WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=nrGb6O1PVM8

Part: 1

1
00:00:00.800 --> 00:00:22.880
You know, that's a great idea. We had some painting done. We need you to look. We need you to come find all the imperfections. >> There are still orange stickers on the ceiling in the attic. >> I know that my founding way's nice.

2
00:00:22.880 --> 00:00:49.160
>> The laptop should not be your second floor. >> The laptop should be mirror. I said, "Good luck with that, man." >> And I have I'm sorry. My stairs in my house are crooked. They drive me nuts every day. I don't need a

3
00:00:49.200 --> 00:02:03.520
level with me. I don't know what we can do about it. >> Get the bottom right. Everything works. But Chris had quite often tore That's the only one. That's the only

4
00:02:03.520 --> 00:02:28.599
one. That's like it >> probably 25T. >> The other the one behind I thought I might be able to. Then you have the fire. So I like zip it. I mean, that's great.

5
00:02:29.040 --> 00:03:03.280
>> Yeah. Initial run then. So, Chris before up there. And then next state park. >> Is this for me? >> No.

6
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:34.319
>> I print out I'm going to guess. >> I bet he's going to want to adopt him in June. >> That's going to be my guess. >> We can We'll roll with it. And >> see where he wants to go, but I bet it's

7
00:03:34.319 --> 00:04:17.319
June. >> This should be the last one if all goes well. 61. >> Yeah, sure. Is that me or Annie? >> Back down for a couple months for a long

8
00:04:23.680 --> 00:04:55.360
taxes. back up. >> My son went out. That means I've come full circle. >> Wow. where you know what my girlfriend's

9
00:04:55.360 --> 00:05:39.120
pretty nice >> house going there. >> Oh yeah. believe, >> you know, he I saw him on CNN earlier some in the background and he's like, "Oh, the speaker asked me not. It's not

10
00:05:39.120 --> 00:06:26.000
that." However, you know, that probably was more of a conversation. Yeah. >> Easy shot. >> Great. >> Okay. >> Uh

11
00:06:26.000 --> 00:07:37.520
Okay. Yesterday Alaskan. I talked to Dominic. >> Talk to Dominic. He's good about the uh geob the geobs financing the geob.

12
00:07:37.520 --> 00:07:58.960
>> Oh yeah. We told them about the what we discovered. Yeah, I told him he's he's fine. He comes in. I said, "Okay, I put the bug in there." >> So, he goes, "Have you told them yet?" I said, "No." I said, "We haven't I hadn't had a chance to tell them, but I will

13
00:07:58.960 --> 00:08:41.839
tell them." He said, "Okay. complicated which quite frankly I do not >> it would not offend me at all. I mean this that was you know great part us and I you know fighting the last war from the United

14
00:08:41.839 --> 00:09:50.360
going to drop out and all that stuff. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> That's not an existential risk to the probably will happen again sometime in 30 years. Mhm. >> Oh yeah. Yeah, this is cute.

15
00:09:58.160 --> 00:10:30.519
We do not have >> right plus 6T for the new house. >> Oh yeah, that's the one that is actually

16
00:10:38.000 --> 00:11:06.600
saw that window. >> I'm sorry. I know you think you're >> I know. I just I just turned that up out of my way. >> Preparation pace. >> Thank you.

17
00:11:21.440 --> 00:12:07.680
I think we've got another at least one other member coming in and more. So, we'll >> wait another minute or two before we start. Yes, there's been a lot. By the way, Dominic, there's been a lot of Nets next memes today. I've seen quite a few of

18
00:12:07.680 --> 00:12:24.560
them. I I I sold out when I was like, "Oh, I got to share this." >> And it's only because usually we're like, you know, 10 games out, right? Like 10 games ahead of everybody right now until the break. Then it's, oh, how did they lose 20 games on the back half

19
00:12:24.560 --> 00:12:42.079
in a row that >> Yeah. Again, that that's not Well, maybe that's a good sign because I said usually we're setting records and on a record pace for the first, you know, 80 games and then one of the pitchers has a 10 erra

20
00:12:42.079 --> 00:13:00.959
10 runs a game. >> Yeah. >> Because looks like we have confused there. >> I don't see anybody else coming in. Patrick, are we custodian? Who likes you ready to roll? >> Is this Can you

21
00:13:00.959 --> 00:13:24.399
very much test test? I don't think any of the lights on. None of that yet. >> Nope. Not yet. >> Need some power. >> Hello. Hello.

22
00:13:27.200 --> 00:13:46.480
It's got a green light on it. Yeah, it's not on. Can someone try a mic? >> It's not amplifying you, Patrick. >> Who? >> It's on. >> Testing. Testing. >> We did test them earlier. >> Really good. Hello.

23
00:13:46.480 --> 00:14:16.000
Do you have the Grandmaster on up there? All right. With that, I will call to order this meeting of the city of Bito Charter Review Committee this Wednesday, April 22nd, 2026. It is 5:33 p.m. Uh if

24
00:14:16.000 --> 00:14:33.760
the clerk could uh please call the role. AJ Range >> present. >> Farber Barber >> present. >> Arian Bryant. >> Dominic Pampier >> present. >> Karen Harriet >> present. >> Carl Thornbrew. Katherine Townend

25
00:14:33.760 --> 00:14:49.680
>> here. >> Keegan Ford. >> Kevin Hypes. >> Luke Clinker. Nancy Zolair >> present. >> Nicole Martin >> here. >> Rebecca O'Brien >> here. >> Steven Shank >> here. Victor Loatria

26
00:14:49.680 --> 00:15:05.040
>> present. >> All right, we have a quorum. The first order of business before you is the approval of minutes for the March 25th, 2026 meeting which were included in the agenda packet for this meeting. I'll entertain a motion.

