03-06-1992 CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 6, 1992
Chairperson Bennington called the Charter Review Committee to order
at 2:07 pm, in the City Hall conference room.
Roll Call
City Attorney Krista Storey Present
City Manager George McMahon Arrived at 2:10 pm
Gigi Bennington Present
Dominick Fazzone Present
Jack Hayman Present
Mary Martin Present
Also present, Susan Wadsworth, George Ewing, Ken Millard, Norman
Billups,.
Mr. Fazzone gave background of the work and meetings the Charter
Review Committee has done. He explained that the recommendations
the Committee put in the final draft had come from the Citizens.
He felt the draft that has been presented by the City Attorney
disregarded all of the recommendations of the committee.
City Manager McMahon explained it was not the intent to disregard
the work of the Committee. The Council reviewed the document that
was presented by the Committee and they felt it needed to have a
legal and administrative review. He went on to say that it was
not the intent to ignore anything or anyone. The City Council
agreed anything that came to them by citizens input and through the
final review will end up being the document that will be presented
to the voters.
Mrs. Bennington and Mr Fazzone stated it did not appear that way.
Mr. Fazzone stated you could not put things into the document at
the public hearing.
City Manager explained the misunderstanding seems to be that this
was not to go directly to a public hearing. He went on to explain
that he recommend to the Council there be two public meetings for
input prior to the public hearing. These public meeting are to
allow the citizens and committees work to take place so that at
the final public hearing a final draft could be presented. The
City Manager assured the members that this draft ordinance was
never intended to be the final draft.
Mr. Hayman echoed the feelings of Mr. Fazzone in regards to the
way this committee was neglected. He went on to explain his
displeasure with the document. It is no reflection to the City
Attorney's work and not an attack on her. Mr. Hayman gave the
history of the Committee such as listening to input from the
citizens before coming up with a consensus. He went on to explain
the documents that were reviewed and studied and how their final
draft document was complied. He felt the way the charter is now,
it will be defeated. Mr. Hayman went on to say the City Attorney
and the City Manager are still in a learning stage and they need
someone to explain why a lot of the things were put in the charter
the committee presented.
Mrs. Martin also stated she was upset because a lot of the work
and input that was put into the Charter was pulled out. She went
on to say that a lot of what was pulled out was taken from public
comments. There were things pulled out that the City had voted on
in referendums. The Merit Board was one that the City voted on by
referendum; is the reason it was put in the Charter. Living in the
Community was something the city voted on and wanted, that is why
that was included. She stated she felt bad the Council has been
sitting on the Charter. She wished the Council would have had a
meeting with the committee so this could have been explained
before it was given to the City Attorney.
Charter Review Comm.
March 6, 1992
City Manager McMahon explained the input that is gathered here and
in the future meetings will be used to get the end product.
The City Attorney stated the document that was dated February 2nd
are simply the issues that herself and the City Manager were
raising. The Council asked that the document be reviewed. She
stated she was aware there was a history to it. She assured the
committee that she had looked at documents, minutes,etc. This draft
ordinance document represents professional comments, it is simply
an issues paper. The intent of the document was to raise issues to
the City Council and then their decision would be implemented.
She went on to say there are some legal issues regarding some of
the referendum issues that were held. She stated she will not back
away from the legal issues. The community has to set the policy.
Chairperson Bennington felt the document that the City Attorney
presented to the Council was a very good document. Her concerns
were that it was not the document that the City wants. She went on
to explain the history behind the document the committee had
presented.
The City Attorney stated she felt we should go through the
document that the committee presented and the draft ordinance with
her comments. She went on to say that the document that she
prepared was from the one the committee had presented and that it
was not completely changed as is being insinuated. Most of the
changes were language changes not substantive changes.
The document the Council instructed the City Attorney to draft is
Ordinance 92 -0 -5 this will be the working base for the upcoming
meetings. Whatever comes out of this committee meeting today will
be brought back to the Council in another document.
At this time there was a discussion on what document the City
Attorney used as a draft base. It was determined it was the
Charter Committee draft 6- 26 -90.
A recess was called at 2:35pm, so that copies of the Charter
Committee final draft could be copied for the members.
Meeting reconvened at 2:55pm
Article I - from the draft ordinance, the City Attorney stated
there were no changes made.
Section 1.02- Construction- from the draft ordinance the City
Attorney stated the last sentence was deleted. The reason for its
deletion being this is now part of the Home Rules Act. The
Committee had no problem with this change.
Article II Corporate Limits - Chairperson Bennington questioned the
description of Corporate limits. The history of this was discussed
and it was decided the way it is presented in the draft ordinance
would be acceptable.
Article III,
Section 3.01- Composition- This article was discussed and it was
decided the way it was presented in the draft ordinance would be
acceptable with the committee.
Section 3.02- Districts- as it appears in the draft ordinance- The
City Attorney stated this was in the committee draft section 3.03
she felt this need to be set out specifically in a separate
section. The Committee agreed.
