Loading...
Pension_11-17-2020MinSMBOARD OF TRUSTEES City of Longwood Police Officers and Firefighters Pension and Trust Fund Longwood City Commission Chambers 175 West Warren Avenue Longwood, Florida SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2020 6:00 P.M. Present: Robert Redditt, Chair Bruce Kubec, Vice -Chair Kevin Little, Secretary Chris Eichler, Member Cole Copertino, Member (Via Zoom) Pedro Herrera, Board Attorney Michelle Longo, City Clerk 1. Call to Order. Chair Redditt called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Informal Hearing Joshua lamaio Disability Mr. Herrera acknowledged Mr. Joshua lamaio, the applicant and Mr. James Spears, his attorney who were attending the meeting via Zoom. Ms. Longo called the roll of the Board Trustees. All were present with Member Copertino attending via Zoom. Mr. Herrera explained how the hearing would be conducted. He stated the reason he asked if the full Board was present is that the applicant is entitled to a full Board for his hearing. Since Member Copertino is attending via Zoom and not physically present in the room, he asked the Board to declare or acknowledge there are extenuating circumstances that are preventing him from participating in the meeting, to allow his vote to count formally. He stated under the Sunshine Law and guiding Attorney General Opinions, absent Trustees who are not physically present, are permitted to participate in the discussion of the meeting, but their votes cannot be formally counted unless there are extenuating circumstances. He recommended that such is the case here, and said in light of the State of Emergency in Florida which is still in effect pursuant to the Governor's Executive Orders, the global pandemic, and the increasing numbers of transmissions, I would suggest the Board acknowledge the extenuating circumstances and allow for Member Copertino's vote to be officially recorded as part of today's proceedings. Member Eichler moved to allow Member Copertino's vote to be recorded Pension 11-17-2020/1 due to the extenuating circumstances and in light of the State of Emergency in Florida, which is still in effect pursuant to the Governor's Executive Orders, the global pandemic, and the increasing numbers of transmissions. Seconded by Secretary Little and carried by a unanimous voice vote. Mr. Herrera said this is one of the most challenging tasks that Trustees are charged with, in your administration of the Pension Plan. Unfortunately, you have a colleague and friend who has applied to the Board and effectively advised his career is over not by choice but rather by circumstance. There is an inherent empathy, sympathy, and personal feelings attached to these kinds of situations. I would encourage each of you to try as much as possible to compartmentalize these kinds of feelings, put your fiduciary hat on, and focus on the record before you and the testimony you are going to hear today to arrive at your ultimate decision. He said at the end of today's hearing, the Board would have one of three motions; Grant the line of duty disability benefits application; Deny the line of duty disability application; Or Table the matter. The Board can choose to table the matter for many reasons not limited to needing more information, in which case we would try to get that, or more time is needed to deliberate. If the Board were to deny the benefits application, the member has an opportunity to appeal that decision at which point the Board would reconvene for a formal administrative hearing. He stated, today's meeting is an informal disability hearing. It is not any less meaningful, impactful, or final of a decision. It is used to distinguish between a formal administration hearing, which is very similar to a trial setting. There is a court reporter present at this meeting; there would be one present for the formal administrative hearing. He said he recommends the Board engage in Special Counsel, as the Boards Attorney he would be conflicted from providing or serving as an advocate for why the Board should deny the application or the benefits claim, and also advising the Board of protocol, procedure, and admissibility of evidence. The Board would hire a special counsel. There would likely be depositions taken of the treating physicians. The process starts getting more lengthy and expensive. He noted we try to address the issue first through an informal hearing, which hopefully adds to expediency and efficiency. If unable, the member has the opportunity to appeal that decision at a formal administrative hearing. This would be called a De Novo Review and would start as though nothing had happened before. The Board would have many of the same documents they had at today's proceedings, transcriptions of depositions, and additional medical examinations. If after the formal administrative hearing the Board would elect again to deny the claim for benefits, the member would have one last opportunity to appeal that decision, at which point the appeal would be filed with the circuit court. Essentially, this Board would be removed from the equation to a certain extent. Each side would provide a written brief to the judge and the judge would receive the transcript from the formal administrative hearing as well as all the documents and evidence that were introduced as part of that hearing. The judge could potentially present an oral argument although generally, that is not the way it works out. At the conclusion, the judge would issue a recommended order back to the Board of Trustees. The judge does not have the authority to either grant Pension 11-17-2020/2 or deny the benefit. He stated at that point he recommends following