27
00:15:05.040 --> 00:15:20.480
>> So move make a motion to adopt them. >> Second for a motion and a second. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Minutes are approved. Moving on to public comment. Do we have any member of the public here

28
00:15:20.480 --> 00:15:37.760
for public comment? There appears not to be. Uh I would continue to invite members of the public to please come on out, but if they have further comment, it may be that you come to the city council uh to address this because uh if all goes as uh uh planned, this may be

29
00:15:37.760 --> 00:15:54.320
your last uh charter review committee meeting for this cycle. So with that, uh I will move on down. Uh I do have a brief facilitator comment before we get to uh the memos uh and items uh that are before you tonight. I just want to

30
00:15:54.320 --> 00:16:10.079
mentioned in passing I had mentioned a couple different times uh over the course of everything and in particular at the last meeting I mentioned that I was going to be providing a uh draft final report for you all. Well, I got some quizzical looks when I said that and I found out why as I was digging

31
00:16:10.079 --> 00:16:27.279
through the agenda materials for the last couple CRC cycles here in Oto. Uh, historically, y'all haven't really had a final report issued by the committee. It's just the same exact type of information you would have is just encapsulated in the staff report to the

32
00:16:27.279 --> 00:16:40.720
uh, city council for that. So, we're going to go ahead and continue to follow that process here. the meat and potatoes of uh what is going to be coming from the CRC is what we're going to be discussing now when we move down to our

33
00:16:40.720 --> 00:17:00.160
items. So, uh, the first, uh, item, a collection of four, um, that I would direct your attention to is, uh, the memo attached to the agenda providing for the CRC's consideration,

34
00:17:00.160 --> 00:17:17.760
um, for draft charter amendments for your final approval and potential or pardon me, your final review and potential approval as recommendations to the city council. Um the first two you have seen previously. Those were

35
00:17:17.760 --> 00:17:33.760
question one. And by the way, these numbers are just for the purposes of reference here. A final uh matter I'm going to ask you to decide is a recommendation of ballot order, but we'll get to that later. For our reference now, I'm just going to refer to them by the numbers that are on here.

36
00:17:33.760 --> 00:17:49.039
Uh question one is the city charter amendment changing length of council terms from 2 years to four years. And question two, city charter amendment revising council voting procedures for ordinances and resolutions. On that uh

37
00:17:49.039 --> 00:18:06.880
second question, I did per uh prior discussion make some minor revisions to the ballot summary to try to make it a little bit more clear. took out some words that were a little repetitive and added a parenthetical to kind of break up a sentence a little bit, make it a little easier to understand. Before we

38
00:18:06.880 --> 00:18:22.799
move on to Before we move on to questions three and four and those this will be the first time you've seen the ballot language um for those two. I wanted to ask with regard to questions one and two. Is

39
00:18:22.799 --> 00:18:39.360
there any discussion or questions or um uh anything else concerning those two questions? cuz if not, I was going to uh suggest a formal vote as to recommending each of those uh two questions to the

40
00:18:39.360 --> 00:18:54.640
city council. Any questions or comments? All right. Then uh I would recommend just to make uh the minutes easier for the clerk that um you have a separate vote as to each

41
00:18:54.640 --> 00:19:11.280
question. So, uh, I would at this time entertain a motion to recommend to the city council, uh, charter amendment question one. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved and second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in

42
00:19:11.280 --> 00:19:27.520
favor, please signify by saying I. I. >> Any oppose? Nay. >> All right. So, noted. Move on to question two. I will entertain a motion to uh recommend question two uh charter amendment

43
00:19:27.520 --> 00:19:45.200
question two to the city council. >> So move second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor please signify by saying I. >> I. Any oppose? Nay. >> Nay. >> All right. So noted. Thank you.

44
00:19:45.200 --> 00:20:02.799
So with that we'll move on to the uh two questions and this is among the four that we had had some level of consensus or interest that these were matters that uh um there was a desire to recommend to

45
00:20:02.799 --> 00:20:19.360
the city council for final decision uh being with your action uh presumably tonight. We will be getting to a fifth question that was uh drafted per discussion at the last meeting. So just wanted to keep everybody's eye on the ball here. So uh pursuant to this uh

46
00:20:19.360 --> 00:20:35.600
memo here, question three was city charter amendment revising time frame for holding special elections. So, if you recall, this was uh the matter uh brought about at the recommendation of

47
00:20:35.600 --> 00:20:52.400
your super your seminal county supervisor of elections to give a little bit more breathing room in the window of time set forth in the charter for certain special elections. Currently, uh they have to be held within a window of between 60 and 90 days. that gets uh

48
00:20:52.400 --> 00:21:09.760
increasingly difficult as Florida election law adds on more layers of protection uh and procedures for voting. And so is on her recommendation uh that uh we have this amendment that would move it out by 30 days. Are there

49
00:21:09.760 --> 00:21:27.120
any questions about uh this charter amendment? Either the ballot summary or anything else concerning it? >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes, ma'am. It says that it would move it out by 30 days, but the voter isn't going to know

50
00:21:27.120 --> 00:21:44.720
the the context. The voter isn't going to know that right now it's 60 to 90 days and we would be moving it out from 90 to 100 120 days. So, you're correct. >> I I I I prepared drafts that that got

51
00:21:44.720 --> 00:21:59.280
into the weeds of all those numbers. Um, and as as I was working through it, I find sometimes uh just give you the rationale of of how I landed on this recommendation for language. I find

52
00:21:59.280 --> 00:22:15.520
sometimes that um uh having too much detail kind of in the in the weeds detail in a ballot question that can only be 75 words um can sometimes lead to more confusion rather

53
00:22:15.520 --> 00:22:38.320
than less. Uh so in this instance here that >> but could you not say that the city charter shall be amended to to hold a special election,

54
00:22:38.320 --> 00:22:55.280
you know, an additional 30 days instead of move out. So increase >> an increase of 30 days before a special election. >> Interestingly, it does not increase any span of time by 30 days. It moves the

55
00:22:55.280 --> 00:23:12.320
span of time by 30 days. So I fool around with all these different types of language. Um the the window uh remains the you know the the span of time that it has here. It's just shifting it out

56
00:23:12.320 --> 00:23:28.000
or moving it out. And I I understand that's a little bit of a vernacular term, if you will, but it's meant to be an explanatory term. You understand what I'm saying? It's it's meant to explain what is happening again with it without

57
00:23:28.000 --> 00:23:45.840
getting into too much complexity. >> Well, it's not getting into enough complexity that the average voter would understand the what's being h what's happening. I mean >> could it say add as opposed to add 30 days?

