We have a new baby. >> I know that's not right. Yes. >> I fig out, you know, minutes one night, you know, delivery was >> this last meeting or you think? >> Okay.
>> Well, it'll be past the due date the next meeting, right? Because the next meeting's March. >> So, >> yeah. Okay. >> No, that's not right. We have one on the 25th, but that's
>> Huh. Yeah. >> Well, I said the next one was March and then I got the >> heat. That is true. >> How are you? >> I am great, thank you. Hello everyone.
>> Hello. >> How you doing down there? >> I actually feel much better >> over there. >> Yeah, just just nas. >> I got checked. No flu, no anything like that.
>> I'm glad you're sitting over there. >> Exactly. I'm I wouldn't have come if I if I felt like I wasn't. It's more of a cold than anything. >> Happy over you. >> H
>> unhappy over here. >> Actually, you know what? I think I'll come sit down. >> Let's switch those things around. >> Yeah, we'll move Rebecca over here. >> AJ, how are you, Barbara? >> Doing great, Dominique. How's it going? >> Very well. Good.
Oh, they magic markered my extra E in. Look at that. >> They probably ran out of characters. Brian said weed might be running a few minutes late. >> He's coming to Winter Springs down 434. He's definitely going to be late. >> Oh yeah.
>> It is backed up all the way to 419. >> I don't know where he's coming from, but >> I had to go. >> He told Brian he was in traffic. >> Had to go right. We go down High Street and go around to get here. >> What's up? >> I missed you yesterday.
>> Joseph Andrews, >> did you get the unit or >> No, it's so funny. >> Two. No, 40 two to three days. >> You mean the one in the morning? >> Yeah, that's shipping. They're not like shipping. Yeah. At T-Mobile, you need to walk in the store and get it. If you you go to
the store, they'll help you order it online. >> Right. Exactly. >> But they're not giving it to you after. >> I laughed at Becca's two to three days. Two to three days. Oh, cool. >> President of BCU is the speaker. >> Say that again. >> President of VCU
speaker conversation with students. >> Oh, okay. >> Fantastic. >> Um, sorry I missed it. I heard about >> it from housing there. >> Uh Gordon, >> I think Gordon was there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. He told me about it. >> Oh, he did.
>> He did. >> I might win. Okay. Either him or >> right next to you. >> Oh, no. >> I guess the other guy is a rotary
member. >> Oh, Lance. Lance Raglin. >> Raglin. >> Raglin. That's his name. Lance Raglin. That's all he does. >> Okay. >> All he does is Wills, Trust, Pro. >> Okay. Uh he's got a an office in winter
spring. It was right before right before Tuscola those you know end to start. >> See so heading down towards Tuscola road a shopping center where Fresh Market is right before that
there's a there's a little office park >> where the dentist and all that stuff. >> Yeah. Yeah. He's in there. >> Okay. >> Lance rack. >> Okay. >> I didn't know. He's good. >> He's good. Very good. >> Is that who you use? >> I just heard like he's when I heard the descript. I just heard he's in the
little office part of my Oh, I know who you're talking about. Yep. >> Very good. >> I've had some recommendations and then other people have said, "Oh, God, don't go there." And it's like, okay, >> he's good. He's fair. He's >> I can't wait too much longer. >> But we and we've done a We did a couple
of complicated things and >> they were accepted. Well, when we went out to other places, people like, "Oh, you need blah blah blah. Well, you need it's in there. It's in there. So, >> okay. >> I'm not planning on checking out anytime
soon. You know, I need to make sure everything's >> Okay. Uh I just asked Terry who she sends it to me. I'll fix it. >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. >> I got I got to bring all my stuff down here to fix.
Not fixed, but just >> I probably ought to have look at what I've >> Oh, he'll want to see everything. >> I'm okay with what I have, but probably ought to just have a check. I have the house, the townhouse is in the lake trust, >> right? So, that's just kid.
>> Yeah. And I have a will, you know, but >> it might tell you never know. going you got to remember I remember when I was going through it some of the important things got to just make sure all your accounts
have what's called sign >> do my dad I don't want to work I'm good. How are you?
>> I'm just trying to protect some of it. >> Oh, trust is we have to trust trust. Everything's got a few of these. >> You know, I die or Debbie dies comes to us. >> Brian, can we put your sign over there?
>> Can we bring your sign over there? Put that whole thing. >> It's only good at one position. That's something, >> right? Yeah. So, we have the trust and the will. They're all It's all in one big binder.
>> But he's a nice guy. >> Oh, yeah. When our attorney went out of business >> 2018
>> 2018 he finished his grass >> possible he didn't get a doctor. No, I just haven't gotten more. >> You know what I'm saying? Just >> he can make really cool himself, though. >> He's doing okay for himself. >> Who else was there in terms of
>> the local administration at the breakfast yesterday? >> Who else was there? >> Is all means regards. >> Yeah. >> Vice President. >> Yeah. >> Very very tall.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Hello. How are you? >> Several devoted from SDS other than financial aid. >> Alicia.
>> Yeah. >> Records. >> Yeah. Otherwise, man, it was a lot of community folks. >> Several mid managers across the university. >> Good representation.
>> I recommend good >> Steve. Okay. >> The same direction. like a kid. So she I saw your granddaughter got her white cooking ceremony. >> I know. Two weeks goes by. A lot happens
in >> That's what it is. >> I've heard I've been absolutely gorgeous place and you cannot even get in to look at the color without the gone and dying. like you're 247.
>> I walked outside. My neighbor and I both have like these enormous hair that are taller than the house. >> Good afternoon everyone. I'm so very sorry. >> It's one of those things to their
shopping centers to hotels. No charge. >> She's coming home after 9:00. You guys are all looking You should complain. >> Well, she sent him a list. I need you
know this isn't this for next semester. My sister told you what she >> I had a few tomatoes just like >> put tomatoes. Um >> hope she does. >> Luckily I found one.
>> What kind of doctor? >> She's at the vet school. >> That's a those are tough programs. I was lucky that we told the breeze I went to go check for anything and there was just brown and I will be right back
school or just finishing somewhere. It's extremely hard to get in. I mean, she applied at all these places and she got in August. >> Yeah. >> It did. We did. We did have a bunch of
volunteers. >> There are young like but multiple things going to >> high girls are continuing their >> so pretty >> challenge for the soccer
>> state championship so they're playing tonight >> I can't make it any bigger >> seminal STEM science community they had their science fair >> last weekend and now they have the awards tonight >> so I was actually heading that way >> oh wait a
are everywhere. >> I got a meeting to be in. >> This one we just call a blue tent, white tent. As soon as I >> turned up on As soon as I turned up 434 from
I was like they was backed up almost directly to the intersection. >> Oh >> quick loop around come in backside and you know park >> right? >> Yeah. As long as you have to get around you can get around. You can get around
>> stuck on the alum there'll have it. >> Yeah, >> the leadership >> sounds like you have a little congestion >> allergies from the there's a lot of yellow palm out right now. >> Yeah, it's that and it's not the flu or
anything like that. I went over city yesterday of that. That's exactly what she said. >> Mhm. >> All right. Good afternoon everyone. I am desperately sorry for being late. I was held up with an emergency matter for another client uh on something related
actually to uh subject matter we might be talking about today. Um first order of business be a roll call. >> AJ Range >> present. >> Barbara Barber >> Arian Bryant >> present. >> Dominic Pampier
>> here. >> Karen Harriet. Carl Thornbrew >> here. >> Katherine Townson. >> Keegan Ford >> present. >> Kevin Hypes >> here. >> Lou Clinker >> Nancy Zolair
>> present. >> Nicole Martin >> here. >> Rebecca O'Brien >> here. >> Steven Shank >> here. >> Victor Bogacher >> present. >> Thank you. And for the record, we are calling to order this uh meeting of the
charter review committee uh Wednesday, February 11, 2026, starting around 5:37 p.m. initially. Our next uh item of business is uh approval of minutes. You have before you
minutes for January 14th and January 28th, 2026. Uh both of your last two meetings. If uh everyone has had a chance to take a peek at those or entertain a motion to approve. >> I'll make a motion to approve.
>> Move. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Move and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. Any >> oppose? Nay. >> Thank you. The minutes are adopted. And we are moving on now to our public
comment period. Do we have any members of the public here for public comment? I do not see any at this time. We of course do invite uh anybody watching this now or later uh to please come on out to a meeting to offer your thoughts
on amendments to the charter. And um I think that deals with all the preliminary matters. We're going to dive right back into the charter if that is all right with everyone.
Do we have copies of the updated uh and it's fine if we don't the updated uh >> running table? >> I I sent it out to them. I didn't print one. >> No problem. >> I can run and get it. >> No, no, no. I think I've got pretty sure
I've got my copy. All right, I apologize. Just one more second here. All right. Well, members, uh, it was all right with everyone. We're good to go ahead and, uh, pick up our
moving through the, uh, sections of the charter from where we left off. My recollection was we left off at, uh, section 3.03, uh, elections and terms. Did we get
anywhere? Actually, you can use the minutes for what they're for. Looks like Yeah, we did uh proceed through uh 3.02. So, we would be at 3.03. So, uh section 3.03 election and terms.
