05-10-1982
...
u
o
CITY. OF EDGEWATER
Charter Review Commission Public Hearing Minutes
May 10, 1982, 7:00 PM
Chairperson Mason called the Public Hearing to order at 7:00 PM in the Community
Center.
Members present: Messrs. Millard, Dore, Kropp, Rev. Hardin, Mrs. Mason, Mrs.
Bennington. Also present: Mr. Mitchell, City Manager, Mr. Henderson, City
Attorney, Chief Baugh, Mrs. Taylor, Mrs. Winks.
There were approximately 44 people in attendance, plus members of the Press.
Mrs. Mason introduced the Commission members, and stated that the reason for the
public hearing is to get suggestions for improving the Charter. The Commission1s
job was to review the Old Charter, to take out parts that were made obsolete by
the Home Rule Act, to review Charters that were written by other cities after
the Home Rule Act was enacted, and to use the model Charter as a guide to go by.
She stated this was the last opportunity for the public to give input before the
Charter goes to the Council, and that revising the Charter was a non-partisan
and non-political effort, and the Commission would consider all suggestions.
After presentation to the Council there will be another Public Hearing by the
Council, and the referendum vote by all the people on July 13, 1982.
The City Attorney addressed the questions raised by a letter published in the
local newspaper. re the Charter being placed on the ballot in July. The
Commission had no control over the date for the election, and also, he stated,
State law requires absentee ballots. He reviewed a history of the City, and
recalled numerous lawsuits involving the City of Edgewater. The City of
Edgewater has spent countless tens of thousands of dollars defending its
own charter, and that is the most important reason for beginning the process
of adopting a new Charter. The initial concept of most of our Charter is
obsolete. He went over the new Charter and called to their attention the
changes.
Section F was explained in detail. The Charter says that if you want to enact
an ordinance without a public hearing, then that ordinance will expire within
60 days unless it is reenacted through legislative procedures whereby the
people have the right to come forward and express their desires on that
ordinance. Also, another restriction is that the Council must declare what
the emergency is.
Language in Article 4 re the City Manager is from the Model Charter, is all
covered by ordinance, and was recently confirmed by the Circuit Court. Another
important provision explains how a person goes about getting on the ballot. He
explained the options for selecting a Mayor. Option 1 .has five Council zones,
and the Mayor is selected from among themselves. Option 2 is the present
system that we live under, dividing the City into four zones, and the Mayor
would be elected at large. If there is a vacancy in office the people select
a replacement. This was adopted in 1980. and is carried over into both options.
Mr. Henderson closed his presentation at 7:34 PM.
COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR
I've got a question to ask Mr. Henderson. I heard him cite dates from 1951,
53, 55, but he missed 1957. That's the year Florida Shores was annexed to the
City. I wondered why he missed that.
Mrs. Mason: We're asking for input to the Charter itself.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By what Statute did you create this Charter Review Commission?
Mrs. Mason: We were appointed by the City Council, Sir.
By what Statute? By what authority----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i
'->
o
Charter Review Commission Public Hearing Minutes
May 10, 1982, 7:00 PM
-2-
I have a question to ask with regard to Article 4. I support the City Manager
form of government, but I don't particularly like the citizens or the Council
being forced to a fixed term. I would like to see some thought put into para-
graph A, Appointment, and the word "fixed term" scratched and call for a 4/5ths
vote of the Council for hiring and/or firing and removal of the City Manager.
This would take the politics out of having a Manager. I think it would make
th~ Council think a little more seriously. I supported the Administration type
government, but I think a 4/5ths vote would be more beneficial.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have both a question and input. The attachment is a revision of Sec. 5. From
what I see it seems to be a conflict of interest in voting, it does not stress
as the original version does, the holding of office. But perhaps my question
is out of order because, perhaps, that is the clarification 11m asking for,
the phrase, "applicable Federal, State law, or County Charter", does that pro-
hibit, and I quote from the original, "officers or employees of the City shall
not hold any other public office, etc." lid like clarification.