58
00:23:45.840 --> 00:24:08.919
>> So when I played around with with add as well that would uh that would imply that it is uh lengthening the window of time in which it can be done which of course it is not. Um I I don't think that this is clear.

59
00:24:10.320 --> 00:24:28.960
Is there any other uh comment concerning uh this balance summary? >> I don't think it's clear either, but I understand the difficulty in trying to word it so that it does not imply something that it's not. And

60
00:24:28.960 --> 00:24:45.720
>> and genuinely the the concern that that I had when I had a whole bunch of numbers running around in in a ballot question, it started to feel like a math problem.

61
00:24:47.679 --> 00:25:04.960
And and so I I will tell you, by the way, that uh there has been a prior adjustment to this exact thing. This is uh this is only the the most meager of defenses, but uh this this uh span of

62
00:25:04.960 --> 00:25:21.679
time has been adjusted previously and by uh prior charter review committee uh when it was an even you know tighter in period of time. Uh it had a lot less detail than this. It just said moving the time frame for holding special

63
00:25:21.679 --> 00:25:37.279
elections and that was it. So without without you know any more detail um what this does is it says that the time frame that uh exists is being moved out by 30

64
00:25:37.279 --> 00:25:53.919
days and that it uh the result of that is to better coordinate with current state election procedures. So both of those things I think give meaningful information to a uh voter to be able to say yes or no. they think that's a fair

65
00:25:53.919 --> 00:26:12.559
idea or not. Again, um it's always balancing different alternatives to to figure out whether or not throwing a whole bunch of little numbers at people is is really going to be particularly relevant for them to

66
00:26:12.559 --> 00:26:29.919
understand the chief purpose of the amendment. And that's ultimately what the standard is under Florida law. So, I guess what I would say to you is there are always a lot of ways you can write a charter amendment. You could write it that way. Um, I had more

67
00:26:29.919 --> 00:26:46.279
concern with all the ways I wrote that way. I had less concerns writing about it this way. >> Okay. Are there any other questions concerning this amendment?

68
00:26:47.120 --> 00:27:03.039
Is there a motion to recommend uh this charter amendment to the city council? >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I.

69
00:27:03.039 --> 00:27:17.679
>> I. I. >> Any oppose? Nay. Motion passes. And now we move on to question four. If you think that one was a uh know the trick. That was that was an easy one.

70
00:27:17.679 --> 00:27:35.679
So, question four, uh the the title as it's framed here uh is uh city charter amendment moving qualifying qualifying period and revising vacancy in candid candidacy procedures. Now, if you'll recall at your last meeting, there was

71
00:27:35.679 --> 00:27:52.080
um there was a fair amount of interest, I think, uh among members of the CRC about kind of the packaged idea. Okay, we'll we'll make some tweaks to this issue that staff has brought up that brought into to stark contrast this last

72
00:27:52.080 --> 00:28:09.600
election cycle where if you've got two candidates say running for a seat uh and then you have a vacancy in candidacy, one person drops out such as there's one left. Your charter has a relatively unique provision in it such that you

73
00:28:09.600 --> 00:28:26.240
have to reopen qualifying. That leads to a problem if the ballot has already gone to print. That leads to all sorts of potential issues as to, you know, what do we do now? Do we cancel that election? Do we delay it? And what have you. So, um, pursuant to that discussion

74
00:28:26.240 --> 00:28:42.240
at the last meeting, the idea was, well, if we there was a concern about completely getting rid of that process of vacancy and candidacy and reopening things. So rather the idea was take another idea that had been proposed,

75
00:28:42.240 --> 00:28:58.960
move out the qualifying period a little bit to an earlier time so that there would be a window of time where um where folks would be candidates for a period of time well before the final ballot goes to print for the November election.

76
00:28:58.960 --> 00:29:15.200
All right. So, those are the two things going on here. Related enough that from a legal matter, I have no concern about them being in the same ballot question. They're interdependent, if you will, in that respect. Um, these are

77
00:29:15.200 --> 00:29:31.919
two, particularly the second one, issues of some complexity. So, that's why you got a lot going on in this ballot summary here. Um, but want to open up to the floor to see uh if there are any questions or comments about uh this

78
00:29:31.919 --> 00:29:50.240
charter amendment uh and in particular the um uh balance summary. >> I have a question. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. So, this says when the vacancy occurs more than 2 weeks before the August state primary

79
00:29:50.240 --> 00:30:06.799
election. So, if somebody drops out in July >> Mhm. >> does that mean that we're going to open up the process in July or does it stay 2 weeks before the um primary?

80
00:30:06.799 --> 00:30:23.840
>> Oh, no. It would it would open back up uh immediately. >> Okay. Yeah, it would it would open it would open back up as quickly as the city council uh passed a resolution to reopen it, which they are it's incumbent upon them to do it immediately or as

81
00:30:23.840 --> 00:30:42.480
soon as possible. We held a just as an example uh in the uh election we had before we um held a a special meeting on very short notice. uh short notices, I would let them uh to

82
00:30:42.480 --> 00:30:59.520
open back up a period uh to do that. So, it happens within a couple days. >> Wasn't that after qualifying had closed though? >> That's right. >> Okay. So, and that's that's if they drop out >> in July if they drop out, it doesn't matter cuz qualifying hasn't closed.

83
00:30:59.520 --> 00:31:15.440
>> Correct. No, this qualifying back into June. >> Yeah. This this would move qualifying. This would >> Okay. >> Yeah. this moves qualifying back to June. >> You're it's based on them passing the first part.

