call Charter meeting call the charter review meeting to order commissioner Smith you give us prayer and the pledge please sir let us pray most graciously and almighty God the give a very good and perfect gift the creator of All Mankind we come once again before your presence Hearts you with Thanksgiving for this opportunity to serve the city oh God we ask you continue to lead guide and direct us at all that shall say and do will be pleas and acceptable in your sight Bless The Heavenly Father this may this commission and all those that should enter the chamber in th son Jesus name we pray amen I plge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with libery and justice for all the cover all right Cliff sheeper no I'll go get it yes sir the mic there have you got the mic on it says it's on okay good yep you're good okay so as you know last time we covered articles one and two and as promised over the past weekend I sent you uh a couple of new documents the first one being the uh memorandum if you that covers articles 3 and four as well as a document that is titled all proposed changes which will be updated each time we get through sections of the charter so this first all proposed changes just goes through sections one and two and it attempts to include the language that would appear not on the ballot but appear in the charter if an amendment goes to the voters and the voters adopted um and so we can either start there and see whether you thought that I got it right or didn't or we can start going through three and four and then come back to all changes which would you like to do I think just do three and four and then we'll come back yeah all right so uh it it was a blessedly short memo for me um and we start with uh article three Clerk and City attorney and City administrator uh section 3.01 appointment and duties of Clerk and City attorney uh as you can see in the memo there I highlighted the sections that would be affected if there was a change to the uh Council manager form of government from the strong uh mayor form of government that we currently enjoy that's why it's highlighted it's it's the actual language with the area that might be changed and highlighting uh how it would read if you go with what you all had decided to at least look at in the first meeting is the city clerk and City attorney will be appointed and removed by a majority vote of the city council which is what happens in a council manager form of government and the city clerk and the City attorney will serve at the pleasure of the city counil as opposed to the mayor plus the council or some combination thereof so that's how it would go uh and at this point that's all I had regarding this section is there any comments any questions uh any additions other topics you want to add on this subject any questions let me ask one yes sir um supposing we decided not to change and go away from the strong mayor want to keep the strong mayor but the council wanted to have the opportunity to um release the city clerk or the City attorney could we leave could you just change that power yes just change that power yes you could and there's a number of ways you could change that power so for example as it currently reads it's uh appointed by the mayor ratified by the city council uh and serves at the pleasure at the mayor and the city council and you recall the controversy again I'm going by what's in the media whether it was actual controversy or not that's for yall to decide but the bottom line is that was the thing that got a lot of attention um what else what could it be well it could also be that instead of having any reference to the mayor on this issue you could have it just as city council but without changing the form of government you could have that you could also have it where it's takes uh a super majority so instead of just three a simple majority it takes four as an example so there's a number different ways you can get to a result depending on what result it is you're looking for if you're looking to Simply say if a majority of council whether without the mayor want it then you can say it's a majority of council and that doesn't change your form of government just takes away one of the powers that the strong mayor currently has okay all right okay any any other questions no questions I mean obviously you're seeking direction from this Council uh as to what you'd like to see added to the all changes document as a kind of a review item as we're going through so this one specifically obviously it was very controversial clearly yeah well I'm kind of staying out of that but I understand I read about it I don't think you're stepping on any Toes by calling it controversial and calling it what it was um you know and I have no problem with the first statement um because that's true of really any other uh department head or director ctor level position within the city that second sentence is where it's all at um and I think the city clerk and the City attorney position are very important to make sure that they stay as um neutral as possible um and no perception that one member of this Council has greater Authority than the remainder um and in this case it does by by Nature um it it creates a veto power that whether it was intended or not intended we can create the intent now um and I firmly believe that the city clerk and the City attorney should feel like they have complete autonomy when it comes to interpreting our ordinances in our in our Charter and at the same time our clerk should feel like she's got autonomy or he whoever's in the position to provide public record and do all the functions that a city clerk doeses um without fear of of Retribution by One Singular member or or multiple so it would be my my preference that however it's it's worded that yeah the mayor still appoints and it's ratified by Council the city clerk and City attorney Shall Serve at the pleasure of the city council because definitionally elsewhere within our Charter the city council does indicate that it's inclusive of both the mayor and Commissioners um so that would be my preference of change okay um anybody else because I in I need to get a consensus of what to change so I I kind of get it you're trying to say to remove the city Clerk and the City attorney from um the way it reads the original way it reads no uh no change the strong form uh the city clerk and the City attorney shall be appointed by the mayor and ratified by the city council the city clerk and the City attorney Shall Serve at the pleasure of the mayor and the city council so you're trying to say to eliminate the mayor but just say at the pleasure of the city council correct because it's implied or not stated in our Charter that the city council is comprised of the mayor and Commissioners okay so uh and this would be with the city manager form of government something that you want for both it can be carved out okay so I I kind of agree it should be rewarded so that even in the strong mayor um City chart it reads the same way okay well again but we're operating in a vacuum here right now because the assumption is right now we're looking at it as it's currently written and it's currently written in the sense that it's a strong mayor form of government our current form however if we do go back and when we discuss the stuff that you had sent to us around article one if that changes to a strong mayor or city manager Council form of government that language would likely be turned into shall be appointed by the city manager and ratified by the city council right and then the city clerk and City attorney regardless of whether or not city manager form or um strong mayor for would then still serve at the pleasure of the city council that's not exactly true let me explain it it could be true but it would that would not be typical in a strong mayor form of government all the people that we mentioned are appointed by the mayor with ratification or approval of the council or sometimes just the mayor has sole Authority but in a council manager form of government the council has two or three people that answer to it one the city manager two sometimes but not always the clerk and three the City attorney whether that's in-house or a contract lawyer so it wouldn't be that the manager comes in and appoints the attorney and appoints the clerk because in case of all three you all need to count on all three professionals and so you need to like and Trust the advice from all three as opposed to filtered advice coming through the one individual but could you do it that way the answer is yes so uh if I understood commissioner Becker vice mayor Becker and commissioner Velasquez what they're saying is that the first sentence would not change in this section the second sentence would be as I wrote it which is as serves at the pleasure of city council and that is fine whether or not you change from a strong mayor or put it to the voters to change to a strong mayor versus a council manager former government it would work either way it's just basically instead of saying we're going to carve out all of the powers of a strong mayor you're just carving out this particular power so is that what you want to see yes I think that I'm in agreeance with that as well okay all right anything else before we move on all right section 3.02 and and and this is more for my colleagues versus Mr Shepard but again if there's no comment on these things especially rebuttal comment the expectation is not to hear this in the news after the meeting this is the form by which we rebut and yeah I'd like to hear something else um I just want to put that out there go okay it sounds like you know I want to kind of get away I want to hear from everyone so we didn't ask the mayor so let's ask May I'm I'm asking for comments from anybody wants to make any but well I'm if that's what y'all want to put on there but but I just want to go back to that my rights up until this point were that I appoint nominate and that you ratify and so all the the um the acrimony we went through was wrong on your part and that I was right and as long as we agree to that then I'm fine with that I want I want acquiescent agree to that you're right versus I'm wrong