2. Charter Review Comm.
March 6, 1992
Section 3.03- Qualification- as it appears in the draft ordinance -
was 3.02 in the committee draft. The City Attorney stated she
had some legal concerns about the residency requirements this was
discussed at length. The committee decided to leave as is for now
and a further study would be done by the legal department.
The City Attorney wanted to make the committee aware of another
issue she needs to take a look at legally is addressing when does
someone have to reside in the area in which they want to run for
office. Her understanding was the person did not need to reside
until after they were elected. They could qualify to run and as
long as they moved in prior to the time they took office. This was
discussed.
The City Attorney stated she has left (b) It was discussed and left
in, she will continue researching this based on the committees
concerns.
Chairperson Bennington asked that the terms of office be held until
later for discussion. (Section 3.04 Elections and terms in draft
ordinance)
Section 3.05 Compensation- as it appears in the draft ordinance
was 3.04- This was discussed and decided it be left as it appears
in the draft ordinance.
Section 3.06 Mayor -as it appears in the draft ordinance. This was
discussed and decided it be left as it appears in the draft
ordinance.
Section 3.07 General Powers and Duties as it appears in the draft
ordinance was 3.06 in charter committee draft. The committee
decided to leave as presented in draft ordinance. Typographic
error; "this" charter not "his."
Section 3.08 Prohibitions as it appears in the draft ordinance was
3.07- The committee decided to leave as presented in draft
ordinance. Chairperson Bennington had a question with paragraph c.
The wording "Shall" she felt it should read "May." This was
discussed and the committee decided this should stay shall.
Section 3.09 Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies
as it appears in the draft ordinance was 3.08 in the charter
committee draft. The Committee decided to take this by sections.
They found no problems with a or b. as it appears in the draft
ordinance, Chairperson Bennington stated she had a problem with c.
This was discussed and the committee would like the wording added
back in to Filling of Vacancies: The City Attorney stated she
moved these section around. The committee decided to go along as
per City Attorney's alternate to subsection c. Filling of
Vacancies- A vacancy on the city council shall be filled in one of
the following ways:
(1) In the case of a vacancy in the office of mayor, the vice
mayor shall serve as mayor for the unexpired term of the mayor and
assume all duties of the mayor. A vacancy in the office of council
member shall then be created and shall be filled as set forth
below. Once the vacancy in the office of council member is filled
a new vice mayor shall be elected by the city council.
(2) In the case of a vacancy in the office of council member less
than six (6) months remain in the unexpired term or until the next
regular city election, the council by a majority vote shall
appoint a successor, who is eligible for the office under Section
3.03 of this charter, to serve until the newly elected council
member takes office.
3. Charter Review Comm.
March 6, 1992
(3) In the case if a vacancy in the office of councilmember, if
more than six (6) months remain in the unexpired term or until the
next regular city election a special election shall be called to
fill such vacancy. The special election shall be scheduled not
sooner than sixty (60) days, nor more than ninety (90) days
following the occurrence of the vacancy and if a primary is
necessary, it shall be held as required by the election laws of the
State of Florida. The person elected to fill the vacancy must be
eligible for the office under Section 3.03 of this charter.
Subsection d. Extraordinary Vacancies- The City Attorney is looking
into if the Governor would appoint interim members. This was
discussed and the committee asked that the City Attorney follow up
on this.
Mr. Billups raised the question of what would happen if the City
went bankrupt. City manager answered it is handled different in
different states. He went on to discuss how some states handle it.
He went on to say that in the State of Florida he does not think it
is spelled out. The City Manager went on to discuss this.
Section 3.10 Judge of Qualifications as it appears in the draft
ordinance- it was 3.02 in the charter committee draft. The
committee accepted as presented in draft ordinance.
Section 3.11 Procedure- as it appears in the draft ordinance (a)
Meetings- This was discussed and the committee decided this was
fine as presented.
(b) Rules and Journal -This was discussed and the committee decided
to put back in what the public wanted the provision that they could
speak at the beginning and end of the meeting. The committee also
agreed to have the Attorney add regular meetings to this section.
There was some discussion among the committee, and Mr. Billups on
the different types of meetings, such as workshop, special meeting,
public meeting, and public hearings.
Committee would like (b) Rules and Journal to read as follows: The
City Council shall determine its owns rules and order of business
except that the agenda shall include "citizens comments" at the
beginning and directly prior to adjournment of regular meetings and
provide for the keeping of a journal of its proceeding. This
journal shall be public record.
(c) Voting- Mr. Millard had a question on the motions. This was
discussed by the committee and it was agreed the City Attorney
should better define emergency.
Section 3.12 Ordinances and Resolutions as it appears in the
ordinance draft was 3.10 in charter review draft.
Article IV Administrations
Section 4.01- Appointment and Qualification of the City Manager -
The City attorney stated she had added majority of the total
membership to the City Council. The committee decided to leave
this as the City Attorney has presented.
Section 4.02- Powers and Duties of the City Manager, in the charter
committee draft it was? Removal of City Manager- The committee
discussed the 12 points and the Mr. Hayman felt they should stay
in. Mr. Millard felt the list of the 12 was more liberal and the
way it was presented by the committee was more of a blanket. This
was discussed further and it was agreed by the committee that the
12 points stay in as presented in the draft ordinance.