Uh this is a uh pretty long section with a number of subsections here all addressing uh different matters relating to municipal elections within the city. The uh first subsection is
uh a uh general matter. We'll go through the basics here. So first provision we have in here is uh all elections of the city and related election activities uh shall be implemented in accordance with state
law. Just uh so you know and specifies that any mandatory provisions of state law. Um any conflicts between that and the charter or ordinances will be resolved in favor of state law. Just so you know, the uh Florida election code actually provides Thank you so much. uh
provides a fair bit of latitude to municipalities as opposed to, for example, counties. Um provides a fair bit of latitude to municipalities in running elections in the manner they see fit. It is not completely
uh without restrictions. However, there are a number of provisions within the Florida Election Code that expressly state that they govern municipal elections and so those become obligatory on uh municipalities and in the absence
of a charter provision or an ordinance within a municipality than the Florida election code controls. Okay. So, this is just basically restating what is the law under the Florida election code. The uh second parag subsection
really more of um an enabling uh provision. Uh just noting that city council can enact ordinances and resolutions to provide for procedures for the various different uh parts of election matters. uh as I was alluding to there relating to election precincts,
polling places, inspections, clerks and and so on. Um not very much interesting I would suggest you in in that subsection. The third subsection uh C uh is actually an interesting one. It's been of
interest to the clerk uh and myself just recently working with the supervisor of elections office. This uh your charter provides whenever uh practicable and in the best interest of the city the city council may enter inter intergovernmental agreements with the
semino county supervisor of elections to implement the election processes of the city. Uh so as you're aware we have a uh uh supervisor of elections here in Semino County that uh operates not just
the state and county elections but our municipal elections for all seven cities uh within Semino County and um uh we delegate a number of the functions of the election processes to uh the
supervisor of elections. for example, the actual uh running of the polling places, the uh maintaining of the uh certified uh ballot counting equipment and and uh election security matters, vote by mail matters, all these
complicated matters that have kind of acred over the decades to implement elections. Their office is specialized in the operation of that. And so we uh end up uh doing interlocal agreements or intergovernmental agreements with the supervisor to implement a lot of those
processes. Any questions about any of that so far? It's kind of basic stuff. I I will tell you expressly mentioning doing uh intergovernmental agreements with the supervisor. It's found in some charters, not very many, but we found it useful here in the city to give a little bit
more guidance that you know that is, you know, the express intention to to make those things happen. Subsection D and this goes to a matter. >> Yes, sir. Does the Florida Election Code takes
precedence over local ordinances and even helps to govern the work of the city council in terms of elections? Is that a fair statement or not? >> So, yeah, it's
I would say put you on the spot. >> Oh, no, no, no, no. It's it's kind of a two-tiered system, if you will. All right. There are certain pieces of the Florida election code that are mandatory, all right, for municipalities that the city council by ordinance or even, you know, with a charter amendment
cannot vary from that or go against it. All right. Then there are a bunch of other provisions within the Florida election code that if the city doesn't have an ordinance or a charter provision on that topic, then you use the Florida election code. But if the city council
were to adopt an ordinance for example that changed something or instituted a new procedure or so on that would be permissible. All right. So municipalities and that's how you end up with different cities having uh different election dates. Not every city
you has their uh has their general election in November along with the county and state and federal general elections. Some have them in March, some have them in the middle of the summer. Uh and all manner of different Some have them in August, different times. Uh
different qualifying procedures as well, which is uh what we're going to be discussing next. So you do end up with a lot of variation on on those types of things. >> Okay. Thank you. So speaking of that, subsection D goes to some discussions
that uh um I think had been very briefly uh raised previously and this is relating to qualifying. So this uh subsection provides qualifying for all regular city council member elections will occur for a 5-day period which
should be Monday through Friday of the week which is two weeks prior to the state primary election day beginning 8 a.m. on Monday and ending noon on Friday of said week. Uh providing however that persons in line to qualify at noon on Friday are entitled to submit qualifying
papers. That is consistent with the way the Florida election code works. If folks are standing in line at noon, they're allowed to file. Um, and it enables the promulgation of administrative rules to implement the provisions of this section. Previously,
it's uh been discussed the possibility of or the thought of moving around qualifying dates as uh we've previously discussed and I try to remember if did we have that down as
a move qualifying period. Yes, we did. Uh we have that uh down as one of the topics um that on our list of crude here. Any any further discussion at this point on on that idea or we can put that away to schedule for a more thorough
discussion on that matter. We'll go ahead and schedule uh some more time to discuss it at that time. Fantastic. Any questions on on that first section? A lot of it is kind of up to the basics and preuncter and so on. Wait, just just
>> please on the >> Can you turn your mic on, please? >> Sorry. >> Better >> just so everyone understands the qualifying period and I know Barbara, you know, and Elelliana, they have to live this all the time. So, uh, I'll
defer to them on timing, but there's nothing to stop a candidate from getting all his paperwork, doing all his paperwork beforehand. The qualifying period is really just when we hand in the petitions, is it not? I mean, the way I remember it, we could open up our
accounts. We can hand in the oath. We could hand in uh everything else. We can go out and collect signatures. We just can't hand them in until that qualifying period. Am I incorrect in that?
>> I think that's correct. handing in the qualifi I because I just I don't remember as I'm just going to go flipping through the section. >> So all the paperwork can actually be turned in any time not uh not just petitions at the end. They can turn it in. I just hold on to it. Um we do
verify them before qualifying. >> Right. >> But I only send out an email stating you are qualified during the qualifying period. >> That's what I thought. >> Yeah. So um formally thank you very much for that. done. I It's a very good point. Formally
qualifying during this this oneweek period of time, folks can go well in advance, months in advance or what have you and pull the paperwork and file the paperwork to open a campaign account so they can raise money. All right? and uh declare themselves formally to be a
candidate so they can go out and um tell people they're a candidate, raise money, spend money, and then once they do that, they incur the obligation to start their financial disclosures under state law to uh share how much money they've taken in, what they're expending it on, and so
on. So this does not govern that process of becoming a candidate under the state uh campaign finance rules. All right. It is uh just this week window of time as Dominic alluded to where that paperwork
all the pieces of paperwork including the petitions are finalized and in. All right. So there's a great window of time uh basically unlimited period of time before that when uh those other things can occur. >> Yeah. Because the big thing always used
to be waiting for the clerk's office to have the packets ready. >> Right. >> So is it worth rewarding this whole section because it as a as never been a candidate I would read that and be like I got to get get my paperwork on Monday,
get it all filled out and get it submitted before noon on Friday. But there's no clarifying statements there that says I can get the paperwork at any time, submit it before the qualifying period. It'll be verified during the qualifying period. I'm I'm seeing this as a as a roadblock to candidacy. And as
we've seen in several past elections, we don't have a lot of candidates. So, if we can remove some roadblocks by rewarding this, that would be, I think, beneficial to our to the voting base. So, let me tell you a little bit about and Ilon may be able to tell you a
little bit about the the process we go through each election s uh season as Domic was alluding to uh each election season, the clerk's office puts together an election packet and I believe a web page uh as well that >> ex well in advance of these dates that
explains all of this, right? Yes, we are actually doing a campaign right now um for this election season to have more education that packets are available, what they entail, that they can come anytime to pick it up. So, we are
working on that after getting some feedback from the committee. So, in hopes that more people are more educated because yes, this is very vague and people do think that I can only come in during the qualifying period. So we're
trying to not necessarily re reward it but aspect more on uh outside education rather than changing this. >> Yeah, that's great. But I think something needs to be added here that says that at at least indicates that the
packets and and paperwork and everything is available before the qualifying period. Otherwise, it seems like a four and a half day period that I have to get all everything in order. >> I can understand that. >> When does you typically have the packet together? Um, I normally start in February, so they're actually I just
finished them today. >> There you go. >> Wade, would that be a function of the charter though to indicate to people that they can pick up packets? That's not that's not a charter function. A charter function is when you can qualify. >> Yeah. Typically, uh,
typically what you would have in the charter is a requirement to do something. Okay. So, I'll rephrase the the thought there as I'm not suggesting this necessarily, but just as a kind of more of a a charter oriented
requirement. uh you know, the city clerk shall shall, you know, issue an election packet indicating, you know, sorry to bumble around here, but something along those lines to indicate the city clerk shall do something by a
certain date to announce that uh you know there'll be an election available and the when the election date shall be in a given year, something like that. >> Yeah. I I mean, I'm just looking for a statement that says qualifying paperwork
is available prior to this qualifying period. That's all it really is. It's it's kind of along the same lines of how vague the section C is. It's wherever practical and in the best interests. It's there's no requirement there. >> Oh, no. And and in that instance, that's not intended to be a requirement. That's
intended just to be enabling. And I'm saying adding a statement along the same vein just enabling. >> I I think it's what they're doing and and I appreciate what you're doing because again for years it was I can say people didn't realize long ago and it
was kind of almost it wasn't that way. It really was that you couldn't get it but you could um you know putting together on the website and getting information out there. I think that's very effective. That's where people going to look for information. They're not going to read this and go, "Let me
see what the rules on." They're going to either contact you and say, "How do I run?" Or look online, "How do I run?" And have a I'm going to say bullet point list that says, "In order to run, you have to be a citizen. You know, 12 months this that thing, and pick up
paper, do this, blah, blah, paperwork is available." I would hate to give you date. I would leave that to council and city manager to say when reasonably it should be prepared. You know that the packets available in full, you know, by
a certain time because, you know, you really shouldn't be running for 9 months and 10. I'm going to be real here and say, you know, you can I I you know, it's been done and it's being being done. But, you know, it's I I understand
your side of it is get trying to get interest. I don't think that's the interest is or what I don't know that that stopped people because I can tell you people came in on the Friday literally Thursday afternoon picked up paperwork, got signatures, came back Friday morning and were qualified when
it was less sign. I'm going to say the caveat there is there were less signatures required at the time. Now there's a few more signatures required. So that is a little more difficult to do in a overnight fashion. Um and try to
get that done. But >> let let me suggest this. I I've got some other ideas popping in my head along these these lines too. Uh can we put this down on the list to to revisit and talk further on? >> Absolutely. Sure. >> All right. >> Sit and think on that. just um a last
comment to get on the record and I agree that I never read the charter. I just called the clerk and said, "What do I got to do?" And she would usually be very accommodating and say, "Here's what you do." Because she knew I was a rookie. Do this, do this, do this, get
it all done, get it all ready to go. And I felt comfortable that she was giving me the accurate information. So it's worth >> and some of the thoughts I I have that even could end up being actual charter language are along the lines of of giving some thought that you know that
information is available or something like this. But >> why don't we put that on the on the the topic list and we can percolate on that a little bit further. >> And and the comment about >> it used to be able to be done overnight almost with less signatures. Oh, that
gentleman that dropped out in the last election basically got all his signatures in one evening at a restaurant. >> So, it can still be done. >> Oh, I'm I'm not saying it's just saying >> it. Yeah, I'm not saying it can't be done. It It's I'm just pointing out I know it was done a little while ago and
like it was just it's a little a little more difficult with 120 something signatures. >> Just for for perspective so everybody understands what we're talking about here. It used to be 25 signatures. That was easy. I mean, you could you could walk out your front door, bang on your
neighbors, and in half an hour or less have 25 signatures to qualify. So, you could we had a candidate one year. She >> Friday morning, >> she she got the signatures Friday morning and got them to Barbara at 11:59, I believe it was.
>> I do know that. >> Well, you know, I remember >> I remember submitting my 125 way in advance. I get a phone call. 25 of these people are in the county. They're not in the city. >> Well, yeah, they have to be valid signatures. >> They know exactly,
>> right? You have to be valid signatures. >> 150 is not if you're a serious candidate, 150 is not it's not not that hard to do. >> Sorry. Wait. >> All right. Oh, no. No problem. Anything further on this? We'll put that down. We'll uh percolate on that a little bit.