kind of we're wrong mindset but you know this is one of those sentences that it's not as I would I would agree with you in in the sake of uh the chiefs of the public safety departments uh Public Services all the other positions that are not the city administrator the city or the city clerk and the City attorney but that sentence within our Charter meant a certain thing and it's they serve at the pleasure of this city council so we have certain authority to give direction around the future employment status of the city clerk and the City of attorney I've got two memos one from or steam Cliff Shepard and one from um spola commiss spola PA both saying that I had the authority and and and and I can appreciate that I just think it's it's interesting that you had multiple sources cite that when we when we went down the direction of having again Mr Shephard is not going to sit there and represent that every attorney that we would put that in front of would have the same interpretation of our Charter because I had an attorney ready to make an opposing view of that interpretation we we decided during that session that we didn't wanted to go that route that we would appreciate the process and move forward but then after the fact you went out and sought these additional opinions when that when that situation had already been rendered moved um but I can appreciate his interpretation that's why we're here today to look at that sentence and then as a collective body in a majority decision to say hey do we need to change that it sounds like at least commissioner Nesta commissioner Velasquez and myself are of the mindset of still serve at the the direction of this Council not giving you unintended veto power on the clerk and City attorney positions is there anyone else say that again unintended veto Powers veto mean that the council collectively has the authority of how I interpret it how we were going to have an interpreted but we didn't get to that point because we decided to go a different route but the statement basically says the mayor and the City Council so additive to a position and it's already stated elsewhere within our Charter that the city council is inclusive of the mayor so to say that the mayor and the city council it's basically saying that the mayor has the authority to if all four of us were in consensus to remove the city clerk or the City attorney and the mayor was not of the same mindset he has the sole authority to debunk whatever the majority the super majority of this Council has and that's the same way that I interpret it and that was the reason I voted the way I did and so that's why I asked the question in the beginning if we kept strong mayor could we simply change that sentence so that we wouldn't have this discussion again because I agreed that the mayor had the authority because it says the mayor and that's why I ask if we remove that particular word then that means it comes back to the council right exactly and but I I think think that the mayor it's redundant the way that the sentence is written because the mayor is part of the city council well so the mayor and the city council creates a redundancy that's not needed so definitionally my interpretation was the intent of that sentence was not to give the mayor an unintended veto power it was basically to say that these two positions serve at the pleasure of the council there there's there's more to that story and I don't know whether you want it or not but um just to explain why I don't think that's the way it was intended to be uh interpreted and why I think clarification is important is because there's some lawyers generally follow something called rules of construction and so the specific controls the general that's one of them there's a bunch of them and also um if you cannot uh if you can it with all possibility you should read the words together so that all the words have some meaning so with those two particularly being the rules of construction that matter matter if you said well we're the mayor is part of the council but it's also true the mayor has lots of other Authority Under the same document that no other council member has because it's a strong mayor so he's not just or she not if it's a future female uh just another city council member it is they are also a city council member but they're not just a city council member and that's the difference so when you add that to the so there's a specific provision here the mayor and the city council and when you apply to that language the rule that says we have to read this stuff in a way that makes you have to assume that whoever put it there had an intention for it and again I don't know who put it there I don't know how long it's been there I don't know what the thought process was but a reviewer looking at it having to apply that rule would say okay it has to have some meaning the mayor has additional Authority this is why they said the mayor and Council instead of just saying as they could have the city council so it's not a redundancy and you could you could interpret it as a redundancy if there was no other way to interpret it but as of the rules of construction you're supposed to interpret it in a way that gives meaning to all of the words if you can get there from here so that's kind of how it works so it is an area that would require clarification if what the desire is that a majority of council can remove that's and that's fine if I understand now I think I have the support at least to see in the next round of amendments leaving the first sentence as it is and the second sentence would just be as I wrote it which is uh as serveth the pleasure of the city council and if that's what you want that's an easy change okay now we can let me just say this if you still stay on their train to let's give the voters a chance on this Council manager then you will probably want to reconsider that because although it's not necessary it is unusual to have a not ceremonial mayor a strong a a a ceremonial mayor have any other authority that you don't have except running meetings that's what a real Council manager form of government looks like but again could you do it yes you could all right with that 3.02 appointment duties of the city administrator uh again if you look at this section um this was was again as a part of the PO potential for changing forms of government which is and that's why I say there's no changes required under your current form of government the mayor is responsible for coordinating and integrating administrative and executive functions as directed by the mayor consistent with policy approved by the council so if you stay with a strong mayor former government no changes unless yall have some others but if you change to or want to put to the voters a potential change then this would be one of those changes which would be a part of the package of changes to get you to a council manager form of government and so it would read instead the city administrator because that's the ter term it could be city manager if you don't like administrator the city administrator will be appointed and removed by a majority vote of the city council and shall be the chief executive officer of the city the city administrator shall be responsible for coordinating and integrating the administrative and executive functions of the city as directed and by and consistent with the policies approved by city council so that is classic description of council manager form of government but only needed if you change to that form of government or want to put it to the voters as a possible change any questions or discussion on this no just a a finer point I I think it would be more clear if it was city manager versus administrator because that's that that's fine that's that's one of those are you a City Commissioner a city council I don't care consistency is important but which way you go with it I don't care is that do youall want to pay city manager instead of City administrator on to go forward you want me to make that change I'm all about consistency so yes which I'm all about consistency so whichever way that looks my question goes back to it says on both of them policies or policy approved by the city council or policies approved by the city council who enforces the charter to make sure that those policies are being implemented I know we discussed that last week yes I've got a lot of or last meeting I got a lot of residents that are concerned of who enforces the provisions in here well the there's a lot of ways to answer that question if it's policies that you put in place and that either depending on whether you do it if you were a council manager form of government where you are all the policy makers and you're all otherwise equal then you have the ultimate say over those three employees I.E typically the three you might only have two you could choose but it'd be the City attorney the city clerk and the city manager if for example you had a problem with the police chief and how he or she was doing things you would go to the city manager and say this person has to go and if the manager refuses then the manager goes and to it's almost like if you're well you're probably well you might or might not you might have studied in history the Saturday night Massacre under Nixon where he tried to get the Attorney General to fire the special prosecutor and when he didn't do it then he fired this the attorney general and he kept H kept going down the line until he found somebody who would actually fire the special prosecutor and you can sort of relate that to where that might happen in this day and time so it's kind of that way those people are answer those three Executives if you will typically the clerk myself or the City attorney and the manager answer to you and that's how you direct policy typically a policy discussion would be hey city manager we want more cops on the beat make sure the budget comes in put more cops on the beat or we need more fire trucks or we need uh another water treatment plan make that happen however that's your policy they come in you evaluate whether they've done a good job you've reflected in their reviews or their raises it's all done in a public setting if