Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout_2001 02 21 City Commission Workshop Minutes -! I' CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP FEBRUARY 21, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The Workshop of February 21, 2001 of the City Commission was called to order by Deputy Mayor David W. McLeod at 6:37 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708). ROLL CALL: Mayor Paul P. Partyka, arrived at 7:04 p.m. Deputy Mayor David W. McLeod, present Commissioner Robert S. Miller, present Commissioner Michael S. Blake, present Commissioner Edward Martinez, Jr., present Commissioner Cindy Gennell, present City Manager Ronald W. McLemore, present City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese, present II. WORKSHOP AGENDA A. City Manager Requests The City Commission Consider The Presentation And Report From The Charter Review Committee. Mr. Ronald W. McLemore, City Manager introduced this Agenda Item. With discussion by the Commission on how to handle this Workshop, the consensus was clarified by Deputy Mayor McLeod who stated, "As Chair, I think I would like to see Jim [Consultant James V. Burgess] go ahead and lead this thing by the Sections." Deputy Mayor McLeod then said, "Nothing has said that we must adopt the 'Model City Charter. ", Further discussion followed on the number of Commissioners and whether the Mayor should be able to vote. Deputy Mayor McLeod then asked, "Whether or not you want to leave the Mayor's position as it is, elected at large, whether you are in favor of that; I guess the other side of that question is - are you in favor having a five (5) Member Council with the Mayor being appointed from the Council?" Deputy Mayor McLeod then summarized the previous discussion by stating, "The consensus - that I am hearing then is that basically we want to continue the form of government that we basically have CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITV COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 2 OF 14 with five (5) Commissioners, each being elected from their Districts, and a Mayor being elected - in the City at large." Commissioner Michael S. Blake asked Deputy Mayor McLeod about his earlier comments and said, "When we discussed each of the Commissioners being elected from their Districts..." Deputy Mayor McLeod clarified, "The City at large - districting." Commissioner Blake stated, "The same as it is now?" Deputy Mayor McLeod agreed and said, "That's correct. The same as it is. That's right." Manager McLemore asked Mr. Burgess, "What has been your expenence In Referendums with success relative to whether it was the whole Charter on the Referendum or just pieces of the Charter on the Referendum?" Mr. Burgess stated, "All of the Charters I have done have been the entire document. Now, I think Marilyn [Crotty] has been with the amended approach." Discussion. Ms. Marilyn E. Crotty, Mediator/Project Coordinator stated, "I don't think you can do that using the new document. I think what you'll have to do, is use your old document and make the changes in that because this is so reorganized, and it's all in different sections now, than things were before." Mayor Paul P. Partyka arrived at 7:04 p.m. Ms. Crotty stated that if we were going to work "Item by item," we have to work off the current Charter. Ms. Crotty then referred to the Seminole County Charter where they voted on the whole document with the help of a good educational program. Ms. Crotty mentioned that the language in the current Charter is sexist. Ms. Crotty suggested, "You can clean up that language without putting it to a vote. That's allowed - under Florida Law. So, there may be some other things that Anthony [Garganese] could guide us on, of what you are allowed to do without it having to be voted on." Ms. Crotty added, "There is also some concern you really have to separate them out, and not combine two things with one question." Mr. Burgess stated, "If you decide to merely deal with those substantive areas of the Charter, such as Mr. McLeod mentioned, that is a real basic policy change. I think if you were to decide to go with a Ballot Amendment approach, and you decide to put those issues on the Ballot, you could probably reorganize your existing Charter through a codification, which doesn't change the substance, but it can move things around." Mr. Burgess continued, "You could put on the Ballot, those substantive issues that you think are very sensitive from a public standpoint, and then - take the existing language of the Charter, and through a codification process, reformat it or move it around, so that you've got the right things in the right place." Mr. Burgess then said, "If you decide to go with the Amendment approach, that you define very clearly those four (4) or five (5) Amendments that you want to put before the public, or two (2) or three (3), whatever they are, and then come back and do a codification." Deputy Mayor McLeod turned the Workshop over to Mayor Partyka at 7: 13 p.m. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 3 OF 14 City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese spoke of previous individual amendments and stated, "If you want to do individual amendments, you just have to keep the single subject in mind. You need to group substantive issues together." Attorney Garganese then stated, "Minor Amendments are called 'Technical Conforming Amendments' you can group together; if you have grammatical changes that are minor in nature, or typographical errors, you can group into one question." Discussion ensued on the direction preferred by the Commission as to whether there should be one revised document or individual amendments. Tape I1Side B Mayor Partyka clarified that the consensus of the Commission was "We just go through this whole thing, kind of point by point on this basis, then at the end I think this Commission will decide whether to go - Amendments verses total." ARTICLE I NAME, POWERS, BOUNDARIES Section 1.01. Corporate Name Section 1.02. Powers. Section 1.03. Boundaries. Discussion ensued on the territorial "Boundaries." Mr. Burgess stated, "Revise that sentence to say the present boundaries of the City as amended are on file in the Office of the Clerk. Is that correct?" Mayor Partyka asked, "Does everybody agree with that? Ms. Crotty stated, "Those kind of technical changes can be made without a vote of the citizens." Attorney Garganese addressed this issue and said, "The corporate boundaries need to be in the Charter, pursuant to Chapter 166 although it is somewhat cumbersome to do that. You don't need to send, as you know, Amendments to your municipal boundaries, out to the voters. You just adopt an Annexation Ordinance and you simply administratively change the corporate boundaries in your Charter." Ms. Crotty stated, "If you are saying they need to be in the Charter, then can they be in an Appendix?" Attorney Garganese stated, "Yes." Deputy Mayor McLeod asked, "So you can't say that it's available in the Clerks Office?" Attorney Garganese answered, "No, Sir." Deputy Mayor McLeod then said, "Your present one does." Discussion. Mayor Partyka reiterated, "Can we just refer to a map in the City Clerk's Office?" Attorney Garganese stated, "My view is that it needs to be in the Charter itself." Commissioner Blake asked Attorney Garganese, "Is the language in 1.03. a change that would require a vote in Referendum?" Attorney Garganese stated, "It is a technical change that would require a - vote." Commissioner Blake reiterated, "So, your opinion CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 2] , 200] PAGE 4 OF 14 is any technical changes have to be questions to the voters?" Attorney Garganese answered, "Yes. That would be like a technical change that actually adds verbiage to the Charter; therefore would require a vote of the people for approval, in Florida." Mr. Burgess suggested, "Take Section 2.01. and put an 'Appendix' on it, just stick it in the back of the Charter. Then you've made no change in the language of the Charter." Mr. Burgess continued, "Take Section 2.01. of the original Charter and just say, instead of 2.01., just say 'Appendix.' Or just put instead of Article II, just change that to read 'Territorial Boundaries, Appendix I,' and stick it in the back of the Charter." Attorney Garganese added, "Then you've got to change the Editor's note." Mr. Burgess then said, "If you want to figure a way to get this out of the front of the Charter, and not have to have a vote on it, just call it an Appendix." Attorney Garganese stated, "You could do that, in my opinion. But not as it is currently drafted in 1.03." Mr. Burgess suggested, "What I would suggest you do in 1.03, is under Corporate Boundaries just put parentheses, 'see the Appendix.'" Attorney Garganese stated, "That would work." Discussion followed on the language of (b) and (c), in Section 1.02. and Section 3.01. Attorney Garganese stated, "As a legal standpoint, Section 3.01 of your current Charter is sufficient. " Mr. Burgess clarified, "On this first page, you are going to go back to Section 1.01. of the present Charter, back to 3.01. of the - Charter and the only change - is the editorial note putting the boundaries in the Appendix." With consensus of the Commission, Mayor Partyka stated, "That's correct." ARTICLE II CITY COUNCIL Section 2.01. General Powers and Duties. Section 2.02. Composition, Eligibility, Election and Terms. Section 