Charter Review Comm.
4. March 6, 1992
Mr. Ewing asked about the residence of the City Manager on 4.01.
City Attorney stated this was one of the things the council felt
should be on the ballot. The Committee went on to discuss this and
it was decided to recommend that the City Manager should reside in
the City after probation, to appear in Section 4.01 at the end.
Section 4.03- Creation of Departments -As appears in the draft
ordinance as Acting City Manager. The committee decided to leave
as presented in the draft ordinance.
Mr. Ewing brought up the matter of time response in respect to
emergencies.
Section 4.05 Direction by City Manager- As it appears in the draft
ordinance. The committee decided to be delete this. It was
repetitious.
Section 4.06 City Attorney- as it appears in the draft ordinance.
The City Attorney stated one change was the addition that the city
attorney must be admitted to the practice of law in the State of
Florida. The committee decide to leave as presented in draft
ordinance.
Committee discussed the City Attorney residing in the City. They
discussed the possibility of the City going back to outside legal
in the future. The subject was brought up that the City Attorney
is not a Department head. A discussion took place that the
residency subject should be discussed when negotiating the
contract. The discussion of the department heads living in the city
is a loyalty. Mr. Ewing read the ordinance of October 1988 that
went to the voters this was discussed.
Mr. Hayman brought up the subject of the City Attorney not being
under the City Manager. This was discussed as being a check and
balance. City Attorney added that usually the City Attorney is
appointed by the City Council.
Section 4.07 City Clerk- as it appears in the draft ordinance. The
committee agreed to leave this as it appears in the draft
ordinance.
Section 4.08 Personnel System- City Manager gave his reason for
the change in this section. The committee agreed to leave (a) as
it reads in the draft ordinance.
(b) There was mush discussion on this. Mr. Harry Jones gave his
concerns with the members of the merit board being qualified to he
would like their qualifications checked to be sure they are
qualified to serve on a personnel advisory committee. The
committee felt that at the end of this section it should include a
personnel advisory committee.
There was some discussion on Florida being an at will state.
The Screening Board was discussed and the Committee decided that
this is a Council function they should be the ones to screen the
applicants. The Committee agreed to leave the Screening Board out.
Mr. Ewing commented that some of the Boards are loaded with people
from one area of the City.
Section 4.09 Financial and Purchasing Procedures and Regulations -
as it appears in the draft ordinance. The committee discussed
this along with the Florida statue section in reference to the
section. It was decided to leave this as is.
Section 4.10 Administrative Code was discussed by the committee
members. The committee decided that this should be included in the
charter language will be worked on by Council.
Charter Review Comm.
5. March 6, 1992
Section 4.11 Standard of Conduct was discussed by the committee
members. It was discussed that this be put in. There was
discussion on chapter 112 of Florida Statute which covers this.
Mr. Ewing asked how this was to be presented to Council. City
Attorney stated something in writing will be presented on this
meeting to the Council for their meeting.
Mr. Ewing stated section 73 and 74 of the old Charter has not been
addressed. Mr. Fazzone replied that was obsolete because it is
covered by home rule. City Attorney added that is now covered by
State law.
Article V- Election
Section 5.01 Electors- committee agreed to leave as is in draft
ordinance
Chairperson addressed the qualification 3.03 in the charter
committee draft, 5.03 in the draft ordinance. City Attorney spoke
on the petitions and fees. There was continued discussion on the
petition process.The committee's feeling is that the qualification
as a candidate needs to be set forth in the Charter. Remove the
petition process.
Section 5.04 Code of Election the committee agreed to leave as in
the draft ordinance.
Section 5.05 Regular and Primary Elections as in the charter
committee draft need to be added back in as City Attorney had
rewritten it.
(a) Regular city elections- If only two (2) candidates qualify for
the office of mayor or for the office of council member from any
one district, then candidate receiving the highest number of votes
at the regular city election shall be declared elected.
(b) Primary election- If more than two (2) candidates qualify for
the office of mayor or for the office of council member from any
one district, then there shall be a primary election held at the
time required by the election laws of the State of Florida. If any
candidate in the primary election receives a majority of the votes
cast for that office, such candidate shall be declared elected
without the necessity if running in the regular city elections. If
no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for that office,
the two (2) candidates receiving the highest number if votes at the
primary election shall be declared candidate for that office and
shall run in the regular city election. The candidate receiving
the highest number of votes in the regular election shall be
declared elected, In the case if a tie vote, in the primary
election the candidates shall be determined pursuant to the
election laws of the State of Florida
Article VI Transition Schedule- This was discussed It was decided
that it will stay as is in draft ordinance.
There was discussion about the changing of elections from November
to March.
There was discussion on the terms of office and how they would be
decided in the first election. The committee decided that maybe a
straw ballot could be used for this.
Discussion on when this should go to the voters. The Committee
does not feel it should be any later than May.
Mrs. Martin made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Hayman seconded the
motion.
Adjourn: 5:43 pm
Charter Review Comm.
5. March 6, 1992