04/06/1994 (2)
Date
CHARTER
REVIEW
COMMITTEE
MINUTES
P?
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
April 6, 1994
The Charter Review Committee met in the City Commission
Chambers at City Hall., third floor, 112 S. Osceola Avenue,
Clearwater, Florida, on Wednesday, April 6, 1994 at 4:05 p.m. with
the following members present:
Gerald Figurski,
Jerry Lancaster,
Joe Evich
Anne Garris
Kenneth Hamilton
Al Lijewski
Curlee Rivers
Tony Salmon
Les Smout
Absent:
Karen Seel
Also present:
Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Mary K. Diana, Assistant City Clerk
0
The Chairman called the meeting of the Charter Review
Committee (CRC) to order.,
Approval of Minutes of March 15, 1994.
Member Smout requested on page 8, paragraph 5, the words "also
contributed" be changed to "was also considered." Member Salmon
moved to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Chairman Figurski noted the City Attorney would not be in
attendance at today's meeting. He said there has been difficulty
in obtaining a speaker on single member distracts. The National
Civic League in Denver will be sending a packet which will include
information on single member districts, multi-member districts and
the voting rights act. A copy will be distributed to all the
members.
Section 2.0.5. Mayor-commissioner,..__functions and powers.
Member Hamilton moved to maintain the current council/manager
form of government in the City of Clearwater. The motion was duly
seconded.
Chairman Figurski supported the council/manager form of
government indicating the system has worked and fits the City of
MINaftoG.94 1 April 6, 2994
Clearwater. He said this form of government would provide for a
dispersion of power.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued in regard to electing the mayor. Member
Garris recommended electing five commissioners and the commission
annually electing one of their members as mayor. She said this
would address commissioners having to resign their office to run
for mayor. She felt this system worked well for the county
commission and believed the commission would work more effectively
with a leader they have chosen.
Member Garris moved that five commissioners be elected and the
commissioners elect annually one of their members to serve as
mayor. The motion was duly seconded.
Member Lancaster believed the citizens have the right to elect
the mayor. He felt a good commissioner does not necessarily make
a good mayor.
Member Hamilton agreed. He thought the citizens should have
the right to choose the person they want to represent them in all
the figure head roles.
Member Salmon questioned whether there was a greater
possibility of obtaining a better leader with the commission
electing their mayor. The commission would know who has leadership
capabilities.
Member Evich said someone should be accountable; however, felt
this would depend on how the commission is elected. He asked the
committee to postpone voting on this issue at this time.
Chairman Figurski felt the person who heads the city should be
elected at large. He noted information has shown if there are
single member district representatives, the mayor should be elected
at large. He said in his experience with county commissions he has
found the person who is chairman reflects the majority block.
Member Salmon expressed concern in changing leadership
annually.
Discussion ensued in regard to how much influence the mayor
has on the city manager. Member Garris felt this would depend upon
communication between the city manager and the mayor. She said it
is difficult to operate effectively if there is a communication
problem.
v
Member Rivers did not agree with the commission electing a
mayor annually: He believed the current form of government in
Clearwater works well. He said the present mayor has a unique
MIHCFH446.94
2
April 6, 1994
:.. .. .•. .?,1;; tsar !3
'. ??fi :'!??".Fein?v 'l.• .
r
ability as a coalition builder. He felt having the commission
elect the mayor would lend itself to cronyism.
Member Salmon felt CRC recommendations should not just be
based on the current commission.
Member Smout noted the school board and county commission
races are partisan. He felt electing a chairperson from among
themselves, particularly the school board, did not add anything to
the process. He felt there were a lot of behind the scenes
positioning in bringing greater political influence into the
process. He supported the mayor being elected at large.
Upon the vote being taken on the motion on the floor that five
commissioners be elected and annually the commissioners elect one
of their members to serve as mayor. Member Garris voted "aye;"
Members Lancaster, Evich, Hamilton, Lijewski, Rivers, Salmon and
Smout and Chairman Figurski voted "nay;" Member Seel absent.
