discuss the Interlocal Agreement with the SOE at a public meeting. The Special Meeting was called for March 25 to give Council Members that opportunity and to meet the SOE’s deadline and get this behind us once and for all. Given that the Supervisor of Elections is unwilling to meet with the City Council on March 25, the City Council will consider the Interlocal Agreement at its next Business Meeting on April 1.”

But Weeks’s approach strongly suggests that the city has only two choices: to sign off on the agreement without any changes, something the city is not likely to do, or to go its own way to conduct the elections. Asked where the city was leaning regarding those choices, Lane could not answer. The decision, in any case, cannot be reached absent a meeting of the council. Meanwhile, Lane said, the matter is in the hands of the city attorney and the city clerk, who “are taking the lead on this.”

For months, Weeks and the city have tangled over details, wording, timelines and speculation about legal liabilities surrounding the 2011 municipal election and the coming elections in 2014. Weeks has provoked the tangles by raising questions about the way Palm Coast went about changing its election cycles from odd to even years. Palm Coast made minor errors along the way, but fixed them. None of the lawyers who reviewed the issues, including Weeks’s own—the attorney for the state association of supervisors of elections—the city’s, the county’s or the State Division of Elections saw any problems with Palm Coast’s resolution.

Weeks, however, insisted that none of the lawyers had cleared the city because none stated with certainty that the city—or the supervisor—were clear of legal liability. But no lawyer ever does: lawyers, like doctors, speak in terms of likelihood, and the likelihood that Palm Coast or the supervisor faced liabilities was reduced to insignificance. Still, Weeks was not satisfied.

But after receiving a long letter from the association attorney explaining that Palm Coast was in the clear, she agreed to draft an agreement—technically called an interlocal agreement, which entails the joint stipulations and endorsements of all parties to the agreement—setting out her willingness to conduct the 2014 elections for the city. Absent that agreement, the city would have been faced with the responsibility to run its own municipal elections.

And Palm Coast voters would have faced a very confusing situation at voting precincts: two parallel elections, one run by the city for its offices, and another run by the supervisor for county, state and federal offices. It would have damaged turn-out in an off-year election when turnout is already low, in a city where turn-out has been falling significantly over the past half dozen years.

Palm Coast voters may yet face just such a scenario.

Following are three unedited documents: the March 19 email from Palm Coast Mayor Jon Netts to Supervisor of Elections Kimberle Weeks; Weeks’s March 20 answer to Netts; and Weeks’s statement to media organizations, issued the afternoon March 23. Weeks’s proposed interlocal agreement appears below.

Mayor Jon Netts’s March 19 Email to Weeks

Good afternoon Ms. Weeks

I’d like to invite you to join with City Council at a special City Council business meeting scheduled for Tuesday, March 25 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center.

With time running short, I’d like to be sure that all details are in place regarding the conduct of the 2014 City elections. This meeting will give us an opportunity to discuss an inter-local agreement between your office and the City of Palm Coast.

In order to insure that City Council members have adequate notice, please let me know if you are able to attend by noon on Thursday, March 20.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Jon Netts

SEO Weeks’s March 20 Answer to Netts

Jon,
I would like to maintain consistency with how other Interlocal Agreements for election purposes have been handled in years past with the city of Palm Coast and the other municipalities in the county. The 2014 election Interlocal Agreement was presented to the City of Palm Coast in the same manner as it had been presented to the City of Palm Coast for past elections, and in the same manner it has presented to the other municipalities in the county. The Interlocal Agreement is in black and white, and believed to be very simplistic and easy to read and understand.

I issued the Interlocal Agreement to you and all the council members at the same time on the afternoon of March 17, 2014. It was possible for the Interlocal Agreement to have been reviewed by those it was sent to prior to the next scheduled city council meeting of March 18, 2014; in fact most persons provided me with a “read receipt” right away after the email was sent containing the Interlocal Agreement confirming they had opened the email I sent them. Because this email containing your Interlocal Agreement was sent well in advance of your last council meeting that took place on March 18th,, any questions could have been presented to me at that time as I personally attended the March 18th council meeting and made myself available. Unfortunately the topic of your city elections was never brought up by you or any council member, city manager or Mr. Reishcmann at the March 18th council meeting, and surely you all were mindful of it with having just receiving the email that contained the Interlocal Agreement, and seeing my presence. However, it was interesting that time was made at the end of the March 18th council meeting for the council to review graphics and hear of flooding on Bulldog Drive.