2.03. Mayor. Discussion ensued regarding changing the name of the Governing Body. That change is changing the name of "City Commission" to "City Council." With consensus of the Commission, the consensus was to continue using the term "Commission." Members of the Commission and the Consultants then discussed the composition of the Commission. Deputy Mayor McLeod handed out a copy of Section 2.02. and read a portion of this document. Discussion. Commissioner Edward Martinez, Jr. asked Attorney Garganese about Section 2.03., "Line three (3) says 'Appoint with advice and consent of the City Council the Members of the Citizen Advisory Boards and Commissions.' Is there a conflict between the procedure we use now, where each Commissioner appoints a Member to each different CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 5 OF 14 Board, or - does - the wording of this say that this is similar to the appointment of the City Clerk or an Attorney where the Mayor would select the people and we would have to vote and approve?" Attorney Garganese said, "You can construe this sentence as Commissioner Blake has indicated, that the Mayor would have the ability to make all appointments to City Boards and Commissions." Discussion. Tape 2/Side A The next issue that was discussed dealt with the Deputy Mayor position, Section 2.02., and Section 2.03. Mayor Partyka stated, "Subject to that one issue on unexpired terms, is this consistent with what this Commission wants?" Commissioner Robert S. Miller said, "You're referring to the - 2.02. and 2.03. that were handed out by Commissioner McLeod with the exception of 2.03. that - third line 'Appoint with the advice and consent of the Council Members Citizen Advisory Board - Commissions' would be struck out - and all the rest of it would remain the way it is?" Commissioner Miller then said, "Then I have no difficulty with it." Commissioner Blake added, "I have no issue with 2.02. as it's stated; and with 2.03., striking out the language that we discussed, but also the language that's in here in regards to the vacancy and re-election. I think we should hold it in abeyance until we get to the section." Commissioner Blake then addressed the fact that further discussion should proceed on the "Additional language in 2.02. that's not on this piece of paper, and that's 2.02. (b) and 2.02. (c)." Mayor Partyka stated, "For the sake of being consistent, can we say that we'll still consider 2.02. and 2.03. the way we have it on this document that Commissioner McLeod has - and with those changes, but we'll discuss (b) and (c), after we handle this? Can we do that?" Commissioner Blake stated, "Sure." Mayor Partyka then said, "Good." Commissioner Martinez said, "I don't have any problem with 2.02. as it is spelled out here; and 2.03. has been amended by eliminating one and half (1 Y2) sentences. And, the only other issue that remains to be discussed, which is - listed under - Article VI of the newly revised Charter, deals with the special elections, filling of vacancies. It doesn't spell out the Mayor's seat, per se, so we have to deal with that. Maybe we can eliminate that from here, and just - it shall become the Mayor, period. Eliminated for the remainder of the unexpired term and then when we get to - Article VI, which has the section of filling of vacancies, we can clear this issue up." Mayor Partyka added, "And that's what the other two (2) Commissioners have said also." Commissioner Cindy Gennell stated, "2.02. is fine. 2.03. with the deletion of the one (1) sentence that we were dealing with earlier, and holding in abeyance this for the unexpired term until we get later on in the process. And I'm assuming here that all the word 'Councils' will be changed back to 'Commission' again?" Mayor Partyka stated, "Okay." CITY OF WINTER SPRlNGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 6 OF 14 Deputy Mayor McLeod stated, "2.02. is fine. The other one - 2.03. on the Mayor, I agree with striking." Deputy Mayor McLeod read from the "old" Charter, page five (5), Section 4.05. regarding the Mayor and a vacancy. Deputy Mayor McLeod clarified that "One says that you would stay until the end of the term, but if there happened to be any kind of a City election and it may not be up for Mayor, the Mayor would then be elected at that time." Discussion ensued on the years that a Commissioner could lose under such a scenario. Commissioner Gennell then said, "Let's hold it off." Deputy Mayor McLeod then said, "I think the thing we want to remember though, in both the Model Charter and our old Charter, it said what happened at the end of the Deputy Mayor, and I think in any case, we want to make sure it's at the end of the Mayor, whatever we decided." Mayor Partyka and