03/06/1984
. 1. e1~ " , ~ ~.J I .....4~4.....~ ~..r' ':" ;...~.. ',." .,..' ", '.' ", ..... \' ..' .' ':' '.'.. ,:, .' ~:.+." ," : .
..
" ,
I .}
.. . ,
'r_C.r~ r...~.:;.;{: :~i.., ." ,"",".. '.. >0. . "., ~.' u ..... '." .." ... .~, +", .~. ?'..
CHARTER
REVIEW
COMMITTEE
,II
MINUTES '
~ '. '.
': .
, ,Date
:,
,1 ,Co t'!' ,
.
'. II
.'> .
,,'
, ~. ,
, ,
" .
,
.' . .
, ,
,
(,;"i~~:;"",~: <.<>t~~
: \, ,', ",,' ,', '" ",.' ' " ,,', >", ':', , . ' ,': ,': ' . " , , '"
, , "', '" ", ,': .-.,' ' , 'I " ~ : ~I " r." , " ' , \ ,,",", '
..' ., " .T;....~...:.'._... :,....,.. ~.......'.. ~,..... .... ..... ',.:. ..,~' .: . "', '. " ~ ;' .... ". .'. . \ . . I '
,.
;'
~ .' ~ .,1,'
'j"'-O,',, "
, . ~ "..... .
F '.. ", '.... ',. . ~ "
o
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
March 6, 1984
A meeting of the Charter Review Committee of the City of Clearwater was held
on March 6, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. in the Mayor's Conference Room, City Hall.
Members Present:
William Schwob
Frank Donnell
Jeff Butler
Mary Lou Dobbs
Charles LeCher
Howard Groth
Nancy Pappas
Elaine Cornillaud
, Lee Regulski
',' Helen Theofilis
Members Absent:
'0 Jerry Lancaster
After discussion on attendance of members at charter committee meetings, the
Committee decided that the commissioner appointing the absent member will be
notified when his appointee has missed two consecutive meetings and that if they miss
one more, the committee will suggest that the'member be replaced.
Chairman Schwob asked for any corrections, additions or changes to the minutes
of the preceding meeting. On page 4, paragraph 2, second to last line, regarding
motions and voting for next meeting, change lIsuggested" to "agreed". The minutes
were approved as corrected.
,
A list of the members of the first charter committee and a copy of the ordinance
amending Sect. 2.01(c) of Article n of the Charter, which will be in the next
codification, were distributed.
~
-1-
; ~"P""'l~':""""l':':"'."-I' ''':-. '". " ',"""1<"
t. . ".1 .i .~. ' I ""
.: ';, ,0' '1'.>, .:'." ~ .:f~':""~_~-""_"""'~"f;"I':."~'_,'"" ". ",' "," "'I'~ " '11' .,':"'. ", "'1' ' \ ,.' . ~ "
"
r
'.
')
A discussion of the individual sections of the charter (Sections 1.01 through 2.06)
followed:
Section 1.01 Corporate existence and powers:
It was indicated that the National Municipal League model city charter
recommends including a paragraph on intergovernmental,relations and a clear
statement of the City's authority. After discussion, it was concluded that Sections
1.01(b) and 1.01.(d) include the appropriate language.
A typographical error at top of page 2, second line, was found. Ways of changing
the first full sentence, or striking the "alf before "particular powers", or changing
"powers" to "power" were discussed. It was agreed that this would be an item to be
voted on at the end of the charter review.
There was a discussed on whether it should be mentioned in Sect. 1.01 the form
of government (home rule). It was agreed that it would be brought up for
,,:) consideration.
Section 2.01 City commission; composition; powers:
Section. 2.01(8) Composition, regarding number of commissioners and procedure
of electing them at large. There was a discussion regarding increasing the number of
commissioners and/oi" lengthening their terms to 3 or 4 years; the setting up of a ward
or district system; methods of candidates running for specific seats or against 8
specific candidates; "single shotll voting.
A revision of Section 2.01(8) was suggested regarding election of 4
commissioners from districts and the mayor elected by city at l~ge to possibly
increase the number of voters. Another suggestion regarding having candidates run for
a specific seat on the com mission but not connected with a a specific district 'or waz'd.
It was brought up that some committee members do not oppose the present system.
...:~.A
..
-2-
'~1""'~~oV'-".".,,,:,,,,,,,,,~"'_4
. '~L_._...j.'..I;_"~"".',o......."".... ......"..............._..~___.
, ; ,,., ,.' ..... , ........ ": -1',' ',~ 0.- t. ...
