Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC 07/27/2009 City of Ocoee Minutes of the Charter Review Commission Meeting Held July 27, 2009 Call to Order Chairperson Grafton called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m., in the Commission Chairperson Grafton Chambers of City Hall, located at 150 N. Lakeshore Drive. gave Recording Clerk Moseley the invocation andled the pledge of allegiance to the flag. called roll and declared a quorum to be present. Roll Call Present: Chairperson Grafton, Vice-Chair McKey, Members Amey and Barnes. Also present were City Clerk Eikenberry and City Attorney Rosenthal. Absent: Member Howell (unexcused) Guests: District 1 City Commissioner Gary Hood and District 3 City Commissioner Rusty Johnson. Approval of Minutes of July 7, 2009. Member BarnesVice-Chair McKey , seconded by , moved to approve the Charter Review Commission minutes of the joint session with City Commission held July 7, 2009. Motion carried unanimously. Discuss Items Sent Back by City Commission for Further Review Number of Districts Member Barnes opened the discussion by explaining the options of (1) remain with the current four districts plus a mayor elected at large, (2) add two districts plus a mayor elected at large, or (3) add three districts with the mayor elected by commission. He thought they should choose one option of change to put on the ballot, rather than both. Vice-Chair McKey inquired of the city attorney if there was any structure required for City Attorney the ballot questions to be ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or if they could be multiple choice. Rosenthal said they had to be ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions; however, there is no limit to the number of questions allowed as long as they are drafted in a manner that would not create contradictory results. He gave an example of one question asking to increase the commission to seven members, followed by another question regarding the role of the mayor. He said that more combinations would make drafting the questions more complicated, but they are not limited. Vice-Chair McKey thought that more commissioners were in favor of keeping the mayor elected city-wide. He stated that he was in favor of changing to six districts with the mayor elected city-wide. Commissioner Rusty Johnson said that he did not remember how many commissioners were in favor of the mayor being elected city-wide, but he thinks they can put both options on the ballot because it all comes down to what the citizens decide. Discussion ensued. Charter Review Commission July 27, 2009 City Attorney Rosenthal explained that a charter amendment is a question of whether you are ‘for’ or ‘against’. If it is ‘for’, that means that the new language passes. If it is ‘against’, then the language remains like it is, as opposed to going to some other alternative. He said that the question regarding the mayor would be separate from the size of the commission; it would be a ballot text which changed the position of the mayor as one that is elected by the city commission rather than the electors. He began talking through the ways of wording the text on the ballot and the amendments that would result in the charter. He said it would have to be drafted so that the questions are not Member Barnes contradictory. said he does not want it to be so complicated that it would confuse the voters. He thought it would be better to only have one issue on the Vice-Chair election, and put the other issue on the following election in the future. McKey said he would rather present both possibilities, and word it in the simplest form. Discussion ensued regarding possible wording to put both issues on the ballot. Member Barnes suggested two questions: (1) Do you want to add 2 districts, yes or no? (2) Do you want the mayor elected by the commission (if so there will be 1 additional district) yes or no? City Attorney Rosenthal discussed which sections of the charter would require an amendment due to the above questions passing. Member Amey suggested they only ask the question as to whether the mayor should be elected by commissioners because they had already decided previously as a board that Commissioner Johnson they would not add more districts until the population grew. said he and Commissioner Hood were not present to sway the board’s decision one way or another. He said every ballot they look at is complicated so they cannot put things off because of that. He said they should put it out there, and give the people the choice. City Attorney Rosenthal suggested they decide tonight what direction they want to go and then he would come back to the next meeting with what the questions are and how they change the text of the charter. If there were any obstacles, then he would identify those before he comes back, and do his best to accomplish whatever recommendation they want to make to City Commission. Vice-Chair McKey believes they are looking at growth, and need to increase the number of districts. He said the question is whether the mayor should be elected by commission City Attorney Rosenthal or remain elected city-wide. asked them what their multiple choices would be, if they could make that type of question, and he would try to convert Member Barnes those into ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions. said they have three options to choose from, being the following: (1)Everything stays the same, or (2)Add 2 districts with the mayor still elected city-wide, or (3)Add 3 districts with the mayor elected by commission each year. City Attorney Rosenthal , clarified option 2 as being 6+1 (six districts plus one mayor elected city-wide), and option 3 as being 7+0 (seven districts with mayor elected by commission). He asked if they had option 3, how long the term of the mayor would be. Consensus of the board was for the mayor’s term to be one year, same as the mayor pro tem currently. 