4:06 p.m. uh city commission workshop sunshine. Sasha Oh, I'm sorry. Uh Christine, is there a quorum? Yes, mayor. Okay. Thank you, Sasha. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay, so today we're going to have a workshop, mostly
presentation, but hopefully some good Q&A on um municipal government uh ethics, sunshine law, and public records. So starting with municipal government. So it's uh provided for in the Florida constitution article 8 section 2B.
Municipalities shall have governmental, corporate and proprietary powers to enable them to conduct municipal government, perform municipal functions and render municipal services and may exercise any power for municipal purposes except as pro
otherwise provided by the Is there a question? No, I bet you said it's cold. Oh, we'll take care of that. Thank you. All right. Um, each municipal legislative body shall be elected. So, all of you are here because
you are elected by the residents of the city. Um, in order to have a municipal body, you have to have a municipal charter and that is considered essential and fundamental for every Florida municipality. No municipal government can exist um nor
can it be created exist without a charter because it's very important. Uh the charter cannot be changed by ordinance without a public referendum. Can you hear me? It's a little bit louder.
No, too. We need it louder. Oh. Oh, I got to Okay. Okay. did it. So, um, yes, the charter cannot be changed. Can I'm sitting tired? Okay, I don't feel bad. The charter cannot be changed by
ordinance. So, only by public referendum. The any amendment to it can be proposed through an ordinance, but it will have to be voted on by the residents. This being the case because um it's essentially your contract with the community. So the municipal charter
originates within the community must be formally approved by a majority of the registered voters of the community and like I said it's in in a sense it's a compact among the residents of the community regarding the extent and the form of government that they
desire. Before you is the city of Eustace's charter which of course is available online in Munich code. Um this is the one part that we don't change unless it involves annexations which of course the city boundaries can be
changed um through ordinance but everything else on here requires it to be um submitted to the electoral electorate for vote. Um there's certain information that's in the
charter that is important talks about how um the charter can be abolished or reestablished. We have the boundaries of the city which is the section that I just mentioned that we can change be
through ordinance as a result of annexations whether voluntary or involuntary. um the form of the government that we have which is the commission manager government. Essentially you have uh five
members staggered terms you each have equal voting power. The mayor has a a prescriptive role as far as being the face of the commission. Um but just essentially it's ceremonial for
for all intents of purposes. um is the mayor is of course considered the presiding officer at uh commission meetings and any other meeting that is held um where all five of you are gathered and the city manager is
essentially the administrator of the city for all intents and purposes. Um the powers, qualifications, vacancies, all of that is included in here. As far as the commission is concerned, we know
we have to come back to this and make some corrections uh to clarify some of the language, but essentially it's all in here. And um it discusses the the roles that each of you have as well as um the ordinances and resolutions that
you decide on at the meetings. Talks about the city manager's role and uh his duties. Now the city manager of course is hired by the commission as well as the city attorney. Uh but the city manager is in charge of
all of the departments. All department heads report to the city manager. Um so everything involving the administration of the city is handled by Tom. Um therefore any the recommendation is always to follow the
charter and address questions related to the administration to Tom um as is required. One of the items particularly uh critical is just because uh the
manager has a day-to-day understanding of what's going on and who's here and who's not. So any kind of request through um from departments or for specific employees should be made to Tom and of course so all so if
we have questions of department heads we should go through Tom. Yes. Okay. Tom is here. Does Tom you want to elaborate to be interactive? I mean, clearly the the commission is approachable and I think it's encouraged
that our staff have good relationships with the commissioners, but especially when we're getting into uh actionable items or policy issues certainly um that uh should be directed through me uh and then I can coordinate with the
department heads. uh and I ask that if department heads have any contact with the commission that they let me know uh about that contact. But yes, I I would ask that you know if it's actionable, if you're asking for action, if you're
asking for policy type uh decisions that that would be directed through me uh and then I can work with the department heads and we'll discuss it later. But another good reason to do this is it helps
minimize a potential violation of sunshine law by communicating with staff or non uh voting members of certain committees, certain boards, um subcommittees that are basically all under Tom's direction, using that individual as a
possible um intermediary to get an understanding of what other commissioners might want or kind of it's just better to have everything can go through Tom. Okay. And um all of the departments that are established for the benefit of the
public are there like our chief of police, uh um the department heads, the police department, fire department, etc. and the powers of the city and the budget, etc. These are just general topics. Is there anything on here that
you guys want to discuss? Revisit? I think I have a little question slide pretty slide. No, no question. Nope. Okay. Would anyone in the audience anybody else have a question? No. Good.
I I have a question. I noticed something about um like like if we were um like when we went through the process of having an interim commissioner, how much leeway does that commissioner have?
What what in that can how much um city business or how much involvement can they have? Is there a limit to it or are an interim commissioner has same full full acting uh authority as any elected commissioner with the difference that
the sitting body would select to avoid having to do a special election uh to fill that void but it's they have the exact same role and exact same responsibilities. So, well, while we're on that,
um, would we have to have a referendum to invoke a timeline for appointing a interim commissioner? Say we have to do one within 30 days in order to change the requirements. Well, it just says the the the
commission shall appoint. It doesn't give any timeline at all. Right. Um, so any changes which we will be modifying. And this is actually one of the things that we um ran into last time. Any changes to the language in this charter, including adding timelines, would have
to go through referendum. That's why we can't do it any other way. However, yes, go ahead. Well, I just wanted to point out that you can you can amend our code of ordinance ordinances
or adopt rules and practices as long as they are not in conflict correct with the charter. Right. So the charter related to appointing it says you shall appoint a commissioner. You can through other means uh decide how that's done as
long as you shall do it. Right. as long it doesn't as long as it doesn't conflict. There's a separate section in the um code that talks specifically about elections and in there there are some time frames that are referenced and qualifications and things like that um
which we have to read them in conjunction like Tom said there can't be a conflict but if they complement each other we can kind of add that criteria um but essentially this when it comes to the charter to the charter it cannot be
changed without a vote from from the public and um yeah so last time we we went through all the process we complied with it by having our appointment shall appoint. Yeah I know but do we I mean and and I know this is up for debate. Do we think we should have a timeline or
no pros and cons? There could definitely well we want to look at this language because there was some u difficulty in in in how it was worded. I mean the intent is is there but there was just it wasn't as clean as I would have liked. So we are looking at it and
if that's uh we want to add into the charter certain stipulations we could do that but if we wanted to keep it more general and then look at adding a um just specific subset of rules in the code we can do that without having to go through the voting.