you don't like what they're doing you get of them pursuant to whatever contract you may have with those parties so that's how that works in terms of who enforces the charter per se that's a more difficult question because there is no law enforcement agency of the charter the first line of defense for Charter enforcement are the voters and what do I mean by that well if the voters want to recall any of you for violations of the charter that is a grounds it's called Malin there are about seven or eight grounds under the statute Malin is one of them the definition of malfeasance is the violation of any law Charter is a law but it also can be for misfeasance I.E extremely negligent handling of your duties and that's sort of a matter of opinion but if you get enough people to agree that that's what's happening and uh to get it on the ballot then they vote on it and your guilt or innocence for any of these things is determined by the voters it's not an actual trial but that's how it works if the voters vote to keep you you're not convicted of whatever it is um and if they voters get get rid of you even if you're not guilty of whatever it is you're guilty from a standpoint of being voted out of office so that's how recall works and there are another grounds are like public drunkenness things that are somewhat irrelevant today in incapacity which usually means mental illness and inability to serve but it can mean a number of different things but those are the ones you typically see and there's a petition process it has to be certified by the clerk if it's certified and then not challenged based on its legal validity it goes to the voters a recall election and then you go from there the second line of defense for Charter could be but is not here and frankly is not in most places is an internal code of ethics what do I mean by internal I mean one that's adopted by the city and has whatever penalties you want to put in it the reason why most cities but not all don't have it is because it creates a due process and political nightmare here's what I mean by that imagine that it's one of you all that's being challenged as to whether there's a violation well then you become the judge and jury well does that have a t potentially to divide along political political lines do I even need to ask the question of course it does and that's why a lot of cities say you know what we're gonna if we have these issues we'll let the voters handle it um an issue came up in maand a while back uh I'm not going to go into the details except to say that it made the newspaper and a councilman ultimately resigned but there was at that moment that that that bright hot moment when it was getting a lot of publicity about the other uh Council people what can we do can we kick them out of office and the answer was no you really can't that's up to the voters um can I express outrage well sure that's what a centure is about you guys know something about that um but but that that's it that's where your jobs well can the governor remove them well has they been have they in charged with a felony well then yeah um recently the the boundaries on the governor's authority to remove people if you've been following the recent removal of prosecutors has been expanded and so far the courts have been sort of saying okay and I don't know how that's going to end up but most of the time it's based on actually being charged with a felony and you can be temporarily removed or permanently removed depending on the circumstances uh so in in a a long answer to your question there are a lot of mechanisms but there's no law enforcement agency that enforces your Charter is there something we can add to our Charter that gives teeth to a law enforcement agency and I don't know it's because they're not criminal they're not criminal laws if you think about what a charter says it says this is how we have a meeting it says this is the power of of these officials but there's no criminal penalty so what would a law enforcement agency do with it um well if the mayor calls an illegal meeting that's a sunshine violation we already have that law and certain people in Sebastian if youve been following that story have gone to jail over violating Sunshine Law this has been in the last year or so uh they thought that during covid they could just have a closed meeting which they can't and they all got arrested and some big thing but but the point is there is the charter is a constitution it's not a document designed to create criminal penalties and no Charter that I know of does a very unique circumstance that happened near here and the only one of its kind that I know of that the mayor of DeBerry was removed from office based on a trial that was held before the city council and the reason I know about it is because our office through Drew Smith was the prosecutor we were Prosecuting the mayor for violations of the charter because they were a council manager form of government and yet the mayor was constantly according to the charges um interfering with the administration of the City by telling employees what to do and what not to do and that's what got that person in trouble there was a fullblown trial there was an appeal the appeal upheld the removal and that's how that thing went down but that is the exception and as far as I know it's still the only time that's happened in the State of Florida okay but but your your question Comm n I I think the spirit of your question is really you know on the city administrator because we're still talking about section 3.02 is the enforcement of the policy approved by the city council so the city administrator reports like it states here directed by the mayor strong mayor form of government for all the administrative and executive actions of of the staff right and on that front it's hey whatever this Council has budgeted for day-to-day operations you're running the city as as a normal person would expect and then consistent with ever policies that we then instruction in a proper manner to instruct staff and what have you if that doesn't happen to your point the the the ultimate recourse is recall of who's ever at the top of the house and that's the strong mayor right um and that's that's the recourse um now whether that's resident run or that's staff whistleblowing kind of whatever that whatever form that takes the ultimate you know end of the RO or end of the line is you know the mayor's office if it's if it stays the way it is now that's accurate if it goes to a council manager it's all the other and all those other things also apply in either form of government but it's just there is a a direct path to the mayor who oversees everybody because of the additional responsibilities that come with the job in a strong mayor government um and so that would apply in Orange County the three I know about are you Eatonville and Orlando there may be some others but those are the ones I know for sure are strong I guess to go back to your comment around rules of construction and interpretation of the of the spirit of this if the city administrator is darl in his or her duties and that person is not relieved of that Duty one could then uh go Upstream right I mean it's top of the house in in the current form of government correct yeah this is where for examp this says City administrator if that City administrator stays in the position is not doing things either administratively or executive that is counter to what either the mayor is saying what's normal course of action and against policy that we set as this Collective counsel if that person is not removed and it's brought to the attention of the strong mayor and that continues down the path that's Mal feance uh if it's a violation of the charter yes if it rise to the I mean I I don't want to adjudicate things in advance but yes that would be the issue is it a violation of the charter that a violation of law violation of law is Mal feance equals potential for recall any any other questions about this section and do you want to leave it as I did it which is except for changing the word administrator to manager um when I do the all changes document or do you want to see something different all right well I'm going to assume then that we will leave it that way we have it at and we're talking right now city manager form of government we are talking right now because of what yall said in the first time so the recommendation is to change administrator to read manager right and and that's because it's the the Assumption based on your first meeting with me is that you wanted to see what this would look like if you had the council form of management on the government on the let me clarified so the top where the the yellow highlights are that's current yes correct where it's underneath the red text that's if we explored the city manager Council form of government that section would be Rewritten to reflect what he has down there below okay let me if situation EXC sorry let me uh point out here for anybody who's listening out in the audience at home or here and may not fully grasp the way this process will work as we get through all sections and there's a complete document called all proposed changes that covers all six sessions then and only then will there be additional discussion where you can go back and revisit okay well it seemed like a good ide at the time we've had additional info from the public but no we don't want to do that or we don't want to do the specific thing so change it back to what it was no problem so we're not making decisions except in terms of what do you want to see in terms of what it would look like so you have time to mull it over so there's other than telling me what to draft so you can take a look at it that's the only decision that's being made today in the future there will be a time when you need to tell me okay I want to see this in the ordinance because I'm going to strongly consider putting it on the ballot we're not there it'll be several meetings from now okay okay so attorney shepher let me ask you a question should we decide to keep the strong mayor but we want to change City administrator to city manager would that still need to go for a vote still needs to be a vote