Motion failed.
Member Salmon felt the single member district issue needed to
be resolved before addressing some of the other issues.
Discussion ensued in regard to whether the mayor/commissioner
should have any additional powers.
Member Salmon suggested adding to the duties of the mayor an
annual program of work, goals and the state of the city message as
listed in the National Civic League model charter.
Member Hamilton felt the goals should be set by the full
commission. He expressed concern regarding the cost of formulating
the program of work and goals into a document for publication. He
said he would not favor such a document if this is being covered in
some other way. He noted the Chamber puts out such a document and
it is somewhat expensive.
Member Salmon felt a determination should be made first
whether the above issue is worthwhile. He noted the model charter
provides the mayor gives policy guidance through goal setting and
advocating policies that address the city's problems.
Member Smout believed a document already exists that contains
the commission's goals and statement of work. He thought this was
being performed by the city manager and staff.
Discussion
an annual state
city's charter.
city manager and
mayor's duties.
MIHCH406.94
ensued in regard to the model charter referring to
of the city message which is not included in the
It was felt this was already being done by the
would be a duplication of effort to add it to the
3
April 6, 1994
Member Evich said Section 2.01 does not indicate the
commission sets the policy entirely. He felt if the mayor is to be
held accountable for leadership, some form of established goals for
the commission should be set.
Member Salmon felt the mayor, as the head of the commission
and the city, should provide visible leadership to the citizens in
some form.
Member Garris noted the commission has goal, setting sessions.
Member Lancaster believed Section 3.'03. Powers and duties of
the city manager, page 9, paragraph (h) addressed the financial
condition and future needs of the city which is the responsibility
of the city manager. Member Salmon said he is looking for policy
leadership from the commission and felt this would be the
responsibility of the mayor.
Member Evich questioned if leadership rather than power would
be expected of a strong mayor. Member Hamilton expressed concern
by placing all the responsibility on the mayor, you are setting
someone up to fail.
Member Smout requested a copy of the commission's goals.
Member Salmon questioned the advisability of adding to Section
2.05, paragraph 2 the word "temporary" before the words "absence or
inability of the mayor--commissioner to perform, etc."
Chairman Figurski noted Section 2.07(c) deals with vacancies
in office; Section 2.05 does not. In response to a question, he
indicated section 2.07(c) also covers death and resignation.
Member Evich recommended if there is a temporary vacancy in
the mayor's seat, the vice-mayor fill in and if there is a
permanent vacancy, the vice-mayor fill the unexpired term.
Member Salmon moved to add in Section 2.05, paragraph 2,
sentence 2, the word "temporary" before the words "absence or
inability of the mayor-commissioner to perform, etc." The motion
was duly seconded.
Discussion ensued in regard to whether "temporary" needed to
be defined and it was felt it did not.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
4 . 4
MINCH906.94
April 6, 1994
Section 1.01 Corporate existence and Mowers. and Section 1.02._
Co orate boundaries.
Member Evich moved that Sections 1.01 and 1.02 remain as
currently incorporated into the charter. The motion was duly
seconded.
Member Salmon said a question had been raised whether the
phrase "safety, health, convenience and general welfare of its
inhabitants" in Section 1.01(c) of the city's charter is too broad.
In response to a question, Chairman Figurski indicated Article
IX deals with bonds and incorporates the public health, safety,
etc. language. He said this language in Florida is known as the
police power of a city, county or a state; the power to regulate in
the interest of the people. Member Salmon noted this language is
not included in the model charter or the state statute.
Member Garris expressed concern the charter does not limit
what the city interprets as safety, health, convenience and general
welfare. Member Salmon noted Section 1.01(c) is cited after the
model charter with the exception of the language referring to
safety, health, etc. Member Garris said she did not understand the
sentence "The specific mention of a particular power in the charter
shall, not be construed as limiting in any way the general power
stated in this section of article I." in relationship to the rest
4 of the charter. She expressed concern if the prohibition against
spending more than $2 million without the approval of the voters
would be null and void because of the language in Section 1.01(c)
indicating if the city decided it was for the convenience of the
inhabitants. Chairman Figurski said there is a distinction between
the granting of power and the limitation on power and believed the
limitations in the charter would address this concern.