~~~,I'~"" " \.,'....'. """<'::>:"':'~,"",',""'.""...:',,\."; ~"'(',""."""::,,:\,,,'><.':.. ':"',:',',::""\""
. , '." . " - \ ," ...... ' . &:.... ,',,' . ,
, " . . " , ' . . ,1',. 1 ~ \ , 1\-.1' ','. " " " ' , ,',' , , ,
"". . " pC
, ~
.' .
The fact that many people would oppose increasing the number of commissioners
because of the increased spending that would occur was also given consideration.
Another suggestion of having the city divided into 4 geographic districts and having 7
commissioners, 4 from districts and 3 at large was made. There was discussion on how
the city could be divided into districts.
Helen Theofilis made a detailed analysis of some of the points brought up at last
meeting comparing them to the sample charters and a copy was distributed to the
committee.
Section 2.01(b), Powers, was approved as is.
Section 2.01(c), Limitations - Subsection (1) regarding total indebtedness was
discussed. It was noted that the limitations in this section were not in old charter but
were put in present charter. However, it was indicated that there appeared to be no
real problem with this section and that the city has never really been close to hitting
/.:> the 2096.
Subsection (2) regarding purchases in excess of $5,000 made to lowest bidder was
discussed. It was agreed that responsive and responsible should be left in. There was
discussion on the raising the $5,000 amount and the fact that purchases made from
"lowestll bidder was not always best. A suggestion was made regarding increasing the
limit in proportion to the inflation rate over the past 5 years and possibly extending to
the next 5 or 10 years. It was decided to invite Mr. Shoemaker to the next meeting to
make his presentation and to answer any specific questions the committee had
regarding this section.
Subsection (3) (limitations on dredging) is most likely superseded by
environmental concerns.
Subsection (4) -new language to be presented by City Attorney.
,/':A
W
-3-
.
.
.'
0"') It was suggested the the City Attorney might want to obtain a copy of the National
Municipal League Model Municipal Bond Law to review before making presentation.
Regarding this section a 25-year maximum lease term was suggested for consideration.
Section '2.02 Qualifications - The discussion was not at the end of tape side 2
and not at beginning of tape side 3.
Section 2.03 Election and terms - There was a discussion on terms of
commissioners. Most committee members agreed that terms should be increased to
give commissioners more exper~ence with the city's concerns. Regarding the present
2-year system, it was brought up that it keeps current interest in the politics of the
city and commissioners can be elected more than one term. Pros and cons were
discussed concerning limiting the number of terms if terms were raised to 3 or 4 years
in length.
Section 2.04 Compensation and expenses - There was discussion regarding a
:~ suggestion that the commissioners be compensated every year at 1% less than the
incree.se the unions receive. Also a cost of living increase or one based on the
cumulative price index could be considered. Another suggestion was made that the
provision in the present charter not be changed at all.
Section 2.05 Mayor-Commissioner, functions and powers - The Chairman
indicated there may be a grammatical error in the second sentence and that perhaps
an "Sll should be added to the word "requires. II The Legal Department was asked to
check on this. There was a discussion on veto power. It was commented that the veto
power would not work anyway in a weak mayor situation, but only that veto power
would make the com mission meetings smoother and quicker. The state legislature
must give these powers to the city.
~
-4-
'\,"" ,','., ,,: , ',' "',,1....,,,"', ~ :""","""', ,,", "", . ","::"~ ,,', ' . Y':, ',",':<",: ,~"","',",,~
. . \ I ; . . /.' .. . ,
",,' ''':~J~''!~
: \, . "',, ;-f;T:,i"'~~JJ Q:;t.
l~ .~~!#..... u V<l
"
..
: ,
" I'
, ,
, "
. . ,~o "1" ,~ ~::'. . 'j~ :':t'. "",~:))1 t~...... I ~""''''.l\< ~. ..-.:... ~/ r_q"+' P~"_ ~~ .. ~ 'L.,
Q
Section 2.06 Prohibitions - It was decided that provision (a) means that the
commission may not order any appointments or removals but it implies that they may
suggest or recommend to city manager.
Regarding subsection (b) there was a discussion as to how a commissioner could
question a city employee as provided for in the present charter. It was noted that this
needs to be done through the city manager. '
r:')
Regarding subsection (c), after discussion on the one-year provision for ex-
commissioners to hold city positions, it was decided that this was a reasonable time
period.
It was proposed and agreed to that the discussion for the next meeting would be
Section 2.07 through Section 2.10. The next meeting will be held March 20.
It was noted that both the city manager and the city clerk had some items which
'they wanted to bring to the attention of the charter review committee.
A question was brought up as to whether solicit citizen input into the charter
review. The newspapers have been asked to indicate in their articles that any citizen
input should be in writing to City Hall.
. t ~>\t,
W
-5-
~ ,. , ....~: ' '....
,,"n hF,~\'::/; <' '.:, .