Loading...
02-23-1982 o v CITY OF EDGEWATER Charter Review Commission Meeting Minutes February 23, 1982 Vice Chairman Hardin called the meeting to order at 1:12 PM in the conference area of the Community Center. ROLL CALL Members present: Messrs. Dore, Millard, Hardin, Kropp, Mrs. Bennington, Mrs. Mason arrived late~ Also present: Mr. Joseph Mitchell, City Manager, Mr. Clay Henderson, City Attorney, Mrs. Debbie Winks, Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Mr. Dore, seconded by Mr. Millard, and UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED, to approve the minutes of the 2/16/82 meeting as submitted. CHARTER REVIEW Mr. Henderson reviewed the different options concerning the form of government. Most of the small city's charters are the mayor/council/ manager form of government with all powers vested with the council and they decide what powers the mayor shall have. At present all are elected at large; the councilmen must come from their zone but not the mayor; and all are elected every two years. Some cities elect all councilmen and the councilmen elect from among themselves a mayor. It was discussed as to which form of government Edgewater should be. Also discussed was the length of term of office, and the possibility of staggering the terms. The concensus as to form of government was that the council/ manager plan should continue. Mr. Henderson's memo and the present charter were gone through. Some sections are obsolete, some should be changed and condensed and some have become ordinances. The whole charter was reviewed section by sec- tion and Mr. Henderson will have a draft of the sections qiven tentative _ _a2proval for the next meeting's review. The following is a summary of what was' discussed on the present charter. Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4 are obsolete. . Section 5 is valid and left as is. Section 6 is outdated and the boundaries may be changed as provided by law. Section 7, Powers of the City, needs to be written and condensed. Section 7A is now an ordinance. Section 8, first paragraph is OK as is but a decision has to be made on the form of government and term of office. Paragraph 2 can be amended as an ordinance. Paragraph 3 will not state the boundary lines and every ten years after the census the zones are redone so they are equal. Section 9 is a valid provision. Section 9A is OK, but there was some discussion on rewording. Section 10 is valid but property ownership requirements are no longer effective. The second paragraph may include more lengthy aspect of code of ethics. Sections 11, 12 and 13 are valid. section 14 and 15 are OK but a decision has to be made whether it is to be changed. Section 16 is valid. Section 17, the first sentence should be taken out. Section 18 is obsolete. Section 19, Penalty for absence, needs discussion as to what could be done for unexcused absences. Section 20 is OK and has been adopted at referendum. Section 21 is in- effective and needs discussion. Section 22 is now contained in Home Rule Powers Act. Sections 23, 24 and 25 is OK but needs consolidation. Section 38 can be amended as if it were an ordinance. Section 39A is valid and can only be changed by referendum. Sections 40, 41, 42, 42A and 43 have been made ordinances. Sections 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 should be rewritten with basic duties listed as the responsibilities have been changed. It was felt that the City Clerk should report to the City Manager not the Council. Sections 57 through 66 are ordinances. Sections 67, 68, and 69 are State laws, and don't need to be included. Sections 70, 71 and 72 are ordinances. Section 73 is covered by Florida Constitution and 82, 83 and 93 ~ 103 are State Law. Section 104 - 112 can be changed as if they were ordinances. Sections 113, 114 are State law. Sections 115 - 127 can be changed as if they were an ordinance. Sections 128, 129 are obsolete. Sections 135 - 141 are valid to the extent they do not conflict with State law. Section 142 is obsolete. Sections 143 - 147 are standard provisions. *Mrs. Mason was not notified of the change in meeting time. u ~ The Commission discussed whether the mayor should be elected by the people or from one of the five councilmen, by the councilmen. The con- census of the Commission was he should be elected by the councilmen. It was suggested that a public hearing to get input and the feelings of the public. Redistricting was discussed, whether there should be five zones and a councilman run from each district, but elected at large, or have four zones and one councilman run at large. It was suggested that the Commission talk to as many people as they could and get their opinion on these matters. The Charter and the redistricting question could be put before the people on the ballot after Labor Day with the primary. Penalty for not attending Council meetings by Councilmen was discussed. Whether a Councilman can be terminated or what action can be taken when he is absent for a certain number of meetings or a certain length of time. The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 PM. Minutes submitted by: Debbie Winks Charter Review Commission Meeting Minutes February 23,/1982 Page 2 J