84
00:31:15.440 --> 00:31:32.000
>> It would exactly Yeah, it's it's packaged together because >> doing doing just the second piece to say um uh you only do it if you uh if the vacancy occurs more than 2 weeks before

85
00:31:32.000 --> 00:31:47.919
the August state primary election date. That's already when primary that's already pardon me. That's already when Okay. existing qualifying is it's it's at that period of time because that's about the right time to get names all ready to get thrown on the demog ballot.

86
00:31:47.919 --> 00:32:04.559
So I had brought up when I first came in not having it together because we all know what we're what's going on in here, but 90% of the people outside the doors don't get it. I gave it to my daughter this morning and I said, "Read this and

87
00:32:04.559 --> 00:32:20.159
tell me what you think." And she was she had no idea what the second part meant. She was way off. And I said, "So if that's on the ballot, what are you going to do?" She said, "I'm going to skip it cuz I got no idea what it means." >> So,

88
00:32:20.159 --> 00:32:39.200
>> okay, we got to teach people to vote no instead of skip it cuz skip it means that >> skipping it is voting no. But if you want, you know, if you want to change qualifying and you see the second part and it doesn't make sense to you, you don't get it, you vote no,

89
00:32:39.200 --> 00:32:58.640
>> then you have qualifying changed. Yeah. >> Yeah. And I will share and I I I think I telegraphed this at the last meeting that I thought this would be a uh particularly sticky wicket to to try to get particularly the second part this

90
00:32:58.640 --> 00:33:15.039
matter of this vacancy and candidacy bit uh to get that concept in front of the voters in a digestible way. But went through a lot of drafts. I assure you the five other drafts of it were much more confusing. Well, I think the good

91
00:33:15.039 --> 00:33:30.240
thing if it's an off-year election, generally more educated voters put out education on what it actually what it really says. We can put out, you know, education pieces that say this is what it's here's the what it's what it's got

92
00:33:30.240 --> 00:33:48.880
to say. Here's what it means and educate people. But again with MOSA it's much more educated smaller pool that comes up in all your elections. So >> any further discussion or comment about this amendment?

93
00:33:48.880 --> 00:34:05.519
>> I I think that second part's worded confusing. That's a really long sentence. I know you have to get a lot in there, but it's a long sentence. >> Oh, I know. And and if you take out the parenthetical phrase when we're talking about and then it

94
00:34:05.519 --> 00:34:35.520
says to when the vacancy occurs. I think that's what's getting me hung out. Let's take a look. Let me see here. Should it be two questions? >> Split it up. >> Yeah. So,

95
00:34:35.520 --> 00:34:49.839
they could not I would offer to you they can't be two questions on the same ballot. And why why I say that in this instance is this. Uh you could do the first part. >> Yeah. >> Uh you can move you can move qualifying to June. That's easy.

96
00:34:49.839 --> 00:35:07.440
>> All right. Um the the second part saying that that's only open for a limited period of time would be a non sequator because it it would it assumes it would have to go with there being a you know qualifying being moved back. So

97
00:35:07.440 --> 00:35:24.640
certainly um ultimately keep in mind that that second part there that was a a concern raised by staff. It is not a concern that the world is going to end or the city is going to explode or anything like this if this piece is not,

98
00:35:24.640 --> 00:35:41.920
you know, >> tightened up immediately. >> The first part makes so much sense and it would it would stink to throw the baby out with the bathwater if people don't understand the second part and they >> just decide not to vote on it, you know. >> Uh that is certainly a uh an option that

99
00:35:41.920 --> 00:36:00.240
is before you in anticipation of that. I've been playing around with a little bit of language that would tighten it up to just the first part if there was interest on it and we could discuss that. So, I would welcome any further discussion about uh where to go on

100
00:36:00.240 --> 00:36:17.920
anything with regard to this question. I I'm fine with with limiting it to the first part, but if we want them to do both parts, why don't we do something like with elections to remain in November and with a special qualifying period to be reopened due to a vacancy

101
00:36:17.920 --> 00:36:39.839
in in a candidacy candidacy. And so, um, and then I'm not sure that you even need the parenthetical phrase. I I think you would uh just cut off the whole question uh after

102
00:36:39.839 --> 00:36:57.599
uh after November quite frankly. And um I would I would leave it to uh the members your thoughts of whether we need even need the uh first parenthetical if we're just limiting it to the one to say with elections to

103
00:36:57.599 --> 00:37:14.000
remain in November. I only added that so people didn't come to some incorrect conclusion that by moving qualifying you were moving when the regular election dates were going. >> I think that's a good idea. I think the parentheical phrase helps that. I I think the best would probably be

104
00:37:14.000 --> 00:37:31.839
just do the first part alone. See what happens there. Let council put that up next election whatever if you know to to do it that way. This is important to move this I mean if everybody feels it's important in my opinion to move this up uh to make the

105
00:37:31.839 --> 00:37:47.760
alignment that kind of thing. And then the second part go for in the next election. Again, if if it doesn't pass, then like you said, it really doesn't second part doesn't matter anyway. I think it'll pass, but I'm just saying that way it gives it a good opportunity

106
00:37:47.760 --> 00:38:04.880
to pass and it makes it simple. >> Tease it up to possibly do the second piece later. >> Do the second one. >> Who would I got something drafted here. Who's Who can I email it to to throw it up on the screen? >> A Madison. A Madison.

107
00:38:04.880 --> 00:38:24.079
>> Give me just one second, everyone. I have to be honest. I don't remember what happened last fall ever happening before. >> At least it happened once. >> I I don't >> where there was a drop out. >> I don't remember any that ever happening

108
00:38:24.079 --> 00:38:40.240
before. >> And it may have, but if it it was only I mean twice. And >> yeah, it happened to me. I thought it happened like not long before I >> It had happened one other time. >> Yeah, it did happen another time.