We said we wanted to do something like that when we when all this was going on and uh the seat was vacant, the election was kind of close. There were some things we wanted to Yeah. And are we It says you shall appoint. But can it be you shall appoint unless
there's a municipal election coming up within 90 days? Then we don't have to appoint. Well, the charter provides for five seats for a reason. when we have four of you, there's a problem and we can't really um you know, if we have a situation where we can't vote on an
item, that does affect the public interest. That's why it says shall um in order to make sure that we eliminate the cir the situations where we can't actually conduct business because that is the responsibility to the to the citizens. So, um I mean, what's everyone
else think on that? I agree with you. I think it should be a time period so that we don't have what we had back then. Nobody knew how long we could. Should we just let it go? Are we going to influence the next commission election if they appointed someone? So, yeah, I think we need some clarity. I Michael,
what do you think? You've been through a lot of appointments. I I truthfully think that I think it should be our discretion. It should be our discretion. However, but I thought there was a time period that if if within so so many so many day uh months or something
that you know other cities do it that way the state government does it that way and I thought we had something because Mary had followed that stuff in the past. So it like a timeline within 60 days. Mhm. But it didn't come up in that during that last scenario. I
talked with Derek and Sasha a lot about that and it well okay so let's let's take it a step further and sorry I mean it just makes sense to talk about yeah so say we have an election within those 60
days so you know say for some reason one of us the next cycle comes through one of us is out for some reason within 45 days of the election but our ordinance says we can we can we shall appoint within 60 days. So we'd be able to let
it go to the election. If you wanted to make that that change, you can. I think it's best for you to have discretion because of the uniqueness of the circumstances. So for instance, had this had this been the case when we had um our interim
commissioner appointed, then it would have made absolute sense to wait until the election um took place. However, the vacancy was much earlier in the year and we had a number of meetings. We actually looked at how many meetings we had left.
Um, you know, when we were going to get the results, this when the next seat was going to be filled, all of that. And it it was too much time for there to be that vacancy. If it's just a matter of, you know, months by the time you get publish, you know, you got to get the publication out, you got to do the background checks, you got
to do the interviews, then it wouldn't make sense. And do Yeah. And do we think 30 days is too soon for that to get to get someone applicants vetted um notice done meetings? Yeah, I think 30 days is too soon. Yeah, that that wouldn't be
enough time. That's quick. Now, and another thing you have also if you have somebody that you're going to appoint that's going to run. Well, that's what I You're putting your finger You're putting your finger on the scale. Yeah. Because you're having somebody run as an incumbent at that point. And and if we did it, I think we'd have to do what we
did in in yours. We'd have to to have someone else. Yes. And we'd have to have that language. Yeah. And it worked out nicely last time. Um but of course that is a valid concern. Uh one of the items we could do and that doesn't necessarily have to be in the charter. That could be done under the elections component or
that chapter in the ordinance uh code of ordinances. What criteria would apply to an interim commissioner? So if there is already um you know if we have closed the the the election uh qualification cycle we have people already that are um you know
trying to get into this position then we will indicate that this is not this individual could not be considered of course and you have a situation where okay what if there's no one else that wants it you know so you have to have that discretion exactly yeah that discretion
so unless yeah there's no one else then. Yeah. In order for someone someone for us to change and instead of them being um um becoming uh invest invested in in January, they couldn't take their seat
immediately. We'd have to change go that would have to be to referendum also. Can we change that that if they're elected like the last time they can be seated immediately? We can add that language assuming that there's not another person
that isn't running the election. So November 3rd in this case, yeah, November 4th, the person who won gets seated the ter then the the term would be longer than what the position requires. So that would not be acceptable.
So So there's in order to change that though so that we could seat someone immediately even if they win they have to go wait till January. So that wouldn't right the terms you they actually and I think we're we're else trying to make those corrections to to make the timeline really clean. Uh but
essentially that first meeting where you have the the swearing in take place that's when you're officially you know welcomed into that role and that's also the last day that you serve in that capacity. So it's a full four years. So um but yes, we can we'll clean up the
language in the charter um by referendum, but also look at the criteria in um in the code to build in those um you know safeties so that it could be certainly uh easier for for people that are interested to to
participate as well as not influence any future incumbent officers. And if I may for um so in 2016 uh we put some items on the ballot and we changed the charter. And so maybe
going back to what Commissioner Holland was talking about. I think prior to 2016 it said one you shall appoint within 30 days and two if it's more than six months until the next election you can't appoint. You have to have a special
election. And in 2016, the commission put on the ballot to change that to the current, which actually offers you more flexibility than what it used to say. Yeah. But special elections are expensive, right? So you you So the
commission at in 2016 eliminated the 30-day requirement and eliminated the special election requirement. I remember right. That's why we changed it. We wanted it changed here. It was because of the expense of it. Right. Yeah. So now, regardless of where you are in a
four-year term, it's a commission appointment, whereas previously it had to be a special election if you had more than six months until the election. So the current language was changed in 2016 and it was designed to give maximum
flexibility. But I think one drawback of that is it doesn't give much guidance. Um, Is there any do you want to talk about uh this component a little bit more or I think what Emily said can actually be accomplished in
wording if you said that if someone had already won the election then they shall automatically be the one appointed for the temporary remainder. of the abandoned seat and then they're
they would end on the first meeting of the year and then ironically they would also get reworn in for their full four so that we have a consistency of the same person. Yeah. But the but the charter the charter says that someone appointed shall fulfill that term until
it's till it's ending. So that would have to be adjusted to. So how do we get around that? You adjust it all. It has to go to the voter, right? Yeah. Well, that has to go to the public because each each term is four years. Yeah. So, it's a way of whether you think
that's worth the effort. Yeah. And again, um I think the flexibility is a way to go because if that is a situation where the individual that um is elected ends up being the only one interested in that position, then that
would kind of work itself out. But it would be um a very, you know, rare circumstance, right? I think I really do think there should be a timeline. That's just my opinion. I I'm not sure what that is. You know, maybe you could guide us more on that,
but could we take a look at surrounding cities and see what they're doing there? There there should be there should be a timeline. It shouldn't go out n 120 150 days. You know, maybe 30 days is too soon. maybe 60 to 90 days, but
you know, 90 days is three months. And like I said, and if you do have an election coming up, then like like Michael says, then you know that was I know that was one of my biggest concerns was you know we point someone up there and they run. I mean we've pretty much I
mean in my opinion we pretty much vetted them and you know and it's unduly unduly influencing the voters in my opinion. Um, I don't know what I don't know what everyone else thinks about, right? You could put a sub in that that if you do appoint someone, they won't run for
office for a minimum of two years. So, that keeps them away from rerunning for that. No, that's not that wouldn't be acceptable. and the court. Um, but I'm I'm happy to take a look at some comparisons and look at some time frames and um present some proposals as far as
what would make sense and that way when we look at the referendum we have a better idea of what the will of the commission is. Okay. All right. Uh the next subject we're going to cover is ethics. I'm going to be calling on you
soon. Uh there are three princip fundamental principles of Florida ethics law. A public office is a public trust. Okay. Uh concern that the public servants avoid any situation that attempts to
dishonor. No one can serve two masters. Okay. So, the ethical principles um are declared by law in chapter 112 part three. Um and that's what you have before you. I printed out the summary of the chapter to kind of
cover um give you an idea of what all the topics are and then specific parts of of um the ethics code because it's quite long. Um but really the ones that are more
pertinent to each of for you guys. Let's see. Um so the um so this will include for instance like voting conflicts, gifting um and your code of conduct. These are
the ones that are kind of sub included in the little packet. Um but all of them are in chapter 112. Um all right. So the legislative intent behind the ethical principles here is listed. Um it is declared to be the policy of the state that public officers and employees state
and local are agents of the people and hold their positions for the benefit of the public. Promoting the public interest and maintaining the respect of the people in their government must be the foremost concern. The underlying principle here of course is you want to prevent and avoid a conflict of
interest. And this is a situation in which regard for a private interest tends to lead to disregard of a public duty or interest. These are the more common uh topics when you talk about ethics. uh
the the the subjects and um there are a lot more but these are the ones that we generally discuss because they're the most common. Um solicitation or acceptance of gifts which it's known as a bribe. Unauthorized compensation, gift
for influence, doing business with one's agency, misuse of public position, conflicting employment or contractual relationship, disclosure or use of information of certain information, voting conflicts, uh restriction on employment of relatives, which is also
known as nevatism. Talk about illegal gifts, anything of value that could have influence. So there's really two parts of this that apply. Um they're different sections, but they have the same intent. So the prohibition on the solicitation or
acceptance of gifts states that no public officer uh employee or candidate shall solicit or accept anything of value to the recipient including a gift, loan, reward, promise of future employment, favor or service based upon any understanding that the vote,
official action or judgment of the public officer, employee, local government attorney or candidate would be influenced thereby. The other subset is the provision on accepting compensation given to influence a vote and that's uh no public
officer, employee of an agency or local government attorney or spouse or mine or child shall accept any compensation, payments or anything of value when the person knows or with reasonable care should know that it was given to influence a vote or or other action.
