06-05-1990 �► ■r
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
PUBLIC HEARING
TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1990
7:00 P.M.
LIBRARY
Councilwoman Gigi Bennington called to order the public hearing
of the Charter Review Committee at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, June 5,
1990, at the Edgewater Public Library.
Members present were City Attorney Jose Alvarez, Councilwoman
Gigi Bennington, Jack Hayman, and Dominick Fazzone. City Manager
Elly Johnson and Mary Martin were excused. Also present were
City Clerk Susan Wadsworth and Lisa Kruckmeyer, secretaries.
Jack Hayman presented a summary of his discussion on the recent
changes to the proposed charter with concerned citizens of
Edgewater on WSBB, on March 21, 1990.
Mr. Fazzone commented that there were a lot of meetings up until
November of last year. On November 27, 1989 there was a special
meeting of the Council and Charter Review Committee to review our
draft. On December 18, 1989, we had our first meeting of the
amended Charter at the Council meeting and they had some comments
then. On January 10, 1990 we had our second meeting of the
Charter at the Council meeting and at that time the public gave
their input. The major issues that were brought up were that
people didn't want anymore than two year terms or the elected
officials. Second, they wanted the elections to be held in
November and not in March. Another one was that they didn't want
staggered terms. They wanted them all elected at one time.
Someone else brought up something about the budget. Those are
all items that were talked about. There was a real lengthy
discussion with Council and the people who were giving input and
at that meeting the Council directed the Charter Review Committee
to refine what was said and go back into effect and that is where
we are today. On January 25, 1990, we had a Charter Review
Committee meeting of the Council's comments and what the citizens
had inputted. On February 15, 1990 we had a meeting where we
talked about night meetings and also public hearings. There
weren't any meetings from February until June and this bothered
me because this is a very serious matter.
Councilwoman Bennington commented that the Charter that was
presented to Council was based on a large percent of input.
Council gave it back and asked us to get a little more input and
that is what we are doing. The issues that need discussion are
compensation, rules and journals, terms of office and time of
election.
Ken Millard, of 238 N. Riverside Drive, commented that the
Committee shouldn't feel bad because they didn't receive more
input because people usually fall asleep as soon as you say
constitution or the state Charter or you talk about our Charter.
■w
It is the most important thing that we have here. It is the
document by which we will actually run this City. It will tie
into our lives and our businesses. The eyes of Edgewater are on
you and those are eagle eyes. We are watching and there has been
more going on than may be appearing on the surface. I think
Dominick has come closer to it than anyone else that has
commented tonight. There is a loose group of people that cover
all the voting precincts and each one of those has contacts with
other groups and we have more time to spend on it than you. We
picked up thoughts and ideas and I am going to try and run them
through. Each of us speaks for ourselves. What has come up over
and over again is this crisis in ethics. We feel that Edgewater
has a crisis in ethics. I am going to use certain names and
things as examples but its only so it will be understood in a
concrete way. We are a City of laws, not of men so therefore the
people who are in office now aren't always going to be in office.
Those on the boards are going to change. Other people will be
coming along after us. What I am saying is a long term thing.
Don't feel badly if 1 happen to use somebody here as an example.
I am sure all of you people are saints and you have the highest
character and you have integrity coming out of your ears. The
highest level of government is revealed to have slipped up on
ethics. The speaker of the house of representatives resigned in
disgrace. The President of the National Security Council runs
the hot seat. The Representatives in Congress are caught with
hands in the honey jar. S : L Executives are arrested for loose
handling of deposited money. Stop manipulative junk bonds fail,
even in education. Use of public owned things for personal gains
and of course they gain points. They use medication that they
shouldn't. Right now as you hear this, the Florida State
Legislature is wrestling with writing a new stricter code of
ethics. The people are fed up. The lawyers and politicians are
counting on every loop hole and law and ethics regulation to
defeat their spirit and intent. In Edgewater's recent history,
we have seen such things as use of a municipally owned vehicle to
drive occupants of personal business, tires from those vehicles
diverted to personal cars, a Councilman slanting an ordinance to
benefit his own property, persons appointed to advisory boards
with prearranged instructions on how to vote, and special
interests contributing large sums to political campaigns for
expected future favors. Some employees have campaigned for or
against Councilmembers and more. Today in today's environment,
additional practices raise serious questions of ethics, even
though some may squeak by the law while violating intent and
spirit. Ethics is the art of doing the right thing even if its
not required by law. Some examples. Husband and wife teams.