And I think there might be some thoughts to go on there. Moving on down to 3.03.01. 01 nonpartisan elections. Uh so I actually tried to do some thinking and uh uh digging around. I'm not aware of
any of the 411 municipalities in the state of Florida that are not uh that don't have elections on a nonpartisan basis. Um that this this exercise made me revisit that. This is pretty much the uniform manner
in which elections are held at the municipal level in Florida. So, um that's what we have there. Any questions on that? >> Moving on down to 3.0302
election and term. This is a matter we do have or we have a matter relating to this uh already on our topics list. And this is um where we have our setting of our two-year terms for city council members.
So this provides for the regular general election to be held first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. That is the uh in even numbered years the uh county and state and federal election date. Um, of course, this happens in
both even and odd years in November with two-year terms staggered between even and odd years. Um, with city council members taking office at the first regularly scheduled city council meeting in December. Um,
we uh we have on the topics list right now the uh thought of potentially lengthening uh council member terms. Uh, member Barber had uh brought up that thought in one of her prior memos. Did you have any uh thoughts to add right now on on that or any further
discussion? >> It's it's never passed. >> I'd like to see go four years, but I'm not going to run again anyway. So, >> don't die on that state, guys. >> And I think it hasn't passed
because you can't really educate people and tell them why this is a good idea or the city can't. it's going to take somebody else to do it. Um, and it's always been bundled with something. It has to be a standalone question on >> Oh, we've done it as standalone. We We
only did that We only screwed that up that one year when we bundled everything. >> It's been been more than once. But >> hey, hey, hey, hey. We know the council member who insisted on that bundling. It was not none of us are sitting here. So, >> I think there was the last time it was
on the ballot, there was something else with it, too. >> Terms. It was terms and term limits and terms can't put them together, >> but it was all separate questions. >> Yeah. >> Right. Didn't we just also >> that was that was how the committee at the time >> wanted to tie the terms specifically. It
was a very as I remember >> Oh, that's right. We tied the terms. >> It was very much tied to terms and had like it was very much the committee >> and it was split. It was was a very split committee in that respect, but it was has to be tied to terms, you know,
otherwise there has to be term limits if you're to get to what Barbara is saying. If you remember when we did that, it was because if you separated the questions and they voted for the terms, but they didn't vote for the uh term I mean voted for term limits but not the terms, you could
have just four two-year terms, >> right? >> That that was the issue with that. I remember that with that committee, >> right? I'm wondering if you have to do terms on one when you get the terms passed then go for term limits at the next >> there you go >> next election not put them on the same ballot >> right
>> I don't know if that's possible >> it's a tough one then you got to get into and we'll we'll dig into this later I know we're just going through the charter but just food for thought for everybody is the the issue becomes how do you start it who either gets their
term shortened or lengthened um because somewhere along the line And that's got to happen in order to get the um not not so much the three members who are already on the general election cycle. It's the getting the mayor and
the council member off the argument >> that that's where the difficulty comes in. So you'd have to have them >> either at some point in the future because this this could take four or five years to implement. At some point they have to run for either a threeyear
term. Right? There's so many different ways to do it. You could add a year to their term is >> the simplest way to do it usually. >> You know, you do it on a a presidential governor's cycle and those three members running. If it passes, they have four years. The sitting members get an extra
year and boom, you're done. But anytime we put that out there, then you've got one member of the council who doesn't like it. Doesn't matter who, and I'm not picking on anyone, they bang a drum. Oh, you're extending their terms. You're giving them a free year. and everybody votes no. So, it it's going to take a
lot more thought than just let's make it four-year terms, but that'll come up when we get there. >> Extending terms is uh one of the tools in the tool chest to accomplish that uh under Florida election law >> tends to be an unpopular one. Yep.
>> Uh just sharing that thought. I mean, to to your point once it gets out. Um so yeah you you more typically in the transitions you end up with uh oyear length term like short term or something like that
>> right somebody gets an odd >> threeyear term to yeah to to eventually step to a four-year term and and things like that. So, >> right. Didn't we just have that not too long ago, not with a term, but it came up in the length of it and they were trying to get
every everyone on the same voting cycle and the guys was to cut down the cost of a non presidential governor of the year, >> right? That and then and then it went out and so that one by itself got shot down. But I think it was the wording in that that
really hit it. Although I'm not really sure we'd want to see a council that I mean the likelihood of it happening is is small but with all new council members for some reason. >> If all you'd split them up no you'd
split them on a split. >> You'd split it every two years there' be election. I mean that's I'm going to say that was every two years there's an election and it doesn't co it helps save the cost because then we're not paying for its own election because you have a gubanatorial and a presidential of the
year. So, it financially helps us a little bit. Um, but you I I would going to say I don't think you could ever go to everybody all in one >> in a wipeout year, so to speak, just five people up for election in one shot. I >> we are as a pra as a practical matter
down in Orange County. We are effectively having that the Orange County Commission right now because people are either term limited or they're running for other things or what have you. So, almost the entire county commission is going to change out in a single election. So yeah, generally you try to plan against that. >> Right. Right.
>> And then two-year terms make it hard for any new member because as soon as you become a member, I you know, anybody who's who's sitting here who thinks you're going to go up there and everybody always goes up there and thinks they're going to know it all, they're going to do it, they're going to realize it until they get up there and
then all of a sudden they're very quiet for six or eight months because it's it's all moving very fast and it's all happening very fast. And then by the time you figure it out, you're running for re-election again. And it's just that perpetual cycle. >> Well, the other side of it is, you know,
four years a commitment. You're you're looking at a commitment. Can you commit to two years or four years? And what do you want to commit to? >> Oh, it could be a prison term. You are right. >> That's you, you know, you can say four years is a little more commitment. You're looking at four years as it's >> I don't disagree with you there.
>> That's that's such a reality is okay, I'm going to run, you know, I want to run for four years. somebody in your head thinking or six years whatever and you go that's four years four years four that those are that's a significant commitment that you're making and I'm thinking like if you think of your kids
and things like that your real lifespan as you're moving along those are commitments that's it's a little easier on a two-year commitment to go I'm in for two years and a year in go you know what I'm changing my mind I want out or whatever or something changes >> that is true because running campaigns is
>> miserable you You ran what? Four times, five times. >> Yeah. >> Right. Five, I think. >> Six. All all to lost. >> Yeah. I mean, and I did 11. >> I mean, campaigns. It's >> I don't know how you guys did that. I mean, you're constantly campaigning with a two-year. >> You just did these big gigantic
mine and and it's a big difference. So, you understand on the presidential year versus the off year is a very different I used to run. >> Hugely a different you know, the off year five 6,000 people are voting. the on year 17 20 you know 18,000 people are
voting it's an entirely different setup and the gubanatorial year if you if it switches it'll get more towards the presidential year number but right now we have a big if you think about that and want to throw that in your head space how that works that off your
election took five six thousand people >> are voting that's it making decisions for 40,000 citizens >> I ran I ran on both cycles because when I was a council member I was on the general cycle and then uh when the transition happened with Mary Lou, I got
bumped off to the off-year cycle. The off-year cycle is for an elect for an incumbent is a very easy cycle to run on because you know who's going to vote. You know, we we we know everyone who's going to vote like Stephen said, it's
6,000 people. It's very easy to go touch four 5,000 people. Um, so I mean there's a lot of thought in this. I mean the the presidential cycle that just becomes name recognition that becomes who raises the most money and does the most mailers. It it's the truth though. I
mean that's just how it works. >> Anyhow, >> it's just different. I just throw it out there to see that there's a difference in the cycles currently that's pretty vast and you may want to consider that or not. It's one of those. >> So are you alluding to an unfairness in the >> No, no. I'm just putting it out there. It is very different.
>> I ran I ran on the on cycle. >> I ran on the on cycle and like like uh Dominic said, he ran on both >> and uh you know I can tell you 2008 changed it was a completely different uh you know 2012 they were completely different elections that started and and
continued forward that these are highprofile everybody's coming out. you know, those are when the numbers jumped from, you know, a lot less voting. Even in Ovido, you you just wouldn't see the real numbers at that point. The numbers
grew tremendously. So, like I said, it's just something to think about if if you want. I don't I'm not trying to advocate for either one. It just >> I'm just trying to understand it here because I've never ran. So, I'm thinking, >> well, I would want to run on an offear cycle, you know, if I have to convince. >> But here's the thing. There's it's great
if you're an and I'm being honest. If you're an incumbent, you have some name recognition and you you know there's I I'll say it this way. I'm going to use Dominic for my example because I'll always say to him when he was mayor I'm like 200 people hate you. There's just that's the that's it.
There's just there no matter what you could be the greatest person you two anybody elected official there are 200 people that hate you no matter what you do. You could go save their baby their whole life, do whatever. They're still going to no matter what just go you're rotten evil person and not it. So you
have to just start. But you get to that off your election like you said there's 6,000 and it used to be 4500,000 people 2500. You could touch 2500 people pretty easily and and figure out,
>> you know, that's 2500 people, which amounts to about a,2500 homes tops. You can hit 1500 homes in that period. >> Okay. So, if I grasp this, all right, as at a two-year cycle, you're going to run on an on-year cycle and the next time
you run again is an offear cycle. >> No, you always run on the same cycle. So, you're always going to be running the same cycle. You always run every two. I I think we should >> even or an odd your cycle. >> Yeah. I think we should explain it this week. Uh three of the seats. So it's uh Britain, Bford, and they run on the
general election cycle. >> So every two years they're either running on the presidential cycle or the governor's cycle. >> Okay. >> Natalie uh and Megan, the mayor, uh those two seats always run in the offyear cycle. Right. >> Two seat two. Is it two in the mayor and
>> one and two? I don't I don't know what the Oh, wait. It's the mayor and then seat one. Yeah. >> And then two, three, four. >> All right. >> So, if we switched to a four-year cycle, >> would would we be affectively would we be able to eliminate an election on an
on a non- gubanatorial non-presidential election, thereby saving the city some money? >> Right. I say you you'd only be running on the gubanatorial and the >> Yeah. You want to run gubernatorial or presidential because then the supervisor counties pay for it. pick up the
>> and that's what I'm trying to get to here is how do we how do you accomplish that? four year terms. >> Four year terms four year terms. That's part of the >> that makes sense. >> Plus to get to a four-year terms is >> yeah heard. >> We're saving 20,000 whatever you know per election. >> What does it cost? About 20.
