Loading...
11-20-14 CRC 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, Tuesday, August 5, 2014. CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING November 20, 2014 – 5:00 PM AGENDA Call to Order 1. A. Approval of the Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014. B. Approval of the Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on November 6, 2014. 2. Unfinished Business from Previous Meetings A. Proposed Amendments Sec. 43 and 53. 3. Discussion 4. Miscellaneous Business A. Discussion on meeting schedule. 5. Next Meeting Date: November 20, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. 6. Courtesy of the Floor to Visitors Adjourn Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 1 of 7 Minutes Charter Review Committee Meeting October 23, 2014 City Hall, 800 Seminole Road In Attendance: Committee Members Don Wolfson, Chairman City Manager Nelson Van Liere Mark Tomaski, Vice Chairman City Attorney Richard Komando Joan Carver, Secretary City Clerk Donna Bartle Mike Borno Katherine Carithers Sally Clemens Judith Leroux David Vincent Absent Tom Goodrich Call to Order Don Wolfson, Chairman, called the twelfth meeting of the Charter Review Committee (CRC) to order at 5:00 p.m. on October 23, 2014. He asked if there were changes or corrections to the minutes of October 9, 2014. Mr. Borno moved the approval of the minutes as distributed, Dr. Tomaski seconded the motion and it was approved. Unfinished Business from Previous Meetings A. Discussion of Committee Report to the City Commission There was discussion of the possible content of the report to the city commission on the work of the Charter Review Commission to date. City Attorney Komando cautioned against providing a detailed report since the committee may make changes when it reviews its work. He suggested a broad overview. Chairman Wolfson suggested listing the items on which the committee has not yet completed consideration and those on which work is pretty well finalized. He noted that this would only be a status report and items could be brought back for re-consideration if desired. He would like to have a red line draft of the charter for final review. Ms. Carithers stated that she would like to review what the committee has done, for example, on the canvassing board and supervisor of elections. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 2 of 7 Chairman Wolfson stated that there should be a caveat in the report that it is a status report and subject to change before final submission. Once the committee has a draft of the charter changes, he would like a final review of the changes. City Attorney Komando stated that there was flexibility in how much information the CRC provides in the interim report. He suggested a broad overview of topics covered, noting the committee may return to some items and change earlier decisions. He stated that the city commission is very interested in the work of the CRC. Ms. Carithers stated that she didn’t believe the city commission needed to know what items are outstanding. She thinks the main concern is that we are moving forward with our work. The discussion turned to deadlines for completion of the CRC’s work. The proposed changes will have to be considered by the city commission which will have public hearings on the changes and then have the amendments ready for either the May or August elections. With this timeline in mind Chairman Wolfson set the end of February as a deadline for completion of the committee’s work. Chairman Wolfson asked City Attorney Komando to provide a list of the changes in the charter recommended by the CRC to date. Dr. Tomaski suggested reporting to the commission that the committee is meeting regularly, that most of the committee members are at the meetings, and the percentage of the charter the committee has completed. The commission would then be aware that the committee is making progress. Ms. Leroux asked whether the committee would have any involvement once the final report is submitted. Chairman Wolfson believed the committee’s work would then be completed. Chairman Wolfson stated that the CRC could report to the city commission that it has made a first review of the charter and that it is the committee’s intention to submit a report on recommended changes no later than the first commission meeting in March. The other unfinished business related to Article 16, Suits Against the City, was discussed at the October 9 meeting. City Attorney Komando stated that he would have a draft of new wording for that article at the next meeting. Discussion Article XV. Zoning Chairman Wolfson stated that he believes things are happening beyond our control with respect to climate change and the elevation of the oceans. Even though he ran for office on the height limitation of thirty-five feet, he is considering proposing increasing the height limitation to fifty feet in an effort to be pro-active in an era of climate change and the resulting increase in tidal waters. It may be that houses will have to be raised a few feet to be habitable. He also noted the burden of the rising cost of flood insurance. Chairman Wolfson asked the committee members to consider this issue in preparation for its discussion at a future meeting. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 3 of 7 Article IX. Elections Sec. 36. Elections. Ms. Clemens stated that the title Sec. 36 should be changed to “Regulation of Elections” to more accurately reflect the content of the Section. Ms. Clemens moved and Mr. Borno seconded the motion that the title of Sec. 36 be changed to “Elections Regulations.” The committee approved the change. Sec. 37. Nonpartisan Elections. Ms. Carithers raised the issue of elections, which are non-partisan in name, but in fact there is an awareness of the party affiliation of the candidates. She noted that candidates get support from people of like political persuasion. She believes the party designation could be helpful to people in deciding how to vote. Chairman Wolfson stated that partisan elections could be very divisive. He would prefer to keep party affiliation off the ballot since it can be a rallying cry for the party making the election even more divisive. Dr. Tomaski stated that there have been meetings in the past where candidates have stated their party affiliation. He noted that these candidates have not done well in the past. He has concern about how campaigns are financed. Chairman Wolfson described his personal experience as a candidate for mayor. He had support from people in both parties and some who voted for him were relieved they could vote for a nonpartisan candidate. He stated that one of the arguments for partisan elections is that the voter will have a better idea of what the candidate stands for. It assumes that the candidate lines up with the party and that may or may not be true. Ms. Clemens noted that only two people had asked her about her party affiliation when she ran for office. Mr. Borno moved that the language in Sec. 37, nonpartisan elections be retained as it is. Chairman Wolfson seconded the motion and it was approved Sec. 38. Electors, Registration. No Change. Sec. 39. Nominations Ms. Clemens observed that requiring ten qualified electors to nominate was a very low number. Ms. Clemens moved that the number of qualified electors to nominate be changed from “not less than ten (10)” to “not less than twenty-five (25)”. The motion was seconded by Mr. Borno and passed unanimously. Ms. Clemens stated that she felt candidates should be required to show proof of citizenship. City Attorney Komando stated that when communities impose identification requirements, they often get sued. Ms. Carithers noted that the committee would have to determine what are proper identifications. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 4 of 7 Dr. Tomaski stated that he liked some kind of requirement for proof of citizenship. He said it would be possible for someone to slip through. Chairman Wolfson stated that an easy way to handle the citizenship requirement was to add a sentence in Article II, Section 6. Qualifications and disqualifications for members of the city commission. The sentence could specify that proof of citizenship could be a driver’s license, a passport or other acceptable documentation. In response to a question from Chairman Wolfson, City Clerk Bartle stated that prior to a candidate’s qualifying, she asks where they live and verifies that their address is in the proper district. She indicated that the candidate must be a registered voter and take an oath that he or she is qualified to serve under the Constitution and laws of Florida. Ms. Leroux suggested the possibility of a charter amendment to ensure that the city clerk is provided needed information. Chairman Wolfson stated that there should be a component of Art. II, Sec. 6 that states that proof of residency shall be a passport, driver’s license, or other legal identification. He has noted this change and will bring it up when Art II, Sec. 6 is reviewed by the CRC. Sec. 40. Elections: Primary. No change. Sec. 41. Elections: General. No change Sec. 42. Elections: Absentee Voting. No change. Sec. 43. Elections: Canvassing board, duties. Ms. Carithers stated that the Atlantic Beach Canvassing Board should be the same as the county canvassing board. She pointed out that Jacksonville Beach has a referendum on the ballot this year to use the county canvassing board so as to be consistent with state law. City Attorney Komando noted that he knew of a case in which a law was overturned because of the membership of the chief judge. Dr. Tomaski observed that it appears that the canvassing board can overturn elections. City Attorney Komando pointed out that the canvassing board is the body that checks signatures on provisional ballots. Chairman Wolfson asked Ms. Carithers why the composition of the canvassing board was a matter of concern. Ms. Carithers noted that the current composition had the potential for conflict of interest. Dr. Tomaski stated that the real concern with the current composition of the canvassing board was perception. A change in the board would remove suspicion of its actions. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 5 of 7 Mr. Borno stated that the city of Jacksonville had stated that the municipalities have a right to use the county canvassing board. Ms. Clemens observed that since Atlantic Beach residents pay taxes, she felt it was a good idea to use the county canvassing board. Ms Carithers stated that the canvassing board looks at those items the staff of the Supervisor of Elections questions. Chairman Wolfson observed that the Supervisor of Elections Office counts the ballots. It is a limited responsibility to review those items that the Supervisor of Elections office questions. Ms. Carithers moved and Tomaski seconded the motion that the City of Atlantic Beach Canvassing Board be replaced with the Duval County Canvassing board in Sec. 48. The motion was approved by the committee. City Attorney Komando will draft language for the revised article to be considered at the next meeting. Article X. Initiative and Referendum Sec. 44. Power of initiative Mr. Borno proposed that the second sentence of Section 44 read “at least ten per cent (10%) of the registered electors at the last regular municipal election” vice twenty-five per centum (25%). Ms Clemens seconded the motion. Chairman Wolfson pointed out the power of the initiative and cautioned that there should be a serious effort behind an initiative. It should be broadly supported. Ms. Carithers