The Town Council's decision to change the hours of construction work on Tuesday aimed to ease traffic congestion. However, a prominent land-use attorney's warning led to a quick reversal. This article delves into the details of this controversial situation and its implications.

How a Town Council's Decision Backfired on Construction Projects

Tuesday's Initial Decision

The Town Council unanimously voted on Tuesday to modify the construction work hours during the Palm Beach season. From 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., it was changed to 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. This move was part of their efforts to address traffic congestion. It seemed like a straightforward solution at the time.However, as the days passed, it became clear that this decision had significant consequences. Many active construction projects were already in progress, and their contracts were based on the original work hours. Changing the hours meant disrupting these projects and potentially causing delays and financial losses.

The Warning from the Attorney

Attorney James Crowley, who represents the Royal Poinciana Playhouse construction project and is involved in several other town projects, raised serious concerns. He warned the council that the change would have a disastrous impact on these active construction projects.Crowley pointed out that by changing the hours, they were essentially changing the contracts with the contractors. This would cost time and money, and it could lead to problems and even lawsuits between the contractors and owners. The fact that the change went against the schedules already solidified in the contracts made the situation even more complicated.Beyond the scheduling conflicts, Crowley also noted that the changed hours would cut the working time for contractors by one hour each day. This could have a significant impact on the progress of the projects, especially those with tight timelines.

The Traditional Process Violation

Crowley further emphasized that the council's vote to change the schedule upended the traditional process for changing the town's code of ordinance. Normally, ordinances need to be reviewed at the Ordinance, Rules and Standards Committee or the Planning and Zoning Commission before a town council vote. By bypassing this process, the council was essentially waiving their own code of ordinances.This raised concerns about the legality and procedural correctness of the decision. Town Attorney Joanne O'Connor also pointed out these issues during the Development Review meeting.

The Council's Response

Council members acknowledged the procedural issues and potential legal issues raised by Crowley and O'Connor. They realized that they might have been too hasty in making the decision.Lew Crampton said, "Frankly, we might have been too quick off the mark on this." They decided to defer the change in construction hours to their January meeting. During this time, O'Connor would work with Crowley and others involved in construction to craft an emergency ordinance that would be voted on then.The council voted 4-1, with Ted Cooney voting no, to reopen the discussion on construction work hours and effectively reverse the construction hour modification. They then voted 4-1 along the same lines to defer the discussion to their Jan. 14 meeting.In conclusion, the Town Council's attempt to ease traffic congestion through a change in construction hours led to a complex and controversial situation. The warnings from the attorney and the recognition of procedural issues forced the council to take a step back and reevaluate their decision. This episode highlights the importance of careful consideration and adherence to proper procedures when making significant changes that can have a wide-ranging impact.