because it's a change but it would be part of of a change in a group of changes potentially where what you're doing is not changing the meaning you're just changing for consistency another example of that would be city council versus City commission I don't care which one whichever one yall want but it in my opinion it would be helpful for it to be consistent since you have called yourself city council then you should be council members if you want to be count Commissioners then you should should in theory call yourself a city commission but do you have to no I'm just bringing it up because you're in a charter change this would be the time to bring it up you follow all that okay all right so let's go to 3.0 excuse me we're now on all the way to section four all right on section four the first section uh was electors and it just simply establishes that anybody who's a resident of the city is a qualified elector of the State of Florida and registers in the city uh is an elector of the city I didn't see any basis for change if there's any you want to discuss this would be a time but otherwise I'm going to move forward it looked pretty straightforward okay the next one is nonpartisan elections it sets forth that we are do nonpartisan elections if there are any cities in Florida that do partisan elections I'm not aware of it that doesn't mean there aren't any because I don't know every city but I've never seen a city election that wasn't nonpartisan so I didn't see a reason to change that unless y all think you need to um with that we go to section 4.03 qual sorry on that point is there a broader state law that that dictates that because without what's that the nonpartisan thing yeah I the answer is I think there might be but I I I I didn't look at that before I'll have you an answer for that because any designation of any political party affiliation what channel verbal written political mailers like what what in what Forum are you not able to dulge because I know that candidates do it all the time I'm fairly certain state statute does kind of specify kind of the yes and the NOS a little bit because I well I mean case in point today there was a republican Forum right where only Republican C now granted all the candidates were able to participate but in Prior election Cycles there's definitely party Affiliated groups that only invite certain party Affiliated candidates to be part of those forums and that's different than the state statute so but let me tell you what I believe with a fairly High degree of C the law is on that so you do not give up none of you do uh who you are and what you can say under the First Amendment just because you get elected office you can proudly claim Republican independent Democrat uh green party that's not meaning you were not running nonpartisan because you can identify as all of those things but it means in the literature that you're running under your your advertisements and so forth I believe that's the limitation that they should say non partisan as opposed to r or D um and your literature should not be featuring oh I'm been a lifelong this or lifelong that or newly converted this or newly converted that that's the difference um but you don't give up your right to be who you are you just run as a nonpartisan the idea being that you're representing everybody in your community not just these or not just ours or whatever else there might be so that's the way that works um now on qualifying this is actually timely and Mrs bone will back me up on that because we have had issues understanding um in the public Arena what the job of a city clerk is when they're acting essentially locally as a supervisor of elections and handling the qualifying chores uh the only change that's recommended here by me is if you want to clarify the clerk's Authority but because of the issues that have come up in this election cycle this would be a time to consider that so with that in mind but again recommendation meaning I think it might be a good idea to talk about do you have to do it absolutely not is the language I put here which is and it and by the way and I think that you all would probably Rec recognize this because in answer to a question I got from the vice mayor Excuse excuse me I copied you all on the state statute that covers this language at State and county level officers uh so I added the last sentence which is a direct quotation from state law except that it adds the word City Clerk and that is the language under the how it would read with all changes the city clerk performs a ministerial function in reviewing qualifying papers the city clerk may not determine whether the contents of the qualif qualifying papers are accurate that accurately States in a place where everybody can go and read it what the law actually is even if it doesn't state it but it gives you a place to point to and Miss bone a place to point to and say look this is what I'm limited to because many times in this cycle I've had to explain no they're qualified she had the evidence on which to qualify them that's as far as she gets to go period and so that's why I suggested you might want to consider adding this language but this is completely up to you all I recommend that we add the two sentences I recommend that we add those two sentences because by what you just said you're basically pulling down was already in state law yes correct so that people who are in doubt will be able to read it I'm support of this as well okay all right I'm G leave that one alone all right 4.04 schedule and notice of Elections now I don't know why I I mean and this obviously been here for quite a while but miss bone am I right this is we haven't had any elections in December like in a very long time okay so this seems like to me a time that we need to consider what's the charter says versus what we actually are doing and that's why I picked on it ordinarily this would be another section where there's nothing to change but it stood out to me that I don't think that anybody has elections in December unless it's a runoff or something from a November election and so it would be a place in which you would want to consider changing just to be consistent with what you're currently doing and uh so the change that I've recommended although you can do either of those because it's an or um elections within the city shall be held in the first Tuesday in March which I think is our current practice in those years when required for the election of a city official or as amended by ordinance or law at least six months prior to the city's City general election if a regular election occurs in the same month as a presidential preference primary is conducted the like this year this year the city council may choose to hold a city election on the same date as the primary which we did here the or is candidates for the office of city council and for mayor shall be elected on a date to be established by ordinance and res or resolution of the city council the second or gives you complete Authority as to when you want to hold your elections and you do it by an ordinance but you have to do it at least six months in advance and if you miss a deadline that might come back to bite you in terms of getting things done timely the first one gives you an actual date that's consistent with what I think you currently do and gives you the option which you definitely want so you don't have to pay extra uh to to change that date to when the president PR preference primary is in a presidential preference primary Year and that is consistent the first one is what I think is consistent with what we do now so but I gave it to you either way I I think my my opinion is we should set it to whenever the most voters are going to vote um you know when the March always seems kind of off because it's always off cycle from something even presidential preference primary if you think about it this year you could have two presumptive candidates on both parties and which is going to drive down voter turnout for a municipal election whereas in a November race general elections I would I would think would have the most turnout um and I don't know why we wouldn't try to latch ourselves onto a general election and go the more November route it is completely this is this is one of those areas where you have complete autonomy to make a decision let me give you the but but here's what you need to think about the first one um you have to think about whether or not there was the potential for runoff like if there were three candidates and nobody got a majority and you did that at the general election you're now going to pay separately and out of pocket for a runoff election whatever that cost and last time I checked it was like 25 Grand I don't know what it is now that's in the but we would have to do that anyways if you were going to runoff but but see they have scheduled elections like it I I think for municipalities the first quote election or first go round they call it a primary but it's really not for a nonpartisan was in August I think uh for November and that gives you then if you get if you had three if you only have two or if only one stands for election then they're declared elected but if you had three or more and it nobody got a majority then you'd have to have a second election which you could then have at the general with having to pay extra yeah my and again I get roasted for saying comments like this but my my first um order of operation when coming up with this isn't money driven um you know 25,000 okay it is what it is but when you think about it the second largest uh voter electorate base within Orange County is non-party Affiliated voters and so when you talk about presidential preference primary you're talking about a primary so if people are not registered with a party they may not be inclined to go vote um same thing with the August vote you know that's generally considered a primary time frame and so again the npas aren't going to be as inclined to vote than say they would in the general election come November so I always think that it should be tied to November and if it does go to a runoff situation you know that's the cost of having free elections that again this