Kimberle B. Weeks

Weeks’s March 23 Statement to Media (Not Sent to City Officials)

MANIPULATION AND MICROMANAGEMENT BY THE CITY IS NOT NECESSARY

The City of Palm Coast has advertised to the media and on their website site that a special workshop is scheduled for March 25, 2014 at 1 pm for the council to discuss and negotiate the 2014 city elections Interlocal Agreement with the Supervisor of Elections. Such advertising has been done despite the fact that I, the Supervisor of Elections responded to the Mayor’s March 19th request for the special workshop on March 20th informing him that I will maintain consistency when entering into election related Interlocal Agreements with the city, and will continue to do business with the city of Palm Coast in the same fashion as business has been conducted with the city for past elections. No other city in the county discusses and negotiates their Interlocal Agreement with the Supervisor of Elections in a Workshop, and I will not entertain the practice of the City of Palm Coast doing so to allow the city manipulate the requirements. The city must cooperate by being team players and fulfill what is required of them in order for the elections to be a success. The mayor was also reminded that the practice established is the very practice that the other municipalities follow and have followed, and there will be no exception for the City of Palm Coast.
· The Interlocal Agreement was presented to the Mayor, City Council members, City Clerk Virginia Smith and City manager Jim Landon on the afternoon of March 17, 2014.

· Soon after the Interlocal Agreement was emailed, “read receipts” were received confirming the email went through successfully.

· The Interlocal Agreement is in black and white, and is very clear and simplistic and believed to be very easy to understand. It included language to protect the process of conducing “county” elections for all citizens of Flagler County. The city no longer has authority to decide if they want early voting or for how long, or if they want all polling locations open in the city, or just six as they had done in 2011. County-wide elections, as are scheduled in 2014, and I will make decisions as to what will best serve all voters throughout the county. The city must realize and understand the elections in 2014, are not just about the city, and it isn’t required that the city’s ballot items be placed on the county ballot; regardless of what they put on a ballot in 2011 to change their election cycle, or whatever their charter language reads. The city will not be permitted to manipulate and control county-wide elections.

· I attended the City Council meeting on March 18, 2014, and my presence was observed by the city mayor, city councilmen, city manager and city attorney. My presence allowed for the city elected officials to bring up the topic of elections, yet the topic of elections did not take place during this meeting, therefore it did not appear there were any questions regarding the Interlocal Agreement that was previously issued to mayor and councilmen. The mayor and city council did however extend themselves to view pictures of flooding on Bulldog Drive at the end of their meeting.

· Entering into an Election Interlocal Agreement is not a new experience for the city.

· The City has no experience in conducting elections, and is not in a position to negotiate something they have no experience doing or that they have limited knowledge about. I am responsible for carrying out elections, and I must put into place an Interlocal Agreement that would allow me to fulfill my duties and responsibilities successfully without being micromanaged and manipulated.

· Election procedures have already been established, and Florida Statutes, Chapter 97-106 must be followed leaving no need for negotiating.

· Following the 2011 city elections the city had difficulty meeting the requirements of Section 10 (General Provisions) of their city charter, and modifying the language within their city charter (Section 8) relating to elections to make the charter language consistent with current practices and procedures as to how countywide elections are conducted, that’s why in late January 2014 they were adopting ordinances and making them retroactive to 2011. The language within their charter should be clear and when the public views their charter they should have confidence that the charter is indeed being followed. The city must realize that the elections that are held in August 26th and November 4th 2014 they are not city specific, they are county elections, and the city shall not be permitted to micromanage, manipulate the process, or insert outside interference.

· As Supervisor of Elections I have experience conducting many successful elections here in Flagler County; including elections for the City of Palm Coast as well as county-wide elections for all the voters of the County. I do not need the City of Palm Coast to negotiate with me as to what I need to do, how I need to do it, or when I need to do it. The city either wants the assistance of the Flagler County Supervisor of Elections Office to carry out their city election, or they don’t, it’s up to them.

· Perhaps the City is uncomfortable with the provisions in the Interlocal Agreement that were put into place to protect myself, my staff, the County and the other jurisdictions that are not city tax payers should a challenge be filed or should additional expenses be incurred by the city due to the city’s ballot items being placed on the ballot extending the ballot cost. However, it was the City who chose not to be cooperative and who refused to take suggested measures to possibly protect the tax payers of the city from costly court challenges by refusing to request the Attorney General Formal Opinion confirming the city met all requirements following the 2011 elections to modify their city charter to know it would be legal for the city to hold elections in 2014, and even numbered years thereafter. The city must accept responsibility for what they did or did not do. If they are indeed confident they met all requirements following the 2011 elections they should have no concerns, and there should be no reservations with the city entering into the Interlocal Agreement I presented to them on March 17, 2014.