109
00:38:40.240 --> 00:38:55.680
>> It was cuz I don't I'm trying to think of who I'm trying to think of who dropped out. Trying to remember I thought it happened before cuz it's like oh yeah that happened before once when it happened last fall. Of course with our our saying it's

110
00:38:55.680 --> 00:39:12.960
unlikely we'll jinx ourselves and it'll help. But but as a as a general matter um you know if if the window of risk is it might happen again sometime in the next 20 25 years doing setting up the preload to it now and then some point in

111
00:39:12.960 --> 00:39:27.680
the future maybe you know doing the other piece uh could certainly >> it's a lot less the other one's so much more important the first part is so much more important to take care of something >> you haven't received it yet uh oh I'm so sorry it's uh it's caught

112
00:39:27.680 --> 00:39:48.160
my out box cuz I have not snuck it out through the uh VPN here. >> Give me just one second. >> You keep up on these things. >> You got it. >> Oh, fantastic. >> It's on the very last page. I just

113
00:39:48.160 --> 00:40:18.000
loaded up the the memo. Um, >> if you go to the last page, >> this is where I already >> very last page. >> Trust me, it's Yes, it is. >> Were you able to get it up on these?

114
00:40:18.000 --> 00:40:43.839
>> Yes. Okay, >> sorry. >> Page. >> Yeah. Is are you able to get it up on these screens or >> No, all four. It's on that and that screen. >> Oh, on that screen. Oh, I see. Yeah,

115
00:40:43.839 --> 00:41:28.960
it's okay. Gotcha. Uh, yeah. The very last page. I can't see it from >> Yeah. Okay. Is are you not able to open it up in Microsoft Word or You see the top that says open the door.

116
00:41:28.960 --> 00:41:56.480
>> Can Yeah. Can you just Yeah, there you go. >> Can you just scroll to the last page? All right, there you go. Very simple and cut down. Just wanted you all to see it uh with

117
00:41:56.480 --> 00:42:13.200
your own eyes. City city charter amendment moving city council qualifying period. Shall the Ovido city charter be amended to move the qualifying period to run for city council from August to June with elections to remain in November? >> Mhm.

118
00:42:13.200 --> 00:42:30.400
Clean and simple. Yep. Very good. And to be clear, we didn't get into the very particular weeds on it, but it is in particular moving it to the week of qualifying for nomination election or county office under state law, which is

119
00:42:30.400 --> 00:42:47.839
in June. Now, it just so you know, I didn't get in the weeds on exactly what it was because the legislature likes to fool with whether it's the 11th week prior to the primary or the 10th week or the 12th week, but it's always in June, >> right? >> Or has been since like the 1960s. So,

120
00:42:47.839 --> 00:43:03.760
um so very good. If uh if the um members are comfortable with that language, I would uh entertain a motion to recommend >> I make a motion to recommend this to the

121
00:43:03.760 --> 00:43:20.319
city council. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. I. >> Any oppose? Name. Motion passes. So those are with that modification the

122
00:43:20.319 --> 00:43:36.800
four charter amendments that were in the larger memo that I had before you. We have one last matter uh on our agenda. This came out of the uh very end of uh the discussion at your last

123
00:43:36.800 --> 00:43:52.960
meeting. Um there was discussion concerning the proclamation authority of the mayor and uh as that discussion went uh the thought was offered. Um while there did not appear to be any you know

124
00:43:52.960 --> 00:44:10.160
strong decision uh having been made at that point by the members at least that I could see. Nevertheless, there was uh uh direction and thought offered to prepare some language to help discussion or or a thought to this end. So uh I

125
00:44:10.160 --> 00:44:26.560
have put together both uh the charter language and uh balance summary addressing this question and uh am uh providing it to to you for the CRC's review and to see if there is uh any

126
00:44:26.560 --> 00:44:41.680
discussion or interest concerning this. I will share uh with the CRC because uh someone mentioned to me uh and I did think it was a relevant fact of state law that has you know some interaction

127
00:44:41.680 --> 00:44:58.800
uh with this fact as you may have heard uh one of the many laws passed this uh session by the Florida legislature was to overly simplify it and put it in the vernacular. It was uh

128
00:44:58.800 --> 00:45:14.160
a couple different ways of quote unquote banning DEI or diversity, equity, and inclusion. All right. And one of the areas it it uh uh expands its authority to actually includes things like

129
00:45:14.160 --> 00:45:30.319
resolutions and proclamations and and so on. So, um I just point out the thought. It's just a thing to to keep in mind in all the in grand uh uh thinking of all these things. Um

130
00:45:30.319 --> 00:45:46.000
proclamations you see in a lot of cities concerning uh different um interest groups or named months or or what have you that would have implications uh for diversity, equity,

131
00:45:46.000 --> 00:46:01.280
and inclusion as it's defined in that new law. um would act to stop cities and counties and so on from adopting a lot of things like that. I'm oversimplifying it, but it's a complicated uh little bit

132
00:46:01.280 --> 00:46:18.640
of law, but it will eventually end up it will end up having the effect of a lot of of proclamations and resolutions that are put out in favor of, you know, blank month or, you know, for this group or that group or what have you are going to

133
00:46:18.640 --> 00:46:35.760
end up going away, you know, with the implementation of that law. So with that, I will uh I share this uh charter and uh ballot language with you and open up the floor for any discussion. >> I have two points. First of all, I think

134
00:46:35.760 --> 00:46:53.520
that that particular um situation that you just alluded to is the reason that this is even an issue. And so it's an issue for based on one particular proclamation that, you know, the mayor

135
00:46:53.520 --> 00:47:09.599
did not want and the council did, but now that it's it's banned, that's that's a moot point. The second issue is when I talked to to some people that said, you know, there are a lot of people coming

136
00:47:09.599 --> 00:47:26.480
for proclamations and they want a proclamation named, you know, with this date because my grandfather was, you know, whatever, whatever. And if you bring that to the city council and ask the city council to

137
00:47:26.480 --> 00:47:41.520
publicly say, you know, we either have to let everybody have every proclamation because, you know, their six-year-old had an A on their report card or their, you know, grandfather,

138
00:47:41.520 --> 00:47:56.880
you know, recently passed. or you have to say no. And and it puts council members in a really bad an uncomfortable situation of trying to choose between what is truly an important proclamation

