Loading...
07-17-14 Agenda Packet In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 286.26, Florida Statutes, persons with disabilities needing special accommodation to participate in this meeting should contact the City Clerk by 5:00 PM, Friday, June 6th, 2014. CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING July 17, 2014 – 5:30 PM AGENDA Call to Order 1. Unfinished Business from Previous Meetings 2. Consent Agenda ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. A. Approval of Minutes from the June 12, 2014 Charter Review Committee Meeting. B. Approval of Minutes from the June 26, 2014 Charter Review Committee Meeting. 3. Discussion 4. Miscellaneous Business 5. Next Meeting Date: July 24, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. 6. Courtesy of the Floor to Visitors Adjourn Minutes Charter Review Committee Meeting June 12, 2014 City Hall, 800 Seminole Road In Attendance: Committee Members Mike Borno City Attorney Richard Komando Joan Carver, Secretary City Clerk Donna Bartle Sally Clemens City Manager Nelson Van Liere Tom Goodrich Judith Leroux Mark Tomaski, Vice-Chairman David Vincent Donald Wolfson, Chairman Absent: Katherine Carithers Call to Order Chairman Wolfson called the third meeting of the Charter Review Committee (CRC) to order at 5:00 p.m. He noted that the Courtesy of the Floor was being moved from the beginning of the meeting to the end. Under Unfinished Business Chairman Wolfson reminded the Committee that Lynn Tipton from the Florida League of Cities is scheduled to meet with the Committee on June 26. He encouraged all members to be present for that meeting. Mr. Borno moved the approval of the minutes of the May 29 CRC meeting as distributed; the motion was seconded by Mr. Tomaski and passed unanimously. Chairman Wolfson stated that the consensus of the May 29 meeting was that the CRC should plan to review the first twenty-five sections of the Charter at this meeting. He noted that Ms. Clemens and Mr. Goodrich had submitted items for consideration to Mr. Komando, the City Attorney, and these had been distributed to the CRC. The CRC then proceeded to consider the Charter, beginning with Article I, section 1. Comments and proposals related to each Article and Section are summarized below. Article I. Section 1. Present Charter abolished and new Charter established. There were no comments. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Page 2 of 4 Article I. Section 2. Reaffirmation of the Incorporation of the City of Atlantic Beach. Ms. Clemens stated that the Atlantic Beach Country Club in the description of the boundaries should replace Selva Marina Country Club. Mr. Borno moved that the words Atlantic Beach Country Club replace Selva Marina; the motion was seconded by Ms. Clemens and passed unanimously. Chairman Wolfson pointed out that the boundary descriptions would need to be changed if the possible annexation of land from the city of Jacksonville occurs. Article I, Section 3. Form of Government. Mr. Tomaski questioned the appropriateness of the term “Commission-Manager Government.” Mr. Komando stated that that this is not a local designation but is a municipal designation in state statute. Art. I, Sec. 4. General Powers. There were no comments. Article II. The Commission. Sec. 5. Number of commissioners; selection; term. Ms. Clemens and Mr. Goodrich both submitted written questions regarding the number of commissioners, their selection, and the term of office. Mr. Goodrich expressed concern with a two-year term for mayor when the other commissioners are elected for four-year terms. The two-year term seems to make it a weak mayor system. Mr. Borno pointed out that the election of the mayor every two years along with the election of two commissioners every two years provides checks and balances since three of the five on the commission change every two years. He noted that he had no problem with the two-year term when he was mayor. Chairman Wolfson stated that his experience as mayor led him to a different conclusion. He feels the two-year term led to a break in continuity and made it more difficult to get his agenda enacted. He also noted that it is costly to run every two years; he spent $42,000 on his election. It can be difficult to run so soon for the office, particularly if you have opposition in the election. Mr. Borno noted that those elected mayor-commissioner come with prior experience as a commissioner. He stated that to get anything done, the commissioners must gain consensus. He expressed the view money cannot buy the election; people want you or not. Ms. Leroux expressed support for a four-year term for mayor. The discussion moved to the question of electing commissioners at large or only by the voters in the district they represent. Mr. Borno stated that Atlantic Beach is a small city to elect by district. He indicated that he was not against districting however but feels it is important to elect at large. Mr. Tomaski raised the idea of increasing the member of commissioners to seven, four to be elected by district and three at-large. He feels having the mayor elected every two years Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Page 3 of 4 encourages citizen involvement. He indicated he would like citizen input on the size of the commission. Chairman Wolfson said that he had championed districts when he ran for mayor. When he was campaigning people from the area west of Mayport Road told him they felt left out of the city. They wanted to be represented by someone who understood their