All right, if I could um call the meeting to order. It is 2:00 Tuesday, March 3rd, 2026. Regularly scheduled meeting of the uh Port Mar Beach Charter Review Commission. We could all rise for the pledge of allegiance, please.
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you all. Let's um confirm our
attendance today. Roll call starting with you, Ed. >> Edconover. >> Hanks. >> Jim Dunl. >> Brian Thomas. >> Beverly Mulligan. >> I move to Sarasa. >> Michelle, can you hear us?
>> I can. Michelle's here. >> All right. I'd like to um have someone make a motion to allow Michelle to participate today via Zoom, please. >> Motion. I I'll make a motion. support for that. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Any objection? >> Motion can't handles or comes unanimous.
Michelle, you can fully participate today. Thank you. All right. Let me spend a moment here for public comment. All right. Seeing none, we'll close public comment and let me move on to the approval of the minutes from our
February 3rd meeting. Those were all sent out to you in advance. Any uh a motion first of all to approve those >> for approval. >> Okay. Hank support. >> Second. >> Second by Bhim. Any additions, deletions, corrections to the minutes?
>> I thought Amy did a great job as usual. >> Amy, nice job. All those in favor indicate by saying I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Any member items before we start today? All right. not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. Let's move on. So,
let me talk about a little bit of what we're going to try to accomplish today. What I'd like to do, we have three articles left in the um existing charter. I would like to go through those if I may and get your feedback um
comments, consensus, etc. Then u if there's changes there we'll incorporate those into the next part of the meeting which is the item D on that which is discuss the u changes the possible changes the ch town charter um
Amy and Nancy and I spent some time together as you would imagine um between these meetings trying to align and consolidate the comments and recommendations changes deletions additions we've had up to this point I've got those synthesized down to a
couple documents today I'd like to go through with some proposed language for your reaction and concurrence. >> Um if that's the case and we will get through that today. I promise you what we're looking at is um then taking that
final feedback. We would have read every word of the charter since we started this process back in the fall. We'll take that feedback and you got a first copy of uh the matrix format we're going to use to consolidate our recommendations
uh to council and we've tried to put some if you will natural columns in there where where things can lie and um that we'll have abbreviated recommendation of the changes we're making but it'll get to the point. The reason I'm telling you this now is that
document will appear in its semi semifinal form on April 7th when we get together. That's really going to be with maybe a couple additions we'll have between now and now. Um the uh essence of that meeting to make sure we are aligned in the way I'm going to
represent our work to council which is scheduled on April 20th. Right now, it is our intent to have a document prepared that will that will give you the not only the the matrix, but some verbiage around um context around the
actual document we're going to send to council and then what I'll be covering at the live meeting. So, think about that. Everything now becomes is it clear? It has to be fairly concise. You know, the old saying is I've had more time I'd write your shorter letter. So we have to take the time and construct
it in a way that's impactful, meaningful and clear because just like we have been people are going to live with our words for a long period of time here and while we have the collective wisdom and focus of the group we want to do the best job we can do. So that's today. Anybody have an issue with any any adjustments on
that? All right. So let's go to page 12 of 13 of the existing charter if we can. Initiative and referendum. This is section 12.01. Give you all a chance to get there and then I'll do what we've done in the past. read it and ask for your comments.
All right. Uh section 12.01 initiative and referendum referendum. At least 25% of the qualified electors of the town shall have the power to petition the council to propose an ordinance or to require reconsideration of an adopted
ordinance. And if the council fails to adopt such ordinance so proposed or to repeal such adopted ordinance without any change in substance, then the council shall place the proposed ordinance or the repeal of the adopted ordinance on the balance at on the
ballot at the next municipal election. Any comments, reaction to that? >> So I have a question. I have a question, Anita. Has that ever happened before? uh that there has been a referendum for an issue to go on a ballot. Um other than a
recall, uh I can't remember. Not saying it didn't happen, but at this minute I don't recall anything. Um yeah. >> So I I also want to add to the conversation that there is a Florida statute that prohibits putting land use
type decisions um on uh the ballot for for review by the electorate. That's >> important distinction because one could say why didn't some of the other ordinances that approve the projects go on that it's not allowed to by Florida statute. So Nancy and I talked about
that one thing that people say why didn't you put that to referendum. >> Exactly. So just so the team knows that you're not allowed to do those for land use issues. >> Um they have to go through the the RIP process which we should now become aware of. >> All right let's move on to chapter 13 then charter amendments.