· I will be going to Tallahassee on March 24th and will not be attending a workshop in Palm Coast that mayor Netts called on March 19th for March 25 at 1 p.m. I responded to Mayor Jon Netts invitation on March 20th.

· I will continue to provide the same quality service to the citizens of Flagler County when conducting their election in 2014 as I have provided in past elections. I am hopeful the city will become cooperative and will enter into the presented Interlocal Agreement to conduct elections for them in 2014. This will allow the voters to have confidence in their city elections in 2014 being fair and honest, and they can have the convenience of voting for city and county measures at one polling location.

If the city does not cooperate, and does not enter into the proposed Interlocal Agreement I presented to them on March 17th, it may be that the city has other objectives of wanting to conduct their own election so they can create voter confusion, and control the outcome of their city election. Voter panic and confusion has already been created after the media recently reported that voters may have to go to more than one polling location in 2014 in order to vote in the county election and the city election if the city does not include their election on the county ballot.

The City knew as of Thursday, March 20, 2014, that there was not going to be an exception for them to hold a workshop on March 25th at 1 p.m. to negotiate the Interlocal Agreement, and yet they advertised this on their website anyway, which again is another example of the City misleading its citizens and creating confusion by manipulation.

Bottom line is, we are not required to conduct the city election, but we are ready, willing and able to do so. I feel it would be in the best interest to the city officials and the citizens of the city if we conducted their election, and we hope the city will be cooperative and enter into the proposed Interlocal Agreement to conduct the City of Palm Coast elections in 2014 so we can move forward.

Kimberle Weeks-Palm Coast Proposed Agreement on 2014 Elections

Print Friendly

19 Responses for “Palm Coast Cancels Special Meeting as Conflict With Elections Supervisor Again Flares”

  1. Florida Native. says:

    Her arrogance almost supersedes the Palm Coast city commission’s. She needs to go too.

    • Genie says:

      @ Florida Native: Why does she need to go? She works for the State, not the council. She is doing her job. You think she needs to go because she is standing up for herself?

      Lots commenting here not familiar with what is happening here.

  2. Will says:

    Maybe it’s time to convince Governor Scott that this woman is an unstable, erratic, megalomaniac who he should remove from office. At the moment she could be replaced by a wolverine, but perhaps some upstanding intelligent citizen, of either party, might make themselves available to run the office until the next SOE election.

  3. Dennis McDonald says:

    SOE Weeks asked if the City wanted her to conduct the 2014 City election of two council seats 12/5/2013, it took 3 months to get a direct answer, YES or NO ! It was not till the City became aware that they could not piggy back elections at the SOE/County election locations and that they would have to find new sites informing all City Voters by mail of the new locations that the DAHHH light went on.
    This January the Council passed the very first Ordinances of 2014 to modify the charter again ! Why would you try and pass a RETROACTIVE two year late City Ordnance January 2014 for something in 2011 ? LEGAL ? Something smells bad here !
    SOE Weeks is protecting against litigation so she does not get involved in a suit like the one from Linda Thomas or the class action that may grow out of the Judge Craig flushing of Landon’s Traffic Court.
    Remember that on 7/03/2012 Meeker put the motion [ Resolution 12-644] on the floor to add 37 Red Light Cams with Lewis seconding, Netts and McGuire adding to the insult.
    Thanks boys for sending $3,000,000 out of our local economy.
    Consider who Cindi Lane speaks for, and it’s not US !

    Opinions from the New Palm Coast.
    Dennis McDonald

    • Carol Mikola says:

      You ask, Is this “LEGAL?”. The answer is YES according to the county attorney, the city attorney, the Florida State of Elections attorney and the general counsel for the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections who, in his letter to Ms. Weeks, supported his position by referring to a prior opinion from the Florida Attorney General’s office. Why is it so impossible for you and Ms. Weeks to admit that you have been wrong?

      According to you, “something smells bad here!”. It seems that something smells bad everywhere you go in the city or county. Have you even considered that the smell might be coming from your foul rhetoric?

  4. Ralph Belcher says:

    I’ll bet Kimble Medley would not have stirred up such a bluster about this. Maybe she ought to weigh in on this in the court of public opinion.