observed that twenty-five percent was high compared to other communities. Dr. Tomaski stated that twenty-five percent was high relative to turnout in elections. Chairman Wolfson pointed out that an initiative petition is different than turnout; it may have an impassioned group pushing it and going door to door to get signatures. It was pointed out that ten per cent would be over 900 signatures. The motion to change the percent from 25 per cent to ten per cent passed with one dissenting vote from Judith Leroux. Sentence two of Article 44 would then read: “Any initiated ordinance may be submitted to the city commission by petition signed by registered electors of the city equal in number to at least ten per cent (10%) of the registered electors at the last regular municipal election.” Sec. 45. Power of referendum. Mr. Borno proposed that the third sentence in Sec. 45. Power of Referendum be changed to read “Within thirty (30) days after the enactment by the city commission of any ordinance which is subject to a referendum, a petition, signed by registered electors of the city equal to at least ten per cent (10%) of the registered electors at the last preceding regular municipal election may be filed with the city clerk requesting any such ordinance may be either repealed or submitted to a vote of the electors.” Dr. Tomaski seconded the motion. There was discussion of the proposal by Mr. Borno to change 30 days to 20 days and twenty-five to ten percent in Section 45. Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 6 of 7 Chairman Wolfson pointed out that it was possible that a smaller number of voters could overturn the actions of a commission elected by a majority. Dr. Tomaski stated that he saw both concerns. Dr. Carver noted that an impassioned minority can sometimes have great power. Mr. Vincent suggested that if the proposed referendum receives sufficient signatures, it should be submitted to a vote, eliminating the repeal by the commission alternative. Ms. Clemens stated that the provision should indicate who would repeal the ordinance. Ms. Clemens moved and Chairman Wolfson seconded the motion to amend the proposed change by adding the words “by the city commission” after repealed. The committee approved the change to the proposal. The committee then approved the amended Sec. 44 which would read: “Within thirty (30) days after the enactment by the city commission of any ordinance which is subject to a referendum, a petition, signed by registered electors of the city equal to at least ten per cent (10%) of the registered electors at the last preceding regular municipal election may be filed with the city clerk requesting any such ordinance may be either repealed by the city commission or submitted to a vote of the electors. Sec. 47. Filing, examination and certification of petitions. Mr. Borno proposed that the second sentence be changed to read “Within thirty (30) days after a petition is filed,” vice twenty days. The motion was seconded by three members of the committee and passed. Sec. 48. Amendment of Petitions. No change. Sec. 49. Effect of certification of referendum petition. No change. Sec. 50. Consideration by city commission. No change. Discussion of the Report to the City Commission (continued) Chairman Wolfson suggested that the report of the CRC to the city commission regarding the work of the committee to date might report that the committee has reviewed all of the articles with the exception of Articles 10, 14 and 17. Ms. Carithers would prefer a more general report, for example, we are meeting regularly, we have accomplished a great deal and we will be finished by March 2015. Chairman Wolfson stated that if we need more time, we will meet more frequently. We will probably have only one meeting in December. He noted that the outstanding issues are Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on October 23, 2014 Page 7 of 7 ones that we have already briefly considered such as district v. at-large elections and five or seven commissioners. Mr. Borno suggested that the committee needed to have a redline copy of the charter that would include the original provisions along with the recommended changes for its final review. Courtesy of the Floor to Visitors. Chris Jorgensen, 92 West Third Street, stated that ten per cent of the registered electors is not a small number. He noted that when you break down the votes cast in the five districts, it is only a few hundred votes. He wondered if the charter should include the longitude and latitude of the city. He observed when he looked up Atlantic Beach on Wikipedia Mr. Borno was listed as the current mayor. With no further business the meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. ________________________________________________________ Don Wolfson, Chair Minutes Charter Review Committee Meeting November 6, 2014 City Hall, 800 Seminole Road In Attendance: Committee Members Don Wolfson, Chairman City Manager Nelson Van Liere Mark Tomaski, Vice Chairman City Clerk Donna Bartle Joan Carver, Secretary Mike Borno Katherine Carithers Sally Clemens Judith Leroux David Vincent Absent Tom Goodrich Call to Order Don Wolfson, Chairman, called the thirteenth meeting of the Charter Review Committee (CRC) to order at 5:00 p.m. on November 6, 2014. He stated that there were a number of errors in the minutes and pointed out several. At the suggestion of Ms. Carithers the minutes of the October 23 meeting will be corrected, distributed and considered for approval at the next meeting of the committee. Chairman Wolfson stated that the CRC will meet only once in December on December 4. Unfinished Business from Previous Meetings Article IX. Elections. Sec. 43. Canvassing Board, duties. Chairman Wolfson brought the committee’s attention to City Attorney Komando’ s revision of Sec. 43. Canvassing Board. Ms. Carithers asked who certifies elections, the canvassing board or the supervisor of elections? City Clerk Bartle stated that she forwards the results prepared by the supervisor of election to the candidates. Chairman Wolfson asked who comprises the canvassing board. Ms. Carithers stated that by state law the board must be composed of representatives of all three branches of Draft Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on November 6, 2014 Page 2 of 5 government, legislative, judicial and executive. Mr. Holland or his designee represents the executive. Chairman Wolfson wondered who was in charge of the Duval County Canvassing Board. Chairman Wolfson suggested that Supervisor of Elections Jerry Holland should be contacted to ensure that he supports the change. Chairman Wolfson assumes that Mr. Holland will check with the other members of the canvassing board to be sure that they agree with the change. City Clerk Bartle suggested a draft of the amended section be sent to Supervisor of Elections Holland for his comment. Dr. Tomaski observed that the Atlantic Beach elections were off the usual election cycle so the Duval County Canvassing Board should be available. Ms. Carithers moved that the committee accept the revised section 43 on the Canvassing Board submitted by City Attorney Komando. Dr. Tomaski seconded the motion. Ms. Clemens stated that she felt the first sentence of the revision was not clear. Ms. Carithers read the statement on the Jacksonville Beach referendum that delegates canvassing responsibilities to the Duval County Canvassing Board, suggesting that we adopt that language. Subsequently, Ms. Carithers withdrew the motion to accept the City Attorney’s version, as did Dr. Tomaski with his second. Ms. Carithers recommended that the first sentence of the revised Art. 43 read: “ The City of Atlantic Beach delegates the canvassing responsibilities to the Duval County Canvassing Board for all city elections.” Mr. Borno noted that the Jacksonville Beach language referred to was the language of a referendum, not necessarily the language of the charter. He suggested that before the committee acts on the proposed change in language, it be referred to City Attorney Komando for his review. Chairman Wolfson concurred. Discussion Sec. 40. Elections: Primary and Sec. 41. Elections: General Dr. Tomaski brought up Sections 40 and 41 relating to primary and general elections. He was concerned about the fact that if there are two or fewer candidates, the primary becomes in fact the general election. This is a problem because the primary is held in late August when many people are on vacation or focused on school opening, so turnout may be depressed for this important election. Dr. Carver suggested that the primary might be held later in the year, perhaps in late September. Draft Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on November 6, 2014 Page 3 of 5 City Clerk Bartle noted that in setting dates consideration must be given to the time needed by the Supervisor of Elections office. Dr. Tomaski reiterated that he had a problem with the primary being the general election. He suggested that if there were only two candidates, the primary could be skipped and the selection could be made in the general election. Mr. Borno responded that if there were more than two candidates, the primary would operate as a primary election. He noted the CRC is establishing criteria, not dealing with “what if” situations. Sec. 51. Submission to electors. Ms. Leroux raised a question regarding the word “may” in the last sentence of this section. This wording suggests that the city commission has an option to submit to the voters or not, but this should not be an option. Mr. Vincent wondered if that wording meant that the commission might not call for a referendum. Chairman Wolfson recommended that this section be clarified. Mr. Borno moved that in the last sentence of Sec. 51 the word “shall” replace the word “may.” The motion was seconded by Mr. Vincent and passed by the CRC. The revised last sentence reads: “If no regular election is to be held within the specified time frame, the city commission shall provide for a special election.’ Sec. 52. Form of ballot for initiated and referred ordinances Ms. Clemens raised questions about the wording of this section. Chairman Wolfson stated one is either for or against the measure. Sec. 53. Availability of list of qualified electors. A question was raised as to the appropriateness of stating in the charter that lists of qualified electors can be purchased from the Supervisor of Elections Office. Chairman Wolfson pointed out that now the lists can be obtained electronically from the Supervisor of Elections Office without cost. Ms. Leroux stated that it was important for citizens to know how they can obtain this information. Mr. Vincent pointed out that this would be a stage in the steps you might take if you planned to run for office. City Clerk Bartle stated that she could not find the statute referenced at the end of Section 53. Chairman Wolfson stated that this item would be referred to City Attorney Komando for information. Sec. 54. Results of Election. Draft Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on November 6, 2014 Page 4 of 5 There was discussion of how the situation of conflicting ordinances might arise. Chairman Wolfson stated that he had seen situations with conflicting ordinances. As an example he noted that you might have a commission ordinance that stated a candidate must live in a district, but is elected at large and an initiated proposal that the candidate would be elected by those in the district. Mr. Borno stated that the charter provision is referring to referred ordinances. He pointed out that you might