So you got to read those kind of together. Uh it's not just the intent of influence but also could this reasonably be done for this particular purpose. So in order for a gift to be
legal it's uh typically reportable. Uh it has all of these have to be true. First it was not given to influence the official's action in his or her public capacity. So that has to be true. It has to be true that it's not
going to influence that official's actions. It has to be true that it wasn't given by a political committee or a vendor. And if it is, it must be reported. Well, actually, that that's not
permissible. Um, assuming that it's not these individuals, it is reported if it's over $100, regardless of who gives it to you. um it has to be reported to the ethics commission. That's your financial disclosures which are required annually.
Um it has to be on there. Now, if it's given to you by a lobbyist or someone that hired a lobbyist, then the gift has to be less than $100. Um but it has to be more. If it's more than 25, you have to report it. So, they have a lower
threshold. So, you can't accept gifts in excess of $100 from lobbyists. Um and you if it basically if it's over 25 you might want to make sure it's on your form. Now gifts um we have the perception and a way to cure improper
gifting. So um even if a gift is legal uh you want to consider the public perception associated with the gift and curing an improper gift. You can do that by paying the value of the gift or fair market value of the gift to the individual that gave you the gift
within 90 days of receiving it. Okay. Do we have any questions on gifts? No. Okay. Prohibition of uh doing business with one's agency. This is uh pretty clear but essentially when you're in
acting in your official capacity uh you shall not either directly or indirectly purchase rent or lease any realy goods or services from any business entity of which the officer employee spouse or child is officer partner director or proprietor or in which he or she spouse
or child has a material interest. So this extends to your immediate family and um and your businesses. So you shall not um one second. Nor shall a public officer or employee acting in a private
capacity rent, lease or sell any realy goods or services to the municipality or agency thereof. So, this is a good one to talk about because I know that um for instance, we have a a lease right now with
um the project involving UCF and that was predated commissioner asbody being a commissioner. So, for instance, that particular lease agreement was not in his official
capacity. Okay. Now, if it were to come back to uh the commission for renewal, for instance, it doesn't mean that that can't be heard, but that's a situation where Commissioner As would have to recuse himself because there's a an interest
associated with that business um since it's in one of his properties. So, that's an example there for example. Do we have any questions on this? Thank you for that example, by the way. Commissioner, are you Hello.
No charge. I can sure you're there. Go ahead. Well, I don't I don't know if not to belabor the issue, but our agreement is not with Commissioner Asbody. Our agreement is with UCF,
right? UCF then has an agreement with Commissioner Asi. And so I guess we would just have to navigate. No, it's it's the the link is the link. So I mean we're paying the third party who has it. So he is receiving a benefit through the
city. Now it's not with the city per se, but it is through the city. Now it's not an invalid agreement or anything like that. Again, he was not in that capacity, but if it were to come up, it has to be disclosed because it is a public of interest to the public.
I just wasn't sure if there was a distinction because it is not a direct relationship. Intermediary, direct and direct. Gotcha. Yeah. Okay. Next is prohibition of conflicting employment or contractual relationships. Um so essentially you uh no public
officer employee shall hold any employment or contractual relationship with any business census or agency which is subject to the regulation of the agency of which one is an officer or employee or which does business with the said agency.
Um, nor shall an officer or employee have any employment or contractual relationship that will create a continuing or frequently recurring conflict between one's private interests and the performance of public duties or that would impede the full and faithful discharge of public office. Um, that is
referring here you guys to the Florida statutes in case there are some exceptions to that. It's usually related to um if you're the only person providing that particular service or the only business that has that particular service within the municipality. Um the size of the municipality. If it's if it's very small, then you don't really
have a lot of options um to pick from. So there there's some exceptions to that, but that's all included in the statute. Is isn't there a law on the books stating that a commissioner can't be employed by the city for so many years after office?
Dual office holding. Yeah. No, no, no. Say like I didn't get elected, but I but I decided to uh be the economic uh development director. I don't believe we have a restriction. Some municipalities have it for certain years. Really? Um but
I don't I'm not familiar with the restriction with the city. No, but I thought there was a state law. It it just says you can't hold dual office, meaning you can't serve in in two roles that uh for for the city. Um
that's um Oh, okay. Maybe it's something else I'm thinking of. Okay, that's good to know. Okay, look at you s your job. Uh oh. Okay, prohibition
of misuse of public position. Um so a public officer, employer, local government attorney shall not corruptly use or attempt to use one's official position or any property or resource resource which may be within one's trust
or perform official duties to secure a special privilege, benefit or exemption. um you do have a lot of influence obviously in the position that you are and there's a lot of information that is um that you're privy to that isn't necessarily readily available to the
public. Um it's just you you already know what the the ins and outs of of what's happening in the city are. Um, so you can't use your position um for your
benefit and it ties into the obviously the misusing a misusing privileged information again um because you do have information that is not necessarily available to general public. You're not supposed to disclose or use that information um that you've gained as a result of the
position you hold for your own personal benefit or the benefit of another person or a business. Nepotism. Do I need to explain that? Don't do it. All right. Voting
conflicts. So, how do we navigate this? First, of course, you want to read your agendas carefully. If you think you have a conflict on the agenda item, please contact me ahead of the meeting to discuss the matter. Um because sometimes you may think you have a conflict, but
you don't have a legal conflict and you are required to vote. Um there are times where you may be able to abstain if there is a um a true inability uh for you to make an impartial decision on the item. So we have to look at it on a
case- by case basis. um if elected officials have a voting conflict that not only has to be disclosed verbally at a public meeting prior to any vote taking place, but we also in addition from an abstaining have to have you fill out a form. Christine keeps that and um
that information is then reported to establish that there was a conflict and that's why there was no vote. If let's see that's elected officials. Okay, we're pointed. Well, we'll we'll skip that one, but essentially it's kind
of the same thing. Now, if you know it ahead of time, it's obviously good to know. It would be a good practice to um make that known even earlier on if possible. Okay. Wow. Any questions on ethics?