Even if both people are saint, it is not appropriate to get the
public impression of undo influence. Obvious post ties and
married persons strain loyalty and objectivity in conducting the
City business. What about one person on two boards? This is a
living document. With about 13,000 population in Edgewater, why
do you need one person to serve on two boards? The impression is
that undo influence is possible. The rule should be one person,
one board appointment. A Councilperson who also serves on an
\we vow
advisory board or committee is redundant. It gives the
impression of undo control by one person. Boards and committees
are needed to provide another point of view and opinion of the
Councilperson. What about when a Councilwoman votes to put her
husband on the Land Development and Regulatory Board, it appears
unethical as it could lead to undo influences both ways. This
applies to any relative of any employee being appointed to a
board or hired by the City. Look at the conflicts on the Charter
Committee as an example. The Chairwoman is also a Councilmember,
thus advising herself on Charter changes. Two members are in the
Building and Engineering Design Trades. Their cases may come to
the City Council for approval by the Land Development and
Regulatory Board. Who sits on the LDRA board? The husband of
the Councilwoman. The same Councilwoman just appointed another
wiener of the Charter Committee to the LDRA board. These present
interlocking interests, all with high potentials for undo
influence and unethical behavior in voting. It's not an
accusation, it's a statement of a possibility. Is it ethical for
a new Council to sweep aside carefully planned and paid for
capital improvement projects and engage in new consultants and
companies to redo the same project previously approved. You
spent taxpayer money without a referendum. Is it just unethical
or illegal? Reckless waste of tax dollars may not be an illegal
act but it violates the publics trust. I am trying to project
these things to the future. No matter where, when, or by whom
the Edgewater Council must stop unethical behavior and undo
influence and conflicts. Another example. When a Council fails
to carry out specific promises to the voters such as implementing
residency requirements for all staff members of the City
government. Are they unethical or uncaring? Another example.
When any member of the Council fails to speak up publicly against
motions or plans of the Council with which he or she strongly
disagrees. Is he having a lapse of ethics? His duty to the
voters is not to go along with the majority but to speak out far
truth, justice, and honesty. Another example. When any member
of Council fails to blow the whistle on any person on the Council
or anywhere in government that he believes is violating the law;
lying, stealing, taking drugs, accepting gifts or money, is he
not also guilty of unethical behavior? Just standing by can be
guilty behavior too. Another area for ethics. Are the business
connections of members of all boards and committees made a part
of the permanent public record? The public must know of possible
conflicts of interest. Honest men would not object to
disclosure. Avoiding the appearance of conflict is a large part
of ethical conduct. What action is needed now? Those are just a
few examples and questions. We need to have a formal, written
policy established and then have a blue ribbon committee on
ethics appointed. This should be a closet judicial panel
virtually independent and authorized to investigate ethics,
conduct hearings, report to the public, and publish guidelines to
help everyone observe ethics and daily work for the City. All
this of course must be placed in a new Charter. To do that
ethically, according to these standards, a new Charter committee
would need to be appointed with no conflicts of interest or
w NMI
unethical influence. Here are thirteen specific things to put in
the Charter that I don't think have been properly addressed. The
entire topic that I just gave to review accordingly. 1. There
shall be a referendum of all registered voters in Edgewater to
approve any bond issue of any kind regardless of whether it is a
general obligation, revenue special district, etc bond. I know
some of those are not required but we could make it stricter
ourselves. 2. No member of the Council or Mayor shall serve for
more than 3 consecutive terms and two year seats. 3. Residency
within the city limits of Edgewater is required for all employees
including City Manager, Police Chief, Fire Chief, and the City
Attorney. One time acceptance may be granted by Council. 4. An
ethics commission is hereby established composed of five members
that shall be appointed by majority vote of entire Council. The
following standards for membership and guidelines are hereby
established. Make those up and stick them in there. 5. Since
the City Council serves the voters, the Council shall at all
meetings permit a system to speak on the subject before the
Council providing the citizen is courteous and brief. A citizen
shall define comments to no more than minutes but any
Councilman may extend. 6. There shall be a public accountant
for all taxpayer money spent by the Council. A reasonable time
and place shall be established where such questions may be
discussed. This may be at a workshop or special meeting or by
full distribution of reports and public notices. 7. Evaluation
standards shall be established for all employees at every level
with criteria to be suitably designed for each position. This
includes City Manager, City Clerk, Department Heads, City
Attorney and outside consultants. 8. No citizen shall serve on
more than one advisory board at one time. Written standards
shall be established by Council to qualify board members and
backgrounds shall be verified. No member of the City Council
shall serve on an advisory board at any time but may sit in on
such board meetings to observe but not to participate or vote.