have two sets of initiatives on the ballot that might have different sets of supporters and that might be in conflict. City Clerk Bartle stated that Section 54 relates to Power of Initiative in Section 44 and Power of Referendum in Section 45. Chairman Wolfson pointed out that in the committee’s revision of the initiative it takes ten per cent of registered voters to propose an ordinance (Sec. 45). He stated if there were a conflict, a judge would look at it and say the charter takes precedence. Sec. 55. Repealing ordinances. There was discussion of the provision that initiated and referred ordinances may be amended or repealed only by a four-fifths vote of the full city commission following a public hearing. Dr. Tomaski stated that the city commission keeps getting an additional bite of the apple. Ms. Leroux thinks that the power to repeal initiated or referred ordinances is too broad. Ms. Carithers stated that the commission should not be able to repeal a citizen-initiated ordinance. She stated that this provision undermines the democratic process. She suggested the provision could be a violation of a citizen’s right to petition. Mr. Borno pointed out that this provision relates to the general powers granted to the city in Article I, Section 4 and he noted that state law was also referenced. Chairman Wolfson stated that if you elect commissioners, you should trust them to act responsibly. They represent the majority. Sometimes messaging is not accountable on a particular issue. He noted in a worst-case scenario you might get an unwise measure on the ballot, promote it heavily and in a low turnout election get it passed. Ms. Carithers stated that she had more faith in the electorate. Dr. Carver suggested that there could be complicated issues that the electorate did not fully understand. Ms. Clemens stated that she liked the four-fifths requirement for repeal, but she would recommend at least two public hearings. Draft Minutes of the Charter Review Committee Meeting on November 6, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Chairman Wolfson stated that he felt the four-fifths vote was important. Dr. Tomaski would like the requirement to be unanimous, five votes to repeal. Chairman Wolfson observed that it takes only ten percent of the electors to initiate a bill. Mr. Vincent suggested that the language should be clarified so there is no confusion as to its meaning. Mr. Borno noted that the charter requires a super majority to repeal initiated or referred ordinances. Chairman Wolfson stated that the CRC would begin the next committee meeting with further consideration of Article 55. Report to the City Commission Chairman Wolfson stated that the consensus of the CRC’s earlier discussions of the report to the city commission regarding the committee’s work was that the report should be brief. Ms. Carithers agreed that it should be a brief report. Mr. Borno suggested that the report state that we have met twice a month, we are making good progress and we expect to submit the final report by the end of February. Ms. Carithers moved that a brief progress report be made to the city commission. The motion was seconded by Ms. Clemens and passed. Chairman Wolfson stated he would draft a brief report, e-mail a copy of his interim report to the members of the CRC for comment and then to forward it to the city commission. The Committee further discussed what should be in the report and decided to leave it up to Chairman Wolfson to write and send it to the City Clerk to send the City Commission. Courtesy of the Floor Chris Jorgensen, 92 West Third Street, stated that he thinks the committee is doing well. He is concerned about transferring canvassing board responsibilities to the county canvassing board. In general he does not agree with transferring small city responsibilities to the county. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. __________________________________________________ Don Wolfson, Chairman Proposed Amendment by the CRC and City Attorney November 7, 2014 ARTICLE IX. ELECTIONS Sec. 43. Elections: Canvassing board, duties. The City of Atlantic Beach Canvassing Board shall be composed of the City Attorney, City Manager and City Clerk delegates the election canvassing responsibilities for all city elections to the Duval County Canvassing Board. In the event that any member is unable to serve, a replacement member shall be appointed by the remaining two board members. Said replacement shall be a registered voter residing in Atlantic Beach. Should the City of Atlantic Beach municipal election occur on the same day as a county or special election, the county canvassing board will fulfill the following duties listed in this section. The Atlantic Beach Canvassing Board shall meet in Atlantic Beach, in a building accessible to the public to publicly canvass the absentee electors' ballots and provisional ballots as provided for in Florida Statutes. Public notice of canvassing shall be given at least 48 hours in advance in a publication of general circulation in the City of Atlantic Beach. The canvass shall be made from the returns and certificates of the inspectors as signed and filed by them. The canvassing board shall submit to the Supervisor of Elections the preliminary returns by 11:59 pm on election night. See Fla. Stat. Chapters 101 and 102 for a complete listing of Canvassing Board duties. After each city election, the Canvassing Board shall issue an official Certification of Election to the city clerk. The clerk shall provide a certificate of election to the candidates elected. Sec. 53. - Availability of list of qualified electors. Lists of qualified electors or registers may be purchased from the Supervisor of Elections for Duval County in accordance with the provisions of F.S. 98.045(3) 98.211.