>> Excuse me. So for your changes no changes. That's right. No changes. Oh, yes. Correct. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Amy. That's an easy one for you. Section 13.01, initiation by ordinance. The council may by ordinance
proposed amendments. I'm sorry. The council may by ordinance propose amendments to any and all of this charter to be submitted to the electors as provided by general law. In the end, the council can do those kind of things and get the reaction from
the public should they think it become appropriate. Oh, there's something missing or they want to add or delete something they think's more uh consistent with the town's operations. That language is pretty clear to me. Anybody have Okay. >> 13.02 initiation by petition. The electors of the town may propose
amendments to this charter by petition to be submitted to the council to be placed before the electors as provided by general law. Same situation we talked about before, but this time is the electric bill. >> So just so everyone is aware, there is
there is general law related to this. It's section 166.031. It does address both of the um issues that are raised in your charter. >> Okay, no changes, Amy. Section 13.03,
charter review. And here we go. The charter will be reviewed at least every 10 years. A five member charter review commission shall be appointed and funded, still kind of waiting for that part, by the council. The charter review commission shall be appointed at least
six months before the next scheduled election and complete its work and present any recommendation to the council for change no later than 60 days before the election. The council shall hold a minimum of two public hearings to approve, reject, or modify the proposed
changes to the charter prior to placing the proposed changes on the scheduled election ballot. I think Amy, that is why we are looking at an April 20th presentation uh to council so they have the time to get you on the calendar for the proposed changes.
>> Correct. But also the um Lee County Supervisor of Election kind of dictates this timeline to us. >> Okay. Um, I personally don't believe 6 months is enough time prior to it because um, like right now our our deadline to get on the November general
ballot is July 6th >> to the S so SOE's office with everything the wording finalized everything. So right there's >> proposing we would start this process earlier. Should it be done again? >> I propose we start it >> reaction from the team.
>> Makes sense. >> Good suggestion. Yeah, definitely >> because we have to get it to the S so's office 120ish days prior >> for anything to be on the November ballot. So candidates wishing to run for office have to qualify before July.
>> I think they qualify. I think they qualify sometime in early June. >> That's right. Four days in June. >> Wow. For the November ballot. >> Yes. So would you think to add to put it two months earlier for beginning of this and therefore complete it its uh work two
months earlier? Is that the kind of time frame cushion you're looking for? >> I'm almost looking a year prior because we're already at six months now today our six month or next month's meeting will be six months and we took what a month or two to actually organize and
start this after the appointment. Is there anything we're not thinking about if we push this to a year before from the team members? >> It's just a technicality, but it says at least 6 months. It doesn't say that it can't be more than six months. The document says at least 6 months,
>> but you'd like to c Oh, would you like to cify the charter or >> Well, I think Ed was reading my notes. >> Oh, great. No, I I wanted to point that out as well that technically you could get by with what your your charter currently says.
However, the reality of it is is that we do need more time, but it is as Ed pointed out at least six months. So, we are we're okay. >> And just like it's reads that now and we put it on an agenda way prior to that. >> So, this is in council's control then to
create and sanctify this body a year ahead. Do they choose to? >> Yes. >> Okay. Carry that message, Mr. Vice Mayor. >> I'm not sure I'll be here in 2035, but uh >> you never know, Scott. I didn't think so either.
>> Michelle Churnney, any reaction to uh this particular topic that we haven't covered? >> No, I researched was going to recommend 12 months also, but works for me. >> Okay. Message delivered by our liaison.
All right. Um, article 14, severability, invalid invalid >> invalidity. >> Invalidity, thank you. of character provision or application. Interesting title. >> Yeah. >> If any provision in this charter is held
invalid, the other provisions of the charter shall not be affected thereby. If the application of this charter or any of its provisions to any person or circumstances held invalid, the application of the charter and its provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected
thereby. So Nancy, just let me start with you before the team weighs in. Um this is a if you break it, you break it all kind of a pre a prevention. Does this give you the room you need to properly um represent and challenge anybody to the contrary on this?
>> Um yes. Um, the only comment I would make for consideration by the commission would be that the invalidity of character provision, I think that's intended to be charter provision or application, um, which I believe it's a
scrivener's error, >> just a typo. >> Yeah. Okay. So maybe you may want to um as we get further into today's discussion, you'll see that uh Amy and I, we did get together and spend a couple hours, I think, kind of going
through it. Um and we will be recommending that you request that town council adopt an ordinance just cleaning up some of the scrivener errors um that we have located as we've gone through. So, um, just put that on your list for a
little bit later. >> Anita, I know you don't know all history, but is there something about character at the moment that charter would that change would have any effect on from what you're aware of? >> I don't think so. >> Okay, great. Scribner carried accordingly.
>> All right. As I turn my page, I don't have any other sections. You guys at the same end of the charter I am? >> Yes. >> All right, then. Let me ask you Oh, sorry. Go ahead. One more thing uh that Amy identified for us for me today >> is that your current charter does have a
seal on it >> and if a logo if you want to comment on that real quick. >> So the current charter the current charter this if the one that's showing on your screen right now is our current logo for the town. >> Okay. >> The the charter we're working under now
has the old town logo with the pier and the palm trees. It's green and white. >> Got it. Uh, that one right there. >> We just need to update it to the newest. >> Am I good with colors? >> I don't think that pier is even there anymore, is it?