is where you have complete autonomy the one thing I wanted to say to you though uh the second part of here is the thing you need to understand even if we went through this and made a change and the and the voter said yeah that sounds good to us it would not affect whatever current terms people are in because you don't get your term cut short nor do you get your term extended by changing when you have your election that can only happen at the next election and so that needs to be understood going into a change like this one can you can you reset so let's say my term ends in 2026 March that what we're talking now about when in that when in 2026 so March of 2026 March okay so does the person that then would take over my seat in March would they only run until if we switch it to November they would only run they're basically filling a short a 10-month ter term basically no what would happen is if this is the direction we would then crash into the amendment as you may have seen in other Charters and if you haven't I'll send you some examples when you make this kind of a change that says essentially for the election of whatever the Year this would become the first next one we'd see from that point on the person's uh will stand for reelection in and then count whatever the years would be three four two whatever your terms are I think it's four um and they would stand for election in nove instead of March of 2009 it would be November because you said it in the charter but thereafter everybody would be elected from November to November and so you set quote the Stagger in the amendment so that the voters so you don't get a longer term or a shorter term just because of a change in the charter and who you elect everybody knows when they vote well this person is going to get maybe six or seven months longer than they ordinarily would because that's how we get the things started back where we're all in the same disclosed up front right it's a part of the amendment okay it only works that one time but that's all it's needed to set the Stagger to get it set reset okay yeah I mean I think to to commissioner Beer's point that November does bring out the most voters which I think the more Civic act actively uh engaged residents we have the better our city is if I recall um commissioner Vasquez got approximately 10,500 votes which was a record for the city of papka yeah that was in because it was November correct well that's my point is that yeah but I his thing is not so much bringing out the voters but he is right because I do follow the um election supervisor of elections the NPA have really outnumbered uh Democrats and I believe um Republicans and so what happens is there is a large chunk of Voters that don't have an opportunity to vote and um if in in the primaries if they're not coming out for the presidential primary a lot of them say well you know unfortunately we have a very we have an apathy of of local elections so how do how do we try and keep our voters engaged so that they realize as a local you know raise their taxes yeah they'll be that's it put something on the thing right for March um but I understand his his um uh you know his argument is that the NPA exactly will not come out but you know that's something that we can't control because the truth of the matter is our our voters should understand um you know I I kind of like the local U March municipalities because it's it really does engage the voters to realize well you have an election cycle in your city um and they realize it's just a city rather than going because then you have the opposite if you have a ballot that's full of of you know the presidential the vice president the home some people just do 102 and they forget the municipal so it works both ways yeah it it absolutely does and and I don't have a right answer here this is where you tell me and then I draft according to what it is you want but that's why I ra the first thing it stuck out to me is that we're not doing it in December so so that should change but which how you want to change it is up to you guys okay so so attorney shepher so in a primary election the nonpartisan the NPA they don't get to vote it we're not an Open Primary State there are some I I think for I think New Hampshire may be or whatever I'm pretty sure that's right but in an Open Primary state if you're an NPA you can vote for the Republican or the Democrat no problem but we're not that and whether we'll ever be that I doubt um and so no if the only thing on the ballot is Republicans Or democrats you wouldn't vote however if there were Republicans Democrats and Charter changes you could if there were Republicans and Democrats and Municipal nonpartisan offices or itial nonpartisan offices you could okay that was my question okay all right vote you can vote yeah because see somebody told me that they could no no no I didn't me yeah and I and if that's a communication on my part my apologies my I'm not saying that people can't vote I'm saying that presidential preference primary and then usually when August refers to August voting it's the August primaries when people hear the word primary and they realize that they're not party Affiliated a lot of Voters will say well there's nothing I can vote on but a lot of times you know even in the August primaries there's down ticket things that are nonpartisan that you can still vote for but people get confused I mean that's I'm not going to fight human behavior that's just always going to be the fact and you're just going to get more participation in November versus March and August and sometimes it's really important stuff constitutional amendments are non-partisan to the state constitution um so whether it's Charter changes constitutional judicial races or local elections they're typically nonpartisan um but but to your point if someone is under the impression this is a primary therefore I don't get to go they just don't go even if it's not true that there's not stuff for them to vote on should we parking lot I like to March okay well I here's what I'll do I think what I'm hearing is yes get rid of December but I'm not sure which way we should go yet so if you want a parking lot this one to your suggestion and consider impact or or check with citizens get more input at that time if if you want to see something in the meantime again drafting is not the problem so if you want to see something looks like you can always change it's not a decision that's what I'm emphasizing so that people listening and people here understand all you're telling me is I wonder what that would look like okay here's what it would look like but if you're not ready to say that that's fine that's what parking lot's for I would I would just say use the March presidential PR primary is kind of your lius test if it's if it's hovering somewhere between 20% or lower yeah it's that's not a good news story and that's typically what it is for Municipal elections in a popet it's like 20% or less I would just like to spend a little more time talking to Residents specifically about this one I've heard a lot about other things within the charter and this provision I just haven't yet so I'd like to get a little more feedback before we I I did get from two different residents who are paying attention to this um City Charter they did they did recommend November um I'm sort of on the fence on it because I think traditionally it's it's municipalities have always kind of been marched not just us uh which are the other cities they're uh aoi winter Garten so sort of our sister cities have been in in March and Orlando's in November so so I would I would encourage colleagues here is you know for obviously we have to change it because we're not in December we don't do it over we'd have to change our things to December which I don't think anybody wants so at that point we're at a blank slate so we're now choosing which month to do it in yeah so please come back with your value proposition to say why is it valuable to do it in March versus why is it valuable to do it in November okay because I would be anxious to hear what the what the logic and the reasoning or the value proposition is for March other than the fact that it's just been status quote and how we've always done it true I know I'm sounding like that right no I mean hey that's your proga I just for my own you know for me I I will say this I mean we this first of all this is a big step for us as the city even trying to consider this to to as an as an option we've never even considered a city uh and I have to always say it City form government um so not only are we trying trying to present this we're also saying okay and oh by the way we're going to change it to November so I don't you know change is kind of very hard um for people to kind of embrace the whole thing um you know I had I I sent you an email I express what I felt sure um you know I but this is something that we have been getting from residents that they want to see something different so I want to be able to present the other side so you know I kind of agree let's park on this and then kind try to get some feedback from some of the residents that you know have been paying attention because I have been getting phone calls it's fine um the one thing I would say is that one of the qu concerns you have raised has been raised by other cities and other Charter reviews I've done which is how many questions is there going to be and are we going to have voter overload right and I would say on that wait till I put together the ordinance and see how many questions there are what typically happens but I'm not saying it will happen here is I'll put together anywhere from four to seven questions and then they look at them and they think let them go send them all to the voters but you could always say let's send three to the voters this time and we'll save the other three for next time put the most important three first and then we will designate the second next time there's an election we'll put three more on so that that avoids the having multiple issues where people are generally concerned about when they talk about V or overload is since I don't understand them I'm just going to vote no on everything