Commissioner Gennell stated, "Yes." Next, Mayor Partyka asked, "Do you revise 2.02. (b) and (c), and the qualifications and term limits?" Deputy Mayor McLeod then stated that the reference to 'Council' Member should be changed." Mr. Burgess took note of this. Deputy Mayor McLeod then said, "I have a question on that (b) - qualifications. In the Section 2.02., on the top, it does not list qualifications, it says eligibility, so why would it not be eligibility as (b)?" Mr. Burgess explained, "It's a catch line. It probably should just say 'Composition, Qualifications' and - delete the word eligibility." Mr. Burgess further said that he would change "qualifications" to "eligibility." Deputy Mayor McLeod reiterated, "Change 'qualifications' to 'eligibility' as it says in the top." Mr. Burgess agreed. Commissioner Blake stated, "Why do you need (b) at all?" Discussion. Mr. Burgess then stated, "What we've done there in 6.02. is codified from your Code. This was not 'Charter' language, this was in the Code. You look at page fourteen (14) of the document; that was an Ordinance, and we've pulled it forward to the Charter, and we made one change there. It was fifteen (15) voters, and we've changed it to read fifty (50) registered voters." Commissioner Martinez then stated, "Mr. Burgess, that's what Commissioner Blake is saying, (b) is spelled out in 6.02." Mr. Burgess agreed that this could be eliminated, and explained that "It's sort of designed for the reader." Commissioner Blake advised those in attendance, "I think 2.03. should be folded in as part of 2.02. (a), or perhaps as 2.02. (b), and then re-letter the remaining sections. If the Mayor is part of the Commission, it should not be in a separate section." Mr. Burgess explained, "This Article has been changed to read, 'City Commission,' and you're now talking about the City Commission as a whole." Mr. Burgess then said, "The only reason for 2.03. being a separate section is that you are talking specifically about one (1) Member of the Commission." Commissioner Blake added, "But we ought to have the Mayor also attached, somehow with the other items here." Mr. Burgess responded, "We would. When you re-write it you would - everywhere you would have the wOfd 'Commission,' then you would also have the word 'Mayor. ", Commissioner Blake added, "Anywhere it says 'Council,' you would have 'Mayor and Commission.'" CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 7 OF 14 Commissioner Martinez then stated, "If we adopted 2.03., which spells out the 'Mayor,' with the corrections that we did, we ought to eliminate 2.02. (a) and 2.03. as it stands here." Mr. Burgess agreed. Mayor Partyka added, "Everything gets changed." Mayor Partyka then said, "One main piece that we're eliminating is (b), that says qualifications or eligibility, that's going to be eliminated here?" Mr. Burgess replied, "It could be. It doesn't have to be. It's just a technical thing. I would wait until you go through the document and then come back and decide." Brief discussion ensued on the planned length of tonight's Workshop and whether a second Workshop would be held tomorrow. Mayor Partyka called a break at 8:32 p.m. The Workshop was called back to order at 8:46 p.m. Discussion ensued regarding term limits, 2.02. (c). Commissioner Martinez referenced Article 7, Section 7.02., and said that "Whatever is in effect, will continue in effect, regardless of what changes you make in here." Commissioner Gennell then mentioned that Attorney Garganese and the previous two (2) City Attorneys agreed that "In my position particularly, to run for my - seat three (3) times, does not preclude me from running for the Mayor's seat because, under our charter, the Mayor's position was deemed a separate job. So that you can't say that the Commissioner is out after three (3) terms - and preclude them from running for Mayor which is a different seat, and vice versa." Deputy Mayor McLeod agreed with Commissioner Gennell. Commissioner Blake stated, "I agree that that has been the position of the Attorney's, all I'm saying - it's not clear." Commissioner Gennell added, "It could be clearer." Commissioner Miller stated his preference, "Council Members shall be limited to three consecutive elected terms. Then, just drop down to the third line and pick up where it says 'after having been out of office for one (1) full four (4) year term shall be eligible for election for a - successive three (3) consecutive full terms of office. Wouldn't that eliminate the confusion about those of us already in office being able to go on for an additional twelve years?" Commissioner Martinez agreed, "I think it should be spelled out more clearly." Mayor Partyka raised the issue, "Can the Mayor and or Commissioner, after they serve that positions' three (3) terms, can they then change from there to the opposite or to the other position and serve in effect another three (3) terms? And, I believe the consensus here says we can do it." Mayor Partyka added, "But, I believe they're saying it has to be stated in here." Ms. Crotty stated that "Under your current Charter I think you could do that. But, on what you're talking about now, making the Mayor a Member of the Commission, makes that unclear." Ms. Crotty mentioned a similar situation with the City of Maitland. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 8 OF 14 Discussion ensued on moving to another District, and Deputy Mayor McLeod added, "I think you somehow have to make that very clear, if you're speaking term limits." Mayor Partyka requested input from Charter Review Committee Chairman Donald Gilmore. Mr. Donald Gilmore, Charter Review Committee Chairman: spoke on terms of office. Commissioner Gennell clarified, "Of office means to be in office in the State of Florida holding office. It does not mean in a particular office seat." Mr. Burgess and Commissioner Miller suggested the following wording: "The term of the office of the Mayor shall be limited to three (3) - consecutive elected terms." With input and the agreement of several members of the Commission, Mr. Burgess then suggested the following wording, "Paragraph (a) would be 'The terms of the office of the Mayor shall be limited to three (3) consecutive elected full terms. Council shall be elected for three (3) consecutive elected full terms from the District from which elected - full - terms of office from the District from which elected." Mr. Burgess added, "We then put the proviso in that 'provided any Elected Official having been out of office for one (1) full four (4) year term, shall be eligible for a successive three (3) consecutive terms. ", Members of the Commission instead agreed on the wording of "One (l) year." The consensus of the Commission was to use "One (1) year." Mr. Burgess stated, "Out for one (1) year, and then run again." Mayor Partyka stated "Right." Mr. Burgess then clarified the past discussions and stated, "The Mayor would be three (3) consecutive elected full terms. Council would be three (3) consecutive elected full terms, - from their District of residence. And then (c), you're out for one (1) year, and you can start all over. Is that the intent? Let me take a crack at writing that up." Mr. Burgess then said, "Paragraph (a) would be the Mayor. Paragraph (b) would be the Councilor the Commission. Paragraph (c) - would apply to everybody." Tape 2/Side B Regarding three (3) or four (4) year terms, Mayor Partyka stated that the consensus of the Commission was for "Four (4) years." Discussion ensued on "Four (4) year terms." Attorney Garganese stated, "Some cities elect to go to four (4) year terms because they want to stagger their elections during gubernatorial presidential election years. Is that an issue that this Commission wants to address?" Commissioner Gennell stated, "In other words, we want to do them in conjunction with - other elections being held." Attorney Garganese suggested, "When the Florida Governor is elected that year, and then the Presidential Year, when the President is elected. That would require some wordsmithing to - get the term staggered appropriately. It would probably take several years to get it staggered." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 9 OF 14 Section 2.04. Compensation; Expenses. The use of the word salary or compensation was next discussed. Commissioner Gennell suggested that the word "Compensation" should be used. Discussion. Commissioner Gennell suggested, "Just change the word on the check from reimbursement to compensation - on the monthly checks. That would cover what - we are trying to accomplish here; and then we would have a compensation check each month, that would not have to have all the deductions and everything taken out of it, and then when we submitted our expenses, then we would get a reimbursement. Right now, everything we get is called reimbursement, and it's not right." Further discussion. Commissioner Blake stated, "What it really, truly is that we receive, it is a non-accountable expense reimbursement plan, which is separate and aside from the other expenses which is an accountable expense reimbursement plan." Discussion ensued on whether the issue of compensation should possibly be done by Ordinance; and "Non-employee compensation." Deputy Mayor McLeod suggested, "There should be some kind of an automatic procedure that based on today's dollar, where we are at, that that continues to roll forward." Commissioner Gennell said, "My suggestion would be