Mrs. Mason: The reason we reworded the entire thing is that we don't want to
limit the pool of brainpower that live in the City that possibly could hold
other jobs with the County government or State government, but it would force
them---they would be held under by having to state previous to their
vote that they do have a conflict of interest.
I understand that. You are not answering my question. The question is, does
this little appendix attached prohibit officers and employees of the City from
other public office?
Mr. Henderson explained that the State law applies restrictions for State
Officials holding other offices within municipalities. The Volusia County
Charter, likewise, has conflict of interest clause which restricts their
employees from serving other municipal offices. When the clause, lother
governmental entity' was placed in the paragraph, the intent was to follow
that pattern. Federal employees no longer have a restriction upon serving in
non-partisan office.
Thank you. Now my input on the thing. No.1, I think we all object to a
situation where a person is in a position of public trust, an employee or
elected official, to directly benefit himself personally. Indirectly, there
is no way to stop it. I am very well aware of what we call informal organization
where people in office, and hold several offices, can influence the outcome of
things in a way that in general most of us would agree would be immoral. So
the input is a recommendation that we retain that portion of Section 5 that
prohibits officers or employees of the City from holding any other public
office. Another thing, the question of voting. The next thing is the effec-
tive running of organizations. There is a simple principle in all organization.
Mrs. Mason: Sir, 11m sorry, I think you are getting off of what we're here
for.
I would like to see, in relation to the City Manager and other City\ employees
that have been deprived of the ability to go over the heads of office heads,
department heads be responsible for the performance of their departments
to the City Manager, and the City Manager should hold those department heads
responsible for the performance of their departments.
.
Charter Rev~ Commission Public HeariQMinutes
ay 10, 1982, 7:00 PM
-3-
COMMENTS (Continued)
The building officials in the City of Edgewater hold important and powerful
positions. I see no provisions in the proposed Charter for the appointment
or hiring of such a person, and if its included, I think his qualifications
should be specified.
If I understand this correctly, our councilmen would be elected in a zone and
not at-large.
Mrs. Mason: At-large, Sir.
O.K. Fine. Also, the Mayor would run on a 4-zone deal; the Mayor would run
at-large also.
Mrs. Mason: Yes, sir.
O.K. Now you've got five people in office, all selected by all the people of
Edgewater. So they get together and they elect one of the five to be their
Mayor.
Mrs. Mason: No, Sir. Not with 4 zones. Only if we make five zones.
So they then elect one of the five to be the Mayor.
Mrs. Mason: They select one of the five to be the Mayor.
Among themselves?
Mrs. Mason: That's right.
He only runs for one year?
Mrs. Mason: He's not running at all. Then he would go back to the council
Everybody is reelected every two years.
I don't approve of that. Anyway, you've got it set. What you're doing in that
circumstance, you are making it so that the new councilmen and the mayor specified
by the Council, they are coming in uneducated as far as running a City. If
you stagger it --
Mrs. Mason: That was voted out by referendum vote. A staggered Council causes
a vote every year, which is costly to the City. I think as time goes by and we
get this thing smoothed out and get people working together instead of fighting,
possibly we will make it by amendment or ordinance to the Charter. In future
years, maybe 4-year terms where there would be election every two years, is a
thing which could pass, but right now election every year can be eliminated by
the way we're doing it. And certainly, some of the members of the council
are conpetent enough that they would be reelected.
What you're talking about as far as cost of operation to have an election each
year, it is not that expensive compared --
Mrs. Mason: The vote is by the people and that is the reason we left it in here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I cannot see where there is any term of office given for the City Manager. It
refers to his tenure. Tenure can be for a term of office or it can be for life.
Is there anything in the Charter that sets a term of office for the City Manager?
Mrs. Mason: There's nothing in the Charter. He's under contract. Also, the
Council can remove him. The contract can be renewed or cancelled. It has been
negotiated for two years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with a former speaker that it should be by 4/5th vote of the Council.