>> It's about 40. >> About 40. >> 40 to 45. >> About 40. Yeah. 20 >> before I retired. 45,000. >> Wow. But then in that in that same aspect, what combining what you're talking about
and what they're talking about about on and off. So then if everybody's at a at a four-year term and everybody's in a gubernatorial presidential cycle now,
it's harder. It's never it it's actually never harder for an incumbent sometimes, but it can be harder for an incumbent to win because now you're you're you're massmailing your your strategy changes and you're touching people for name
recognition for when they're going in voting for governor, president, whatever else, and they're having to vote for someone in our council and mayor. It's not necessarily I know their viewpoints. I'm voting for you based on your viewpoints. It's, oh, I've seen 10
of your mailers. >> Yeah. >> And I'll throw if I could throw something you just kind of hit if and I'll get off, but you know, it also depends on the ballot. >> You know, we've had two and a half page ballots. We're on the half page. We're way at the end. So, you get fatigue. Uh,
you know, you've seen some of those ballots to one, two, three, and then you're here with, you know, there are there are county and other things going on that you're checking. You're sitting on page three and a half. And then suddenly there's two names that people
have maybe learned some of this all of it god bless I hope you know and gone through it all but ballot fatigue >> fatigue into that and to us is also plays into on the onyear so that's what I'm saying there's things about both elections that you could be stuck on the
onyear elections that you're just sitting on the ballot that that's long and although it sounds well you're getting more people involved you may get people have no clue. >> And the presidential cycles can be interesting. Let's just call it that.
>> Well, I mean, as sitting here as as a voter who's likely to never run for council, um I don't really care how hard it is on a candidate, right? >> Incumbent or otherwise. >> I know. If you want it, you got to go. >> Yeah. But at the same time, I don't I
don't My point of view is I don't really care of the difficulty for you being an incumbent or not of cycles or whatever. What I care about is fair election and efficiency of money usage in the city. So, if there's if there's a way to
switch to a four-year term that accomplishes those things, great. You know, if it's if it's hard to run an election, that's what you're signing up for, >> right? >> All right. >> I think what happens is the in the transitioning from two years to four years, that's where the existing board
says, uh, I'm not doing one year. I'm voting it down. It just seems to never pass. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Right. >> We'll figure it out when we get there. >> Every every transition, you know, >> you start telling your kid no more dessert and you're going to have a fight
for a while. >> If uh if there does end up being a will on the CRC to to recommend that, then we'll come up with a way to put it together. >> So, we can recommend a suggested way to do it, too. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Oh, yeah. That's that's precisely what you're uh what you're tasked with.
What's going to eventually get voted out of uh this committee is the proposed charter amendments that's going to be going to them to consider. They may mark them up and pull with them or what have you, but they're going to be getting full ballot language and charter language and all of that
>> as part of our recommendation. >> That's exact as a recommendation. Yes. >> I'm going to throw that at you going. You're saying, "Oh, we can do this and tell them what to do." Like, >> we can propose. >> You can have a very detailed >> recommendation. Come on.
>> I want to thank you all for that discussion. I I was thinking about reigning it in, but that was actually very valuable because it's it's a very important point to keep in mind. When elections happen are incredibly relevant to a number of factors. How many folks turn out, how much it costs the city,
and all of this. And that was a good discussion of the dynamics there. Yes. >> Is there a term limit? Meaning, is there a limit for how many terms each council member can serve? Right now there is none. >> No. >> All right. Anything further on this right now? Because we'll be talking
about this again. The question of potentially I I think the the discussion seems to gravitate towards the potential of moving from two years to four years. So there's nothing further right now. We'll bring that back around for some more concrete decision- making uh in the
near future and we will move on. Our next section is 3.03.03. This uh section alone is less interesting than it looks like at first appearance. Uh there's some other sections about uh special elections for
uh officials that are more interesting. This is just basically saying that special mun municipal elections that are called under other provisions of the charter to fill vacancies in certain instances follow other except as it's otherwise modified follow the regular
rules. All right. It just kind of saying uh that the mayor calls uh as a ministerial duty calls the special municipal election by proclamation and it sets up um uh everything for the uninspire uh unexpired term. Basically
everything that would be prescribed by the uh other requirements we're going to talk about later in the charter for filling vacancies when we have vacancies arise on the city council. Any questions on that? Again, this isn't the interesting one when it comes to filling vacancies or anything like this at this
point. All right, so uh moving on to 3.03.04. This um for the most part uh just uh restates the authority that the uh city council as the governing body of the
municipality already has the authority to call special elections for uh other purposes. So, for example, for a referendum, whether it's a bond referendum or a charter amendment referendum or so on, the only thing that would I would point out to you, and this
is kind of a suggestion from my office, uh, if you will, is uh there is there's a time parameter in this uh subsection that is not very common. I'm not familiar with
what the purpose is behind it and it seems like it could be very constraining uh in a given instance and that is says a special election for a purpose other than nomination or recall of city council members may be authorized by resolution anytime by the city council
provided not less than 60 days no more than 90 days intervene between the date of the adoption of the resolution and the date of the election. So what that's saying is the city council purportedly under this has a very short fuse to from
the time when they call an election to when it's held. What is infinitely more common is a city council or governing body of a municipality will call an election. Sometimes it could be called many months in advance. they would uh
adopt an ordinance or what have you in February of uh of a given year of a a even numbered year to be for that referendum to be held at the November election. Okay? They want to put it on an election. They don't have to pay for
a special one or anything like this. So, uh but they're getting it out of the way way beforehand. they're getting it out of the way um uh well in advance so the supervisor of elections has it in time this this time period I don't know what
positive benefit it it is was ever meant to provide if anyone happens to know and um it's very constraining from a uh complying with modern election law time requirements so if I would have a
suggestion just from my office that might consider in uh in an amendment, possibly a cleanup amendment or, you know, something of that sort. Uh be a little bit more than cleanup, but possibly one to to gang some miscellaneous uh matters to potentially
uh remove that constraint because I unless someone's aware of of the beneficial reason it might have been put there. doesn't the rest of it then encumber the timeline as well that they could get around it anyway
>> utilizing the rest of that >> uh unless a different time uh unless a different time is otherwise provided in this charter by ordinance or by statutory law or constitutional provisions under which uh election is called. Um
the only thing that would be the only thing that would get your most common matters there would be um the byordinance bit which basically and this is actually another thing that I thought was a little cumbersome in this. It sets
up um this section sets up kind of arguably a two-step process to call a referendum election. you'd have to pass an ordinance to enable it and then you pass a resolution to call it, right? >> The much more common way in municipalities throughout the state is
you just adopt an ordinance, right? And do it all in well, one fell swoop. So that actually brings up the the other bit. I don't know why it says it has to be called by refer by resolution. And this all sounds like boring technical stuff. I I understand it is, but these
are the kind of things that keep city attorneys and city clerks up at night when we've got to >> What would this jump through hoops? G give What's an example of what this election would be? What would >> uh calling uh a referendum on charter amendments for for example
>> um or calling a referendum on um uh on voted millages on on bond issuances or special tax under under uh certain provisions in Florida statutes. uh although those would fall under the uh
statutory law exempting them from that window because they are now all required to be on November uh even number of year elections. So it it's a constraint that I didn't see what the purpose of it for I mean there's escape hatches for some but not for all. >> So just a thought to put out there if
it's all right I was going to put it down uh on the list to have there maybe to to >> work into something. I don't think it merits eating up its own space on a ballot. Uh, just this, but might be something to to gang with some other
things. Any questions concerning that section. Moving on down, we got 3.03.10 nominating petitions. As you heard alluded to, this was recently amended
just back in 2021. This uh section provides that nomination all candidates uh shall be made by nominating petitions and uh it was amended in 2021 to change the required number of registered voters
signing nominating petition petitions from 25. >> Yes sir. >> From 25 to 150. So that's where it sits currently. Any questions concerning this provision?
All right. Uh 3.03.11. I think this is uh probably a boring one as well. It's uh setting out the form of petitions for uh for the nominating
petitions. It basically just lays out the basics of uh what would need to be on the nominating uh petitions. tracks a number of the things that you would find on nominating positions um for uh
different state level offices. Any questions on this one? Yes, ma'am. >> I don't have a question. >> I don't have a question on that. My brain glitched from going from 0.04 to10.
Um, is are there items that are missing or that removed? >> Great question. Yeah, there there were uh apparently looking at the editor's notes in the charter uh there there were a number of provisions that were 05 through09 that were removed by charter
amendment back in 2003. So yeah, and sometimes you end up with gaps in numbers like that. >> Okay. So do we correct that um as part of the new >> as of right now? Those are just uh put in they're codified as reserved. You just have a notation there. Uh it's left
there with spaces in between because someday there might be a good idea the most rational place to put some new charter amendment relating to elections might be right there. >> We just put it right in there. renumbering uh charter provisions or ordinance provisions uh every time you
you end up with spaces like that leads to a lot of confusion in the future because it's very useful over the decades to be able to refer to a charter provision by the same number. You see what I'm saying? Uh I mean you can can change it but it leads to a lot of
confusion. >> All right, moving on down to 3.03. 03.12 acceptance of candidacy. Any person whose name has been submitted as a candidate shall file his written acceptance of such candidates at the time of qualifying which except shall
state. If such candidate is elected, the candidate will serve uh as such officer. A candidate within the time hearing fails to file the acceptance and the candidate's name shall not be printed on the ballot. Do we have a separate form for that separate from the statement of
candid the statement candidate? No, we use the states for point >> statement of the candidate. Okay. All right. Um I unless there are any questions, I I don't find that to be a particularly interesting one. One thing you got to remember is um particularly in the style
of municipal charters from many decades ago. A lot of things that are just the way things are done or laid out in state statute, they just wrote it down in the charter. And so we do have instances where they're just stating what is, you
know, the default already. So, uh, that's effectively nowadays a reference to the state required, uh, statement of candidate. >> I do have I'm just a little lost in this section. Um, >> yeah, me too. >> Is is there two ways to get on the
ballot here? You you either go gather 150 signatures or you get a somebody nominates you. So the wording as used in the charter is these petitions are quote nominating petitions. >> So this section and the previous section are essentially
>> they are tied the same thing. >> Yeah. They're they're they are highly related to each other. >> So this section covers if somebody doesn't go out looking for the signatures and 150 people independently come in with a nominating petition to the city clerk. I don't know how this works. Like this doesn't make a lot of
sense. >> Yeah. as a as a practical matter. Um I don't know if if uh back many many many decades ago such a thing was contemplated uh >> you know potentially happening that way.
I'd be surprised even decades ago that it would happen that way. Perhaps when it was 25, you know, they would kind of volunte. I don't know. But um it's it's not an
uncommon structure to to refer to them as nominating petitions in the sense that you know these other folks are all saying yes you should run but in in matter of fact they are solicited by the candidate or agents of the candidate.