9. No relatives of any employees shall be employed anywhere
within the City's personnel at any level. No relatives of
Councilman or Mayor shall serve on an advisory board or be
employed by the City. 10. All officers and employees of the
City shall treat every citizen and voter with respect and
courtesy at all times. Violators will be terminated after the
first warning. 11. No City personnel shall engage in political
campaigning during office hours nor contribute to said campaigns
for any Counciiperson. No candidate shall accept any campaign
contributions from out of Edgewater political organizations.
This is undo influence, unethical and unfair. 12. Every
department head and contracted employee shall have a background
check made of education, financial morals and criminal records.
Also shall every candidate for Council or Mayor. The top policy
making bodies of the City must pass the same background checks of
honesty and integrity as department heads. 13. It shall be the
policy of this City that no department heads, employees, or
contract employees shall entertain with gifts of any kind to the
Mayor or Council. Fraternalization off the job is discouraged as
damaging to discipline and normal panels of communication.
w New
Frank Roe, 2732 Juniper Drive, asked what the advantages are of
the extended terms of office. Jack Hayman explained that one of
the disadvantages of the extended term is you don't give the
public the opportunity of throwing them out if they don't do what
you want done in 24 months. He also described some advantages.
He went on to explain that it takes at least three months for
someone to become "qualified" to really perform as a
representative. There are a lot of people that think that two
years is adequate. In summary, there are a lot of disadvantages
and advantages of the extended terms of office. We think there
would be some advantages if you had a person in office longer
than 24 months. Mr. Roe felt that the extended term wouldn't do
any good because there are two people on the Council that have
been in office more than one term that haven't produced anything
for the City. Mr. Hayman explained that the qualifications are
in the draft in the present Charter. We also suggested that you
pay a $25 qualification fee. Mr. Roe felt that a background
investigation should be done to determine whether someone is
qualified as an elected official of the City.
Jake Lodico, 302 N Riverside Drive, stated that he served on the
Council every other two years so that is eight years not in
rotation. He stated that he doesn't understand why they put a
Councilmember in to head the Charter Review Committee because
Councilwoman Bennington knows more about the Charter than anybody
at the meeting and with the help of Mr. Bennington he stated that
she knows twice as much as anybody at the meeting. He also
commented that he feels elections should be in November as is and
two years is enough each term. Mr. Lodico also stated that when
he was a Councilman, they tried staggered terms and it was a
flop. He would like to see everything back the way it was in
November.
Mr. Fazzone commented that he has come to meetings in the past
six years and there is no one that has attended more meetings
than him. He stated that he has not missed one Charter Review
Committee meeting or one Land Development and Regulatory Agency
meeting. Mr. Fazzone also stated that as far as Councilwoman
Bennington's knowledge, of course she knows because she's been
around and if you go to his home, he has as much knowledge as she
does because the counselor gave him stacks of literature to read.
Back in January, after the Council's second reading, the citizens
had inputted to the Council what they didn't like. Some people
thought that the Charter was too complicated for the people of
the City of Edgewater to absorb. He stated that he feels that
the reason the citizens don't want two years for any politician
is because they don't trust people today. Mr. Lodico stated that
if a person is a good politician, that person will be back. Mr.
Fazzone commented that he doesn't represent the Council; he
represents the citizens of Edgewater.
Councilwoman Bennington stated that the reason we don't have
people on boards is because people don't apply to be on boards.
Nov Now
George Ewing, 2923 Royal Palm, asked who made the charts on
staggered terms and why they were put in the order they were.