No. No. Okay. All right. So, Sunshine Law, you think we covered it already, we did not. Uh, this protects the public from closedd dooror decisionmaking by providing a right of access to governmental proceedings of
public boards and commissions at both state and local levels. Now, it doesn't apply to judiciary or the legislature. Um it's provided for in the constitution and basically says that any meetings of any in this case commission at which official acts are to be taken are
declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times and no formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such meeting who's covered by sunshine law. Pop quiz.
I just asked if we were going to be popular. So obviously it applies to you guys. Um elected and appointed boards advisory boards also um are subject to Sunshine Laws like our historic pres you know
historic preservation boards. They're really advisory and make a recommendation um even if it's not binding which it's not in the in the sense that they can certainly come to commission and appeal the decision. um but they are subject to sunshine
law. Individual members that are appointed to negotiate narrow decisions or make decisions for the full board are also subject to those. Um so those would be like subcommittees or if you have a designated what is but does that include collective
bargaining? No. Um I haven't gotten there yet. Good question. There's an exception to this. Yes. Okay. Sorry. That's an exception. And and does that include GMA Mike uh for you know he's out uh negotiating
for us? Well any documents that are sent to him are subject to to um public records law right so under sunshine um as well as anything that he does for the city. So if you were to
prepare like the master plan for instance was prepared for the city that became a public record including the the drafts uh because there's no complete work public record. Um but in that sense yes it's a it's a sunshine law. Now he
does come before you all and and talk publicly. So the the requirement is just for it to not only be a meetings requirement open to the public etc but also that the any records that are exchanged in relation are provided to the city for to maintain
as a public record. Did that address it? So let's go deeper. He negotiates but it's still I mean he provides us information but it's still our decision. He's not making a decision on our behalf. Right. Now, yeah, this is
specifically individual members appointed to negotiate. So, let's say um there was a subcommittee and we're going to designate one of you to go and do this particular task where everyone else is not in the city is not involved, but
it's essentially for the city in official capacity. Anything that is done that's relating to that particular task is a subject to sunshine and it's a public record. Okay. So using another example, say we
say we hire uh an engineer right Pierce to do some work for us and there's some proprietary information that they're they've gotten but they're working on our behalf. You can't somebody can't say well give it to Wright Pierce because then it's not I mean I know I'm
venturing into public record now but if somebody has something and and one of the commissioners says give it to Wright Pierce so it's not public record that is not the case if somebody gives something to Wright Pierce Mike Gman Kimley Horn
uh who are working on our behalf then it's subject to sunshine and open open records correct so Okay. Um that would private entities that are acting as a replacement for the public agency would also be subject to
to that. So we have like um contracts with certain providers for like lean searches and things like that. They have to provide um they have to observe sunshine law and it's part of the contract because anything they do on the city's behalf, they have to comply with Florida law
because it's even though they're not the city, they're doing something for the city. All right. So, conducting meetings in the sunshine. Um, few components here. We have that open meeting requirement, uh, advanced notice requirement,
agenda, minutes and other records, uh, parliamentary procedures and requirement to vote. Yes. Going back to the other if if we negotiate or
We talked to the county about one of the commissioners, one of the county commissioners about u 100 acres outside of of of Eustus that we want to annex in. Is that considered? Are you doing it in your official
capacity in order to get that property for the city under this scenario? Probably. Okay. Then yes, it's subject to sunshine in the sense that you're going to disclose at the time that that item comes up that you've had a conversation with the city about it. We
have this happen all the time. Yeah. I mean, and if it's not happening, if it's at a public meeting, then obviously that's already uh compliant, but we have it happen all the time. You know, Tom has meetings with the city manager and um just different tasks that they come and report back. So the the issue is we
want open communication, but we want it to be transparent. So anytime that there's an uh interaction involving city business that um doesn't happen at a public meeting has to be disclosed and we do that frequently. So we we had a
meeting with this you know on this particular item this project etc. Same thing with with all of you all. If you have a conversation with a resident, every time you know when they're reach they reach out to you and they make a comment about a particular item um that is coming up on the agenda, you tell us
you were contacted and this is what you discussed or if a developer uh wants to talk to you. That information is made known to the public through disclosure. But nothing prohibits a member of one
government agency board from talking to another government agent. That is not an open meetings violation. If two of our commissioners were in on that discussion or two of their commissioners, that would be a violation, right? It's best to avoid it in that scenario. But again,
the the the crux here is official business. and if there's if it's something that's foreseeably going to come to the governing body. Um, so that that's where if you had a conversation one- on- one and it's something that
influenced your vote, you obviously want to share that information and because you might have gotten the information that is not available to everyone through that conversation, etc. So, we just want full full disclosure is is the way to go.
Okay. All right. So, policym and your meetings, commission meetings, the procedure um of the meetings and the records for that meeting. That's the that's the heart of the municipal government here at the city of
Eustace. Uh we want to have formal decisions made in a timely an orderly timely manner with adequate input from an informed public. Proper conduct of these meetings is key to have successful municipal
functioning and we have um jurisdictions many of them adopt rules of procedure to assist with the with conducting um the elected body business at these prescribed meetings. So um we have a resolution that was adopted back
in 2019 which all of you have a copy of um and it basically gives us some guide a guideline right um as to how we want to conduct our meetings and that is something that you can adopt right as a governing body like Congress
does. So Congress has the rules that they've established um and uh it it applies to the procedures that they want. Now, of course, a lot of governing bodies have like Robert's rules or which is very familiar. We don't have that one per se, but you don't have to have um
adopt any particular ones, but we do have the the rules of order that were adopted by by the commission back in 2019 and those can be revised as well uh depending on the will of the commission. We have the two meeting types. Uh
legislative which are our typical commission meetings. Um and uh formal action may be taken on policy proposals at these meetings in the form of the adoption or the rejection of proposed ordinances and resolutions. And we have our regular meetings which are already
scheduled pretty much at the beginning of the year. and special meetings. Those are of more pressing nature, tend to have, you know, we have to give certain notice requirements for those. Um, but those also allow for legislative action to be taken.