>> They can't make you run right. you. >> Well, and and that nominally is what what that section is is kind of referring to uh in in >> right, >> you know, the orientation of thinking of >> if you're volunttoled like you said. >> Yeah. >> And you come in and say, "Okay, fine. I'll be on the ballot." You got to come
in and say, "Okay, I accept this." >> Yeah. >> And you also have to comply with all the state law requirements of of um >> Yeah. >> It makes sense. It just seems like an obsolete section that you're not going to get. It >> is its phrasing is its phrasing is a
little obsolete is a is a fair way to to say it. >> Although they kind of made George Washington run, right? >> They kind of did. Yeah, I suppose. >> I have a question is >> please. Um so the written acceptance
um at the time of qualifying so that written acceptance should be done within this 5day qualifying period. >> It becomes uh effective within that uh time period. So just just to let you all
know uh this is uh something that the uh clerk was referencing before in state elections. All right. State and county elections, uh, elections that are fully governed by the Florida Election Code. We have a oneweek qualifying period, same as this. All right. You
have that onewe qualifying period, but folks can do two things. one, they can, as we discussed before, um, open a a campaign depository and name a treasure and declare themselves a candidate,
start collecting money, spending money, months and months and month, even years technically for for state and county stuff in advance of the election they're running for. So, they can do all that stuff. Um and for that qualifying of one week, the state statute actually
expressly provides for the idea that the paperwork that you would file in that one week, you can pre-file with the filing officer in that instance either the state uh uh department of state or the county supervisor of elections. So
this pre-filing process is contemplated in the Florida election code. All right. So, uh, basically that statement of candidate we talked about there can be put on file early and then it's deemed or it springs into
existence as filed the minute qualifying opens because it's already done. Does that make sense? >> Okay. >> Any other questions on that? All right. We'll uh truck on down to 3.03.14 03.14 election procedures, votes, pluralities,
ties. So, this uh lays out what we were talking about how city council members run in uh different groups or seats or what have you. In case of election of city council members, there should be as many groups
as there are vacancies to be filled. All candidates shall be voted upon by the voters of the city at large. candidate receiving the highest number of votes cast shall be elected. All right. Now, that sounds like, well, yeah, that's how it would work. But
there are a number of different ways that can play out in different municipalities. This is, as the title references, plurality voting, or whoever gets the most votes wins. You end up with the same result if you only have two people running. Whoever gets the
most votes wins, has a majority. But in some places, some cities, they have it set up where you have to have a majority, at least 50% plus one to win. Then you end up with runoffs and all manner of stuff like this. And I can
tell you the universal trend, you don't have that here, but the universal trend among municipalities in Florida is to try to get rid of runoffs because you end up prolonging your elections uh substantially if two rounds of of elections and what have you. and moving
to plurality system where it's whoever gets the most votes wins. Now what ends up happening there is if you do have three people run uh you could end up with nobody getting over 50% plus one but
somebody gets 45% and the other two get less than that that's the person who wins. So you have a plur plurality vote winning system uh here in Ovida >> um And then uh the election results in a tie. Outcome is determined by law.
That's actually what's provided in the Florida election code. You flip a coin, you draw straws. Uh duel, >> there's actually pistols at dawn. Uh there's actually litigation about this recently. They're fighting about what uh by lot means.
>> So it doesn't define it. >> The court No, it doesn't. The court basically said go away. Uh, you know what it means and they >> go flip the >> Yeah, go. Yeah. Stop. Yeah. >> Um, anyways, any questions about that?
>> Yeah, I I do have a question, please. >> If all city council positions are at large um positions, they're elected at large. Why do we have groups? >> Oh, yeah. >> You wasn't here last week for that discussion. >> Oh, yeah. That's right. You weren't. So,
we had Yeah, we we >> That's right. I get that, but like, okay, so the mayor and um the deputy mayor were most recently in an election cycle, but now we have three others, and they're going to be groups 2, three,
and four. And if there's if they're if they're the only three running, there are three separate elections unopposed elections. It's the same election, but it's three separate ballot items. >> Right. Right. I think it's just you got to have a number. Well, and and they
don't >> A B C D E whatever >> which seat is up for >> but it my point is is it doesn't matter what seat if everybody's at large it doesn't matter >> right but if you're running against >> you have to have a plurality you're not otherwise how would you >> represent other than that seat
>> yeah but who you're running you got to run against the guy >> it's effectively >> yeah it's it's effectively which seat you're jumping into as a practical matter to pick your opponent >> right Okay, >> that's kind of what I figured it was, >> right?
>> Uh so if you if you had cuz there are cities uh where you do have elections where it is everyone hops in and and whoever or the three top vote getters >> get it. All right, that leads to some
very interesting game theory uh mathematics. I'll be quite frank because I represent some cities where that occurs. And you have folks who are very like-minded, okay? Uh who end up they are from a voting and mathematical
standpoint, they're technically adverse to each other, if you will. They're running against people they are very, you know, politically aligned with versus other people they might be not politically aligned with or what have you. So that's just from a policy standpoint. From a pure politics and
math standpoint, if you have if you had the scenario you just mentioned, you had uh three seats and three uh folks running for those three seats, whether it was uh by seat or it was whoever gets
the most votes wins, you know, in in the whole batch. You got three and three, you're not having an election. All right? So, when you have individual seats and you've got an individual um you know, let's say an individual incumbent, all right, or three
incumbents who are all going to run, then someone looking to run is effectively getting to choose which either which incumbent they want to run against. Or if the incumbent's not running, now you have an open seat where there's no incumbent running and folks
can choose which seat they're going to run for. Are they going to hop in and run against the incumbent who's been there 20 years and is probably going to, you know, have the power of incumbency and win? Or are they going to hop in and choose the seat they may have a better chance at? So these are these are
>> they're not representing a particular district. I see your point. Yeah. >> And it's it almost as a voter from a voter standpoint, I I I feel like my right to choose my council members is effectively taken away because
we only have three people ever running and they're in three different ballot line items and people may not want to run up against the 20-year guy. So then they'd go, "Uh, I'll just do something else." They never end up running. So we end up with unopposed a lot. And I I
wonder if a there would be a cost incentive to have a single ballot line item with all council members running and a sort of like a rank choice um system which I don't know how everybody feels
about that but I'm just throwing it out there as something that is has happened has been done and it avoids runoffs in a way um but it it it seems like it might open up the field a bit more to more
candidates with a better choice and the voters have a better voice of selection and there may be a cost savings I don't So, just to mention one thing, the legislature got out in front of you on one of those things. Uh, rank choice balloting is illegal in Florida.
>> That it's expressly illegal in the Florida election code because a lot of folks were proposing it and uh before they banned it, you probably could have done it in municipalities and so they banned it. Um but uh so
>> I think that was you're you're talking more the discussion of districts that I we're going to bring bringing that up again. >> Yeah. Well, >> I'm not really talking about districts. >> Yeah. Well, actually, you are >> you kind of are anyway saying they don't represent >> if we're at large, why do we number the seats and why do we run independent
ballot items? >> Right. I think we're at large and I'm not arguing that we should be split up into districts. You're just saying this should not then you're kind of saying I'm going to say then you're really saying all five should go up at the same time. >> I'm I'm saying that if we're not going to represent districts
>> we shouldn't be split splitting them in. >> I understand but then you're saying all five I mean naturally the step would be that all five should be at the same time. You should have all five up >> or keep the mayor sacred so to speak and have four council if you want to keep the mayor sacred and have four council
members every four years. They all run at the same time. >> And the four highest vote getters. >> What a disaster. >> Okay. I'm just trying to I'm just trying to figure out what you're aiming for cuz I go I don't see where that >> gets I'm not really I'm just posing
questions as to >> Yeah. No, I'm just trying to see the direction cuz that's what I don't understand. >> You said before I don't care about the candidate running an election >> and I don't hear I'm not talking about that. I'm just trying to go on the candidate >> how you think that's better or how you think that's getting you to a better I'm proposing the question of maybe does it
open the field to more candidates? What can we do to get more candidates to try to run for these these seats that that are perpetually going unost? >> But why why is it our job to make it easier for candidates? If candidates
want to run, if they have that desire, you know, I I I think that's a whole philosophy of society today because back in the day when I did it, you did it. I mean, the way you did it is you came into this chamber and you spent your
time here and you invested your time and you got to know this staff and you got to know Barbara and you got a hold of the agendas and you learned what was going on. You got to know the members. Um, you learned how it worked and then you made that decision that you wanted
to be a member. I mean, you can't treat this as I'm going to wake up on a Monday and I want to go run for city council. >> No, I'm honestly >> But that's that but that is what you're saying because you constantly are saying I want to make it easier. I want to open the field to more candidates who may not
have may have looked at this these things and said, "You know what? It's more trouble than I can get into or I have some other hurdle that I have to get into. For example, I have an 8:00 a.m. 8 to 5:00 p.m. 9 to5 Monday through Friday. There's no way I can get over to
city hall to submit this paperwork." Had I not known that I could go and presubmit it, I would be like, "That's the end of my candidacy." >> If you don't have uh Keegan, I'll be honest. If you don't have the time or you can't make the time to submit the paperwork, how you going to do the job?