>> No. >> No. >> And does anyone have a a preference between the round one that's up there now or let's say the one that's on the wall behind Anita? That's technically the official one. They're both official. They're just used in different ways. like whichever fits
better in the document you're doing. >> Learning is circular versus >> Right. >> I love the one that's on the I love >> Yeah, it kind of fits on the page a little better. >> Yep. >> It's bold. >> Yeah. >> Put that one down. Our more material changes we dealt with today. So,
>> very important. >> All right. Let me move you to the handout. You should have um three pages starting with proposed language for discussion and um there's five or so I want to go through with all these are
work that we've done in between the meetings as you requested uh Amy and Nancy and I and I'd like to go through the proposed changes here. Um, this is what I heard the notes, the minutes, and as I we watched these meetings was the
will of the group. So, I I feel pretty strongly that we've captured the essence. I just want to make sure the the words are acceptable due to what they put down. Um, really not going to reopen the conversation for relitigating the various points of view and perspectives we had at the time because
I think we went through that properly and ended up in this space. So if there's something significant, obviously we'll readress it. Otherwise, I'd like to get some of the um word smithing done and make sure the message we're trying to portray um is well done here. So let me start with all powers possible. Hank,
this goes to >> strengthening the ethics. I'm going to read this because we've done everything else that way and make sure it's on the record for the public that way in case it didn't get through the whole packet. Pursuant to its municipal powers, the town of Former mayor's beach shall adopt ordinances promote transparency and
ethics in government by the adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the acceptance of unlawful gifts and disclosure of exparte communication in quasi judicial hearings. This puts it in the charter bold and front. We have lots of backup language on our other policies and
procedures to further qu clarify the how people are supposed to behave which Nancy can get to if anybody's interested in but I want to make sure particularly since it was yours Hank that you saw it appear in charter form this case. >> Okay. Well my comments are one thanks Nancy for >> you need to come up to your mic.
>> Such a mic here if you want. >> Thank you. >> Um what are unlawful and lawful gifts? >> That's it was my question too. So is there a lot >> in your in your packet you do have a copy of actually the town has already
done what is being requested in the charter. Um so in ordinance 2-488 um talks about the standard of conduct for town officials and employees and this is basically the adoption of the
code of ethics from uh Florida law chapter 112 um that is already there right >> um section two talks about no town official or employee may solicit or accept anything of value from any vendor
or bidder including gift, loan, reward, promise of future employment, favor or service based upon any understanding that the actions of said official or employee would be influenced thereby. So technically you've already done what
your charter is asking you to do. However, there's no legal impediment to putting it in the charter. Um but you have already done that. And the same is true for um and and again I wanted to emphasize that not only is it in your
ordinance but it's also in chapter um 112 of Florida statute. So there's a stat a state statute an ordinance and now your charter is really emphasizing the importance of it. >> I I understand. Thank you Nancy. But I
read the 112 the Florida statute and section two of the town ordinances. That's 2488. Um, and I didn't see any reference to lawful gifts. Um, and that's why I was raising the issue of unlawful gifts for
the phrasing seems um to beg the question. >> So the the way that this statute your gift is not my gift and my gift is always lawful, you know. Uh I'm not sure if I follow you, but um
if there's you can't have an unlawful gift, that means there are lawful gifts. >> There are lawful gifts such as >> under $25, >> then then I think maybe is uh not intended to influence you in any way. I
mean, if your land use decision is going to be influenced by $20. >> Okay, I understand now. So you're saying if it's under $25, it's lawful. That's according to state law. >> That's the the 112. >> Yes.
>> And there's a lot of Well, let me explain that in 112, we do have the Florida Ethics Commission, and they they have a whole cadre of attorneys that prosecute um public officials, public employees
for violation of chapter 112. There's an entire litany of of case law from that u commission identifying what is uh a permitted gift and what is not. >> Um so what your your proposed change
does is it really highlights and gives it additional >> that section 12 >> to the public that ethics is important to the town of Fort Meyer speech. Would you object to saying un uh unlawful gifts over over $25,000 or $25?
>> Yes, I would. And the reason for I would is because I believe you're being way way too spec specific. Okay. >> And then should the Florida statute change, then your >> um >> charter is going to be out of whack >> and maybe inflation will play a part.
>> Could it as well? >> And values in the eye of the whole too. So, so just leaving it unlawful that by using that word unlawful does get you back into the scheme of what does the Florida Ethics Commission say is an unlawful gift.
>> I understand now and I would suggest then that either in footnotes or parentheses that we uh put Florida statute state statute 112313 and Florida statute 112 313. >> How about by general law? Because what
happens if the legislature changes those >> extension? Yeah. Okay. But would you reference it so that uh >> I I can put Florida general law >> and the town ordinance section 2488 >> and town ordinance. Well, I don't want to put the exact number and I would say
or town ordinance >> or town ordinance. Okay. And then what about uh what does the quai judicial hearing mean? >> Quai judicial hearing. >> It goes with the exparte communications. take that whole sentence. >> Right? So we have legislative decisions
and we have quasi judicial decisions. Quasi judicial decisions basically will impact an individual's private property rights. So because of that we have to be more cautious that we're not abridging any of those private property rights. >> I see.
>> In a legislative decision making process, it's going to affect everybody because it's legislative. So, um, and you kind of gave me the segue to the next couple comments regarding the exparte disclosure. So, you do have an
ordinance already. Um, it's 34-52. >> Yes. >> And there's a copy of that. Um, >> we included that in your packet, so you guys have that reference. >> Um, and there is a definition of exparte communication, a definition of legislative action, quasi judicial
action is defined. >> Um, >> okay. And by reference, you don't see the need to include it as a footnote here, section 3452. >> We could do the same uh as far as referencing back to Florida law because
there is a Florida statutes in 286. >> Yeah. >> Um and then also the town the town ordinance so I can make those changes. >> Thanks, Nancy. >> No, thank you. I appreciate it. >> Okay. Other comments from the commission on the proposed language here with those adjustments?