Non-legislative, we have the workshops, which we're pretty familiar with. Other types are um organizational meetings. Some municipalities will have a specific meeting to address the the the meeting dates and and certain changes they want to do to the schedule. uh that would be
considered non- legislative because it's more administrative. Um it's and but the workshops for instance we we do get a benefit from those um because it allows you to have informal discussions to achieve a better understanding of certain topics like your budget meetings
and all those. It lets you have um more meaningful discussion, ask questions, although you're not taking any official action per se. Um again, no action may be taken. You can do straw straw polling to get a sense of the will of the commission it when it comes before a
public meeting. Typically, uh, public, uh, workshops have, um, limited public input because of the fact that they're really more administrative and it's it's just to kind of, um, what do they call like I'm very bad at at
um, like uh, the analogies and things, but when you sleeves, sleeve, roll up your sleeves. Sleeve work. What is it? Sleeve shops. Well, you do the work, you know, sleeving. I don't know anybody.
No, that's not it. Thank you. Okay. Uh, open meeting requirement. Now, I want to know what roll up. Yeah. Sleeve roll. Sleeve. Sleeve. Roll. Roll up your sleeve. Yes. Where you do the work because you're basically diving into
a better understand. Speaking of doing work, why don't we move on? Exactly. We have plenty of time. Plenty of time, Tom. Amen to that. Next. Next. Next one. We're going to do a game for real. This is going to be really good. I'm going to do like a Jeopardy session. Um, all right. So, open meeting requirements,
meeting gatherings, right, of two or more individuals to whom the public has delegated the conduct of public business. These are subject to open meetings requirements. Um, again, use of non-members or staff to communicate information andor thoughts subject to
open meetings requirement because we cannot use them as a conduit. So you have to ask if you're going to inquire as to what the a particular position is. Um you need to do that in a public meeting. You cannot do that outside of a public meeting. Okay. Public meeting
requirement is again a gathering or discussion formal or casual of two or more members of the same border commission to discuss some matter on which foreseeable action will be taken by said governing body. this uh communication can happen in many
ways. It's not just in person. Um we could be again phone, email, text, facts, telegram, any all sorts of things. Um it can happen in um not just
at you know at city hall uh or at a particular meeting. It could be at a social event as well. So you should not discuss issues that relate to or might come before your governing body with one another privately. This has to be on the
record and the benefit for the benefit of the public and you need to have that input from the public as well when making these decisions. I think I have okay not yet. Again, uh public meeting requirement in social
media. We have our social media expert here uh to help us with that as well. Social media sites, these could easily become a forum for exchange of ideas or or comments or things like that between um commission members. So, if you are friends with each other, please avoid
commenting on positions um that the other may have if it relates to public business and understand that you need to be discussing these issues at a public meeting. You should avoid posting
position statements on issues that may come before the commission. Again, not to generate engagement and or anything like that between the members. and it is your responsibility to avoid this. Um,
so don't do it because it could be viewed as a an attempt to circumvent the requirements of the law of your office. So you are you saying don't comment? Yes, that's my that is my legal
recommendation. If it's an I mean I would if you have an item that is very um very clearly going to be coming before the commission. You do not want to share your opinions, your thoughts because that is considered a meeting
and the public who is not on social media may not necessarily be able to to participate in that. That's why you have to have those discussions here. So if if someone posts and I hate I hate it. Word of mouth used to word of mouth. Don't
comment. What are they posting? Are they saying happy Wednesday? They're talking about uh a new housing development that's that's going up um just north of No. When Dixie, I would avoid that because again, this is something that's
coming before the commission. And we could get Tom to have Jamie respond on social media. I hate it. Yeah. Uh if you have to do that, I mean, I don't know because they the the proper channel is to contact the
city if there's any kind of concern. So that that's really where the direction should be. Now, responding to someone that doesn't know which department to to contact, that's fine because you're you're not it's not, you know, you're just giving them information. Um, you don't want to get yourself into a
situation though where they may be posting something that could eventually turn into a public records request and you have no real idea because of the way they framed it, but you responded and now it seems like it's your responsibility to make sure that goes out and now we're in a situation where it's public records request violation.
So it's best to just ensure that communication is given to the city, everything comes through the city. That way it can be handled um how it needs to. But yeah, any questions there? I personally think no one should
have social media, but that's that's my opinion. Um okay, let's talk about public meeting violation. Here are two examples. You guys have heard this one before. Uh we have Rackcliffe versus Bishop where
there was a commission meeting and there was a recess that was called um it was several minutes and they called the this meeting to get advice from the county attorney in this case. Um two commissioners joined that
conversation off the record. Of course, the court um did not appreciate the irony that the county attorney was involved in this uh violation because it's clear that you cannot be having private conversations with two or more commissioners. It's one
thing to have one commissioner to come and ask a question during a meeting, but definitely not two because that's a public meeting. We just talked about the two plus um requirement. The other one here is um the school board
uh Martin County. Uh there was a visit to an adult education school and they tooured classrooms, spoke to teachers, students, etc. And they did not provide notice of this meeting. They did not have any minutes taken and this is clearly a
meeting in violation of sunshine law because this was foreseeable action that would be coming before the school board. and they did not notify the public, which is a requirement, nor did they have minutes taken. Um, this is why we had such a hard time figuring out how to
do the Reworld tour because that would constitute a public meeting requirement and we have if we're going to have all of you or or two or more of you together, then we need to follow this procedure. So, we're not in the newspaper. Okay. Next requirement is
advanced notice. Um, city staff does a great job of taking care of this. It just requires reasonable notice be given to the public so that they can decide if they want to attend the meeting. Reasonableness and timeliness will depend on the circumstances. Again, if we have an emergency situation, we have guidance in
in the rules um to provide at least 24-hour notice. Um, we we really do our best to kind of put it out there. Um, and there are circumstances where even though it might be a short notice as far as publication, as long as
we get the notice out and we have that public input, it would be okay. But we haven't had that issue, thankfully. Um, and the notice doesn't necessarily require the newspaper advertisement. Um there are certain cir circumstances that
do require it depending on the type of proposed um policy or that's going to be um enacted but not always. Um and we see a lot of this with like resolutions. Those typically don't require publication in the newspaper. Um and an
agenda is not required but it's a good idea. And I think I have agendas right here. Yes. Um it's not required but it's definitely recommended. you are familiar with your consent agenda. These are typically ministerial acts. Um it's administrative in nature or ordinances resol not ordinances I'm sorry
resolutions that really don't require a lot of discussion. Um of course we can always pull an item from um consent agenda if the commission wants to discuss it. But these are basically just business uh municipal business that
is pretty routine. And of course under new business we talk about policym and that's where you have your um ordinances and resolutions that are not subject to
the consent agenda. Minute requirements. We have written minutes um that they must be taken and they must be available promptly. That's why you have them as the first item at each commission meeting. Um, you do not need to have sound
recordings and because they're not accepted for the written minutes. Um, it doesn't the minutes do not have to be a word for word transcript. Just the summary is enough as long as we have every vote recorded. And public comment is a
critical component of all of our commission meetings. The members of the public shall be provided with an opportunity to address any appointed or elected body during the decision-making process and prior to the body taking official action. So, um we're familiar
with some of this already. We have time limits on speakers of about 3 minutes or so. Um and we've adopted that as as part of our rules and policies. um having representatives of a group speak, just have one instead of having every single person come up. As long as that
individual can speak uh for for that group, we have forms um indicating that they want to be heard, they fill it out uh prior to each meeting. And um again, we have designated time period for
public comment. Not only do we have it um at the beginning of the towards the beginning of the meetings for any any member of the public to address the commission uh not necessarily on an action item and of course we have it after every or well as part of every
action item. So those periods are designated there. Can required to vote under Florida law. Elected municipal officials have an obligation to vote on all matters that come before their board unless there's a conflict of interest in law.