Because this job isn't >> Yeah, but Keegan, this job isn't you just come in here every other Monday, sit up there from 6:30 till 8:30 and make decisions. There's things that go on all day long. Uh well, especially for
the mayor's seat, but even for the member seats. I mean, you got to want this. and and it's it's it's it's a job in itself, you know, it it gets it
gets paid and treated in the charter and as a part-time job. But Brian, was this ever a part-time job for Stephen or I or any of these members who are sitting there? Uh for the 15 $16,000, you you
you have to want it in your heart to be here. And if you don't want to put in the effort to do it, >> you shouldn't do it. >> I'm on an unpaid HOA board. I UNDERSTAND. >> OH, IS not at all. >> No. No. Let me If you If you Keegan, if
you're trying to compare an HOA board to >> Listen, I'm not I'm saying I get the standpoint. It is not >> No, I I understand what you're trying to How to get more people involved? >> Do we have enough candidates? Well, >> is there something we can possibly do within the bounds of this charter that
could help bring more candidates? That's all I'm after. I don't understand questions. I'm proposing >> certain avenues. And you may hate it. Okay. >> No, no. I just don't know where you're going. That's all I was trying to point out. Hey, an example for >> think about it.
what Keegan's talking about about um so we had an election recently where we had incumbents running and then we had an open seat because someone chose not to run again. So then we ended up having
two candidates choose not to go against incumbents and so they went against each other. Right? in an open election as he's discussing those two candidates that ran against each other could have possibly ended up both on council
and another incumbent off council. >> I don't think it changes the power of incumbent >> if if you go back and look and I'm not trying to you know we've seen a lot of different ways it's worked out. I I'll my my first when we're talking about percentages and make it you know you
need a majority the first second election I was in I my first election I I went I lost I wasn't in it I got 24%. The winner got 29%. Five people ran in the seat 29% was the win. So we had a com, you know, somebody. So, you know,
but other elections I've seen people go up against incumbents. The year before, three incumbents lost, got just taken right away. >> Yeah. >> So, I'll say I I'll start with I'm not a big fan in any way, shape, or form of
term limits because the term limit is the guy out there voting. So, to me, it's if you want to run, run. There's they're adding more help in my opinion. And I was like, "Oh, wow. That's a great thing to put online and have more information on how to run." It it's
gotten better, a lot better than it was, and it keeps getting better and and it looks like it's going to get even more. Here's information. I don't know the people want to run. It's a matter of can we make charter to help people run. It's a matter of how many people do you
know go out there and going, you know, I really want to run. I really want to run and do this. It's like running for your HOA. Is your board full? Do you got people dying to get in there and want to sit with you and go, "Hey, this is my thing and my jam." Or is it I want to
protect my I want to protect my you know what I own and that's what you're usually up against on a higher level at the same level >> in council. So I don't know if there's anything we can do in charter in terms of I don't know that the best way is
add top five gets it. Um because like I said it becomes it definitely uh that that election that I lost I can tell you right off the bat I sat there with somebody who said I'm I is this how you want to vote like I can't really say because once you become
a candidate here's legal stuff. You're perceived you can't go out and say like this is how I'm going to vote. You can't sit there go well I'm a I'm a candidate. How are you going to vote if this comes up? I'm going to say you really shouldn't. legally that's not a thing you should do. >> Or or the infamous question, are you a
Republican or Democrat? >> I'm a Republican or Democrat. >> Nonpartisan election. >> So, I didn't give the answer to that. She goes, "Well, I'm running." I'm like, "Well, this is what's going to happen. This is this is going to you're you're going to pick the same people from I am and this is what's going to there's I don't want to say there was mathematics
to it." There is. You can start looking going that candidate and that candidate are the same two guys pull the same exact people pull and people are going to figure that out. I don't luckily think it's really been a big issue in here that like oh we're going to you
know really but or you know the big one that you'll see higher up is like you were alluding to you're running someone that seemed to be with that guy and liked that guy and suddenly went into election against that guy. Well there was mathematics all figuring that out
that that was the right thing to do. So I think you start getting into a wide open hey five people you know there's there's best of we take the top three people or four people run we take the top four the shell game I think it becomes more
of a shell game and you'll start seeing more playing than I don't want you to say it's worth I don't know that you get any more candidates >> that are real >> possibly not I mean >> you know that that's why >> I'll just what if >> or candidate and I'll I'll be frank or candidates >> that I want I'll go. I want people who
really want to serve, do stuff, and care. I think it was last meeting when I said, you know, about districts. I don't want districts. Why? Because every council member should know every area of this city and should kind of understand all of it. And that's part of it to me is the same thing going, well, I want
people who are stepping up that really want to care and step up and do stuff. I may not agree with them. I can tell you I don't agree with every five of them, but I'll sit there and give them all praise that they all care. They all want to do the right job. I may not agree with them all, but they don't care and do the right job in my opinion right now.
>> Yeah. And candidates are born generally from, you know, folks who have an issue. >> You know, if if people are happy and and you know, 99% of the population of our city just
wants us to deliver clean water, flush the toilet, it goes away, and the garbage picks up the garbage and they feel safe. holes. I knew that was coming. >> Wow. >> So, I'll gone so long you forgot.
>> Yes. Well, that's because it was paved before I left, but >> I'm going to try to bring us back in. >> Yeah. I'll add my two cents very quickly. Is this on or >> But that but that's what creates and like you know back in the day. How long have you been in the city? >> I've been in the city since there
>> 2007. >> Okay. So way back in the day, and Katherine remembers this, I mean, every seat used to have five, six people running for it. Wasn't uncommon because there was I I won't call it controversy,
but the city was changing. It was evolving. Um the way of life around here was was growing and it brought candidates out. I mean, my first election was seven people in the race. I
got 32% of the vote and the person who lost had behind me was 30. So two of us had 62% of the vote in a seven person race. So, you know, it's um and and then I had an election
every year. I didn't get a a pass on an election until I think the first one came when I was mayor. I I don't I didn't have one when I was council member. We always had a race. It was just what you did. You know, you got elected, you waited a
year, you got a packet, and you were running again. So, um, that when folks are are happy, and most people in the city are happy. I mean, you could look at social media and say no one's happy. Well, that's social media. Social media.
Nah, the social media has completely ruined politics and it was, you know, one of the reasons why I decided to uh step aside because it affects your family, it affects your kids, it's u people will say anything, but that that's the only way you to try to
manufacture candidates. I don't know. >> I I agree with Stephen on that one. We're Yeah, we're we're going to keep bustling on, but Kevin, please >> just a quick comment because u I think Dominic's on the money. You got to want it. You got to want to run for it. You can't create a situation that makes it easier. But what we could do is educate
people a little bit more on the value of devoting your time to your city. And in my case, my commissioner at the time up in Sanford said, you know, you're pretty sharp guy. You're in real estate. You'd be useful on a board. And he just
volunteered me onto a citizens, you know, board. It was a very low level. We had no real power, no say, but it got me on a board and I started to get interested in what was going on in my city. And I went from there to the planning and zoning board and that was
in my wheelhouse being kind of a development guy. And once I was there, I was nine years on the PNZ board before I ran for commission. But I got involved. So we there's probably things we can do to encourage people to get involved. Not necessarily run, but get on a board. There's a zillion boards you can serve
on. >> Kevin, they have trouble filling the boards now, I think. But we should we need education really uh because you can commit to a board. It's not overwhelming. It's not like going right for the council which is a big obligation. >> Yeah. That's how most of us started. You
started, Stephen started, I started. We all started on >> planning and zoning or >> board of adjustments or codes. But more when we're looking when we're looking at our charter and trying to >> above to solidify or what we may need to change in charter, some of these things
that are in our minds and we're going through aren't necessarily something we need to change in charter or charter language, but they are things that we need to either ourselves get on other boards or other ways to help promote and expand the knowledge of
getting people involved in our city. So th those become two different things. >> Yeah. Because three >> just wanted to have a little antidote here since I'm the historian. They tell me. >> You'll have to excuse my voice. >> I would never say that.
>> You'll remember this. When I ran, it was Phil Clowninger, Todd Russell, Micell, and me >> talking about your sevenman race. We had a fourman race. >> So we knew that night that Phil Clowninger had won.
The next morning, the Ovito voice, the headline said, Townsen is mayor. These people started calling me saying, "Congratulations, you're the mayor." And I thought to myself, I know I read the charter. I don't remember where it said
if you came in second, you were the mayor. That's a true story. >> Nice, >> members. Thank you all very much. I I let that go a little far field because I all that discussion I think is useful background for a number of the members to understand how these dynamics work.
You've been working through it. It may seem like we have not gotten wildly far, but you've been working through some of the >> five pages ahead with that discussion. >> Yeah. Well, you've been you've been working through been working through some of the most uh some of the most interesting parts of
the charter. it it goes to the fundamental form of government, how we're choosing folks and so on. By the way, just uh to the idea that was brought up in just in the interest of our documenting for our final report and potentially further discussion, uh I'm
going to put down that as a variation on you changing up how folks are elected >> uh down in our list if there's any, you know, further discussion to be had in the future on it. Um and uh with that we'll move on from this topic for right
now if that's all right. >> Good. >> So we are about to be out of 3.03 which is elections proper. Uh 3.0315 conduct of elections uh for elective office. There's not much going on in this uh
other than just reiterating again whoever gets the most votes wins. Um and again kind of reiterating that state law controls uh in the event of any uh uh in the or if uh there's no provision in the charter or ordinances. The one thing I I
would offer to you that I found a little interesting in this uh provision is in uh subsection A violation of provision of uh the election code uh Florida statute chapter 104 shall disqualify candidate from holding office. When I
first read that very quickly, I just saw a violation of the election code shall disqualify a candidate. That would throw everybody out very quickly. Okay? Because whenever anybody runs for office, they will mistakenly write down the wrong number on a campaign finance
filing or what have you and and what have you. The thing is, campaign finance uh regulations are under chapter 106 of the Florida Election Code. 104 is actually the criminal part of the Florida election code and it's the bad
stuff. It's selling votes, buying votes, um uh all manner of stuff you're going to go to jail for anyways. So, in the end, after putting that two and two together, that provision is not particularly remarkable
>> that it's there. I I wouldn't see that as an issue. If that said any violation of the Florida Election Code, I'd be having a much different discussion with you because uh that would be wild. Any questions on that section, section 3.04, recall of mayor and city
council members? This is just stating what is already the law in Florida, that every uh municipal uh elected official in all 411 uh municipalities in Florida are subject to the municipal recall
statute uh 1361, an arcane and Byzantine statute that hasn't been thought through in decades. Unfortunately, my office knows about it because two of our cities have gone through them recently in the last two years. Uh it's a mess of a statute and may we all pray we never
have to deal with it. Any questions on that? It's just restating that it follows state law which is what they have to do anyways. >> All right, with that we are out of at least a fair part of election related
matters. Moving on to section 3.05, the mayor, deputy mayor and duties. And by the way, if it is all right with everyone, because I was a little bit uh late and u I do want to try to pick up our our pace a little bit for uh your
good work through all of this. Do you all mind if we stay a little bit later to maybe uh 7:15 7:30 if we're moving through? Well, >> I actually have an obligation. So, but go ahead and go through. I got to leave about 10 minutes. >> Okay, fantastic. Yeah, and we can catch
you up later as well. So, section 3.05 5 getting into the office of mayor. Uh subsection A lays out the duties of the mayor. Um specifying mayor shall the following duties but shall not exercise
administrative powers of the city. Uh voting member of the city council as we've discussed um that is common but not universal uh for offices you know holding the title of mayor. uh being recognized as head of city government for ser for ceremonial purposes. That is
very typical in uh municipal uh charters. Be recognized by the governor for the purposes of martial law. This is kind of an esoteric uh thing in the grand scheme of things, but it's repeated in just about every municipal charter in Florida. Um be the official under the provisions of state law for
the purposes of declaring states of emergency within the city limits and to exercise emergency powers. I actually meant to speak with the city manager about this provision prior to this, but I'll ask him now. Has this provision ever been discussed
or or dealt with or thought about when it comes to hurricanes and >> we're declaring emergencies all the time and all that jazz? >> How do we define? >> Uh we basically use it. I I mean the what we normally do is the mayor we do a proclamation
>> in which the mayor declares the local state of emergency and state law requires us to reissue that declaration once a week. >> Yeah. >> Uh and so uh that's that's what we use use this for. Uh the rest of the time uh
if we go into a activation level one which is full activation of the emergency operations center then it transfers over to the manager um per chapter 20 of the code. >> Gotcha. >> So but we do use this and one of the
things that we also do basically it's the city manager makes a recommendation to the mayor please declare state of emergency >> but that's that's what we use it for. >> Okay. And the the it's it's the last clause in particular that I was curious about and to exercise immunity powers.