2 Charter Review Commission July 27, 2009 City Attorney Rosenthal asked about the implementation date for the change to 4- year terms. He said after the 2010 election, the next election would be in 2012 which would be after the next census is done and the redistricting takes place. He said they previously suggested matching up with the presidential primaries, but nobody can predict what legislation will do in 2012; they could move the dates, but usually give municipalities the Vice-Chair McKey option to move their municipal election dates to match. asked when City Clerk Eikenberry the best opportunity would be to have that election. said March 2010 would be the next opportunity. City Attorney Rosenthal stated that if 4-year terms pass in March, then they would have to tie that into the charter. He said they have elections in 2010 and 2012, and asked how they would stagger the terms if it passes to have 7 members of commission. Discussion ensued regarding the various scenarios and how the terms would be staggered for each. City Attorney Rosenthal stated that commissioners will finish their term, and then at the next election they would switch to the revised terms, etc. It was decided that if they stay with 3-year terms, that one would be elected in 2012 with a term to expire in 2015. The other would have to be for a 2-year term to expire in 2014. City Attorney Rosenthal said you can shorten but not lengthen. He said if they switch to 4-year terms, then one would be elected for a 2-year term and one for a 3-year City Clerk Eikenberry expiration. said she would go through the charter to see if any other issues would arise out of those changes. City Attorney Rosenthal summarized the options discussed: Scenario 1 – no change. Scenario 2 - adding 2 single member districts, for a total of 6+1, no change in mayoral election. Scenario 3 – adding 2 single member districts, changing mayor to single member district (which would basically be adding 3 single member districts), mayor be elected by city commission for a 1-year term as comparable to current mayor pro tem. Additional seats - those under a 3-year term, one new position would go to two years and one would go to three years. Under a 4-year term, one new slot would be for two years and one slot would be four years. Residency Requirements for Department Directors, Chiefs, and City Manager(s) Member Barnes mentioned one issue that current employees are grandfathered in, so Member Amey they are not forced to make any moves. said they need to specify that it is for department directors, chiefs, and city managers. Members suggested allowing the Member Barnes employees 90 days to move into Ocoee. inquired if the city would be Chair Grafton assisting an employee with relocating. said that was not something that should be put into the charter because that was an administrative issue. City Clerk Eikenberry suggested that only allowing 90 days for relocating could be Commissioner Johnson tough. said they could allow a 30 day extension if the city Chair Grafton commission felt it was needed. was concerned that the probationary period for a new employee is currently one year, so forcing someone to move before their 3 Charter Review Commission July 27, 2009 job is secure seems harsh. Commissioner Johnson replied that they would not be forcing anybody to do anything; it is their choice whether they want the job or they don't. Member Barnes said he agrees that people do not have to agree to take the job with the conditions, but he thinks they could lose out on potentially good employees. Vice-Chair McKey believed this was something that could be in the employee handbook and not the charter. Chair Grafton stated that currently the only positions in the charter are the city manager and the city clerk, and they should be careful not to add stuff that is not necessary in the charter. Member Barnes said they should allow the city commission the authority to grant extensions, at their discretion, of the 90-day base period for those employees to meet residential requirements. City Attorney Rosenthal said the residential requirements would affect the wording of Article V, Section C-25(C); he does not want to change the numbering of the charter. City Attorney Rosenthal asked if the board desired for him to draft the changes and bring the language back to the board at another meeting to adopt as a report. The members agreed. He said he would send out the draft ahead of time for review, as it is possible they could come up with another question during the drafting stage. The next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, August 26, 2009, at 6:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 7:43 p.m. 4