to do it at - the change of the fiscal year, and that is in line with when the CPI comes out." Commissioner Gennell then asked, "Could we word this in such a way as to - identify the two (2) types of - reimbursement, a non-accountable reimbursement and an accountable reimbursement." Manager McLemore responded, "I don't think I would put that in your Charter, lets just agree to do it." Commissioner Blake asked Attorney Garganese, "If we struck Section 4.04., in the current Charter, in it's entirety, then that would not prohibit us, any way shape or form, from doing any of those things? Am I correct? It would not prohibit us from paying ourselves a salary or for providing ourselves a non-accountable reimbursement account or an accountable reimbursement account, or whatever method we desire to do so under our home rule powers?" Attorney Garganese responded, "I think arguably you are correct, that under the home rules powers and the inherent powers of this Commission as a legislative body, you could establish a reasonable salary or compensation for yourself if this provision was not in the Charter." Commissioner Blake then said, "My recommendation would be just to strike it." Further discussion ensued on the issue of compensation; and avoiding any reference to the CPI and COLA. Commissioner Blake stated, "I would suggest one of two things, I would suggest either do nothing, and through Ordinance we can craft what we just talked about." Commissioner Blake then suggested, "Or strike Section 4.04. in the current Charter and do nothing else. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21,2001 PAGE 10 OF 14 Commissioner Gennell suggested, "Leave the Charter alone." Mr. Burgess then said, "So, we're going to leave 4.04. as it is?" Commissioner Blake and Commissioner Gennell agreed with this. Commissioner Gennell asked Attorney Garganese, "If you change the one word in 4.04. - 'salary' to 'compensation,' does that require a referendum?" Attorney Garganese responded, "Yes." Mayor Partyka asked the Commission for a consensus on Section 4.04. The consensus of the Commission agreed to leave 4.04. as it stands. Section 2.05. Prohibitions. Mr. Burgess stated, "Unless you want to raise this to the level of an amendment, you may want to just stick with your existing language." Commissioner Martinez stated, that regarding "(b) on page four (4), interference with administration, which is in conflict with the powers." Mr. Burgess responded, "It's an attempt to take 4.07. of the existing Charter and model it after the 'Model City Charter,' except that we left out item (b) in the Model Charter, because of the legal questions that were raised." Commissioner Martinez then asked, "If we are vested - in the City, why is it that we cannot address ourselves to an employee of the City without going through the Manager first?" Mr. Burgess stated, "I am not saying you can't do that." Mr. Burgess further stated, "The reason it is here is because the Charter Review Committee felt they were under the instructions to put in this Charter the business from the Model so far as they could. This was a provision out of the Model and it is consistent with the City Manager form of government. It's - purpose is to make it clear that the Manager directs and supervises the employees, and not the City Commission. " Commissioner Martinez added, "If all powers are invested in the Commission including the appointment of the City Manager, why is it that we are forbidden, if we adopt this here, from addressing an employee?" Ms. Crotty added, "You can talk to them, and ask questions, and investigate, and all of that. You just can't fire them. You can't hire them. That's all under the City Manager form of government. This is a normal phrase that is included to make sure it is clear on the role of the executive, the City Manager, and the role of the policy makers, which is not to interfere in the day to day business," Discussion ensued on the use of legal terms and "intent." Mayor Partyka asked Manager McLemore for his opinion of this. Manager McLemore stated, "The intent is to preserve the - Governing Body. Because once any individual of this body has any right, over and above any other individual, you no longer have a form of government that is manageable." Discussion. Tape 3/Side A Commissioner Miller suggested a change in the wording, and said, "On the third line delete the words after - 'City Manager', put a full stop there; and delete the words CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 11 OF 14 'solely' through the City Manager. And - then start the next sentence with a capital 'N' for 'Neither the counciL..'" Discussion ensued on the matter of investigations and this wording. Mayor Partyka