Code Proposal Review

At the Council workshop Monday, September 29, Mayor Molly Young, Vice Mayor Rick Sartory, Patrick Painter, and Jayson French went along with a terrible new code proposal from the Public Works and Utilities Directors. This proposal will have a massive detrimental impact on the village and residents. Councilwoman Laurie Brandon opposed.

We show in the attached review, with detailed references to authoritative sources, the following three points:

1. The proposal is a huge and substantive change to the current code, not a mere streamlining as claimed by proponents of the new code. We will show you in the code—with comparisons between the existing code and the proposed new code—numerous important changes that embody not only changes to the code but also to policy and for which there is no mandate. We will also show you that the proposed code does not clarify the code at all. To the contrary, you will see that although the titles and purposes in the proposed code use terms like "Florida friendly," "bio-swale," and “trees," when you read the proposed code carefully you see that the operative code text does the opposite of what these words suggest. It is not a clarification of code to use words in titles and purpose sections that suggest exactly the opposite of what the code actually does. This is deceptive and obfuscating code drafting—not a clarification or streamlining that makes code easier to read. As we will show, with many other examples, the existing code does not prohibit bio-swales, trees, or shrubs—it encourages them in the right-of-way. Yet we will show you that the proposed code changes this to prohibit them all.

2. The proposed code changes are based on two false assumptions that are inconsistent with modern infrastructure design and best practices. We will show you this with authoritative references. The first false assumption is that trees and shrubs pose a generalized threat to underground utilities. The second false assumption is that swale design should prioritize unimpeded flow to the exclusion of water retention and absorption. The overwhelming wealth of evidence establishes that these two false assumptions result in a dangerous (and out-dated) conception of storm water management that was identified as one of the culprits in the catastrophic flooding of Houston in 2017 during heavy rainfall from Hurricane Harvey. Best practices involve green infrastructure (trees and plants) to increase dramatically the water absorption capability of swales and more generally to promote in-place water infiltration to relieve the storm drain infrastructure from overload during intense rainfall events. Thus the proposed code embodies a dangerous backward step that is inconsistent with modern design and best practices and should be rejected by Council.

3. The existing code is far superior to the proposed new code. If streamlining is the goal (as claimed) and not a massive code change (as the proposed code effects), then all the Council needs to do is to bring the existing Ordinance 26-19 (2019) into the code text so that this policy is easy to find. It was approved in a unanimous Council vote and at the recommendation of the prior Utilities Director in 2019. ("Low-impact design principals such as bio-swales and other creative stormwater management techniques are encouraged." See attached Ordinance at page 4.)

For the reasons set out in the attached review, the Council should reject completely the proposed code. The principles of the proposed code do not comport with modern best practices and also they are incompatible with many other core village priorities and policies.

Three Attachments

Review of Proposed Code

Ordinance 26-19 (2019) (The current law from 2019 with the current policy that the proposed code destroys (along with many other changes): "Low-impact design principals such as bio-swales and other creative stormwater management techniques are encouraged.")

Proposed Code (The proposed code presented to Council 29 September 2025)