Upon the vote being taken on the motion on the floor that
Sections 1.01 and 1.02 remain as currently incorporated into the
charter, the motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued in regard to single member districts and it
was indicated this issue is not being addressed at this time as
' additional information will be following.
Section 2.06. Prohibitions.
Marilyn Gioquinto requested the CRC consider addressing
ethical conduct in the charter. She felt a desperate need to do so
indicating the present commission is walking a fine line. Chairman
Figurski requested a copy of the city's ethic ordinance.
Member Garris felt whether something is ethical or not is a
matter of opinion. She recommended making paragraph (b) of Section
2.06 stronger because she felt the commission can not do a good job
MINCH406.94 5 April 6, 1994
r
if they can not ask questions of staff and check on what is going
on.
Member Lancaster said he preferred leaving paragraph (b) as
is. He did not want the commissioners doing more than scrutinizing
and asking questions.
Member Rivers agreed with asking questions; however, said it
appears that some commissioners are overstepping their bounds.
Member Salmon noted the model charter reflected dealing
through the city manager but did not prohibit the commission from
talking to city staff.
Member Evich felt if ethics are to be addressed in the
charter, there should be a separate section and very specific.
In. response to a question, Member Salmon said Section 2.06 (b) ,
both paragraphs are almost identical to the model charter. He felt
the committee should not base their recommendations on current
situations.
Member Salmon read portions from the model charter that dealt
with prohibitions. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not to
make changes to the city charter by substituting paragraphs from
the model charter.
?
11
Y The meeting recessed from 5:05 p.m. to 5:10 p.m.
Discussion continued in regard to whether or not the language
in the model charter should be substituted for the language in the
city charter.
Member Lancaster moved that Section 2.06(a), (b) and (c)
remain as it reads in the charter. The motion was duly seconded.
Member Salmon suggested in Section 2.06(c) inserting the word
"city" before "employment" and inserting the word "elected" before
the word "appointive." Concern was expressed commissioners would
be prohibited from resigning from office to run for mayor if the
word "elected" was inserted.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
Section 2.07. Vacancies; forfeiture of office- fillip vacancies;
advisory boards.
Member Salmon noted Section 2.07(b)4. dealing with forfeiture
of office if the commission fails to attend six regular meetings in
a 12-month period, whether excused or not, is not addressed in the
model charter.
MINCH406.94 6 April, 6, 1994
kt .?.`.., i.;
r
Discussion ensued in regard to whether or not missing six
regular meetings in a 12-month period is too restrictive due to the
current schedule of the commission.
Chairman Figurski asked Commissioner Deegan, who was in
attendance at the meeting, whether he saw this provision as a
problem. He responded he did not.
Member Garris moved in Section 2.07(b)4. to delete the words
"excused or not" after 1112--month period." There was no second.
Discussion ensued in regard to setting a percentage for number
of meetings missed.
Member Hamilton moved to approve amending Section 2.07(b)4. to
read "Fails to attend 250 of the regular meetings during a 12-month
period whether excused or not unless such absences are excused by
the commission and to approve Section 2.07(a) as it currently
reads. The motion was duly seconded.
Member Salmon noted the model charter includes the language
"violates any express prohibition of this charter" as a reason for
forfeiture of office and recommended adding a subparagraph 5 to
Section 2.07(b).
Concern was expressed regarding failure to attend 25% of the
regular meetings also being too restrictive. Discussion ensued
regarding what would be an appropriate percentage.
Member Hamilton amended his motion to change the percentage of
meetings missed from 25o to 330 The seconder accepted the
amendment.