and so that's a legitimate concern I I assume it happens with some folks most of the time that concern once you see the questions and understand they're not overly complicated which typically they're not most cities will say just let them let them all decide at one time but again you don't have to make that decision today okay okay all right so the last thing it's really a non thing and that is the recall and this is goes to the section uh that's in your Charter that Echoes what happens in state law that commissioner Nesta asked about which is even if this was gone if I had any recommendation it would be you can delete this because it doesn't matter state law provides recall and all this says is the procedure is established by General law ordinance of the city you don't have an ordinance for this but general laws covers it you can set forth a petition set forth one of the seven or eight grounds get enough signatures get it certified by the cler that you have the signatures and it goes on the ballot unless it's challenged as to be insufficient and uh unless you want to talk about what that means which really is not relevant to the amendment um that's it unless you want to change it or take it out or do something else with it anything else all right well that concludes three and four I have my marching orders and I know what to bring back to you for next time on that to go back now to the all changes document this covers just articles one and two these are based on my understanding and if I got anything wrong this is the time to tell me so I can fix it of what you told me you wanted to see so in article one uh you can see where I struck mayor counsel and put in council manager you'll note up top underline is new a striketh through is what's being taken out so this would be what it would look like if you change to a council manager formal government and this would be part of a series of changes but one question on the ballot shall the city of Apopka change to a council manager for government from strong mayor for of government yes or no that's all the voter sees the actual Amendment language is in the ordinance available for distribution at City Hall online however you want it but but remember how many times you've voted on amendments you just see the question you don't get to see all of this so it's important that and the law requires therefore that the title which is 15 words or less as well as the summary which is 75 words or less accurately not necessarily completely but accurately describes what the initiative does so the voter can read it get enough of it to say yes or no and then check yes or no so that's how that works so um so just to give a just to give an idea of what your there there's no we're not on a side the side position is is over this is I don't think yeah there's this is just the public comment portion which would come after I get done we're talking now about the changes that we recommended from the first go round so to give examples because you hear you hear what you're saying but just to kind of give color to the people that are listening so yeah it's a very simple question but then the the other amendments or other language that has to then follow suit are you talking specifically as it relates to the Charter or within I'll give an example like in the codent ordinances uh like chapter two I think talks about Administration or chapter one or chapter two where something in there it talks about the mayor will be paid a full-time salary this that and the other yes where you know if you go into a manage or Council form of government obviously you would change that language does that get changed as a matter of those amendments or that then gets changed after the fact it's going to get changed by an amendment that's yet to be drafted so let's suppose that you you stick with the idea we want to give this to the voters to decide and amendment that will be part of that package is all ordinances inconsistent with this Charter are hereby repealed all references to whatever it might be are now changed to say where it says where it might have said mayor now said is City administrator or city manager whichever you you end up with and so it's a it will be a part of the package that goes under the the umbrella of council manager versus strong mayor and this and as I say as you can see there are a number of sections that will be changed in the charter but there will be sort of the catchall part that says all ordinances that are inconsistent are repealed all references to the city manager or or C mayor are now changed to the city manager etc etc so so even though the ordinance themselves if you were looking at it would still say whatever they said the charter has overruled them in that regard thank you okay all right so the second part of the all proposed changes Doc and I did in this but it's not something I could show because I'd love to be able to put on screen for all of you but it's not in my presentation that's that when they put it together they just did the Articles we're reviewing today but in section 2.01 again and this was the consistency because we call ourselves throughout the charter of city council if you refer commissioner then we probably should consider changing our our title to City commission and then be Commissioners or city council and be council members I don't care as I mentioned before just tell me and I'll try to make it consistent whichever way but since I thought I understood that you wanted council members to be consistent with you're being a city council that's what this next change in 2.01 is about it's an easy change back to whatever it is you want yeah I think I I wrote to you asking what would be this standard addressing a commissioner or counsel um we've been known as Commissioners so I found council members I just not the same not the same I I don't know why I just didn't because I say the the city commission I say the City commissioners um so I don't know I guess that'll be a preference from up here really it is it's the easiest of all the changes I can make just tell me which one you want I know but I did I did all the things that were here I said I don't like the I think I told you that I don't know council member just doesn't ring but it's interesting because if you were looking at forms of government if you were to I informally based on what I've seen I think the vast majority of mun IAL governments are councils whether it's town or city council but there are some that are City commissions interestingly on county level most counties are County Commissioners and they are County Commissioners uh County commissions with County Commissioners like Orange County is the Orange County Commission the boc is the Board of Commissioners and you see that at the county level more than you see at the city level but it's not like they're exclusive and there are some that are like valua it's the County Council so so there's no rule just tell me what you want yeah well that I like Commissioners me do do too that's what I've been yeah I kind of like commission um I just feel like it has some teeth to it it has some Authority it just has some Prestige to it um do you think I'm not fussed on this one because quite honestly again this would have to be a formal voted on thing even though this is what I would perceive as to be title change but if we're getting to a stage where you're having seven five seven eight questions on a thing this would to me would be the lowest of the low priorities Because unless there's some reason to say if there's in congruent titling that there's some ramification that's there's no ramification so like no ramications but but but to your point it would also be one of the simplest because it would be say shall the charter be changed to make a consistent reference between Commissioners and counsel or councel and counil and so forth it it'd be very simple and and so whatever changes had to be made even if it's six or seven different places that capture that idea it would be one question covering a bunch of changes okay okay all right so if you want we don't again we don't have to cite it now if you want to see Commissioners and commission that's easy change just let me know okay election and term terms again the only change on this section which is 2.02 was to get council members I I sort of hear a preference for Commissioners that's an easy change and that's the only thing that's changed in 2.03 um the other change in 2.03 is the Striking again because of the idea of a council manager form of government which we were instructed is the last sentence with a strike through which if it stays the same says the mayor shall receive the salary established by the step for the mayor in the annual budget if you go to a council manager for a government that is irrelevant and it would be stricken if you don't or you decide not to put that to the voters then that sentence would stay unless there's something else you want to change without regard to that this is designed just for consistency with Council manager um 2.04 uh changes this is where the most changes occur regarding the change in the form of government if you decide to put this to voters the typical situation for a uh a council manager form of government where the mayor sits in the C in the center chair runs the meetings but as otherwise just quote the ceremonial head of the government means that they might sign proclamations you know whereas we recognize uh uh Crime Victims awareness week or whatever it might be and and does that sort of stuff that's ceremonial that's what you typically see uh they might go to ribbon cuting and represent the city in that capacity um and they have the title of Mayor um so these changes are consistent with what you see in other cities where they have Council manager forms of the government and so it strikes out as you see uh shall be responsible for to the electorate for administration of the city Affairs appointing the for the good of the city and suspending terminate you know employees and all that because all of that in the council manager form of government is done by the manager subject to your oversight of the manager not the employees um and the so that's