Everybody feel pretty good about that because you're going to see it again on the 7th in a more finalized form. >> I want to throw out one thing just just to see what you all said. Uh it seems to me that a lot of a lot of issues could be eliminated if it said no gifts.
Forget about a lawful or a lawful gift. Now then I then I can recognize I invite Scott over to sit on my patio and talk about stuff and have a glass of >> Scott. Suggested that Nancy >> is that a gift? You know >> that was not >> No, it wasn't single malt legal gift. >> It wasn't what
>> single malt. >> That's right. It was >> depends on the brand. >> Well, but but do you see what I'm saying? I mean, how do you you start in the quantifying or you know, uh you get invited as the chairperson of the chart
review to go to dinner and you only get an appetizer, but then you get a glass of wine. It just it if somebody's watching you >> and they always are. Yeah. >> And they always are. Uh where does $25 start and end? Is it per item? Is it a
whole dinner? Is it an afternoon at uh the whale? >> Nancy will have her reaction. I'm sure what what I guess learned through trials of tribulation is the more finite you get with the descriptions, the more precise they get with the exceptions. >> Yes. So that's why that's how it works because those appetizers were on sale.
So I could get a beer. >> Exactly. It's Thursday. >> No gifts. So my recommendation would be if you do want to strengthen it that you do that in your ordinances rather than in your charter because your charter kind of
like your comprehensive plan. It's more of the bigger picture, the more global look and you are addressing it with with Hank's um amendments. Um, but you could be more specific and drill down in your ordinance and it's
okay for your ordinance to be more restrictive than the state statute. >> Okay, Michelle, any comments you haven't heard from the group? >> None. >> Okay, let's move on to compensation. This is the um embedment of the blue rim
commission conversation we had which will now just be folded in without giving it a separate title and identity um as part of our section 4.05 compensation which I'll read the entire thing because we purposely left some in there because its current state and its current operating. I think it does need
to remain that way. And then what we added uh going forward effective April 1st, 2016, base pay for the mayor will be 19,200 annually and council members will be 16,800 annually as compensation for their services. Compensation shall
be revised annually based on across the board adjustments budgeted for staff and administered at the same time as town employees, which we've discussed and had testimony on. Now, the new ads. No sooner than every two years, but not later than every four, a compensation
committee consisting of five residents appointed by the town council shall make recommendations for compensation adjustments to council to town council. The first compensation committee shall be appointed and will make its recommendation to the town council no later than three months prior to the
date of the next general election. Any action by the town council to change its compensation shall be effective as of the first date following the next regular election. I tried to capture the simplicity of what we talked about but also put some time frames in here. Made
it very clear it's a recommending body not a salary determining body and those recommendations will be make made on peer group lifetime jobs and value the position in the open market. the council can then adjudicate that, discuss that, reject it, accept it, do whatever they want to do when they get their
recommendation from the commission. So, I pause for comments on that. >> I think you you know this was very confusing to me last meeting and I appreciate you're trying to simplify the language. It seems to me it gets to the point very quickly and I even I
understand it. >> Hank, that's always my goal. >> Others, please. So, I changed the name from Blue Ribbon to to compensation committee. >> Sounds like money. Sounds fine. >> I'm confused by the second sentence. >> Okay.
>> It seems to contradict the rest of the statement. >> Compensation shall be revised. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> It brings up across the board adjustments which are basically cola budgeted for staff and administered at the same time as town employees. And then we go into this uh language about
the blue ribbon commission or compensation committee. >> So think of it in this context. Um it may be as frequent as every two years or it may be only twice a decade that council decides they want to have the comp of them and their peers looked at.