stated, "Let the record show that Commissioner Martinez is leaving." Commissioner Martinez departed at 9:55 p,m. Deputy Mayor McLeod next spoke of the responsibilities of the City Manager. Deputy Mayor McLeod then said, "The (b) insert should be added back into it also." Manager McLemore stated, "I think it needs to be in your Charter, and not just somewhere in a Resolution or whatever. It's such a fundamental part of your government. But I think we can rewrite it a little bit to satisfy the concern that was raised." Commissioner Blake then read a portion of Section 5.03. Mr. Burgess suggested, "If you are going to make this a Charter issue, I'd go and put (a), (b), and (c) in, and with a rewrite of (b), as Ron has suggested, to get around that language. " Mayor Partyka said, "Lets take a little quick poll to see if we want to do that, and in effect put it into the Charter." Deputy Mayor McLeod replied, "Yes I do, and the only rewrite of this thing, when it would be done, it also needs to included the Mayor." Commissioner Blake stated, "If it is as it is written, then I would say 'no.'" With certain corrections, I might find it agreeable." Commissioner Blake continued, "The 'Prohibitions' section, I agree the new language is more complete and easier to understand than the old language. I don't know whether or not that's worth an item on the ballot. Okay. In terms of section (b), I think that (b) and (c) could probably be easily rolled into one (1) item, and could probably be stated more clearly to suggest that the City Manager alone is responsible for the hiring, the firing, and the direction of the employees; with the stipulation that this - does not prohibit any Commissioner from free and open access to any member of the City's Staff that would be afforded to any other citizen out there. And then add to that the inquiry and investigation language." Commissioner Miller stated, "My concern is also as Commissioner Blake said. I hate to see us load up the Ballot with all these issues that are - important, they're not critical. I think he has addressed the other issues that I concur with." Commissioner Gennell's response was, ''I'm concerned with loading the Ballot up, but I don't really think the 4.07. that we have in our current Charter addresses all the issues that are covered in this amendment, so I think it's probably worth dealing with, whether you combine (b) and (c), or whatever you do. I think probably it needs a little bit of wordsmithing, then come back to us." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE 12 OF 14 Mayor Partyka stated, "I don't know if this is a tie or whatever, but I sense enough to say that this, we'll put a little issue here and at the end, as we set our priorities, I think this is an issue that needs to be talked about, at that point in time." Commissioner Blake reminded the Commission that they have until September to consider all the issues. Regarding the poll just taken, Deputy Mayor McLeod stated "I'll break that tie if it means a little wordsmithing." Mr. Burgess stated, "I'd suggest you go ahead and keep 4.08. (a) and (b)." Brief discussion. Members of the Commission briefly commented on whether they wished to continue with the Workshop. There was agreement to keep the discussions going. Mayor Partyka asked "Any problem with anyone, with that?" No problems were verbalized. Section 2.08. City Clerk. Mr. Burgess stated that "2.08. is different under the present Charter where the Mayor nominates and the Commission approves, so this is a change. The change is the Clerk would be appointed by a majority of the Commission, and removed by a majority of the Commission." Discussion ensued. Deputy Mayor McLeod read from his handout about "Section 2.08. City Clerk, (a). The City Council, after receiving a nomination from either the Mayor or a Council Member or Members, shall by a 4/5 vote of the Council, appoint an Officer of the City who shall have the title of City Clerk." Deputy Mayor McLeod then said (b) does state that the City Clerk may be removed by a 4/5 vote of the Council. Further discussion followed on numbers instead of percentages. The consensus was for 4 (4) votes and not 4/5's. Deputy Mayor McLeod stated that the City Attorney language was basically the same as the City Clerk. Commissioner Blake asked, "If it requires four (4) votes to hire and four (4) votes to fire, how many votes are required to approve a contract for one of those three (3) people?" Mayor Partyka stated, "Four (4)." Commissioner Blake requested that the Mayor explain his position on who should make the appointment to the Commission for the positions of the City Clerk and City Attorney. Mayor Partyka stated, "The only issue is clarity. I really don't care