    Our Current SOE served the county adequately with the previous elections, don’t wreck it now. There’s “something about something” about this. Has our community activists threatened her with an epic lawsuit if she holds the election for the city? Makes you wonder. This is so bizzare.

    Paging Peggy Rae Border… Anybody… Bueller?

  5. 166 says:

    The city scheduled a workshop after the supervisor told them no–if this is not a prime example of their way of doing sneaky business what is? I don’t blame the supervisor for not agreeing to meet publically. A public workshop is not appropriate and Bunnell didn’t promote all this drama for their election the supervisor just held for them. Maybe the city wanted to sell tickets to generate more revenue. This was Netts’ plan to put a bunch of men on stage against a woman. The woman is a constitutional officer, the mayor and city council are not. Show some respect men! She is elected, and doen’t have to bow to the city’s demands.

    The supervisor put things in place to protect us voters and to enhance voter awareness to improve voter turnout. Why is the city opposed to promoting the election? Are they trying to control the outcome? I recall hearing the city wanted to charge the supervisor something like $35,000 in 2011 to advertise their last city election on their website. The city obviously tries their best to keep voters confused and uninformed and they want to control voter tunrout. Everything with the city seems to have a price tag. It wasnt just a few months ago the city wanted to charge the supervisor to have early voting at the community center. Everythng this woman wants to do for us, they give her a hard time. The city should be ashamed. I wonder what tomorrow’s city headline is going to be about. This city is an embarrassment.

    The city should assist and help find alternate polling locations when polling places need to be moved-most of the voters are in Palm Coast and the city has authority to be an asset for the benefit of the voter. This story confirms the city is not about working together to ensure elections are promoted here in this county.

    The supervisor is looking out for us, and the city is being hard to get along with. They obviously want to control the city election, and want to try to trip it up in anyway they can. The city admittedthey made mistakes, they lied and said they didn’t know what the supervisors issues were over the past several months, and now want to play the victim again. The supervisor is right, they dont need to tell her how to do her job. I am thankful the supervisor stands up for us, and doesnt coward down to these bullies.

  6. KMedley says:

    Crimea and the City of Palm Coast… each destined to have their votes invalidated and voices silenced by officials more comfortable with issuing a “one-way edict”.

  7. real people says:

    it may be that the city has other objectives of wanting to conduct their own election so they can create voter confusion, and control the outcome of their city election.
    What else is new? it is not a surprise, it is a common Landon, Reishcmann and Nets Mafia practice.

  8. Brad says:

    Just say “No” to Kimberley Weeks and hold our own elections. Enough is enough. It’s pretty scary when a County gets to a point where it’s SOE will hold elections hostage for her own delusions of “power”. She is way out of line and should be removed.

  9. 166 says:

    Good call Supervisor Weeks. Netts was baiting you into a trap. Don’t put up with any s*** from this city. If this city wasn’t trying to manipulate elections, they would simply sign your agreement and let you do your job. There is nothing in the agreement that provides for a public discussion. What is wrong with voters being made aware of an election so they will vote? The city should be jointly working with you to get as many voters to vote as possible. If this means putting information on their website, in their newsletter, on their door, in their city bills there should be willing. Seems as though when you want things done right, they want to lie and bitch. This scheduled workshop was a trap for you. Keep up the good work!

  10. confidential says:

    [Note: the commenter below, and Weeks, are not correct: the meeting previously scheduled for March 25 was, in fact, a special meeting, not a workshop. Public input would have been included.–FL]

    Weeks is correct. A workshop is one of those meetings were the public is not allowed any input, like “pay and shut up”..such a workshops should not even take place as often as they are called as such, just to prevent us all the taxpayers approval or disapproval. Same with soo many consent agenda aka “swept under the carpet important decisions” without the public attending not even knowing what is all about to be unanimously approved by council and mayor. One of those consent agenda lately was uncover, recovered from under the rag by the Bulldog Drive property attorney regarding the city not owning that road under county and state and having palmcoasters spend millions on its improvement while even suing that owner for years to no avail, just to benefit another lavish access to Town Center.
    Other than wasting our hard earned taxes in all those hours of employees and expensive lawyers fees in useless opposition and attacks on a good serving constitutional official they should abide by the law and use common sense and stop wasting our hard earned taxes…We have many programs and services we lack that could be instead be funded with those $$$.
    What does the council and mayor have to hide from the city residents. Just have the SOE and council discuss this issue in a regular city council meeting were the public can be present and give input and also for the one’s that can’t be present see it on TV. We, by large majority elected our SOE and in spite of that she is being targeted day in and day out by officials that were elected with 5 to 10% of the all votes she’s got and she is targeted just for doing her job and under the law.