139
00:47:56.880 --> 00:48:12.960
to make for the city versus something that somebody just wanted. Um, so I think that it is it is easier for and and probably

140
00:48:12.960 --> 00:48:29.359
for the lack of better terms cleaner for the city if one person has that decision power rather than having to make those decisions in public. because then the parents of that six-year-old are going to be unhappy or the parent or the

141
00:48:29.359 --> 00:48:44.960
family of the grandfather is going to be unhappy and um you're asking council members to say no to this and yes to that and try to explain their um thoughts about it and I I think it's

142
00:48:44.960 --> 00:49:00.800
it's much it it's it's a it serves the city better to have one person who just makes the the decision on on issuing a proclamation because the only point of

143
00:49:00.800 --> 00:49:17.359
contention was that one issue. It wasn't a long string of issues. It wasn't over a long period of time. It was just that one issue that's already been outlawed. So I I personally do not think that this is this should be appear

144
00:49:17.359 --> 00:49:33.119
on the mountain. I might have to disagree with my colleague here. Uh because you don't know why I want my six-year-old to have that proclamation. It could be that they've got extenduating circumstances and they

145
00:49:33.119 --> 00:49:51.119
really deserve that. But Dominic, help me out here. What What is the possibility that it could be because this was a signatory thing as I understand it. The problem with that proclamation, what if it was

146
00:49:51.119 --> 00:50:08.559
that the council person requesting it had the authority to sign it and that not everything had to be signed by the mayor? Is it not working again? I am jinxed every single time.

147
00:50:08.559 --> 00:50:26.720
>> Brian, did you do that? Would that be a reasonable Would that be a reasonable um assumption? >> Well, no. The compromise on how to do that. >> Yeah, the mayor should sign them, but

148
00:50:26.720 --> 00:50:44.079
as I said, the way every mayor has handled them has been different. >> Yeah. >> Um, you know, Tom Walters never met a proclamation he liked. Mary Lou never met a proclamation she didn't like. Exactly. Um

149
00:50:44.079 --> 00:51:00.720
and and and it's no offense to either one of them. It's just personalities. Um and Steven was there for both, so he knows. Um you know, I took a different tact with it if a member wanted it, you know, as long as Barbara approved it.

150
00:51:00.720 --> 00:51:15.920
Because sometimes they would ask, somebody would ask for a proclamation that Barbara would research and say, "This is something that the city should not be waiting into. I would do it for them, you know. So I I think if there

151
00:51:15.920 --> 00:51:33.119
was a mechanism where, you know, members could have input rather than just one finite decision maker, it could make the process more open and smoother. But end of the day, it proclamation should be signed by the mayor. And I don't know if

152
00:51:33.119 --> 00:51:48.720
this changes that or not. Uh I don't think they should be signed by I mean, they could be signed by every member. that's the team here wants not going to matter but it just should be more inclusive you know we always found it easier that way >> well I think we live at a time when

153
00:51:48.720 --> 00:52:05.359
people are more prone to object to things that they find to be and I don't know what this one was by the way what they find to be morally or whatever object objectionable than we've ever lived in

154
00:52:05.359 --> 00:52:22.400
so I offered that as a compromise that perhaps if it were a situation where a anybody had a real moral dilemma in signing it that it could be signed by the one that brought it forward

155
00:52:22.400 --> 00:52:39.920
>> if it had in fact been passed by the entire body. Wasn't there a time? >> As I said at the last meeting, um, you know, I brought it up. I'm not going to die on the sword on this one. Um, whatever the committee would think. I I

156
00:52:39.920 --> 00:52:58.000
understand where you're going with that that compromise. Um, I just What do you think of that, Stephen? Barbara has something. >> What Barbara think? Well, wasn't there a time that as long as it would could valid proclamation, it could go on the

157
00:52:58.000 --> 00:53:15.240
agenda to be signed, but it wasn't read correct in front of the public unless it pertained to city. >> See, I think that's the way Brian could help with that cuz isn't that the way our order of business is written? >> Okay.

158
00:53:15.440 --> 00:53:31.359
Brian, let me let me rephrase your question. Isn't that the way the order of business used to be? I don't think the order of business ever really addressed proclamations. The thing with it's just something I did. Is that what you're saying?

159
00:53:31.359 --> 00:53:48.160
Surprised me. And it was the thing with the putting the proclamations on the uh in the consent agenda was that city council was voting on it. And that was the whole thing with the proclamations. There was It wasn't like a resolution

160
00:53:48.160 --> 00:54:03.599
that was a policy statement that required a vote. >> Exactly. >> And so we really shouldn't have been putting it on the consent agenda because it wasn't something it was more of a discussion item than really anything. >> Um so that that was that was the the

161
00:54:03.599 --> 00:54:19.359
concern about putting them on on the consent agenda. >> I just didn't want to read them. >> That that was at the time. >> That's why we put them in consent. Well, and and to Miss Miss Townson's point, at the time when you were mayor, we were getting five and six proclamations per

162
00:54:19.359 --> 00:54:34.960
meeting. Everyone wanted one. >> Yeah. >> And uh you get to the end of the school year, you get to, you know, this team, that team, these guys, those up on the sports teams of this, the that they're all proclamation. They went to states. They did this. They said hello. Like I

163
00:54:34.960 --> 00:54:51.359
said, their six-year-old had a birthday party and they were the top of THE YOU DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH ME if my boy stuff, you know, and it is up to the, you know, council member to kind of go, you know, it's great. Why don't you bring them to and, you know, I'll give a shout out,

164
00:54:51.359 --> 00:55:08.400
you know, you give them a shout out and say, "Hey, by the way, we've got special guests here." Walk out, but you don't have to go through special process. I don't think that's a bad, you know, that's kind of how we were trying to get through it was just, you know, you don't have to. But I

165
00:55:08.400 --> 00:55:25.359
I even besides all that, I just think they should be by council. That's my, you know, again, I'm not going to die. I could care less. I just think really they should be proclamations should be from council, not as a duty of mayor. The mayor is in charge of uh

