Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-18-17 Minutes r )( ( )(—'( ftarida Charter Review Board January 18,2017 MINUTES 7:00 p.m. Call to Order Chairman Hopper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., in the Commission Chambers of City Hall, located at 150 N. Lakeshore Drive. Recording Clerk Sibbitt called roll and declared a quorum to be present. After roll call, Pledge of Allegiance was led by Member Griffin. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum Present: Chairman Hopper, Vice-Chair King, Members West, Murray, Griffin, and Alternate Member Bonham. Also present were Recording Clerk Sibbitt, Charter Review Commission "CRC" Facilitator Rosenthal, and Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier. Absent: Alternate Member Grogan Guests: None Approval of Minutes of November 16, 2016, Meeting Motion for Approval of the November 16, 2016, Minutes: Moved by Member West, Seconded by Member Griffin; Motion carried 5-0. Public Comments -None Discussion/Review of the Current City Charter Chairman Hopper said that he noticed everyone has the memorandum provided by the City Attorney in front of them. He explained the memorandum summarizes that the Charter Review Commission cannot put their questions straight to the ballot. It will have to be brought back before the City Commission. It is his understanding that the amending of a county charter is different than the method for amending a municipal charter. Assistant City Attorney Crosby- Collier explained that under Chapter 125, which regulates counties, there is a provision relating to county charters that allows for charter itself to establish how the questions get to the voters. There is, however, a different procedure in the State law for cities. Provided in Florida Statute 166.031, it states that the only way to get a charter question to the voters is to either have the City Commission pass an ordinance or a petition of ten percent (10%) of the voters. Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier shared that it is her understanding that about ten (10) Charter Review Board January 18, 2017 years ago the last Charter Review Commission moved to model the Orange County Charter to have amendments and revisions of the charter go directly to the ballot. The attorney further explained how they came to realize that charter questions cannot go straight to the ballot and the inquiry that was conducted with the Florida League of Cities and Local Government Law. Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier explained this is an opportunity to look at the charter and make corrections that will be more favorable for everyone. At the City Commission Meeting last night this was also discussed and explained. It was recommended to the City Commission to allow the Charter Review Board to present their recommendations in which they could adopt an ordinance with those recommendations to put straight onto the ballot. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal shared that when he heard of this he was surprised as he did not recall the question of putting amendments directly on the ballot to the voters when the charter was amended last time. It is his understanding that there have not been any litigations or charter amendments challenged over the provisions that match our current charter. The risk is they can leave the charter as is and have it go straight to the voters without going through the City Commission; however, if someone wanted to challenge it, it could be a successful challenge. He briefly explained some of the history of the prior charter verbiage and the steps that the Charter Review Board had to endure during that time. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal advised that the board has the opportunity to address this current charter with an amendment and have something stronger than what was in the charter before. He explained that they can change the language so it does not give the City Commission the power to veto their amendments, but the Commission would still have to adopt an ordinance. Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier shared some information that she found on the City of Tarpon Springs, which allows for their City Commission to review their report once before the board finalizes the report to adopt by ordinance. If this is something they may like to consider, she can research further. Chairman Hopper shared his concern that the Commission might not being happy with the changes they recommend and vote down the ordinance as some of the decisions they make might directly affect how they operate. Member West shared that they are an appointed board, and he feels they should not be above an elected board. He opined that the elected officials should have the final say. Chairman Hopper disagreed, as the Charter Review Board is an independent board that was asked by the City Commission to review the charter. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal suggested one of the things they can do is present their amendments with an ordinance. It would still have to be adopted, but it would eliminate another step. Chairman Hopper said he likes that suggestion and would think that the Commission would appreciate that. Member Griffm said that the logical way would be to present it as an ordinance as it will be the Commission's choice no matter how it is presented. He opined that presenting an ordinance could streamline the process and not make it so cumbersome. Alternate Member Bonham said he shares the same sentiments as Member West and feels that the City Commission will listen to them and take their input. Vice-Chair King inquired if sending it as an ordinance would be a one-time opportunity. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal shared that right now there is not a procedure that answers that. Currently, the charter says it goes directly to the voters. For future charter review, after this one, they have the opportunity to recommend what procedure they would like to follow. Member Murray said he also agrees that the ordinance would be the way to go. After further discussion ensued, CRC Facilitator Rosenthal suggested that the board put off discussion until the next meeting to allow the city attorney to bring back different options or provisions they may want to 2IPage Charter Review Board January 18, 2017 consider. Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier shared that the Supervisor of Elections Office did advise the City Clerk that they will need to have the ballot language by January 19, 2018, which is when qualifying begins for the general election. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal added that if they work off that date, then November would be the latest month that they will have to conclude their changes so they can send an ordinance before the Commission for adoption. Chairman Hopper asked Recording Clerk Sibbitt to please begin reading the Charter from where they left off at the last meeting. The following items were briefly discussed when reviewing those sections: Article III City Commission - C-9, Created; composition, desijination, election generally Chairman Hopper inquired how they feel about the single-member districts versus a commission at large. Member West opined that he likes the single-member districts, because otherwise they could have Commissioners that all reside in one subdivision or area of the city. It was asked that Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier briefly explain the Districting Commission, which is set to meet soon. Vice-Chair King asked for clarification on the question that Chairman Hopper posed to the board. Chairman Hopper shared that he was asked by a resident if they could do away with the single-member district seats and have a commission at large. Member Griffin shared that it is great to have a Commissioner who lives within the district they represent, because then they would personally understand the issues within that district. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal advised that this discussion would also relate to Article XI. Vice-Chair King inquired if the person asking had any reasons or thoughts on why they would want a commission at large. Chairman Hopper shared it was an inquiry and the thought was that they would not have to have a Districting Commission and the citizens of Ocoee would also be able to vote at large, which allows the Commissioners to be accountable for the City and not just their district. Brief discussion ensued. Member West inquired when the Mayor pro tern was elected. Chairman Hopper shared they are not elected but appointed by the City Commission. Discussion ensued regarding if there is a rotating process. Member West said he would also like to address the process of resignation of Mayor. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal advised that would be Section C-17 — Vacancies; forfeiture of office; filling of vacancies. Chairman Hopper agreed that it would be a great idea of review that process. Vice-Chair King inquired why there are four districts. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal explained that historically there have always been four districts. He shared that the Districting Commission is looking to meet, but typically most jurisdictions do their districting ever ten(10) years with the census. He further briefly explained the difficulties of districting every five (5) years as currently stated in the charter, because it requires projection data versus real data. CRC Facilitator Rosenthal shared that they may want to consider changing the redistricting of the city every ten (10) years based on the census. 3iPage Charter Review Board January 18, 2017 CRC Facilitator Rosenthal suggested that they keep a running list of topics that they would like to revisit and discuss again. It was asked that the topics of Mayor pro tern (C-9), districting (C-9, C-65 and C-66), and vacancy (C-17) be added to the list. Chairman Hopper encouraged the members to please go through the charter and highlight areas they would like to discuss. He further announced the next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 15, 2017. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Melanie Sibbitt, Recording Clerk Michael Hopper, Chairman 4jPage