whether the Mayor does it, the Commission does it, or both people do it. It is clear. So from my standpoint, if you give the Mayor, and the Mayor should have as much say in terms of the appointment as the Commissioners in this case. So yes, you get the appointment from anyone up here, and termination should be done - by the Commission. " CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21, 2001 PAGE \3 OF 14 Commissioner Blake stated, "Then, I would suggest actually somewhat broader language for each of those three (3). Instead of by the Mayor, and/or by a Commissioner or Commissioners, I think it should be open to the Commission, which we have decided that the Mayor is a part of, to determine how the selection process will occur, each individual time." Commissioner Gennell stated that "I was quite comfortable handling the screening process." Deputy Mayor McLeod stated, "I wouldn't have a problem I guess with that, if it was to go back and put it the old way, that the Mayor has the right to appoint and the Commission confirms. However, as long as the (b) is in there that says that the Commission Members of the Council be by four (4) votes, will be the ones to remove them." Discussion. Mayor Partyka asked, "Is it the Commissioners appointing, or is it the Commissioners and the Mayor appointing?" Commissioner Miller stated, "Both. Commissioner and/or Mayor." Commissioner Blake stated, "I would just call it the Commission, which to my understanding encompasses all six (6) individuals, then it is up to us to decide." Commissioner Blake stated, "For clarity, the Mayor and Commission." Mr. Burgess asked, "Are you going to go ahead and use the language of 2.08., and change that to read the Mayor and Commission by a vote of four (4) Members, and the City Clerk may be removed by a vote of four (4) Members. Are you saying just go ahead and use the language in 2.08. as it is written in the document or are you saying, go back. I'm a little confused as to what document." Mayor Partyka stated, "You can use your words, but it is four (4), and it's Commissioners and the Mayor - the Mayor and Commissioners. " Commissioner Blake asked Attorney Garganese, "Since we are talking about these three (3) Commission appointments, and that's all of the Commission appointments, those three (3); is there a way to craft that in one question? Not to enumerate the three (3) positions necessarily, but to define how the Commission makes each of its appointments, by Commission and the Mayor appointing, the Commission approving by four (4) votes, and that removal be by four (4) votes." Attorney Garganese stated, "That is a good argument you have to separate them, because each individual person is its own office, is a Charter office." Commissioner Blake then said, "But their duties are defined independently, but I'm just wondering if they're, and I think we should look at this - I'm wondering if the appointment and removal process needs to be separated between the three (3) officers, and I would argue it doesn't have to be. I'd appreciate it if you could look into that." Attorney Garganese stated, "I could look at that." Discussion ensued. Deputy Mayor McLeod recommended addressing the three (3) officers separately. Mayor Partyka asked Mr. Burgess what his view on this was. Mr. Burgess stated, "I think I could draw up some language to combine it, so it would be generically all one item." Attorney Garganese stated, "There's no question that you can draft the language, the question is whether we comply with the single subject requirement." Discussion ensued. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP - FEBRUARY 21,2001 PAGE ]4 OF 14 Commissioner Gennell departed at 10:37 p.m. Members of the Commission then discussed tomorrow's Workshop. Section 2.09. Investigations. Section 2.10. Independent Audit. Section 2.11. Procedure. Section 2.12. Action Requiring an Ordinance. Section 2.13. Ordinances in General. Mr. Burgess stated, "The next sections, 2.9., 2.10., 2.11., 2.12., to the end of this section, are duplicates of the existing Charter - you can make a policy decision that these would not be Charter level, and keep them as it is." Commissioner Blake asked, "2.13. also?" Mr. Burgess stated, "2.13. also." Deputy Mayor McLeod stated, "I disagree with that. Number 2.11. has been changed." The Commission agreed that tomorrow's Workshop would begin at 5:00 p.m. III. ADJOURNMENT With consensus of the Commission, Mayor Partyka adjourned the Workshop at 10:40 p.m. /- - _ _ r ' ,0\ ' v/: ~ -'..'.' -' . r _ - -...... ---- ""; //...... { 0' rJ::-.' S~7C~jt'fY SUBMITTED BY: " ...~_.' . J~t. ;:V u . /,:' -,'.. "'IDRE1\.;.f - ZO-LUACES _, -__ ~ ~ __' ~~ ,0=:1 ";' - '-.,CIJ.'Y GJ;E.R1<: .... . :- --- .. -, I ".