why all the powers A and B are stricken and then it get down to C which would then become a the chair be the chair and a voting member of the city council for all other purposes the mayor has the same status as any other council member that's again Council manager um and then the next thing is the vice mayor uh shall be the senior again commissioner council member serve as the chair of the City Council meetings the absence of the mayor that stays the same in the event the senior council member declines the position the vice mayor or council is elected from the remaining members so for example in your case if you'd said you know I really want to be vice mayor then the council would throw it open and pick somebody to to serve in that capacity but it doesn't give you any more Authority you would have the same Authority that the mayor would have in a council manager foral government which is very little except to run meetings so that's the that change um then on Council employee relationship uh again this was just a change um for uh the consistency of the title but it it carries a message that should be repeated here that you are all familiar with again in a council manager form of government the rule that applies to at least four of you then applies to all five of you which is you do not underscore do not because this is what will get you removed from office by voters because they get real hot about it uh interfere with employees that's why you hire a manager so you might want to talk to Mike about extra police leasing but you don't you might want to talk to the fire chief about whatever the issue might be but you don't you go to the city manager that's who you talk to if they don't express your wishes as policy makers then that's when you talk about what am I going to do with the city manager but that's how that works so this isn't a change but it's a reinforcement of the idea of what it looks like it just now would apply to all five of you um vacancy filling again that was just a change in the reference um and I I added because again assuming it goes to council manager or you put that out to the voters if any vacance occurs in the office of mayor or the city council and then it goes through the process it wouldn't be just council members who get replaced that way but the mayor as well because in that instance he or she is just a council member um and then the last thing which we talked about and was an anomaly that definitely needs correction for the reasons I stated last time is the Quorum uh because because as currently written and this is a change that obviously needs doing for reasons that you all will understand I'll repeat no action of the city this is section 2.08 Council shall be valid unless adopted by affirmative vote and this is what it currently says of a majority uh of the city council present and voting which means if you had three people show up and two people didn't then two people voted for it you could have something passed as the law of the city with only two votes of a five- member Council just B on absences this is not a good rule so even though you can keep it if you want to my recommendation is and that's what what youall agreed to see affirmative vote of three or more of members of the city council or commission not present and voting because that's the language that makes it if you're there and you got a quorum then two of you can make a decision and that's the problem and it's what it's called in most cities that have this similar rule is called the rule of Threes no decision of you is valid unless at least three of you vote for it and so this fixes that to be more aligned with what you see everywhere else all right any questions on articles one and two changes that I drafted for your instructions the only thing and this is more for the other council members up here or Commissioners is uh I know we discussed this last time term limits at all is there any taste or distaste for term limits in any capacity or is it leave it as it is last last review I I said a three- term limit is something I'm comfortable and would encourage if if you if that's what you want I'll make sure I get a draft what that would look like um I didn't have that in my notes or something to definitely change no it wasn't it was and if you want that as a part of the parking lot and then tell me whatever you guys want just let me know and I'll put it together I mean there's no appetite for the you know for what you guys want then then no words it just it was brought up to me again so yes it was brought up to me um actually by two by two residents and and actually one of those two residents was even saying a a three-year term because he said there was a time in the city of aapka there were threee terms is that correct uh mayor yeah how long ago was that don't know can't tell you it was you have any idea Susan yeah but I mean I don't know when they changed it the four years yeah um and yeah because the I mean it was just one resident but still it was it was a suggestion um and I had expressed that I thought that uh three years uh was not consistent with the county uh Commission because we worked with the County Commissioners and I just felt here you have a three-year term uh elected official and they're doing four term a four-year term and so they would have to start over uh to kind of build a relationship if they if if that's how it works CU you know um I always feel it's important for us to have a relationship with our County Commissioner because that's where the money comes from for projects and and um so I was on the fence about that I did I did express my you know opinion but um the person was very adamant about you know um uh that's okay that you feel that right but he wanted something to you know to consider so that's something that I will put on the parking lot and see an appetite for that from because like you said you have to kind of prioritize what what's important um and as far as term limits that that was brought up to me but again um how I feel is that's what elections are for um you know I don't know if if a threeyear term if you have someone that you know is is doing the right thing comes up in it's three-year term and they're gone but then I look around and I realize that other cities do have term limits uh certainly our Orange County has term actually they have two it's a two term limit right M so um yeah it's that's something else that you know can be put on so a term limit write something for a term limit sure well there is a term limit now it's question is do you want it longer or shorter I think the mayor can only serve two terms if I remember correctly where no any there's no term limits here I've looked at a couple different chars today I think Marland is a textbook example we don't have not say it's a bad thing say I remember that now I must have been looking at somebody else's Charter and trying to get ready do I mean I did check some of the neighboring cities and they seem to have term limits we don't have term limits does wintergarten have term limits wasn't sure with them yeah I have to go back and check with winter do you know if Winter Garden has any term limits may have I think I don't think anybody does Matlin does but that's a relatively new development yeah yeah um does Eatonville have I'm trying to remember right now and I honestly don't think so I think so I don't think so well the Constitutional officers for Orange County have four four or four year terms I think 16 years Max something like that yeah but obviously the city of Orlando doesn't or we would have a different mayor who's been here almost as long as I have yeah he has in fact when I moved to aaka he was elected taken off and reelected but yeah I think if yall don't have any further questions from me this is public comment so I will step away and then if you want me back I'll be happy to see well I mean I guess my my question procedurally is okay you've done these proposed changes do you need instruction now to go deeper on the Amendments that would support questions on any of the topics that we not yet um because I I know what to draft for three and four which will then be added to the changes I also know what to change on one and two based on the input for example Commissioner versus council member and make that look like that's going to look um and that's what you'll see next time a revised one and two all changes and brand new because you hadn't seen it yet three and four and then when we get through five and six then you have the entire document you can see the whole thing what it would look like and then you tell me okay I like that don't like that want to tweak this for example you might say there might be another thing where the first sentence I'm okay with the mayor doing appointment with ratification but I'm not okay if we don't have it where a majority of us can kick whoever out that's okay and again so there are certain things you can sort of I don't want to say mix and match because that means like you're really mixing but you have authority you can take some Powers away and so it's not a strong strong mayor but it's sort of a moderately strong mayor something like that there there are some hybrids you can do I'm using the typical model but that doesn't mean you have to keep it that way you can change it to your liking as long as it makes sense and it's consistent throughout okay perfect so what if we decide well I'm not g to say we but if after we riew the whole thing and we feel you know what um because I keep saying this I don't feel like we should change an entire form of government if we're unhappy with certain leadership that is occurring now that that if you're unhappy with the leadership which is mean any of us um can we tweet or can we revise or review the strong mayor document that's exactly what what I'm saying and um again because the Eatonville stuff is going to be on this ballot and we'll see how it gets voted on but one of the issues that was very hot initially was going to change we do not want a strong mayor anymore but then they heard from the citizens who said yeah we kind of like it it's been working for us for 60 70 I however many years and we don't really want to change