Exceptions. Uh we have some pretty major exceptions here. Pending litigation. Um we have those closed sessions in the shade and um those are only exempt from
public meeting requirements um as far as the actual meeting. But we do have court reporter present transcribing all of it as you guys know. And um once litigation concludes those minutes and all the items related to um
that litigation are public record. Settlement negotiations, strategy sessions, expenditures, labor negotiation, bargaining team, risk management committee, security system meetings are also uh protected for clear
reasons. We don't want to disclose how we're providing security um and negotiations with with a vendor. All right. Parliamentary procedures. So again, we these may be established by the commission. We have um our our rules of
order. The public has the right to hear all comments made by or to commissioners. So we want to avoid private discussions. This is critical. That's why all your comments, opinions, thoughts, anything has to be on the record so that
they can hear what what is occurring. Um, it it's hard to get out of of the habit of just kind of saying little things. But that's why I'm always kind of watching you guys and making sure you're not leaning over and what what's what was said there because I want to make sure there's not a perception of
comments being made on a particular item that is being done outside of the purview of the public. um receipt of messages, private notes or emails during meetings must be avoided. And this will come up again when I talk about uh
public records, but essentially, I'm not sure if you guys are aware, the cameras above us um are viewable to the public and they will see when a commissioner is on their
phone or um when I'm on the computer or uh if there's a note being passed. All that information is subject to a public records request. So we want to avoid giving the perception that we're
um engaging in conversation related to a particular item outside of you know that you're you're deciding outside of the public. We also want to avoid there being a mini open meeting violation in
the sense that two of you guys are talking about a particular item while the meeting is taking place and no one knows about it. That's also a reality and um frankly it could just be perceived as disrespectful to the public when someone
is trying to um make a point or or address the commission and they're not being given your full attention. Um, so it's um something to consider. Yeah, I've had people just say that to me like
that sometimes it looks like we don't we're not paying them any attention. So, and I've been guilty of it. So, so I get it. Well, we saw accountability is a first step. I'm also a comedian partially, but this
is really fun. Okay. Um, time limits are permissible as long as they not unreasonably restrict access, not just for the public, but also and we've had this some of the subjects that um come up. We want to
make sure we're addressing the business that needs to be handled at each meeting. Um, if we need to have additional meetings through the workshops or whatnot, then those can be coordinated to discuss certain topics. But the public is expecting action to be
taken on what's on the agenda. We have people here um that come to express themselves and and hear the decision of the commission on their um items. So, we want to make sure that that's getting done. Um and they're not waiting
unreasonably long for a decision that was, you know, supposed to start at a particular time or anything like that. Um, we want to make sure that you are afforded enough time for discussion, but Mr. Mayor, you know, the presiding officer, um, you can regulate
any comment, especially if if it's being shouted out from, uh, the audience. I mean, that's not acceptable. Uh, but we want to make sure that there's not repetitive comments, um, anything that would be irrelevant to the discussion, uh, or disruptive comments or
behavior. that is um certainly not um the way to conduct business and we want to make sure that it's it's it's done correctly and we're good about addressing those things. Any questions on this? No.
Okay. Okay. So, uh prevention of sunshine law violations. Do not So, when you get your emails, do not reply all uh to emails from staff to ask questions. make sure that it's going just to the person you need to ask the question to. Um, so please, this would
be good to have just avoid. Yes. One of the things, and I don't know if anyone else finds this annoying, is when stuff comes in to us, it comes in through the commission email and it goes to all of us. is is that
so um if someone sends an email to the commission email, it goes to Ellis or Christine or whoever is monitoring one of our staff is monitoring that account and then staff will send it on to all of
the commission. We are not monitoring your individual emails and so if someone emails you at hawkinswustice.org uh we are not screening or monitoring those. So so when Ellis and Christine
send it to us and we reply we we're only replying back to them. You should you should reply just to the sender not reply all. So I I think you're saying that the email has all of your names. Right.
Right. Because Right. So I think we have language in there that says do not reply all. Not sure. But it's like if I if I email each of you individually um well you're all in the same email, right? But you're I'm putting you in individually.
If you reply all, you're going to put everyone's name in there. That's why I'm always saying do not reply all. Make sure you contact me separately if you need to talk about this. Um so same thing. And we we do not want to alter that system again because of the public
records requests issue that I that and and the ability for there to be a public um sorry sunshine law violation. Um if it's a matter that has to do with city business and it's something that the commission should be aware of, you know, definitely the right thing is for all of
you to know. Um just just because it goes to commission email doesn't mean it goes directly to all of you guys. like it's being filtered through city uh staff in order to make sure that but it's still you just forward it on to all correct so I I think the question is the
commission email is an inbox that has people it gets distri uh that Ellis receives it and then sends it out to all of you when you reply back you're replying back to the commission email inbox not to everyone is that the question you really can't he's asking
was I don't I don't forward it to say I just because the email is for the commission so Tom instru but when if
if inadvertently I respond to all it goes back to all the commission or does it go back to you? Okay, that was a question. Okay. Right. Is there a delay in how soon we get it?
For instance, if someone sent it, does it take a time period before it comes out to us? It depends on staffing. But yes, uh there is a delay. Uh sometimes the delay is a few minutes. Uh but depending on staffing, it can be days uh
depending on who's who's in the office and who's monitoring. Sometimes that causes issues too because we don't get it in a timely manner. Yep. Yep. We we endeavor to get it out as quickly as possible, but um because of
vacation days or sick days, sometimes it takes it takes some time. But Monday through Friday or myself or Mary, so there shouldn't be any unless it was overnight for the weekend. But Monday through Friday, you're getting it pretty
much within hours. I'm always here. Yeah, I mean there there was a complaint uh someone sent something at 8:00 p.m. on a Friday evening and you didn't get it until
Monday and there was a complaint because we had a workshop on Saturday. There was a complaint that you didn't have it before the workshop. I get it, but I also if something comes in at 8:00 PM on a Friday evening, I don't know what the realistic expectation should be.