However, each and every year inflation and cost of living as is generally accepted by by our HR community has an effect on the compensation base of our folks. So if we don't leave that first that second section in there, they will be static at that for as long as four
years. The adjustments may be larger, more dramatic and the compensation um compression as we call it in that place would be more dramatic by them not going along with cost of living year after year, which is why I left it in. So another option that you have is
instead of requiring no sooner than every two years or not later than every four years, you could just make it discretionary on the part of the town council. Um whenever needed or um at at
the request of town council um an adjustment could be made. Yeah, I would just like to add that I I thought the reason we were even diving into the compensation issue was because our current lays on
I'll use your word Scott political suicide for the council would give them self raises. >> Yeah. Ju just asking if that's not in there, if that language isn't in there, same political suicide. Hey, we need to look at we need to get this committee going here
>> and then it's gonna raise all kinds of questions and >> I'd rather have it in the charter. So, >> and I feel strongly about it for an additional reason and you don't have to agree because it's we got our our equal pure group team here. Um,
notwithstanding the honorable position that Hank has about public service being public service and I completely get it and some people can look at it that way and actually contribute that way but not all can and some of our brightest minds, most committed folks etc have to make a
living in addition to the public service that they give. So having a competitive compensation packages with the type of position they're holding, I think opens up the pool of talent, recruitability, and opportunity for more people to
contribute to the to site the the the decisions we make on behalf of the entire town council or otherwise. And if it's not kept at uh where what it would cost per dollar, if you will, to have somebody like that in here, not making it as raw as that, but that's the truth
about it. And this is in Naples right up too. How they looked at the same kind of thing. I think you miss a whole pool. >> So I feel we're doing a good thing for council. We're insulating them from the process to a degree. We're still holding them accountable for making it happen and looking at what the value of that
job is in the open market and they have the ultimate say in the end of whether to do anything with it or not. So once the commission is is exhausted its recommendation, it disbands and it's back to where it all belong. Town council. >> I have a suggestion. take that, put that
on the clerk as for every two years, one year, however often you choose to bring it on to an agenda >> to be reviewed. Nobody has to make that decision to bring it up >> if it's needed. >> If needed, >> if it's needed to be convened, >> we put it on an agenda. Do you want to
appoint the the commission or whatever committee or not? >> I think that's a good suggestion. Yeah. >> Take it heartburn and put it on to the clerk. diagnose that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, it's a good idea. >> I'm not sure I'm as happy with that to say the truth. It doesn't matter. But
I'm just thinking that then council can say, "Yeah, no thanks." >> This doesn't put a no thanks in there. And again, >> okay, so every need to >> Yeah. Well, I like the recommendation and that's an honorable way to do it, >> but a choice to do it or not do it, it to me is the slippery slope back down to
the concern of council deciding it's time to look at our comp beef. >> I have to agree with Jim. I think we should try and remove the process away from council as much as possible even though ultimately they have to make the decision >> and and clerk too >> and clerk. >> So is the timing that we have um every
two years but no later than four is that adequate. >> I I would like a a concrete number there >> rather than two or four. Okay. >> I mean three five something concrete. easy recommendation
>> and two years is consistent with voting cycle. So I mean you can >> it can be implemented uh and the language is there for that purpose. >> I think I think I think this does not eliminate any of the political challenge
for a council member. >> I think it will fail on the referendum >> and I I get exactly why you're saying it. You just gave the same exact argument. He gets it to merit. I the same exact argument I gave when I first
initialized uh why council should be paid. Exactly the same argument. >> Um I think the biggest thing the town did to enlarge the u pool of potential candidates to this is um putting putting
benefits on the council salary. Uh, so when they said, "Okay, now council's s now the council gets to have health insurance and whatever else." That was huge. That was huge. Especially huge for a person like me who is self-employed or
any other working person, person like Scott, any other working person. That was huge. That was absolutely huge. Much much huger than than this could potentially be. >> So you're right. That is a significant I mean, I told someone recently, "Consider
it. You'll get health insurance." And the response was, "Are you kidding me?" >> Now, I don't know if that includes or potentially includes spouse or children, but if it does, it does. Well, I mean, that's enormous. That's just enormous. >> It's pretty similar to what what the
town offers. The only the only thing it we don't have is 401k or or >> no retirement. >> No retirement. No pension. Well, but still I mean the insurance alone for my wife and I to have insurance is is huge. >> Is ridiculous. And so now this is really
I mean I think that that it it was a tremendous thing. Uh I failed in trying to get that passed for years and years and years and years. >> I was glad to see it happen. >> Give another shot. >> I was glad to see it happen. >> Back to Ed's recommendation. Um, what I'd like to do is let me make one
further inquiry to our professional on staff about when the most meaningful frequency is for compensation changes on the peer group markets that are out there because those things have a cadence to them. Um, she'll know best on on kind of a recommendation we're going to bring it down to number. I have no
problem personally with putting a hard number on there that every three years it has to happen or whatever it happens to be. So, if you'll give me that flexibility to bring that back for the seventh meeting with a with a number in there um carrying you ahead, I'll be glad to get some professional advice and bring that back. >> That good? >> Yes, >> Michelle.
>> Yes, I agree. >> Chair, may I ask that maybe you all do identify a number and then I can draft it and then after you have your conversations, we can just change the number just to simplify it. >> Okay. Anybody have an idea that um has
some thought as to the cadence of it? >> If two's too often and four is too late. >> Three. >> Three. >> I think three. >> No, I also think three would be a good idea. And I I think it would be a good idea if you also did it the three and
non-election years. >> So if we started at three in a non-election year, we'd be fine with that. >> Wouldn't it work out that way with the way we run? Yeah. Okay. All right. Three. Anybody else? >> Take out some of the political pressure.
>> Okay. That's not true. >> Three it is for now. Let me um do what I >> do three and then it's six. You're going to hit >> right. >> Am I missing something? >> Yeah. Every third year it'll catch itself up. That's right. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> So, how about um for the next meeting I'll just say every blank years. >> That'd be good for you. Let me get some recommendations. >> What about every off >> every blank year? Okay. >> Every odd year, every even year, every >> every odd year. But that's I I think twi
going through this process every two years is a little >> too much. >> Little too much. Maybe odd year and then four years after. I don't know. I'm just throwing out ideas. >> But it should be But Ed's right. It should be an it shouldn't be a campaign
issue. It should be an off election. It should be in the off election cycle. I I feel >> Okay. I still have some homework on this to um bring that piece home. So, I'll take that on my watch. >> Good team. >> Okay.