166
00:55:25.359 --> 00:55:41.280
proclamations. It is THAT'S YOU MISUNDERSTOOD. NO, NO, I know you're there. Yeah, I know you're for it. I say it's I I think it's should be a, you know, part of the council's duties and that's their responsibility and the proclamations does come from city

167
00:55:41.280 --> 00:56:01.920
council. Po, what what are the criteria for for proclamations when you research them? >> I don't remember. I thought we have our clerk here. At present the um the proclamations are either initiated by staff because they occur sort of on an annual basis. So for

168
00:56:01.920 --> 00:56:18.720
example May has officers week and and things of that nature. So there is a I guess you could call it a historical component if we've done it before. Um otherwise they different um agencies or individuals reach out to the mayor and then she asks

169
00:56:18.720 --> 00:56:36.400
it of us and we play more of a um like a formative role. Um but I don't believe that anything in the past few few years has been um raised any concerns that we've had any

170
00:56:36.400 --> 00:56:51.040
conversations. It hasn't occurred recently that we've had to sort of not question or sort of, >> you know, you know, it's >> it's hey, it's library awareness week. Uh, this is National Library Week. This week it's so you're doing National

171
00:56:51.040 --> 00:57:08.000
Library Week. You're doing it's beer beer whatever. It's this, it's that. We've got all these groups that come forward and they're great groups. I mean, I think one time we were like it it felt like and I I don't mean but you had every health there was you know this group it was cancer it was this it was

172
00:57:08.000 --> 00:57:24.079
that it was that and you're like going every group go oh we can get a proclamation you know for that month and you're doing like two a month you know every month every meeting you got a proclamation because oh this other group got it so why don't we get that you know so you

173
00:57:24.079 --> 00:57:39.839
start looking around and you guys all see that hey it's this month it's that month. There's a month, you know, every month's got five things going on. >> Wouldn't it be wouldn't it be difficult as a council member to to to say no? >> No, no, you just, you know, we

174
00:57:39.839 --> 00:57:55.520
understand historically our police officers and the police here that we like you to say no to that cancer group. You know, it becomes that it becomes that you do have a lot. It's like we just had we just did a you know cancer

175
00:57:55.520 --> 00:58:11.280
but we just did had our our whole we did our golf court you know or this month we're doing our our donation. So it's like we don't really want to have you know that kind of thing. It's not that difficult. You can talk to them and say you know that there's a lot going on and

176
00:58:11.280 --> 00:58:28.160
here's why. You can't do proclamations for everything in every meeting. Otherwise, you really will have a stack of them. You said five, six, seven that you could sit there and have three. >> But I think the issue was on having who would sign it. Correct. >> No, I think it was the issue was

177
00:58:28.160 --> 00:58:42.880
>> whose duty it was. >> Whose duty it was to decide >> which group got proclamation, which group didn't. >> What? Why don't we go to Wade for a second here? What what give us your perspective?

178
00:58:42.880 --> 00:59:01.200
Absolutely no opinion on this one. Wait, you're absolutely on this. >> Didn't you unless anybody's you know for wanted to say something. Sorry. >> Didn't you sign some that you did we did

179
00:59:01.200 --> 00:59:16.400
you did for people but they never went on the agenda. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. >> We used to just you used to just I used to sign it and tell you you used to just send it send it to her. >> But will do that. But >> agenda,

180
00:59:16.400 --> 00:59:33.200
>> she has to. And sometimes Mayor Slate will rather than uh do a proclamation, she will do a letter from the office of the mayor, right? >> And she'll do that, too. >> Exactly. >> So, but she does do proclamations. >> Yeah. We used to do those for the uh the

181
00:59:33.200 --> 00:59:48.480
Boy Scouts, right? >> When they were becoming Eagle Scouts, they used to get a letter letter from the mayor, office, the mayor. And and to me that seems like a a nice thing to do for whoever just made Eagle Scout where they don't have to go before the city

182
00:59:48.480 --> 01:00:05.359
council and have council members decide yes or no. They they just get their letter. I mean, why do we want to change that? >> Like I said, guys, it's a complicated issue. Wouldn't you leave it alone?

183
01:00:05.359 --> 01:00:22.319
>> WE HAVE ALL THIS CONVERSATION CHANGE. But it was a healthy conversation was a very good feeling. There's only three of us more for us to talk and I know it's easier for us cuz we lived it. But

184
01:00:22.319 --> 01:00:38.079
>> I think we create more problems if we change it. >> Okay. Well, that's great. Aaron, were you have an opinion or wait? Are you Wade? You're just going to I have no opinion on this one. Um, on this particular issue, I don't have a really

185
01:00:38.079 --> 01:00:55.440
compelling opinion, but it seems like it may be more complicated to change it than just to leave it alone. >> There you go. You have an opinion more effort than it's worth. >> All right. Is there any further discussion on this matter? >> Nicole, look like it was a lot.

186
01:00:55.440 --> 01:01:16.079
>> That was kind of what I was, but yeah. No place if if you have anything. >> I was in favor of this um making it more for city council to decide instead of just one. >> Yeah. I mean after hearing everything like you said it's a lot of work just to

187
01:01:16.079 --> 01:01:32.480
change it. I just thought with the city council involved and it's letting them have an opinion on whether it be a proclamation or not because like you said, you're not going to do one for everything. I mean, you know, and sometimes it's like, well, she made that decision or he made that

188
01:01:32.480 --> 01:01:52.079
decision. We should make that decision. So, so I really like the the option of saying when let's do a letter from the office of the mayor. That's kind of like >> a a way to acknowledge the specialness of the whatever the event is without

189
01:01:52.079 --> 01:02:11.839
being, you know, proclamation. >> All right. Is there any further discussion or any uh action concerning this item? I'm seeing head shaking now. >> Question. >> Yes, sir. Um, if this is recommended

190
01:02:11.839 --> 01:02:28.079
with for the whole council to do resolutions and and uh proclamations, does that preempt the mayor from doing a letter to that group or to that individual? >> That that would not. No, >> that would not.