So, but if one if one of us like if Ellis is out, Mary and I, as she said, do look at those emails. Now, remember, I'm checking my email and the city clerk email and the commission email and the city manager email or she would be doing the same and similar. So, we try to get
to them as quickly as we can, but sometimes these emails just keep coming. We do our best to send them out to you. There's not a way to get to get it involved where it comes into commission. It's automatically forwarded out to us. We can talk I mean, if you want that, we
could talk to it. I Ellis, are there are there any junk emails that you filter out and don't send on? I So you're we're we're not trying to filter that information, but we are trying to protect your time. Oh, even even to the
commission email. There's And even Barracuda seems to catch some of the spam, but I've looked at the list that Barracuda catches. I mean, it's a long list and we even filter through those to make sure that it didn't inadvertently get stuck in spam and then we have to release it and then go ahead and send it
and there is a time process and a delay with that as well. Okay. All right. Yeah, this is it's better to do it this way because again, a lot of emails come and and they're either um you know, just people needing information of what department to contact or they're making
a public records request, not going through the right email. That's something that staff has to handle because if not, if you if it goes directly to you, it's on you to make sure it gets to the next person to to comply with the request. So, we want to avoid, you know, giving you more um to
be on top of. I mean, it's enough with the sunshine uh requirements. So, um it it it's it's that. And then also, if it's really not city business, you know, you really again, it is to protect your because you you should just be looking at things that involve city business.
So, it's one of those things where this is as good as it can get. Yeah. I think it's pretty good actually. Now, that's not flawless, but um if there are certain things um I I know Tom and I have spoken about um making sure that the filtering is done just because there
there are things that come through that um do not involve city business and it's still, you know, you might still get it and that's not appropriate because again, it has to really involve city business and pertain to what the commission is looking at. So, and I think there are, just you're aware,
there are some emails that come in that might also involve a police um interest or a public works interest, and we try to also get those to the department heads so that they can appropriately help deal with them as well. Yeah, we're good there. Okay. Hopefully. Okay.
Um, any questions about meetings? Um, please make sure you're if you can just call staff or um make sure you're just replying to that individual. uh not using evasive devices. We talked about that before. And not circulating any kind of reports or statements to try
to elicit responses to kind of gauge where the other members are. Okay. I didn't have a questions on there. Any questions on that? I think I don't like the um email process.
you brought up some good points as to why it's makes it easier for you guys, but it also makes it uh potentially vulnerable to
um some information not getting through. Um, I like one of the guys here I think said to either Willie or or I like that if that email came to you to commission that it came out to all of us. I get
that. So there's some spam. Well, I get a lot of spam anyway in my regular email. So I survived through that. The value of being able to see that information timely and unedited by the
city I think is more important than whether we get spam is one thing. I would like to see that when it comes to commission it gets sent out to all of us and to staff so that she can have it for the purpose of um of u records. The
second part is I don't like that Underneath each of our individual names on the website, our email address is commission.org instead of our respective individual emails where constituents
might feel that they want to communicate um to us. Um, and I don't have a problem to make up for this that if an email comes to me for example to body G that
it also gets copied over to Christine so that she can have it in records. But that should come to us and our names and our individual emails should be on the website if you ask me and that accomplishes both things. A copy of it
which happens emails all the time where it goes out. Anything comes in commission, it goes to all of us right away, including her. And then on our website, I would like to see my own city email on there and I consent that I'm okay with it being copied immediately to
to um to Christine or Ellis that they can have a copy of it. I'm going to make two comments there. First, it's not edited, so there's no redaction or anything taking place. It's a filtering process. I said timely to timely. You I
believe you said unedited email. So I want to make sure it's clear they're not tampering with the B with the body of the email or anything like that. It's a filtering process. Um secondly, the the purpose of that is to avoid what I just said, public records requests being
directed to you all. It's going anywhere today. That's likely going to be a huge um time concern for Christine because she's already monitoring the public records. There is no time concern. She's going to get it right away. Boom. Just like that.
We just get it to an an additional email is what I'm saying. We don't she doesn't need to get copied for purposes of the records because all of your emails with the city are already um public record. I mean they are archived and they can access them. So anytime we get a public
records request, she can go in there and pull all the emails or anything that's responsive uh to a public records request that comes from your um work well your email here with the city. Anything that's done on a personal device, it's your responsibility to
provide those if a um public records request would come through. So yeah, I think I have to be forthcoming in telling you that I don't agree uh that it all flows through flawlessly. Uh
is one and two, I just want to reiterate that I think the citizens of our community should have a right to our email on our site to send us something that we could receive immediately. And I can't say that I disagree with it. Yeah. Um, I don't
think it's an issue to put your emails right on the city page for them to contact you directly. Uh, the I want to put the caveat here and because it's it's going to it's a requirement, right? If you get an email
to your email that is a public records request, um it's going to be incumbent on you to make sure it's followed up on because I don't they're already handling I don't know how many different inboxes. Sasha, I I thought about that and that's a good
point you brought up and that's why I'm saying when an email comes, let's just say an email gets sent to Hawkins W and it goes, it's also copied to her. So, it's there. It's done. you don't have to worry about it. It's when you set up emails, you could send an email to an
address and it gets I'm familiar. So that's what I said. Yeah. And that accomplishes that. So So that's Tom as a city manager. I mean, you know how many inboxes they're handling? Um I don't get that. What am I missing, guys? Can you help me? You're asking
them to take on five more inboxes to monitor. No, just one. They're not. So here Mike, I send a message email to you as soon as the system picks it up. Bryce can have it that it comes into G O G right away. Anything that comes to
OSBody G or any one of us goes also to commission and she sees it. No one does anything. She only reviews one. She never has to review yours. Example, I have info at Mega for our company for if you if you see an ad or something you
want. info comes and it goes to all our administrators and anybody in there. Service at Mega goes to all the tech guys, stuff like that. It's flawless. It's actually going to save them time and it's going to give our citizens direct. If they send us something on
Saturday night, that's very, very important. We get it right away. It's going to take strain off of staff and give our community direct access to us. So, it's helpful to them. Sometimes it will also open us up to whackados.
But if a wackadoo sends an email because it's already filtered. But if a wackadoo sends an email, are you saying if a wackadoo sends an email to you, you don't send it to us? I did not say that. But I will say that if anyone were to call and ask for your email to email to
contact you directly, we give them your personal email or your work personal email. So if a wackadoo so if you saw a spam message come through spam or a wackadoo those are two different things. Well, something weird and where someone was threatening or doing something if
you would filter that. We would send it, tell me if I'm wrong, we would send it to commission if it comes into commission, copy the city manager, which that city manager and um Miranda on that as well as sending it to the chief of police, for example, if it was applicable for something like that. But
we don't send it to if someone sends a threat to our mayor, for example, or either any one of us. I would think he would and I know I would want to hear see that immediately. Yeah. So I think we can accomplish everything. We're saying the same thing. All we're
doing is putting in that IT format that the that email goes back to everybody. We're So I So I'll talk to Bryce. I mean maybe the solution is we put both. You've got the commission.org And then below each of you, we have the
specific email and the citizen can choose whichever one they want. But I think the point is is that we are not actively monitoring individual indiv. And so I think what Sasha is
saying is if a citizen sends you a public records request, you have to put that on our radar because we are not actively monitoring asbody at use. So if you get a public records request, you have to send that to us. I think is you
have to actively get it on our radar. No, we don't. And I'm sorry for keep beating us, but please can you guys help me if I'm missing something here? an email comes in, okay, it goes to me, G,
whatever. Automatically it's gone to her CC to that automatically. That's a system that's standard at the first lowest level of emails. Microsoft has that. You can go in now and you can even put your um city commission as soon as
you get an email on on your phone, for example, it can automatically send it to your personal email if you don't always check it. so that you could see it, but you should never respond for their I'll spare her all the long story. You should that whatever, but at least you see it. That's all we're saying. We're making
everyone's job easier and they don't have to send it to us because we already have it. We already have them. And then if you put both commission and that now you confuse the public as to which one should I send unless you post if you send to this email there could be a delay. It goes through on a that's all
too much. put our email, if you guys remember, an email came in from a lady in Mount Dora about a house I have and not liking the bushes in the front of it and she sent it to commission and then it went out to all of you.