Upon the vote being taken on the motion on the floor to
approve amending Section 2.07(b)4. to read "Fails to attend 33% of
the regular meetings during a 12-month period whether excused or
not and to approve Section 2.07(a) as it currently reads, the
motion carried unanimously.
Member Salmon moved to add to Section 2.07(b) a subparagraph
5. Violates any express prohibition of this charter.
Questions were raised as to who would determine whether there
is a violation and would a violation of the code of ethics, either
a city ordinance or a state statute, be a felony. chairman
Figurski believed the ethics code in the state statutes provides
how violations are addressed and could include forfeiture of
office.
Chairman Figurski pointed out Section 2.07(a) provides any
forfeiture is to be declared by the remaining members of the
commission.
?j IA MINCH906.94 7 April 6, 1994
:?.. . -t .. 1 ? t »:?• •_ . .? _....... • ? ... MrJli.'41..s.Al.i iii. es'?... S'n .. .,, , s ? ? .. f
Member Hamilton expressed concern the added language in
AMIL subparagraph 5. would be a matter of interpretation and could
become a major battle whether a person should remain in office.
Member Garris felt some sort of consequence for that
commissioner who violates the charter should be included. A
question was raised as to whom should determine if the charter has
been violated.
Discussion ensued in regard to violations being filed with the
Ethics Commission who in turn make their recommendation as to
whether a violation has occurred and what the punishment should be.
Member Lancaster said there are procedures to remove someone
from office. He felt adding the language would become a political
football and create more problems.
Chairman Figurski said he will research the statutes to see
what the ethics statute says about violations and consequences for
a violation.
Member Salmon moved to withdraw the motion on the floor to add
a subparagraph 5 to Section 2.07.
1c)-Filling of vacancies.
Member Hamilton felt someone resigning to run for another
office should be replaced as soon as possible. Member Salmon noted
the model charter and other city charters provide if a replacement
is not found within 30 days, a special election is called.
Discussion ensued in regard to the resign to run procedures.
Concern was expressed regarding filling a seat prior to the
effective date of the resignation and campaigning for a higher
level of office and still sitting on the commission.
Discussion ensued in regard to calling a special election if
an agreement for a replacement of a vacant commission seat is not
agreed upon.
Member Salmon read from the model charter the process for
filling a vacancy.
Member Salmon moved in Section 2.07(c), after the first
sentence, add the following "If the commission fails to do so
within 30 days following the occurrence of the vacancy, a special
election to fill the vacancy will be held no sooner than 60 days
and no later than 90 days unless a regular election or special
election has been scheduled within 120 days of the vacancy."
A question was raised if the person appointed or elected
serves just the unexpired term. It was indicated the person
HINCH406.94 8 April 6, 1994
appointed by the commission would serve until the next regular or
special election. The person elected by the voters would serve the
unexpired term.
Discussion ensued in regard to the procedure for filling a
vacancy in the mayor's seat. A question was raised if a vacancy in
the mayor's seat is filled by one of the commissioners, would both
seats be filled in the next regular or special election.
A question was raised if the commission should fill the
permanent vacancy in the mayor's seat from among themselves or
should the vice-mayor move into that seat until the next election
or for the unexpired term.
Member Evich referred to a memo from the City Attorney
indicating the vice-mayor would step in until the appointed person
takes over the duties of the mayor and until an election is held.
He said he would like to see a person who currently serves on the
commission serve the mayor' s full unexpired term and fill the empty
commission seat at the next election. In response to a question,
Member Evich indicated he would support a replacement within the
next 90 days.
A suggestion was made to develop language regarding this issue
before a motion is made.
There was no second to the motion on the floor.
Discussion ensued in regard to future meetings of the CRC.
Meetings have been scheduled for April. 26 at 7:00 p.m. and April 27
and May 10 at 6:00 p.m.
The meeting adjourned at 6:38 p.m.
Attest:
Assis t ity Clerk
April 4, 1994
MINCN406.94 9
rl 1. ? i???;; •.