>> All right. 4.08. Clearly timely on this. So, again, I'm going to read this to make sure it's clear because we spent some time talking about this. terms. In the event of a vacancy, filling of vacancies, a vacancy
on the council, except for the position of mayor, shall be filled by appointment by a majority vote of the council members remaining, and set appointment shall be effective until the expiration of the term of the vacated seat. I had a much more eloquent paragraph
written than that, but she got it down to that one sentence. Nice job. In the event that a majority of the members are removed by debt, disability, law, or foreure of office, the governor shall appoint an interim council that shall call a special election to be held within 45 days following the occurrence
of the vacancies to elect a new council. In the event that the mayor becomes unable to fulfill the duties of office, ceases to be qualified or is removed from office as provided by law or this charter, the vice mayor shall assume the
full powers and duties of the mayor. The vice mayor shall assume the the office of the mayor for the remainder of the unexpended unexpired term as mayor. Make sure that's clear because I was careful about writing that. The mayor is appointed every year by the peers. That's the term we're talking about here. So it will self-expire when the
mayor's term would have self-expired as mayor. The vacant position of vice mayor thus created shall be filled at the next regularly scheduled meeting by the town council until the next selection of a vice mayor. That's a normal cadence we get on if there's one day left or nine
months left. If the vacancy created is not temporary, the vacancy shall be filled >> under the provisions of this charter. tried to capture all three things there that we talked about last time. >> I think you did a good job with that.
>> So, just just to make sure, um, we're actually not changing the language about the vacancy when someone is appointed. It just goes to the end of the expired term of that seat. And that's that's the way charter
is right now. Correct. >> No, no, no. to the next regular scheduled election. So the appointment made by Mr. Mlan just now only goes to November. Had this been in place, it would have gone to Jim Aderhalt's a full term, whether that's 6 months or in this case two and a half, three years. So
that's a very big change and it's very clear um on what that seat that you're being appointed to when it actually expires, >> how long it take. >> Right? >> So that's the first part. The second part as we were going through this um
the uh selection or appointment to serve as the mayor and as the vice mayor as the chair pointed out it is a one-year appointment. So then we started looking at that language a little bit closer and it there was some a little bit of
confusion because of a vacancy. Is it a vacancy of the actual seat or is it a vacancy because you don't have an individual serving as the vice mayor or the mayor? Um, so we tried to clean that up a little bit as well.
>> Michelle, comments, please. >> Do we have a language saying that we have to fill special election within so many days? >> What? I don't think we do. I think that the
town can function with a vacancy. Um, >> and that could have happened in the last appointment. They could have gone all the way to the next election should they choose to operate that way. >> Sure. >> Causes some challenges during the budgeting process in particular, but other than that, it doesn't uh imp inforum
or their ability to conduct town business. >> That is the issue. As long as there's a quorum. >> Yeah. And our quorum is three in our setup. Yeah. >> And and that is also addressed in your charter in that if there's a majority of the members are no longer able to serve
by death, disability, law, or forfeite, then the governor will step in and appoint an interim council >> and we don't want that. >> We don't want that. Right. >> Uh Mr. Chair, I have a question. I'm looking at my notes from a couple means ago and we had talked about >> um
after every election cycle we we elect a a mayor or we amongst ourselves on the council appoint a mayor and vice mayor. Um then we had some discussion about would we only do that after every election as as the charter is written
right now we have to do it every November. Are we still going to stick with that? Is that your recommendation? We stick with that or we >> It was my It was my consolidation of the conversation. Um recommendation notwithstanding. Um they the way I
remember it distilling down was um the council has a prerogative to renew that contract anytime they want to as long as they want to. Um but depending on who's out the c on the council at the time, uh may or may not be the will of that
majority of the council to continue with the same leadership. Okay, that's fair. >> That's that's was my >> Okay. >> When I read the >> I just had some notes. I was just circling back, but yeah, that that >> ultimate freedom for the council was the goal. >> Okay, fair enough.
>> All right. That seems to grab the issue for all of you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I just want to add that uh I I understand why we're doing it this way because it keeps the rotation >> in line, but I'm a strong believer that the the people that sit on the council
should be elected by the people of the town and not necessarily by the council of the town. So, I'm a little uncomfortable in this situation with someone being appointed and and sitting in that seat for three years. >> And your the notes on that particular meeting carried that position you have
on that, Ed. um just the will of the group was in a different different direction. All right, let's move on to the last two then you'll see as um my recommendation letter to council and that comes on the 7th for you to all look at section 5.01 elections.
The regular election of the members of the town council shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November or as otherwise provided by general law. Nancy, you struck out the last sentence or two, so context there.
So, we ran into this um situation where the qualifying period shall be from noon of the 50th day prior to the election to noon of the 46th day. Um we ran into that situation because of the recent
recall where those dates and numbers just didn't work. Um ultimately our supervisor of election um decided that um under his contract that he had the authority.