problems with crime and prostitution. He stated that the idea of districts was not well received overall when it was raised. In the citizen referendum it was passed narrowly. Chairman Wolfson indicated since the CRC had not reached a consensus on the issues of the size and election of the commission, the committee would move on and return later to consideration of those questions. Article II. Section 6. Qualifications and disqualifications. Ms. Clemens raised the issue of the Qualifications to serve as a commissioner, recommending that the Charter require commissioners to have documented proof of citizenship. It was pointed out that under Florida Statute to be a qualified elector you must be a citizen. Chairman Wolfson suggested the citizen requirement would be redundant but we could recommend it if the CRC wished. Ms. Clemens moved that the requirement of being a documented citizen be added to the qualifications for commissioner. Chairman Wolfson seconded the motion. The motion failed to receive the vote of a majority of the CRC. Ms. Clemens raised the question of requiring commissioners to have resided in Atlantic Beach a minimum number of years. There was discussion of how many years should be required and whether years had to be consecutive. After further discussion it was moved by Mr. Vincent that two years of consecutive residency in Atlantic Beach be added to the qualifications for commissioners. The motion was seconded and passed. Ms. Clemens raised a question regarding the meaning of “shall not hold any other elective office”; for example, would that include an office in a private organization. Mr. Kommando indicated that elective office traditionally did not include religious or private groups. Mr. Vincent suggested adding the words “as defined by the state”. Chairman Wolfson felt those words might have to be added to many provisions if we set that precedent. Chairman Wolfson stated that in the interest of completing the Committee’s work in a timely fashion meetings would not be limited in time to one hour. The Courtesy of the Floor to Visitors will come at the end, not the beginning of the meeting. Courtesy of the Floor. Two visitors spoke to the CRC. Chris Jergensen expressed appreciation for the opportunity to hear the debate on questions. Michael Hoffmann spoke on behalf of single member districts. He noted that he had supported the Charter amendment requiring commissioners to live in the districts they represented in spite of the at large election provision, seeing the amendment as a first step forward. Mr. Hoffmann pointed out that the basic flaw in the current system is that a Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Page 4 of 4 candidate could receive a majority in his district but still lose because he did not win a majority city-wide. He also stated that his concern that the results of a referendum can be overturned by a vote of the commission. It was moved to adjourn by Mr. Borno, seconded by Mr. Vincent and approved unanimously to adjourn at 6:40 p.m. ______________________________________________________ Don Wolfson, Chairman Minutes Charter Review Committee Meeting June 26, 2014 City Hall, 800 Seminole Road In Attendance: Committee Members Mike Borno City Manager Nelson Van Liere Katherine Carithers City Attorney Richard Komando Joan Carver, Secretary City Clerk Donna Bartle Tom Goodrich Judith Leroux Mark Tomaski, Vice-Chairman David Vincent Donald Wolfson, Chairman Absent: Sally Clemens Call to Order Chairman Wolfson called the fourth meeting of the Charter Review Committee (CRC) to order at 5:00 p.m. He welcomed Ms. Tipton of the Florida League of Cities and thanked her and the Florida League of Cities for their support for municipalities in Florida. Presentation The first order of business was a presentation on Charter Review by Lynn Tipton, Director of Membership Development for the Florida League of Cities. Ms. Tipton, who has been with the Florida League of Cities for 23 years, has municipal charters as an area of responsibility. She stated that 99.5% of the 410 municipal governments in Florida belong to the Florida League of Cities. All of the municipalities have a charter and no two charters are exactly the same. Ms. Tipton made a number of key points in her slide presentation (which is attached and made part of this Official Record as Attachment A) to the CRC on charter reform. These included the following: • There is a model city charter but it is often regarded as a framework. • Most city charters do not have a provision for periodic charter review. • The Internet is an untapped resource for charter review committees; minutes can be posted on it; public hearings announced. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting held on June 26, 2014 Page 2 of 6 • Common characteristics in the charters of cities are size of the commission, five or seven, occasionally six when the mayor is non-voting; length of term, two, three or four years; election, at large, district or mixed; mayor, elected at large, within the council or rotated. In a majority of cities in Florida elections are at large. • The forms of municipal government in Florida are: council-weak mayor; council-strong mayor; commission; council-manager or commission-manager, or a hybrid of these. • Twenty-five communities in Florida were singled out as being similar to Atlantic Beach in population (12,000 to 15,000) and eleven of these also have a coastal location. It can also be important to consider the council and the functions performed by the government. • Best