191
01:02:28.079 --> 01:02:43.200
>> No. >> Okay. But it it would but then the question is how would it would it flow? Would it flow? Cuz right now it flows to the mayor and the mayor can decide well let me let me write you

192
01:02:43.200 --> 01:03:00.079
a special letter or or we'll bring it to the council for a proclamation. But if you have to bring it to the council for the council to decide, then you're sort of publicly saying, "Nah, your your thing is not I think you're thinking of it a little bit different instead of

193
01:03:00.079 --> 01:03:15.839
just it it flows one through one one person as the gatekeeper, so to speak." And I I'm not, you know, Dominic's a hard person at times. We all understand that. And realistically, if he didn't want to do something, it would be very

194
01:03:15.839 --> 01:03:31.839
hard, let's say, for me to sit there and go, "Well, I'd like to do a proclamation." No. And that would pretty much be the argument was like, "What do you mean?" Or or say yes and it just get lost. IT'S NOT REALLY A IT'S NOT REALLY A VOTED ON. It's just opening up a to me

195
01:03:31.839 --> 01:03:49.599
it's it formally says this the proclamation comes from the council and it gives the opportunity for council members really say, "I'd like to proclamation. which they can, but they really kind of that that's their I like to do a proclamation for uh National

196
01:03:49.599 --> 01:04:05.359
Pickle Week and somebody and Americans go, "No, I can say that." Right. Well, and a lot of it flows through the clerk, right? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Cuz how many times would Barber Well, to me at least or to the council say that's not a proclamation. That would be a

197
01:04:05.359 --> 01:04:20.960
resolution. Anybody can write like listen city council members can write letters but it MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING FROM the desk of the city council means absolutely nothing as opposed to from the mayor. So it's not like the mayor can't keep writing. I'm sure she writes

198
01:04:20.960 --> 01:04:37.440
many more hey from mayor than you know you ever assume because it really does sound special to a 7-year-old 9year-old 11year-old kid to get that that says hey thanks for your input. Here's a letter from the mayor. Thanks for my favorite of all time was and it was happen to be

199
01:04:37.440 --> 01:04:53.680
a friend of my sons and I didn't know he put it having cats. We have police dogs and we do a lot of this stuff for police dogs and we're buying police dogs. You know cats are really and he meant every word of it. He was like 9 years old and wrote this formal letter and you know

200
01:04:53.680 --> 01:05:09.280
the mayor wrote back this we all talk had a great I love cat hysterical but he wrote a nice letter from the desk of the mayor. You know she does it all the time. It's a great thing that won't never stop either way. >> I remember back in the day we used to actually have stationary

201
01:05:09.280 --> 01:05:26.160
and it was this tan with this beautiful gold seal on it. >> Yeah. >> Uh and you probably used many rings of it and I'm sure city council members use three to your mom and dad

202
01:05:26.160 --> 01:05:42.559
from your council members. >> All right. All right. I think this been a fruitful discussion unless there is unless there is a motion. Yeah, I think we'll we'll go ahead and move on. Um and so with that

203
01:05:42.559 --> 01:05:59.280
members, I believe we have completed the business that is before you. I want to thank each of you for uh this has been an outstanding process working with each of you. Um, thank you very much for

204
01:05:59.280 --> 01:06:16.640
uh uh being easy to work with. Uh my first time uh with the uh OBO CRC. Um uh you all have been fantastic. So, thank you very much. Does anybody have any uh closing thoughts? Thank you everybody for all the work you guys do.

205
01:06:16.640 --> 01:06:32.799
We really appreciate it. >> I want to thank our facilitator for taking us through it. Nice job. I appreciate that very much. For those of you who hadn't participated in this before, I hope you all got something out of it. >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, it's uh it's kind of

206
01:06:32.799 --> 01:06:48.240
interesting when you start to get into the nitty-gritty and then you have others who have been around a while and you you just like Mary. >> You've been around a long while. But, um, you know, we kind of hope you got an understanding of a little bit of what a

207
01:06:48.240 --> 01:07:02.880
member goes through. It's not it's not just, you know, we come in here and sit there and look pretty and vote. I mean, there's a little bit more that goes on, >> look pretty. >> Very good. So, uh,

208
01:07:02.880 --> 01:07:19.839
>> on the wall there pretty. So with that then the the one last meeting we had tentatively uh scheduled in case we needed it on May 13th uh we will not be proceeding with but the uh charter

209
01:07:19.839 --> 01:07:34.160
amendments that you have approved for recommendation of the city council uh staff is going to be putting together the staff report to provide all of these uh to the uh city council. Oh, actually

210
01:07:34.160 --> 01:07:51.880
that just reminded me one uh last thing very quickly. Uh does the CRC have any preference on recommendations of order for the charter amendments on the ballot?

211
01:07:52.720 --> 01:08:09.440
>> I uh I posted the order as they were on here because I thought it was a rational order. There are a lot of different ways you can order uh charter amendments. If there is no uh recommendation, then they're going to be presented uh in this order and we're going to ask the city

212
01:08:09.440 --> 01:08:25.679
council if they have any preference for any other order. And uh go difficult. >> So be easiest goes first. >> Wait, you'll let us know when it's on the agenda in case anybody wants to come down and >> Absolutely. We will uh we will make

213
01:08:25.679 --> 01:08:41.520
sure. Uh that's good. Yeah, we will make sure uh staff emails out to uh the full CRC to let you know the uh meetings uh when these are going to be considered. If we follow past procedure, are we going to be going uh Brian uh first to a work session?

214
01:08:41.520 --> 01:08:57.279
>> We'll probably do a work session. I I would guess the work session would be in May and then we'll hit the uh two council uh agendas uh the 1st and 15th of of June >> for the first and second reading of the ordinances. >> Fantastic.

215
01:08:57.279 --> 01:09:08.759
Very good. Well, if uh there is nothing further, thank you all very much and we're journed. >> Great job. We >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you everyone.