This is an important position in the City.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
.
, .
Charter Rev~ Commission Public Heari~Minutes
May 10, 198?, 7:00 PM
~4-
COMMENTS (Continued)
Whereas your justification for 100 signatures to have a person appear on a
ballot? Can you explain that?
Mrs. Mason: It was explained to you by the City Attorney a few moments ago.
That's approximately 3 percent of the registered voters of Edgewater. That's
what the state law requires now.
Is it mandatory?
Mrs. Mason: No, it's not mandatory. It's a rule we went by to prevent friv-
olous filing at the last minute to split votes, which you know has been done.
If it isn't mandatory, why is it put on here?
On a 4/5ths Council vote, I see nothing wrong with that either.
(Speaker became loud and off the point; Mrs. Mason asked him to sit down.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next speaker wanted to read letter into the records concerning the July 13th
date. Mrs. Mason explained that that date was picked by Katherine Odham.
After some argument the speaker was asked to sit down.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A woman speaker thanked the Commission for their hard work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re. City Manager, under the present Charter, does it say shall, or does it say
may? It was explained by Mr. Henderson that this was legal terminology, saying
that it says "shall". Sec. 9A is a controlling provision for a City Manager
form of government.
What this is saying is that we will and shall forever have a City Manager form
of government. We have provisions in here for removal of a City Manager, but
there's nothing in here that says how long you have before you have to appoint
another one. Does this mean everything comes to a stop and do we get into a
big hassle about how the City is going to be run? The point I was trying to
make is that there is a provision for the removal of the City Manager, but there
is nothing in here that tells me what will happen during interim time when you
are trying to appoint a new manager, does the City come to a stop; how do we
manage the City during that transition time?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next speaker wanted to know if the City Manager serves at the pleasure of
the Council. It was pointed out that the manager shall be responsible to the
Council. The speaker felt he must also serve at the pleasure of the Council,
which "puts teeth" into that provision. If you delete that proviso that insures
the people that the Council will have control of their City Manager -- I would
rather refer back to the old charter.
Mr. Millard suggested the speaker look at paragraph B entitled removal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to me we have a crossoverof duties between your 1egistative branch and
your administrative branch. You take away the veto power of the Mayor. Think
our forefathers set up a government with a set of checks and balances whereby
no group could gain power and this is one of the reasons for a veto. Also,
reo the merit board, I believe people working for the city should come under
the direction of a merit board. Your police chief should come under the merit
board.
Mrs. Mason said the chief is under the merit board.
Then promotion to chief should be under the merit board. Also believe 25 people
signing for someone wanting to become an officer of the city, or councilman,
would be a fair number. Also, there's no duties in here of the council listed.
It was stated that Article III spells out what they can do.
. .
C h art erR e v...:. ~ W Com m i s s ion Pub 1 i c H e a riU" " M i nut e s
UMay 10, 1982, 7: 00 PM
-5-
COMMENTS (Continued)
I believe that the Councilmen should be elected by the district he represents,
otherwise he has no obligation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't have anything personal against the City Manager, but under Sec. 2, item
5, the City Manager can suspend or remove any employee, etc. That is a little
bit rough, perhaps. When you come down here, the police chief and the city
clerk, I notice from an earlier charter they are hired or fired by the Council,
this says that the City Clerk and Chief are hired by City Manager and ratified
by the Council. I feel they are very important positions, and that they
should be hired and discharged by the Council alone, with consulting the Manager.
How did our City Charter become obsolete, especially when it expresses in: the
provision a chance for the City to adopt, readopt or make all its present charter
amendments ordinances.
Mr. Henderson explained the enactment of the Municipal Home Rules act. Stated
that at that time most of the provisions of the old charter were either repealed
or converted into ordinances. Many cities in 1973 and 74 reenacted their old
charters.
Mrs. Mason stated that the new charter would be submitted to the City Council
and they would have their own public hearing, at which time they would hear
further comments.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 PM.
Minutes submitted by:
Joan Taylor