practices in charter review include methods to reach out to the public, for example, public forums, websites, and civic groups. • Questions to consider in charter review include: whether the charter is reflective of the city’s current population; whether the council is representative of the population; whether the charter addresses responsible professionalism; whether the city has provided opportunities for citizen participation in the process; and whether the city is engaged in civic education about the charter. After completing her power point presentation, Ms. Tipton took questions from the committee. In response to the question of how to encourage citizen imput, she suggested being proactive, for example, speaking to civic groups about the charter review. Among the pitfalls in charter review are not finding a way to involve citizens in the process and a council that takes on review on its own and only half tackles reform. Ms. Tipton noted that Florida cities have their elections at a time of their choosing, but there is pressure from some supervisors of elections to move municipal elections to the general election date for reasons of efficiency and cost. This push conflicts with home rule. She responded to a question from Ms. Carithers on the role of the supervisor of elections in other cities by suggesting contacting the city clerks in comparable cities and looking at comparable city websites. Ms. Tipton noted that the reason recommendations by charter review committees go to the city commissions for approval is because of checks and balances—the commission is the elected body directly responsive to the public. She noted that some cities have a direct petition process that bypasses the council. In response to a question regarding funding for charter review committees, Ms. Tipton stated that the only funding for the committee in Sarasota was staff time. She cited the cities of Northport and Gainesville as having useful web sites. She provided her telephone number if the CRC wishes to contact her for information, 850-701-3637. Unfinished Business Ms. Carver moved that the minutes of May 29 be corrected to include Tom Goodrich among those present since he was inadvertently left off the list. The motion was seconded and approved. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting held on June 26, 2014 Page 3 of 6 Chairman Wolfson stated that since the minutes of the June 12 meeting were not distributed prior to this meeting, consideration of approval is postponed to the July 17 meeting. Courtesy of the Floor to Visitors Chairman Wolfson stated that since members of the public wished to speak on issues already considered by the CRC, he was moving the Courtesy of the Floor up on the agenda so the Committee would have the benefit of the visitors’ thinking in its deliberations. Chris Jergensen, 92 West Third Street, stated that he feels a person who lives in a district but is elected to the commission as a result of campaigning outside the district means in effect that the district does not have representation. He would like to see more information on the Atlantic Beach website. He wondered whom you contact when there is a major ordinance you find offensive. He noted that he would not mind having seven commissioners. Nancy Whittington, 1861 Beachside Court, asked what behaviors the city wished to encourage. She speculated that a different regulatory model than a development model might be considered. She stated that the committee might consider a full time mayor. She also suggested an elected police chief for a four or six-year term, a seven person commission with more neighborhood representation, timing the elections to coincide with national elections. She asked what incentives could be developed to make citizens more interested in the government. New Business The Committee resumed the review of the Charter initiated at its earlier meetings. Article II. Section 7. Salary. Ms. Clemens submitted in writing the question of whether raises voted on by the Commission should not be effective until the next election cycle. Chairman Wolfson stated that the salaries were in line with comparable cities. He noted that he had reduced salaries when he was mayor because of the uncertain economic times. Mr. Borno stated that the election cycle is every two years. Salary changes are made by the Commission. Salaries have been adjusted over the years depending on the budget or the Cost of Living index. He noted that with respect to Commissioners’ salaries, commissioners spend more getting elected than they earn. Article II. Section 8. Presiding officer: Mayor. There was considerable discussion on the power of the mayor to appoint committees. Dr. Tomaski stated this section was very confusing and that he would like to clarify the wording on the mayor’s power to appoint committees. Chairman Wolfson agreed. He said that he had appointed committees and subsequent to that the city attorney ruled that city commissioners could appoint committees as well. Mr. Borno said the issue is the things the mayor should have the right to appoint. The mayor can ask for approval to appoint from the other commissioners. The spirit of the language is cooperation. It is a process. But if something is important the mayor can appoint a select committee as he thinks desirable. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting held on June 26, 2014 Page 4 of 6 Chairman Wolfson indicated he had a problem with the word or in the appointment power and believes the document should be clearer. He also believes the mayor should have the right to appoint committees. Someone running for mayor has a vision for the city that he is trying to achieve. Dr. Tomaski said that as a long-time observer of city meetings, he felt that the city attorney struggled with the language of this provision. Mr. Borno noted that there was nothing in the language about needing to get the consent of the commission to appoint a committee. Chairman Wolfson noted that he created committees on trees and parks when he was mayor. If the mayor wants to implement a program, he may need to appoint a committee to achieve that objective. Ms. Carithers asked doesn’t the title mayor-commissioner convey some special power. Dr. Tomaski stated that he considers the role of the mayor as a moderator. He believes that both the mayor and the commissioners have the ability to make appointments. Chairman Wolfson pointed out that the committees are advisory; they cannot take action; they report to the Commission. It is checks and balances. Although Atlantic Beach is a weak mayor form of government, he believes that the mayor should have the power to appoint committees. Mr. Borno said the staff puts out data on the committees but that is done by ordinance or on a case-by-case basis. Dr. Tomaski moved and Mr. Borno seconded the motion that each CRC member submit in writing to the city attorney a revision of the sentence on the appointment of committees beginning “The mayor-commissioner shall have…and ending… and affairs of the city,’’The motion was approved. Chairman Wolfson stated that Ms. Clemens in her written questions had requested a definition of mayor pro tempore in Section 8. He noted that the appointment should probably be by a majority of the commission. Mr. Borno suggested that the provision regarding appointment of the Mayor Pro Tempore should be under the powers of the Commission in Article 9. Mr. Borno noted that he had appointed a mayor pro tempore when he was mayor. Chairman Wolfson raised the question of whether the commission had the right to nominate someone other than the mayor’s nominee. He expressed the view that this should be the prerogative of the mayor but that the language was vague. Mr. Borno moved that the clause ”who shall be appointed by the city commission from among its members” at the end of the sentence beginning “In the temporary absence or disability of the Mayor a Mayor Pro Tempore ....be moved to Section 9 Powers. It was seconded by Mr. Vincent and approved. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting held on June 26, 2014 Page 5 of 6 Sec. 9 Powers There was a discussion of the need to renumber the powers because of changes made to the list. It was pointed out that re-numbering would be confusing because all items would be redlined, It was agreed to put a notation on the section recommending re-numbering after commission review of the recommendations. There were no comments on item (1) Adopt a budget or item (2) relating to issuance of bonds, etc. (3) Establish official boards -Mr. Tomaski stated that he has the same problem with the appointment of boards as with the earlier item relating to the appointment of committees by the mayor. He is concerned that the mayor can establish the board and that although the commission elects the members, they are recommended by the mayor. There was discussion of the powers of the mayor and commission. It was moved by Ms. Carithers and seconded by Mr. Borno that following Establish/Delete should be added. The motion was approved. (4) No comment on adoption of the official map. (5) Ms. Clemens suggested in her written comments that this item seemed to give too much power to elected officials. Chairman Wolfson pointed out the power to regulate the height of buildings is limited by the Charter provisions limiting height of buildings. (6) Ms. Clemens asked in writing whether it would be helpful to have a financial report at the beginning of election term and an independent auditor. It was pointed out that financial reports are always available. Mr. Komando stated that an independent auditor is contracted by the city and works for the commission and for him with the responsibility of reviewing the city finances. (7) Mr. Vincent raised a question about maximum fines of $1.000. Mr. Komando stated that this figure refers to the maximum fine for secondary misdemeanors. To clarify this provision it was moved by Mr. Borno and seconded by Mr. Vincent and passed that the words or as otherwise provided by Florida statute be added at the end of item 7 . (8) and (9) There was discussion of the provisions giving the power to lease and sell city property, including parks. Ms. Leroux and Dr. Tomaski expressed concern that the city commission had this power. Mr. Komando pointed out that the purpose of the Charter is to convey broad authority. You do not want a situation where the city does not have the authority needed. Mr. Borno agreed that the Charter gives broad authority. Chairman Wolfson said he felt Item 9 on Powers was going to require some time for consideration. Mr. Borno stated that he felt that it was self-explanatory. Chairman Wolfson noted in response to Dr. Tomaski’s concern about the ability of the Commission to sell parks that under the Charter any sale has to be submitted to the voters in a referendum. Ms. Carithers asked Dr. Tomaski whether he wanted the citizens to have more control over the parks. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting held on June 26, 2014 Page 6 of 6 Mr. Vincent agreed it was important to protect parks but that we don’t want to put our officials in a position where they cannot act. There are checks and balances. Dr. Tomaski held that the language in Item 9 was not strong enough to protect the parks. He does not feel there is a provision that can be too limiting with respect to parks. Dr. Tomaski stated that rather than trust in the current provisions, he would protect the parks in the Charter by prohibiting any sale of parks without a change in the Charter. He stated that parks are a gift and are sometimes misused. Chairman Wolfson stated Item 9 needs more discussion. The next meeting of the Committee will begin with this item. Housekeeping Chairman Wolfson expressed concern regarding an article in the “Beaches Leader” by a member of the CRC who had not had the letter approved by the CRC prior to its publication. Chairman Wolfson noted that , contrary to a statement in the article, the city did, in fact, provide assistance to the Committee, for example, the staff support. He asked committee members not to make statements regarding the work of the Committee without Committee approval. The calendar for the remainder of the year for the CRC meetings is listed below. Meetings will be two hours in length. Thursday, July 17, 2014 at 5:30 p.m. Thursday, July 24, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, August 21, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 11, 2014 at 5:00 p.m.. Thursday, Sept. 25, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, October 9, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, December 4, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, December 18, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Borno moved for adjournment and Mr. Vincent seconded the motion that was passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. _______________________________________________________ Don Wolfson, Chairman AITACHMENT A ATLANTIC BEACH: CITY CHARTER REVIEW MEETING Lynn Tipton Florida League of Cities, Inc. June 26, 2014 MUNICIPAL CHARTERS IN FLORIDA •All charters ore unique; haven't found any two identical •41 0 cities, towns and villages-all hove a charter •Goal for tonight: discuss municipal characteristics in Florida and compare Atlantic Beach using peer statistics 1 ATIACHMENT A COMPARABlE CHARTER CHARACTERISTICS •Size of Council or Commission: five (5) members is most common; some seven (7) and some (6) where mayor is non-voting •Length of term: two, three and four year terms are fair l y evenly spread across 4 1 0 •Type of election per council seat: at-large; single-member district (SMD); e lected seat with at-large voti ng; some councils are mix of at-large and SMD •Selection of mayor: elected at large; elected from within the council; rotational •Form of government: see next slide FORMS OF MUNICIPAl GOVERNMENT IN FlORIDA •Counci l-weak mayor : original form brought over from England; about 1 00 Florida cities with populations less than 25,000 •Council-strong mayor: an elected executive implements council actions and administers the city; about 30 Florida cities in all populations •Commi ssio n : each elected official oversees one or more departments autonomously; come together as legislative body. less than 5 Florida cities have this •Council-Manager or Commiss ion-Mana g er: professional manager appointed by mayor & council to administer city, prepare agenda and recommend actions to council, and present a budget each year; about 275 Florida cities of all popul ations •Hy brid: elements of the above; about 5 Florida cities 2 ATLANTIC BEACH: PEER COMPARISONS Using population 1 2,000 to 15,000: 25 cities meet that factor Using coastal location (ocean, gulf and intercoastal) -Callaway, Oldsma r, Niceville, St . Augustine, Destin, Key Biscayne, South Daytona, North Palm Beach, Panama City Beach, Wilton Manors, Gulfport ( 1 1 total) One of the 25 is council-strong mayor, but not coastal: Palmetto (Manatee County) 24 of 25 ore council-manager or commission-manager Of the 11 coastal: all 5 seats except Niceville (6); Destin (8); Key Biscayne (7) Should a/so compare scope of services if any charter elements ore compared more deeply BEST PRACTICES IN CHARTER REVIEWS •Ho l ding several public forums for discussion (especially if referendum is scheduled) •Use of website for display of current and proposed l anguage, as well as minutes from CRC meetings •If referendum is being held, develop "FAQ" for websit e A IT ACHMENT A •Utilize league of Women Voters and other civic organizations to help with forums, public discussions-proactive role of elected officials and city sta ff to reach out and include these groups 3 CHARTER TRENDS IN FLORIDA Form of governme nt: trend since 1950s toward the council-manager and commission- manager form of government (including new incorporations) Charter rev iews: seven to ten (7 to 1 0) years i s widely seen CHARTER REVIEW : QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER From the 2008 eighth edition of the Model City Charter: Is the charter reflective of the city's current population? Is the council representative of the population, both resident and business? Does the charter address responsible professionalism, and do it adequately? Has the city provided opportunities for citizen participation in the process? Is the city engaged in civic education about the charter (web site, for example)? ATTACHMENT A 4 ATIACHM ENT A QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION Thank you for including the Florida League of Cities in your process! 5