Mr. Fazzone commented that they were put on the chart in random
order. Mr. Ewing stated that he hopes there are just two year
terms. He also asked how staggered terms are going to be on the
ballot and Councilwoman Bennington stated that Council will have
to do that and all the Committee can do is give the proposal they
have. Mr. Ewing commented that he thinks that Section 3.09b,
Rules and Journals, should stay the way it was and he feels that
it is working out fine. To have a proper democracy in the City
of Edgewater, he feels that citizens should be able to comment at
the beginning and at the end and particularly at the end on
anything that has been discussed that evening. Mr. Ewing stated
that he doesn't agree with Mr. Hayman as far as a Councilman
being more qualified after two years. He also stated that he has
been attending Council meetings for 16 or 17 months and he has
yet to hear one Councilperson initiate anything for the good of
the taxpayers or even any change except the sewer system. Most
of the items that Council takes up at the meetings have been
proposed by the citizens. He feels that if someone is a good
Councilperson he will get re- elected.
John Lee, Needle Palm, asked why one of the requirements for the
Mayor or Council isn't being a full time employee instead of a
part time employee. Councilwoman Bennington commented that at
this time, we have a City Manager form of government that is not
conducive to that and to have a full time Council, you would have
to compensate these people for that. The people wanted a City
Manager, someone there to oversee the administration of the City.
The Council is elected as a legislative body. Our job is to do
the rules. The City Manager enforces the administration and
makes sure the City is run. Mr. Fazzone stated that most cities
throughout the United States have part time Councilpeople. Only
the big cities can afford a full time Council. Councilwoman
Bennington stated that we could go with a full time Mayor but it
would have to be a Charter change and he would basically do the
job the City Manager is doing. So far the people haven't wanted
a "strong Mayor ". It was because of a referendum by the people
that we have a City Manager. Mr. Ewing stated that he feels a
person running for City Council should be asked if they are going
to devote the time necessary to act as a Councilman because
sometimes some of these people don't have the time to do the
proper job on Council.
Frank Roe stated that all that should be handed out are the
changes being made in the Charter instead of having to go through
the Charter and find the changes. He also asked for some idea on
the public input that has been adopted. Councilwoman Bennington
stated that the whole Charter is from public input basically but
with the legal information added.
Don Bennington, 121 Virginia St., stated that he feels citizens
comments should be at the beginning and end of the meeting. He
also stated that he feels the citizens should have the right to
r
pick what they want. Councilwoman Bennington stated that the
citizens that don't care won't vote, but the one's that do care
will get what they want.
Mr. Fazzone commented that many sections of the Charter are
obsolete. When we started this Charter, we got information on
what they call model Charters, Charters from other states.
Councilwoman Bennington stated that the Charter is set up in a
logical order so anyone could look at it and find what they are
looking for.
Mr. Ewing asked how the recommendations made by Mr. Millard are
going to be handled. Councilwoman Bennington explained that
they are going to be given to the City Attorney to see how much
of that can legally be discussed and put into the Charter. After
we get a legal opinion on that, the Committee will look at them
and address them. Mr. Ewing asked City Attorney Jose Alvarez
where the objection would be. Mr. Alvarez stated that off hand
he didn't know but basically the Charter can be more restrictive.
There are areas that can be handled with ordinances but then
again ordinances can be changed so it is a matter of preference
from the citizens and the Council.
Councilwoman Bennington commented on the qualifications for the
Council. She feels that before anyone could be qualified to run,
they should be given a simple ordinance to read and interpret.
If they got it anywhere near what it was supposed to be, that
could be one of the qualifications. You can not do that though.
Mr. Roe suggested that the citizens incorporate in the Charter
that no bonds shall be issued for over $2 million without the
consent of the public.
Mr. Bennington asked if the citizens as voters can take people's
constitutional rights if they are running for office. Couldn't
we put something in the Charter to protect taking someone's
constitutional rights away from them? City Attorney Alvarez
stated constitutional rights are our problems.
Mr. Fazzone commented that last night on the bond issue, the
Council adopted an ordinance. Mr. Fazzone asked City Attorney
Alvarez for an explanation. City Attorney Alvarez stated that
there are basically three types of bonds for indebtedness that a
governmental entity is allowed under state law and under
constitution to approve. Mr. Roe commented that the reason he
wants it in the Charter is because after $2 million you go to the
people. Mr. Hayman stated that Mr. Roe was stating that we
include in the Charter a provision which addresses major fiscal
obligation in the form it must have a mandate for the public form
of a referendum.