Has that been read or exercise emergency pas has that been read effectively uh to declare the state of emergency to invoke emergency powers? >> I think it sort of >> to to authorize the exercise of emergency powers. >> Yes, I think that's it.
>> That that's how I would read it too in a matter consistent with state statutes. Chapter 252 of the for statutes governs uh how emergencies uh are declared and it it leads a wide variety. It's perfectly permissible for it to be done by procla proclamation of
mayor as opposed to a resolution city council what have you. But there are some constraints on it. The purpose of declaring an emergency like for example when the hurricanes come and so on. There are at least two. One is to make sure we get FEMA reimbursement. They want to see it in the file when we sign on all the stuff. It's for money. The
other though is an important legal one. It is under chapter 252. It enables the city or certain designated people within the city to break their own rules or to break state law certain state laws. And by break
what I mean is they are not constrained by those rules during the course of the emergency to the extent they need to do it to meet the emergency. Okay. So purchasing policy and so on, purchasing policies get waved or waved within
certain constraints. Usually waved to not be what the city's constraints are even the state's constraints. It becomes FEMA's constraints. Why? Because we want to make sure we comply with FEMA rules to be able to get reimbursement. Um but it it's what authorizes us to to wave
those rules when they're in the way to deal with the emergency, a hurricane or what have you. So just wanted to ask about that a little bit and I don't think uh any changes are needed with regard to that is just the wording of it. I just wanted to get a little
clarification on how it's been implemented in practice in the past. Any questions on any of those so far >> that footnote just applies to the statute? >> Yeah, the footnote it actually references there are a number of different uh emergency declaration
statutes. Um that footnote is actually to the reference to to kind of the criminal and riot uh emergency uh statute which is not used very often. Um but it it's just as applicable to 252
which is for emergencies like natural emergencies and so on. Hurricanes being the most common example. Subsection five to issue proclamations relating to events persons or issues of significance to the city. Six, to execute ordinances, resolutions,
contracts, agreements, other instruments of the city. Seven, to represent the city and intergovernmental relationships. Eight, to execute certifications to other governmental entities. >> Are there any questions about any of these? >> Wait, I I have one and we can put this on for a later discussion.
>> Yes. uh section five uh the issue of the proclamations. That's always a little bit of a bone of contention that uh I won't take time now and explain it, but we'll get into it at a later date. There's no objection. We'll go ahead and
put that down just for further discussion because I Yeah, I think there was just Yeah, we'll bring it up the discussion and getting into the particulars of that. >> Um, this subsection or this uh section then proceeds to uh go on to address
choosing who would be the presiding officer at city council meetings. All right. So it provides that first city council meeting of December of each year, city council shall determine by majority vote. Member of the city council shall preside at meetings of the
city council. If any city council member is selected besides the mayor or other than the mayor, that member shall serve as deputy mayor. So we have the introduction of the office of deputy mayor. Um, and so if someone other than the mayor has chosen to chair meetings,
that person is automatically deputy mayor and and uh fills that role. Um, yeah. If Yeah. And it it provides effectively a default. If a majority vote in favor of a member of the city council other than the mayor does not
occur, the mayor shall presiding officer. to take a maj affirmative majority vote to make it someone other than the mayor as the presiding officer. Then goes on to uh provide that if the mayor uh is the uh uh individual chosen
to be the presiding officer, then the city council chooses uh another member of the city council as deputy mayor. and um it provides that the deputy mayor acts as mayor in the absence, disability
or inability to serve uh of the mayor. Any questions about any of that any of those dynamics? All right. 3.06 interference with administration. This
is where we start to see some interaction with the next article we'll be talking about article 4 and article 4 is where we have among other things discussion of the city manager. Okay. And so this is
in one form of or another a non-inference provision is a very common provision that you find in municipal charters with a city manager form of government. Okay. and you end up with very similar language in different
municipalities, but there are tweaks and there are different nuances to uh the different pieces of language. This is it's short and sweet, but there's interesting stuff going on in it. So, I'll go over the whole thing. Interference with administration except
for per for the purposes of inquiries and investigations under section 3.08.01D, 01D. The council or its members shall deal with city officers and employees who are subject to the direction and supervision of the city
manager solely through the city manager. And neither the council nor its members shall give orders to such officer or employee either publicly or privately. The general principle this stands for is the idea that
the employees of the city and um officers of the city that are subject to the direction and supervision of the city manager which is basically everyone except me uh as city attorney um that
they answer to the city manager. All right. And this non-interference provision binds both individually council members in the most extreme instances uh prohibits them from individual council
members from giving orders to individual staff. Okay. Um and in the phrasing that we have here, it binds the council itself from formally uh giving orders to
city staff directly. Instead, they have to go through the city manager because it's the city manager that works for is hired and fired by and works for and is accountable to the council. And then all
of those other employees and and uh department heads and um uh officers are accountable to and hired and fired by ultimately the city manager. >> All right. It's a pretty straightforward. >> Any first thought on that?
>> It's pretty straightforward. It's the residents, the council, then you've got city attorney, city manager, and everybody else. >> The organizational chart's simple. >> Sure. Uh, two nuances to to
discuss. Um, and I I'll I'll tell you just as a general matter because we'll talk about it when we get into city manager as well. as a practical matter as opposed to the pure theoretical legal matter, the words you see on the page in a charter. The exact dynamics between a
given city manager and a given city council, all right, or city commissioner or what have you in a city, the the dynamics of exactly how that communication works and so on tends to get sorted out in that relationship
between the city manager and the city council. Okay. Um and so you there are some cities where where the rule is uh by the city manager absolute
council members are really not even talking to individual staff or even department heads if the city manager isn't present or they don't talk to them at all and they only talk to the city manager and then um the city manager
talks to those staff people. >> I can name those city managers if you want me to. >> What's that? >> With that tape running. So we we've had that here in Ovito. >> Yeah. Uh and you you so you get that dynamic in some cities and then you have
you you have a different dynamic where uh the relationship between the city manager and the city council or governing body is such that the city manager um says no you know please contact you know
these folks or contact these folks just keep me in the loop or you know just do this or just do that. those dynamics as a practical matter um you know work out a little bit differently in each instance. Generally a non-interference provision
gives the city manager that latitude to be able to enforce those boundaries but kind of work out those boundaries in practice. So that's the general purpose this serves. Ron, do you want to add anything about the general way things uh
work out right now? because I was tee up um one of our council members thoughts on this. >> Okay. Uh I I think one of the things Yes. Uh I do have peers in other cities where the
only um the only person that the uh elected officials speak with is the manager. That's it. There's no discussion with any other employee. Um, and I uh I've taken a different tactic
with it. I I know there was a deep discussion at Calo uh one night about it. Um I allow the council members access to our directors. I asked them not to go below the directors because it tends to make people very very nervous. The directors
are trained to work with the council members. One of the things also having worked for all of my predecessors, uh, some of which were the absolute kind, you only deal with me, I I noticed that a lot of times council members were only getting were getting second and
sometimes third third-hand I I I never claimed to be an expert in anything and so I like it when the council members get firsthand information. The other thing that I've noticed in allowing the access to the directors is that I see relationships
forming. And I sat in many of meetings where I heard council members say, "We're all one family. We're all one team." And then on the other side, the staff is sitting there going, "No, we're not." And the thing that I've seen since I've been city manager and allowing this
access, I'm seeing more of a development of that team and of working together. And it I I feel like there's better communication now. And so, but I will say this, this is something that former council member Pollock said one time. He
was at that Calo meeting. He said, "Yes, our ca our city manager gives access to us, but he can take it away at any time if we abuse it." And um so that's the thing that I look at. I look at it from a standpoint of firsthand information
and creating that that cohesive relationship, but there are managers out there that you talk to me and me only and that's it, you know. And uh so but anyway, that's that's what I've done since I've been council, since I've been city
manager >> and and having been a member under both, Brian's approach is in my opinion the better approach. You know, as long as Brian's rule with all of us was always
you can send a question to a not department directors, we're not talking about rank and file. Uh but to always copy him in, loop him in every every time. So you would just CC Brian question go out to public works or the
clerk or wherever it had to go. um that just worked better like Brian said when it was the other way that that those were the days and Katherine remembers this when we had seven eight people running for council because the information was
whatever the city manager wanted the information to be is basically it. We used to have one that the director would get up there and there'd be signals on what they could say and couldn't say. Well, it seems like from from our standpoint and what our duty is here
with this, the way it's written gives and especially when you have a manager as we have now the proper layering that city manager giveth and can taketh away.
And if the council itself then at some point deems, oh, this is too overboard and that and there's a majority of city council that thinks this, well, they can replace the mayor or the the the manager. And so
it it becomes a a balancing act the way it's written a nice balancing act between our council our manager in that there's ways for
in a prior s where Dominic was saying if you had a situation that council goes enough of this and they have to remove them then they do or if you have a situation as such that your manager can
say most of the council is is doing what they should and and how they should. We have one or two, hey guys, you need to go just through me because you're overburdening or you're you're harassing or something's just not copathetic and I need to be the lead on this. So it it
seems and that's just from my point. It seems from our task it's well worth it. I I would I would agree, but I I have a question of um I I don't think it's an issue based on how it's currently running, but is there a scenario where
this section could be superseded by the emergency powers of the previous section where the mayor has a state of emergency and exercises emergency powers? Is there any scenario of conflict there or supercure of this?
>> Sure. Good question. The the thing to remember about emergency powers is and it's all the more been clarified in recent years since co uh emergency powers are very temporary or they're supposed to be. All right. Um so if if
you're looking at for at least uh emergency powers invoked at the local government level. All right. You heard reference to having to uh be them having to be re-uped every seven days. All right. So as a as a practical matter,
you only end up having emergency powers invoked um really under governed under state law uh when you have real emergencies, you know, for a 7-day or 14 or 21 day period of time. So I mean th
those would be discreet periods of time as opposed to, you know, the running of the relationship for the whole period of time. >> I hope that helps with regard to the emergency powers at least. Yeah, I think so. I think the the way it's set up, if I understood it correctly, it's not
really an issue. It was just a thought that popped in my head, is one section stepping on the other, right? >> Or possibly stepping on the other. And >> there's always one law stepping on another. And that's it keeps folks like me in a job. You know, it's just how it works.