the judge's order. That would be the conclusion of the proceedings. He said for the proceedings today, after he concluded with his remarks, he would turn it over to Mr. Spears and the member to present their case to the Board. Mr. Herrera stated in these kinds of matters, the members bear the burden of proof. They would have to proof by a preponderance of the evidence, by 51%. They would need to prove to the Board by a greater likelihood than not, that the member is totally and permanently disabled from rendering useful and efficient service as a firefighter. He stressed that the burden of proof remains with the member; the documentation received includes a Boards cheat sheet. This is the issues before the Board. He noted they have developed a set of five questions to hopefully guide the Board in its deliberations and discussions. If all of the questions have been answered in the affirmative, that would lead the Board to a reasonable motion or allow them to pinpoint, if the motion is to deny, where, and why the denial is being issued. Part of the materials received are issues before the Trustees. The questions on the cheat sheet should satisfy all of the requirements of your local ordinances as well as the State Statute Chapter 175. It meets all of the eligibility requirements and provides a clear record for an appeal, the Board, and the public. The questions are: 1. Has the member suffered an illness or injury? 2. Was the illness or injury caused in the line of duty? 3. Does the illness or injury cause the applicant a disability? 4. If there is a disability, is it permanent? Has the applicant reached maximum medical improvement? 5. Is the applicant totally and permanently disabled from rendering useful and efficient service as a firefighter? Mr. Herrera said this is a job -specific qualification. This is distinguishable and different from the social security disability benefit, which is a gainful employment threshold. What this means is that the member is prevented from working as a firefighter/paramedic and would be eligible for the disability benefit under the plan. He explained what the records provided include. He said the same set of questions was provided to the Physician, Dr. Harding. This allows the Board to have the benefit of the Physician's medical opinion. It is the Boards responsibility to weigh the evidence before you to what you believe is most relevant. He noted his job is to provide the Board with the most information possible and a reasonable process. After that process, the Board would have made a reasonable decision, which is a legally defensible or justifiable position. Mr. Spears thanked Mr. Herrera and the Board. He said he has the pleasure of representing Mr. lamaio in this matter and, unfortunately, there have been delays in information getting around to this particular case. He said most of this is incomplete, not only the diagnosis and testing but also the records. That is no fault of anyone's. It is just how this played out, unfortunately. He noted they are still waiting for some information to be provided by the City, specifically requested by a couple of psychiatrists. He thought this would be of vital Pension 11-17-2020/3 importance to the Board. He said this is a list of all of Mr. lamaio's calls that he has referenced during his evaluations with various physicians, but has not been documented in terms of timing and nature, which many of the cardiologists are requesting. Mr. Spears stated they do know that on July 4 of last year, Mr. lamaio began experiencing symptoms that debilitated him. They were considered chest like issues and other symptoms that were causing problems with working. Mr. lamaio was worried and concerned and went to be evaluated. They were looking for everything and could not figure it out until he met with the psychiatrist. This ultimately led to him being diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) earlier this year by Dr. Syed. He said that was for a fit for duty return to work type of physical examination, and he was found not fit to return to work. He has been evaluated by that physician and has been seeing his counselor and a psychiatrist under worker's compensation, Mr. Figueroa. Mr. Spears noted that Mr. Figueroa has not completed his evaluation and needed more information on his records. It was reported that he had been requesting this information from workers compensation and the attorney that they have to work with, just never got it to him. He needs to evaluate Mr. lamaio again once he receives the initial information. Mr. lamaio has also been seen recently by a separate psychiatrist for an independent examination by the name of Dr. Martinez. There is a lot of information out there that has not been completed to date. Mr. Spears stated he feels they would have a much better view of everything that is going on, along with the diagnosis that Mr. lamaio has. Mr. Spears said they have some issues with Dr. Harding's report. They feel there are inaccuracies and things that have been taken down wrong, or misinterpreted and misconstrued. He said they are not sure what diagnosis all of the psychiatrists are currently using and what basis or criteria they are going by. It is still relatively new for a lot of us and for many psychiatrists to be involved legally in these PTSD types of claims. He said they found that they are not all uniform in what criteria they use to make a diagnosis, which is important and something we need to confirm with everyone so we know we are all talking about the same thing. He stated they understand the record is incomplete and just have Dr. Syed and a therapist backing Mr. lamaio up on this. He reported that