So, you know, I think a way to get around that would be um the commission email to remain and then it just automatically gets forwarded to each of you. That way staff can just monitor that one inbox to
respond to um you know public records that go in there or direct individuals. You'll get immediate notice of everything good and bad. And um that way you're not missing out on immediate contact, but it's just one inbox that needs to be monitored for staff to make
sure that the requests are addressed. Now, anything that goes to you individually, that would need to be put on staff's radar. I like I like I like what George is saying. So some Yeah. Okay. So we can So we can move on and let Sasha finish. I
think what we need to do is let Tom, Christine, and Bryce and Mayor get in the room and talk it through. Willie, you know what we're looking at. Yeah. And and see if the four of you can come up with a a plan to to get it done.
Mike, I I I'm good with moving on if that's what you want to do. But I think this has been something got a lot more to go. Well, this is important to to me at least. But I'll respect that, Mike. So, we'll move on as I really don't care. If you want to sit here and talk about it for the rest of the night,
we'll sit here and talk about it. I don't want to talk about all Let me just get to the slides and then you can re-engage in the conversation. All right. So, public records um the public records act provides for access to government records and that's a constitutional right in the state of Florida. Public Records Act affords the
right of access to those records to the public. And this involves documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photos, videos. I mean, anything and everything. Um, and regardless of the format that it's in, uh, the characteristics that it may have or how
it gets sent to you that is made and received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency which is used to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge. So, uh, for instance, voicemails, if you get a
voicemail, that is considered a public record. You can't just delete it. Um, there has it has to be registered. Uh so you can send a copy of it um if depending on how your phone has it so that that information is given uh in the
event that there's a public record records request for all city business email or sorry voicemail that you receive. Um like I said there's it's not subject to a finalized work product. This includes notes, drafts, things like that. anything that you circulate
um is subject to public records as long as it has to do with city business. If if if you get a threat uh do we turn that over to I mean and and it's not like I'm really going to kill you, but it's a so
none none that I would get from up here. But uh but do we do we turn that over? If you get a threat text message or email. Yes. If it's that's obviously something if it's in your official
capacity that they're making these claims, you want to have that. And of course, we want to alert the chief of police and see and you want to Tom will want to know as well. Do we really have to notify who? The chief. Yeah.
Uh, I'll leave that up to you. Um, but if it's in your capacity, yeah, you don't get to qualify. Go ahead. Well, I was just it it's you don't have an obligation to notify the chief. Your obligation
comes into play. If a member of the public says, I would like a copy of the threat made to the mayor. Then you have to produce it as a public record. Mhm. So, I think the point is if you get a voicemail that's related to city business, you don't have an obligation
to turn that over to anyone, but when a member of the public says, "I'd like a copy of it," that's when your obligation kicks in. Yeah. So, the thing is with with things especially that come to your personal device, you might have it set inadvertently to delete after a
certain amount of time. that doesn't necessarily conform with this with the requirements that we have by law to retain records. Um so a way to avoid that is anytime you get something handed whether you know um it's physical paper
or a text or photos of a particular project or something that is coming before the commission of voicemail to forward it make sure that you know the city clerk has it because they can store it and then you don't have to worry about oh I have to make sure I have I keep this for the amount of time that
law requires and that way you you know it's just less less to worry out um because you can't delete public records if you do. I mean there there are clear uh penalties for that. Um and this is one of the cases that talks about it. Um
basically here they made a request for text messages um that were sent to personal devices for the um was the school board and or the county. And basically the response was well these
are these are personal um so we're not going to go ahead and you know we asked or whatever. No the court demands that even if it's a personal device there has to be a reasonable effort by the city to comply. So you're going to have staff
you're going to have me. Um we need to respond to this. You need to produce the the text messages. we have to do this timely because otherwise we're in violation and that's something we don't want to happen. So, all right. And for the record, that hasn't happened. That was
just awitted. Sasha, um if someone for instance a citizen ask for um like to meet for American Bloom and ask for an appointment to meet is is that something
you have to document also for instance like if you get an email asking you to meet with them to discuss it is that something you have to keep it's in your if it's official business for the city if you're doing it as a liazison yes I mean you will retain that email or
you'll pass it on to to the city clerk and then you don't have to worry about keeping the record. Okay. Well, if we have to go through all of this, why don't we have city phones? Should that be? It doesn't matter if
it's a city phone or not. I mean, I'd rather at least you could keep it and Yeah. rather than it all clogging up my phone. I I I mean this the settings I second is the issue. So I just want to make sure I don't want
another phone. Sorry you guys can take another phone. I want to take it. Just me. That was just me thinking. Yeah. Okay. Now this is also social media by the way. This isn't just phones or you know computers or emails. I mean
this is any form. So, um, keep that in mind. Let's see. So, uh, just went through some of this. Uh, the recommendations to prevent a public records act violation. Make sure that staff has a copy. So, you can dispose of your copy or don't have to
worry about, um, keeping it for a certain amount of time. if you receive a public record from a source that's not from staff. Um again, if you have uh any resident just come up and and give you something in your capacity like whether
it's like a photo or a letter they wrote or anything like that, you want to make sure that you give the original or copy to staff so that we can keep keep it as part of uh the public records conforming with the deletion schedule. I mean, the Florida Department of State has the
timelines and it's very, very thorough as far as every document you can think of. Um, and it tells you when items can be deleted. If you're unsure, you can always ask me, but please do it before you delete it.
Um, that's that's always preferable. And uh if you have a record that's a if a record is available in a specific format um we can't refuse to provide it in that format. So if we let's say we have a a copy of a document both electronically
as a word document and we have physical copy and they want it the word version um that's electronic versus the physical. If we have both we should provide it the way they're asking for. if we we don't have to come up with a new system or come or get new software
that we don't have, but if we have options, we comply with the one that they're asking for. Um, that's it. You guys can go back to the email discussion now. Any questions on this? No. No. Okay.
Well, thank you for bearing with me. Thank you. And he's off.