  11. Genie says:

    It seems that both sides have now put the validity of the claims here in jeopardy. Shouldn’t this merit an investigation by the State? I don’t think many of us will feel convinced until that happens. Time to call in the State AG and let her do her job. It is the only way to guarantee the integrity of future elections here.

  12. We the people say says:

    The city needs to just enter into the agreement letting the supervisor do the election, and let her do it. She has experience conducting their city elections as well as county elections. The city should provide whatever support they can to enhance voter turnout. Isn’t this a no brainer Palm Coast? What’s your beef, you want to control the election/results?

  13. Ms. Themis says:

    In this corner – the SOE and the Constitution…and in this corner, our Elected Officials! As with some stories, there are no clear good guys. On the one hand there is the SOE, an alleged puppet of the Reagan Assembly and alleged victim of her own alleged self-righteous, inflated egotism, selling us the constitution and way of doing things as only she can allegedly interpret…who by the way, does have a relatively solid history of success at her job. On the other hand there is this alleged posse of elected officials led by an allegedly arrogant manager only interested in allegedly protecting theirs and his collective tenures…, with a relatively solid history of selling us everything they deem best for us (that’s what they’re there for). Stories with no good guys can be interesting, but not when it involves the constitution, a taxpaying public, and a city that is allegedly sinking faster than anyone cares to admit (red light cameras anyone? unemployment? sidewalks to nowhere? crime?). We can only hope that citizens are not again, left holding another alleged bill of goods with this election biz. Hmmm. Sounds like Palm Coast all over again, but our ability to vote is not the same as a road or a building, its a right and requires everybody’s care. Come on SOE – Stop the Grandstanding! Work with the city! City – work with the SOE! Come on officials, uh, well, stop doing whatever you were going to do. Unfortunately unless these two parties can sit down together and be civil, we’ll never know what that was. We need everyone to be a good guy here, otherwise, you can just remove the word “alleged” from wherever it appears in this commentary .

  14. Anonymous says:

    The city of palm coast is never admits wrong doing; even when they spent $5 million dollars on a project on land they don’t even own. The city never before has discussed the interlocal agreement in a public meeting, and they don’t need to try and brow beat this supervisor now. She does a fine job, and they need to let her do her job without trying to intervene. This is a supervisor that was recogonized by the governor to be one of the best in the state. These city officials want it their way or no way and are clueless as to what is going on. This supervisor has been trying to get the city to cooperate for months, and has been given nothing but a hard time. Time to quit acting like bullies and get along.

  15. 166 says:

    we elect a supervisor to conduct elections, so why is the city involved in the supervisors business. The supervisor should be conducting the elections and the city should provide support in anyway possible. This is ridiculous that the city has allowed this matter to go on for the last many months. It seems that no matter what the supervisor asks of the city they refuse to cooperate and play the poor ol me card. Councilmen and mayor wake the hell up.

  16. KMedley says:

    Finally!

    Thanks to the Secretary of State, we have our “Shut Up & Sing” moment. Secretary of State Detzner sent a letter to SOE Weeks and told her:

    “Any issue about the propriety of the city’s actions in changing its election and qualifying dates is solely the City’s concern,” Detzner wrote. “As the Supervisor of Elections when administering a city election, your responsibility is to conduct the election in an accessible, fair and efficient manner.”

  17. 166 says:

    Sounds to me the Secretary better tell the city to cooperate and stop their minipulation games. The secretary stated how municipal elections are to be conducted and that all municipalities who are to be on the primary and general election ballot should receive the same type of interlocal agreement. Since Palm Coast is the only municipality to have an election on the county ballot, they will be the only ones to get such an agreement. Of course the supervisor is required to conduct elections in a fair, east accessible manner. If Weeks didn’t have an agreement in place these same people would walk right over her and that would be the end of her record of good elections. The city now understands the Secretary has concerns, so they better get on board.

Leave a Reply

Read FlaglerLive's Comment Policy | Subscribe to the Comment Feed rss flaglerlive comment feed rss

More stories on FlaglerLive
Loading

ADVERTISEMENTS

support flaglerlive palm coast flagler county news pierre tristam
news service of florida

Subscribe to FlaglerLive

Get immediate notification of new stories.

Advertisement
Log in
| FlaglerLive, P.O. Box 354263, Palm Coast, FL 32135-4263 | 386/586-0257

FlaglerLive.com