Mr. lamaio was a good and strong employee for a long time and this is not how he wanted his career to end but unfortunately, this is what has happened. Although we would like the Board to approve his application at this time, we understand if it is not able to because of the information and stuff that is still out there that we just do not have but should have within the next couple of months. Mr. Herrera asked Mr. Spears if he is looking to table this matter until he gets more records. Mr. Spears said if that were something the Board would entertain he thought by the next meeting in February they would have everything needed for the Board to make a decision one way or the other on an informal basis. Pension 11-17-2020/4 Member Copertino asked if a continuance was permissible. Mr. Herrera said the Board could table the matter until we received further information or decide to deny the benefit. He noted, there is an appellant right and when they would reconvene for the formal administrative hearing, presumably the records would be available and could be introduced as part of that hearing. Member Copertino asked if we would require a second independent medical examination based on the introduction of Mr. Spears having more medical opinions that he will be providing. Mr. Herrera said my initial response would likely be yes, if it is additional records from treating physicians that we are waiting on. Those records would be forwarded to Dr. Harding, to expand on his original IME and if his opinion has changed or if something is different in light of the new records he has received and reviewed. He mentioned one of the items was a list of the calls that have been run and describing the incidents. He would recommend forwarding it to Dr. Harding as well as any other additional information that the Board would receive. Member Copertino said the fact that Mr. Spears has alleged there is some sort of delay on behalf of the City in providing records, worried him about making any vote today because he does not know if the processes are completed. Mr. Herrera mentioned the Pension Board is separate and distinct from anything that is going on with the City and Workers Compensation. He noted we might use that information as a resource. Discussion ensued on allowing more time for the member to get additional records they feel are necessary for the Board to review. Member Eichler moved to table the line of duty benefit application. Seconded by Secretary Little. Member Copertino asked to add an amendment to the motion to recommence at the next scheduled meeting in February. Further discussion ensued on having the information and records needed by the next meeting and whether to hold the hearing on the next regular meeting or as a Special Meeting as soon as records are obtained. Ms. Longo asked if Mr. Spears could advise what records he is pending from the City to be sure those documents would be provided. She noted she was unaware of anything that was pending. Mr. Herrera asked Mr. Spears to send him what records he was waiting on from the City and they would follow up. He agreed to forward that information. Pension 11-17-2020/5 Mr. Herrera noted and advised the Board their hearing is a public meeting and while they are typically dealing with confidential information, a member of the public could walk in and ask to see the binder that the Board has. He said there is nothing in the Statute that provides any kind of exemption for these deliberations however, before and after the meeting, these records are confidential and not open for public inspection. If you have any of the materials in hard copy, I would suggest you leave them in the City until the next meeting. Discussion ensued on whether to hold the hearing at a regular meeting or a special meeting. It was mentioned to hold a separate meeting to allow the Board Members to focus on just the application for disability benefits. It was also noted it would be up to Mr. Spears and Mr. lamaio to let the Board know when they were ready. Secretary Little said the member is going to see a new Doctor. He asked if we would have to consider the statements from the new Doctor. Mr. Herrera replied yes. He recommended if those documents and opinions were going to be relied on as part of the presentation and application for benefits, we would want copies and want the Trustees and Dr. Harding to review those records. Any new information would be relevant and should be taken into consideration. Secretary Little asked if Dr. Harding is asked to review additional information, would this be over the maximum amount the Board was allowed to spend on the IME previously set in motion. He also asked if we know where that is at or would we need another motion to increase the examination. Mr. Herrera said he does not know where it is at but if the Board is comfortable with passing a motion authorizing the Chair to approve any additional expenditures to have Dr. Harding review additional medical records, I think that would cover us for any potential costs. Motion to table the line of duty benefit application as amended to recommence at the next scheduled meeting in February carried by a unanimous voice vote. Secretary Little made a motion to allow the Chair to approve an additional $5,000 up to $12,500 for any additional costs on the Independent Medical Examination. Seconded by Member Copertino and carried by a unanimous voice vote. 4. Adjournment. Chair Redditt adjourned the meeting at 6:56 p.m. Minutes approved by the Board of Trustees: 02-03-2021 Pension 11-17-2020/6 Robert Redditt, Chair ATTEST ichelle Longo, di ary Pension 11-17-2020/7 This Page Left Blank Intentionally. Pension 11-17-2020/8