There was some discussion, some disagreement as to whether or not he did, but he took the position that he had been ordered by the judge to set the qualifying period and he was not going to violate that um judicial order. Um,
so there are some situations where if we do have to have a special election, it would not be possible to do it from noon of the 50th day prior to the election to noon of the 46th day. So by taking that
out, it just makes the process work and um avoids any issues as one that we encountered >> as it really functioned as we've really experienced it. >> Yes. Any push back from anybody on that change? Okay. Then the last one, town camping
board. I won't read it, but um remind us Amy and Nancy. I think that function is handled for us and uh why we removed that whole section just so the public was reminded of that. Please. >> Uh the town has entered into an interlocal with the Lee County Supervisor of Elections Office that
performs all our canvasing for us. So, we no longer do that >> and that has been functioning >> quite well. >> Quite well. >> Can we go back to something? I'm sorry to do this. >> Oh, no, please. >> Uh, what Ed just said just triggered something and what Scott said triggered
some a thing. So, I looked back at my notes. We did have a conversation about the election of the mayor being for more than one year. >> We did. >> And were you saying that the majority of people thought that was a bad idea? Well, that's what my I write down all
those notes from all those things. >> I saw three people out of the five said that was the way they wanted to go to have it every year. >> Okay. >> Um Okay. And again, but if there's a resurrection, somebody changing their mind in that regard. >> I still feel that way. So, I don't know if the group that felt that way still
looks like I'm getting nods. So, yeah, stays an effort. >> Okay. And then the second thing was the term. So, I I I think we we talked about two things at once. We talked about uh the appointment uh when it would be elected. I mean in
other words what and and and the length of the term and and that seems to be mixed together to be you you get appointed for the length of the term which certainly makes things cleaner, easier and whatever. But I also, you
know, in the case of this uh and and I love John Mlan. I think he's marvelous and I think he'll be a very good council member, but would people want him to sit there for the whole end of Jim's uh term? I don't
know. Would the council still have voted that way? I don't know. I I just think that that is that throws a real ratchet in things. uh for me at least I I I probably wouldn't vote for that referendum just just because of that.
>> Sure. And we we had very robust on that about which seat they were actually running for seat they're being appointed for seats. So we ended up in the mirage if you will of um the of uh the cleanest way to do it and then ultimately the residents are going to decide anyway if
that's a good change. >> So that's that's true. >> It will be down to that. I made it as clear as possible for a referendum issue or council reaction. They may choose not to advance it, >> but what we did was clean it up and that debate at least will stop for the moment and we'll see if they want to reopen it.
Yeah, I I think Adita that the genesis of all this was what happens if Dan or I for whatever reason left and then you'd have a long conversation >> then that pendulum goes way over here and >> I just didn't recall that it we came to the conclusion that
>> I mean there may be a a better way to do it. >> I don't know what that would be but I I >> I don't either but that was >> sorry sorry >> and that's why we're moving it up to the IQ category of council. That's why it's going to you guys to check that out. The way I do this is I I try to write
down a quick note in each individual's position. >> Then without pollution of watching it, then I go and watch it because when you're running it, you can't watch it as much. Go back and watch it. Make sure I capture that right. So I I believe that the will of the majority has been captured by the document. The debate has
not stopped and all the arguments are still legitimate. It's just where we ended up. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So those are the ones you will see coming from us as formal changes. There's scribe errors and a lot of other things that obviously we'll get into and we'll go through but we're at
the point where um the matrix I think has some context for us now if I I believe that's right. So you all had that in your in your deck. That's what we're going to work from. Um obviously there's some there's some recommend recommended infills that we've put in
there. You've seen some of that today. Those are going to be in the matrix already. Um, what I'm looking for is anything missing from what we sent out to you because we're going to have a working session on the 7th to fill in anything that's left. But is there anything material on your minds that we
didn't capture with the way the matrix is set up or the recommendations we've gone through so far? >> So, the way that we u tried to approach this was in your packets you got a copy of the matrix, right? and it's blank. And we were hoping that as you went
through your notes um that Amy also included in your packet where um she diligently took notes of each section as you were debating it and discussing it. And so then what we did was we took her
notes um the five changes that have already been reviewed and will be moving forward and we tried to consolidate it into a filledin matrix. >> This is up on the screen for the public and for you all. >> Yes. And so again we very meticulously
went through each um each item. So, um, I would like to just go ahead and and breeze through them. This will not take the, you know, the rest of the afternoon. It'll be very quick, but I do want you to have an understanding of what is what information is embedded
here. So, if you look at, you know, article one, this talks about the name of the town. So, you're not making a change there. The purpose of the charter, you're not making a change. Again, if you if you could follow me also on the annotated version of your
charter, you'll see how we pulled them. No change to the territorial val uh boundaries, no extension. >> The first one where there is an X um there is actually no article section number and that is true. Um but
we are proposing language uh to add the ethics and the reference to the exparte communications and that would be by charter change but again there is no actual section number. Um but we do have a section 302 and so we're going to
change 302 to 301 as a scrivener's error. So these scriveners errors we believe can be addressed by council just by an ordinance. So, in the column that's marked ordinance, you'll see that there's an X there. And you're going to hear me repeat that a couple times um as
we go through this. So, going down to section 4.01, uh you all did have discussion about seat numbers and at large elections, but there was no consensus for changing that. So, we did mark it as no change.