>> Mr. If I could, >> please. >> Uh just one little thing. When we declare state of emergency and chapter 20 of the code of ordinances kicks into gear, uh yes, it does give the manager a lot of uh authority to
carry out what needs to be carried out to respond. Uh but one of the things that the manager has to do is on a regular basis bring what he has done to the city council and have it confirmed. Mhm.
>> So I and I remember during COVID the council was going not again because every meeting there would be a resolution on the agenda saying confirming all the things that we did between the then and the you know that meeting and the meeting prior. But that's one of the I think there is sort
of a check and balance that the council is still involved that they're confirming the things that we're doing on a regular basis and we try and especially now with the statute requiring us to reactivate the state of emergency every week and that was a
result of COVID um because they figured out that there were municipalities out there like us that were following the surgeon general state law and we were doing it for 60 days instead of one week and so they said, "All right, from now on, all local state emergencies are one week." Um, but what it does is we
between count, so every council meeting, we have something on the agenda confirming what we've done during that state of emergency. So, I I think from a standpoint of that, um, they still stay informed about what we're doing, right? >> And we also we keep them up to date. I
mean, that is something that we we do automatically, >> right? I I guess I got confused with the emergency powers. But I understood it to be that the mayor kind of stepped into your role. >> Oh no. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And that that's that was the piece I was questioning about how that
language has been because it's is written a little vaguely, but the way I actually read it is the way they implement it. that it's the power the mayor invokes there is just the power kind of a ministerial power to to declare it but not to exercise those
powers you know as in the role of the manager because that's been that's been sorted out >> well maybe if we if we have like a cleanup ordinance you know throw a little the word author you know is I think you basically said oh so it's to it authorizes or like just
>> authoriz >> throw the wise throw the words in there if we again if we if we're deemed to have a clean up or not. >> Wouldn't Yeah, we we've already got a couple other things. >> No, and that's why I figured to that maybe another one just, you know, throw a couple of words in there that >> makes it >> a little better.
>> It's probably Yeah, rewinding to that. It's probably not a bad idea if we can toss that on the >> the list. I did want to mention one thing uh with regard to the uh um non-inference uh provision here and it was actually a suggestion just as a reminder because I think I mentioned
this at the beginning although I haven't gotten many yet. the council when they first discussed setting up the uh charter review committee and and so on had uh given direction that any council members who had any particular thoughts
or suggestions about the charter that they provide those uh suggestions to me and I can share them uh with the CRC. This section was actually uh a section that council member A had some thoughts
on and um generally the the the the overall thought on on this uh section was that he is very much approving of the way that the current city manager implements that balance to allow
communication with the uh department directors and so on. and he was looking for a way to crystallize that a little bit so that if it came to be in the future uh there was another city manager uh at least some part of that uh could
remain or be propagated with this language. As we were bouncing around to ideas, uh some thoughts uh that came uh to mind were relating to the first uh
clause this except for the purpose of inquiries and investigations under section 3.08.01. We're going to deal with that investigations piece in a little bit. But um the way that clause is is phrased
currently, it arguably limits uh everything that that is accepted out in that clause to be just relating to those investigations that we're going to talk about later. Kind of narrow. What you what you find
in a lot of charters um uh in their non-interference provision is it will stop after investigations or it'll just read uh uh investigation except for the purpose of inquiry or except for the purposes of inquiry and investigation the council or its members
shall deal with the thought was this uh with regard to inquiries to do something to the effect of adding language after inquiries to say uh inquiries to department heads and then add a comma to
break it up to make it clear that there is an opportunity to make inquiries to department heads. Again, uh just passing on uh this thought from council member Aught as a uh as a way
potentially to put some uh pieces of that in there. we can talk about it further later uh because that's a little bit of the dynamics that need to be thought through. Yes, please. >> So, I understand and I would be in agreement with the way
uh our current city manager is uh managing communications and interactions. I just heard the concerns of council member Aught and I know that his concerns if I play it out of my mind,
someone stepping into that role, I mean just administratively, it would just bog down the communication process, right? The current currently the way we do it right now, if you give um some latitude for council members to speak directly to directors, you know,
it speeds up the process. they can they can speak to them and and gain information to make some informed choices. So, administratively, that's one of the reasons why I like it. I like it for different reasons. Here's my concern. What happens when you have a council
member who doesn't have um the ability to understand boundaries? It's a fair point and I can share with you uh certainly not from this city but from other municipalities that my office
has represented, you do have to deal with situations like that. Um because what you end up with very commonly with non-interference provisions is either the city manager or the city attorney or both end up having
to have conversations with members of city commissions or or what have you when they are um going well beyond inquiry and going into direction of staff. And um so that is that is a
reality that you uh see under the navigation of of provisions like this in cities throughout the state. So that's a point >> and that's whatever limitation you're going to set. There will be there's going to be some limitation that you're going that's even Mr. Rod's
proposing. Um, I'm going to go the other way though, you know, and just say, you know, and I appreciate Brian, believe me, work with Brian and and love the way he does it, but that may not be by putting in there, hey, you can go talk to, you know, you're encouraged to
talk or you can blah blah blah, then it works the other way. If a city man you hire a city manager and that's not his style. This has flexibility obviously enough that or I'm going to say the looseness that city council
accepts the way that certain things go that you know they're both working in harmony. Um I'll say there's enough flexibility or whatever in that that allows that um right now you put in kind of this is how it should be or can do
then you can't resend that. can't walk in and go, "That's not my style." I am the kind of guy I'd like everything to come through me. And that may be it may work very well. It works in other cities. Obviously, I'm not going to say my style wouldn't be that
same or I might not flourish under that. But that may be the future of city council. never want to bind future city councils and put a b, you know, a binder on them and say, "Hey, you're going to you're going to allow city council always or to be able to reach down and
talk to these guys no matter what." >> Right. >> And it is isn't it city I mean should there become a situation that a new city council member or a new a new uh city manager is in need to be hired. Not saying it's happening.
the counselor is doing the hiring and the interviewing and everything else. They're setting up their own process. If they hire the wrong individual that then they go, well, we thought, well, those were things that you should have discussed during the process, things of that nature. You're actually I mean, you hire
somebody to detail your car and you don't have a proper discussion that it includes vacuuming the inside and then you're getting upset because they're not vacuuming the inside. Who's at fault? But our our wording, if we, as I said,
you put in additional wording and you're kind of clamping down future city councils in their style, clamping down um future city managers and their style if a council chooses to hire someone with a with a more rigid style or
something of that nature that I don't know if that's I mean, and we'll have future discussion, but I don't know if that's something we should do if we have a good wording that if city council does their positions correctly, we have a good city manager.
>> And I'll just I'll just add it occurs to me that this section doesn't currently align with how we are operating. Um we're allowing council to speak with directors, but the words on the screen there say that's not the way it should be happening. And so I would propose
that instead of saying um solely through the city manager should be something along the lines of at the discretion of the city manager. It allows the city manager to open the door to the directors or not.
But right now, it doesn't seem like we're really operating within the bounds of the charter. Although it is working, >> we are. He stays in the loop. He's concluded this is solely through the city manager. If the city manager says you can go talk to that's you're you're working within
through his guidelines and >> just keep me informed. >> I I I I understand what you're saying. >> Yeah. >> Because I read read it the same way a lot, you know, and go but I also the nuances of solely we can then start let's go out the word solely through the city manager. What does that phrase
mean? And that could mean does a city manager say listen you're the city council member. you come and say, "I'd like to go talk to these guys." And he says, "Yes, you may." >> Yeah. >> You are working through the city manager. If you go do it on your own without
>> his approval, that >> agreed. >> Yeah. >> However, I mean, if we're if we just wanted to really cement it in place as to saying exactly how we're working. >> No, I I don't want to I want to me it's leaving the nuances so that if somebody does if the city manager does want to say it goes solely through me. And my
definition of solely according to this is as the city manager if you're looking to hire me as you're saying or whatever is solely through me. >> No, I I'm trying to get there too. >> But what I'm saying is the other way
>> where we have a manager who wants to allow that communication. It's at his discretion, >> right? >> And it's at the discretion of a person who doesn't want that communication. So it it the words the words as written right now seem to imply that it's one way only and that's it.
>> So let let me let me put they're separated by a lot of words but I want to put two words together. The verb and then the uh conjunction deal shall deal with city officers and employees who are subject to direction
supervision city manager solely through the city manager. Deal is a slippery word, too. Right? This is on purpose. I'm I'm being quite frank with you because this is a very common phrasing in municipal charters. Deal with uh deal
with those officers and employees solely through the city manager. All right? So, dealing with them, it's not saying speaking with them. So it's it's the only way that that the communication can happen that deal through effectively
sets up and says the city manager is the gatekeeper. The city manager can say the way it'll be uh done is the manner I direct in every instance. So it you will find sometimes it's meant
to be broad or vague because we cannot anticipate every happenstance or circumstance. When we try to do it, we end up with five pages of of detail and it becomes brittle. It's what we tend to call in the law. So
>> this is intentionally set up to be a little vague. >> Okay, I'm okay if >> not I'm not suggesting that there aren't tweaks to be done. I'm I'm just telling you the the calculus that goes into drafting like this. >> If it allows for the way we're operating now, but to also close the door later if
whatever reason they want to, the city manager wants to, then I'm okay. Leave it alone. But >> legally, I believe that the wording as it's all put together absolutely does. >> So, it can you can open or close the door as it is? Y >> okay, then then I'm fine. Leave it alone.
>> Yeah. No, I will be the I'll be the first to tell you and I still get to get away with this because I've only been here less than a year. I'll be the first to tell you when I come across something and say, "Oh, we're doing something wildly off base. We got to fix one or the other." But here, I think the
practice as it is fits within the bounds of this language. >> Okay. >> Thank you all very much. Great discussion. I We're at 7:32 now. I think this will probably be a good place to stop at our next meeting. Um,
I'm going to be uh driving us hard a little bit to work through more of this because I'm trying to be mindful of the time we have available to us. Uh, we've got to get our work done between uh now and May. And I think we've gotten over a fair
number of the uh of the more interesting pieces in the charter, even though numerically we've only gotten so far. So, at the next meeting, we'll pick up uh where we've left off and uh drive through uh hopefully well into
section 4 uh or article 4 by next May. Three.