Tom Sheridan, 1911 Willow Oak Drive, asked the City Attorney what
the consequences are of the City not being able to meet their
obligation? City Attorney Alvarez stated that he is not a
financial expert. You have to trust that the experts have done
their projections accurately but the growth will occur. It is
based on expectations of growth. It could happen that the whole
economy falls out and there is no more construction. Mr. Roe
asked if that puts their personal property at risk. City
Attorney Alvarez stated no that is why there is no referendum.
This is strictly revenues.
Mr. Millard stated that when the last election procedure was
changed, it was changed because people got petitions out
requesting that the Council change the Charter and the Council
got it all written up legally and we got ballots and we changed
it. This time what is making people nervous, unhappy and
suspicious is because a Charter Committee is recommending a
change in the election procedure. Councilwoman Bennington stated
that the Committee is not recommending a change. They are
recommending giving the voters an option if they want a change.
Mr. Millard stated that the difference is it didn't come from the
people demanding a change.
Mr. Hayman commented that people in Edgewater are very concerned
with the way we go about qualifying candidates for office. If
you feel so strongly about it because of past experiences or
situations that you see occurring or reoccurring, you most
definitely can put it in the Charter.
The Committee went on the talk about Article V Code of Ethics in
the Code of Ordinance book. There was also some discussion an
Section 3.08b, Forfeiture of Office. Mr. Ewing was concerned
with Section 3.08b not stating anything about something happening
previous to election of that official. City Attorney Alvarez
stated that it doesn't have to be because if it is discovered
that individual had prior conviction of a felony, at that time
the individual loses his or her qualification process.
Mr. Fazzone recommended that talking at the beginning and prior
to adjournment should be put in the Charter. Mr. Sheridan
commented he thinks the establishment of a screening committee
should be included in the Charter so that it can not be destroyed
by the whim of a couple of people. I think it would be to the
advantage of the City to get good reliable competent people to
serve on our boards and submit recommendations to Council. I
think a Screening Committee is essential to the welfare of this
governmental City. The City Engineer was hired by a committee
established by the City Manager. By an unbiased board, these
people come in and they are screened and their qualifications are
checked. The City Manager should hire employees and a Screening
Committee should hire department heads because they are a vital
part of the City government. City Attorney Alvarez explained
that because we have a City Manager form of government, it is the
City Manager who hires and fires department heads. Councilwoman
Bennington stated that we had an ordinance that stated department
heads are not hired or fired without the consent of the Council.
Mr. Sheridan stated that what is he suggesting is not that the
Screening Committee would have the authority to hire or fire.
Their only purpose would be to check the resume, have the
interviews, and do background checks on people and submit their
recommendations to the Council for approval. Mr. Bennington
stated the first time he was ever put on a board, he didn't even
know he was being considered. The Council that appointed the
Screening Committee ignored half of the recommendations. Not one
single question asked had anything to do with the Planning and
Zoning Board or the LDRA or his qualifications. Mr. Hayman
stated that what he sees them getting into is the value of
helping out the City Manager and the Council. He also suggested
looking at the procedures of the Screening Committee. He stated
that he had no problem with including in the recommendation to
the Council the provision for establishing a Screening Committee
and going in there with some verbiage that would identify what
their role would be and further on establish them in the role of
helping the Council and the City Manager in the screening and
selection process.
City Attorney Alvarez stated that Section 3.09b would read, "The
Council shall determine its own rules and order of business
except that the agenda shall include "citizens comments" at the
beginning and directly prior to adjournment." He also stated
that Section 4.05 would state not withstanding the provisions of
Section 3.07b, "There shall be a Screening Committee consistent
of five members each appointed by a member of the City Council
whose primary duty will be to interview applicants for City
boards and make recommendations accordingly to the Council and
the City Manager respectably." In Section 13 -71, add after
Florida Statutes "and any subsequent amendment hereto."
Mr. Ewing asked who is in charge in the City Manager's absence
and Councilwoman Bennington stated that someone is appointed. It
is usually the City Clerk or Chief of Police but it all depends
on who is going to be there. City Attorney Alvarez stated that
the City Manager by letter files with the Council who designates
a qualified City administrative officer to take charge in the
City Manager's absence.
There being no further business to discuss, Dominick Fazzone
moved to adjourn the meeting and Councilwoman Bennington seconded
the motion. The Committee adjourned at approximately 9:25 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Kruckmeyer