Um the same was true with the section regarding the mayor. There was discussion but no consensus. Um 404 discussion no consensus. Um proposed language provided that was on compensation 4.05. You saw that today so
we marked the X under charter change. Um vacancies uh f forfeite of office no changes. Uh the filling of vacancies in 4.08. you had some language today, so we marked it as a charter change. Um 4.09
4.10 no changes. Um there was a request to add as provided by law in section 4.11 and that would be in an ordinance. Uh we believe we can accomplish that. Uh
nothing in the rules section. Uh nothing under v voting quorum. Um, under elections 5.01, there was language that we gave to you today. Again, it's a charter change. 50 5.02, 5.03, no
changes. Um, the remainder section was a little messed up just for scrier errors. So, that would be we need to put an X in there. Um, Amy, um, because that would be addressed in an ordinance. >> 5.04.
Correct. Um and then 5.067809 no changes there. Um 5.09 proposed language provided to you today which was the deletion of the reference to the town camp canvasing board. So you see an
X in that right hand column. Uh regarding the town manager, those sections, no changes were recommended. Uh, regarding the town clerk, there appeared to be um a reference to 7.01 as
a scrivener's error and to also in that ordinance uh interpret the language regarding a journal, signatures, books, etc. to be inclusive of digital documents. And that same uh recommended
change is also going to be in section 10.02 PND and 10.03. 03 that I believe can be done accomplished through an ordinance. Uh, regarding the town attorney, there was no reason to have a section 8.01
because there was only one paragraph. So, we're viewing that as a scrivener's error. Um, no changes to the establishment of additional departments. Um, ordinances and resolutions, no changes. the
adoption of resol of ordinances and adoption of resolutions. That again is uh recognizing that we do have digital documents now and no longer use printed uh journals and books. Um moving on to
financial procedures uh for fiscal year. We didn't mark this one Amy but there should be no change to 11.01 um regarding the submission of the budget and the budget message. Um, we
had a presentation from our finance uh director and he had suggested uh tweaking the wording to say preliminary budget which I believe is an interpretation type issue that could be accomplished by ordinance. Um, the town
council action on the budget, no change there, no change to public records. Um, again under budget amendments, there was a scrivener's error regarding the word interlocal. there was an extra space that can be accomplished by ordinance
the initiative and referendum. You reviewed that today and we thought that you would not make any changes but let's go back and just double check. Um
so in >> yeah there was no change except your clarification which wasn't a change >> right in 12.01 and then the charter review um you were okay with with the time you didn't make any changes there however we did in 14.01 01 we did
recommend um a the correction of the scrivener's error of the word chart character >> to charter. >> Yeah, >> Nancy, I have a question. You you had talked about article 8 removing it
or can you clarify what? >> Yep. Hold on. >> I think that's the >> town attorney. Um, no, not removing the town attorney. 8.01. Just it's a scriveners.
>> Oh, I got you. Okay. >> Because it has a number, but there's not an 8. >> Breaking news. Okay. >> Nice try, Scott. >> What was your recommendation, Scott? I didn't hear a recommendation. >> Sorry, your mic was off. >> Mic doesn't work.
>> And it basically So, you're just removing 801. >> Yeah. just as the scriveners. Um I know we're just trying to clean it up a little bit. All right. >> Um so at the end of the day then um I believe that we have five charter changes that you would be presenting uh
to the town council for their consideration to be placed on the November 6 ballot. And I believe um there are seven changes uh mostly uh scrivener errors and just general cleanup. Um, and then also we would add
the direction to use the updated logo. And I think that would be a summary of of what you all have been working on for the last couple months. This particular matrix, what we were intending to do was to label it as exhibit A and then that
would be attached to the letter that you provide to town council. >> Good job. So procedurally, you will all get this uh obviously to reflect on both the recommendations that have already been made on your behalf and any additional ones you want to challenge on
the 7th. That'll be the day to codify. We'll take an official vote on recommendation to accept the matrix into our work product. And then if you want to mark your calendars for the 20th of April, our team will be here, I hope, and I'll be recommending to council our
body of work. turn it over to them for their reaction and um it'd be good if we're there for some reaction. So, we'll see what they have. The rest of the story would be once it does get to town council, um if they agree that the five
uh recommended changes to the charter, if they agree with you, um then they do have to adopt an ordinance and there'll be a first reading of that ordinance and then a second reading of that ordinance and then ultimately transmittal to the
supervisor of elections. So there's more opportunity if if you know individually if you want to make comments. >> All right. I make sure everybody knows both the um status of the point we're at in the homework assignment. Um Michelle
Turney, I'll start with you. >> Is it clear? >> Nothing. >> Okay. Y Anita, >> clear. >> Beth, >> I'm fine. >> Thank fine. >> Ed, >> I'm good. Thanks. >> Okay. All right. Any non-aggenda items? Anybody wants to cover that they want
considered for the next uh meeting for the 7th? All right. Hearing none, I'd take a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Support. >> All those in favor? I >> All done. Thank you. >> We're off the air. Thank you, sir.