it and so what can we do and we were having some problems um similar to some of the problems you would faced not the same but for example the mayor would make an appointment but she only had one other vote that she could count on so she would try to make a vice mayor for example and three would vote against no matter what she said and they needed a appointment for some other position where she has the ability to make the appointment but it has to be ratified and she couldn't get ratified and the way their Charter was drafted is she has to make the appointment at a certain month of the year she makes the appointment if it's not ratified she doesn't have to make another appointment so this position stays empty so they had no vice mayor for months even though there were people sitting there ultimately what solved that problem was they decided to try to get along and so she appointed one of the people that kept voting against her to solve the problem but in the charter if the change is adopted it will be no longer that situation the vice mayor will be initially I think is what I remember it uh suggested or appointed by her if she can't get the votes or whoever sit in the chair can't get the votes then it immediately becomes a majority of of the the Town Council so you get the first shot but the second third and fourth shot if there needs to be is until you get a majority of council and because otherwise they were bound they she had done her Charter Duty they had said no she didn't have to appoint anybody else so the position stayed vacant C can I pick your brain a little bit on that comment because you made the comment the last Charter review too um if you don't change when you have a a poor leader in the current seat the logic behind let's not change a form of government or consider it just because there might be a poor leader in the seat then basically you're saying that you would never change it because you would certainly wouldn't change it if you had a good leader in the seat so I'm just I'm curious as to that statement okay yeah because I and I I I expressed it to a cliff I've never um dealt with until I moved to the city of uh until I moved to the state of of Florida I've never dealt with a city manager form of government so that's was all new to me and I realized that some cities do it and when I came to apaka was a strong mayor um up until I became you know a commissioner um then being part of the government you know I saw there was some things that could have been improved um but you know I had never considered well let's just change the form of government because some things were not uh working as it should um and certainly this last uh this time while I'm in office I'm seeing a lot of uh what's not working and and that includes us here up here in the de and certainly in the last two years we've seen a lot of you know contention some real issues that have kind of divided us um and so again you know I still feels very strongly about a strong mayor I'm just saying maybe if we can address the charter to to change and revive some of the things that we feel that we have not been able to have a voice on as a as a commissioner maybe that would make some improvements but um you know I'm looking back at the history of of apopa it's always been a strong mayor I I just you know I have to say that I'm kind of Unsure how I feel but the one thing I do respect is that we are all here for the people and the people are now starting to tell us what they want yeah and that will happen and um and that and the city has grown I came here was about 25,000 residents in the city of apaka we're probably you know we're up to what 60 65 and it keeps growing and and those extra 45,000 residents don't have a footprint in the previous administrations they're just seeing these two of last two or three new Administrations so they're basically starting to you know rise up and say well let's try and let's try something different because we're not getting to where we need to be so I I said I want to present this to the voters but I also want to have a another side I want to be able to go back to the strong mayor and see what can we do in that Charter that would make it um more to you know to to for us to work more cohesively and for our residents to feel confident about the form of government an analogy would be outpatient versus major surgery right um but but again to your point if you think about it with nville being a notable exception what you typically see and the reasons I'll explain are easy to understand the smaller communities use the council manager because people have full-time jobs and and they really don't want to sit in City Hall all day and manage a city because they're in insurance or real estate or lawyers or doctors or whatever they're doing they have full-time careers and sitting there trying to run City Hall particularly for the salaries that you typically can make certainly at the smaller cities is not worth it to you because even in those cities you would pay an administrator substantially more than the person who was the strong mayor but as you go up in size you're more likely to see a strong mayor that's why you see it in Orlando as an example and why as the second largest city in Orlando in in Orange County which I think has been true of apka for quite a while it has um it it you know there's a reason that that happened because it was it did justify a full-time salary and a full-time job as opposed to what in these other communities it really wouldn't um they have to make an affirmed decision to decide we like the idea of a citizen running our government essentially and all the details of it and we're going to pay commensurate with that and uh and yes if you get voted for it that's fine but sort of that's the other side of it right you're voting for someone to run the city like we vote for a president to run the country but that doesn't mean they've ever done anything like that before and so you know why you have administrators even in the strong mayor form of government and why you have city managers in a strong in a manager Council form of government is because those people have allegedly had the training had the experience all the stuff they understand about personnel management HR setting up budgets and all of those things and not everybody who runs for the job has that kind of experience and some do so again the higher you get up in terms of population the more likely you are to see a strong mayor but that's not always true I just want to be able to give the residents the choice yeah but that doesn't mean that I am personally and that's something that I've been struggling with in the last few weeks because um they know I'm working on this and they say well what's your opinion well my opinion is I you know I just feel the strong mayor has worked in the city of apaka in the last two or three years it's it's been there's been some disagreements up here and and we can't seem to come to uh consensus you know um but then it's it's because of because of what's going on here the residents are are saying you know what maybe a change of government will change what's going on so I just at this point this is a good review um this is something that we can present to our residents but I want to be able to give them that choice sure okay anything else for me public comment Tod bankson storm weight Court poka Florida Commissioner Vasquez to your point I know where you're coming from I agree with that to a point but there is nothing that holds any of y all the mayor or anyone to any SE level of Education how do we know that we have the best person for employee relations labor laws anything like that we just wing it there's things that's happened in the last three five 10 years that aren't proper that shouldn't have happened but if we don't have people that aren't educated enough in these areas how there's nothing that says the mayor or the Commissioners have to go to attain this level of Education that's the beauty of a city manager you set the parameters of who you wish to hire and the skill level and what their past experiences are and you can require them to attend classes and learn things and go to school and how to take care of employees and do things in the proper manner that but that wasn't even what I was coming to talk for ratification uh Cliff so we talked about it before the ratification is three out of the five right to get so if the mayor brings over a new department head it it's three out of five but one of the three has to be the mayor under the current correct he appoints so the mayor brings a department head up for and the mayor puts it forward and only Smith say votes for it commissioner Smith it dies on the vine right yes so if we have to have that's what I don't get if we have to have three to ratify it and move it forward why aren't we concerned that we should have three should be able to take it away too once we give all that power to the mayor to say okay you got our three votes do it and then something goes sideways or bad there's nothing we can do about it there's no we can't say okay this is we've gone three years we don't like this we're going to have a vote and now we have three so another ratification but we can't undo it that's that's the part that I don't get how you all don't comment on that that's the small fix to the program if you want a voice I want my Commissioners to have a voice I'm voting for you the mayor and all youall to be up there I want a voice if you think something's wrong three or five of you got to have a pretty good idea of what we need and you should say all right we don't think that this person isn't working the guy running public works or wherever the police dep wherever it is but it means nothing it just goes away golly that's just so wrong to me but all right thank you well I mean and that's only just the two just the two that's just the attorney and the No cour but but the value but again in the presentation I made I know exactly what you're talking the presentation that I made two weeks ago or the the last meeting was just that fact so let me play that back to you we ratify I'll just use the example the fire chief position right we did that back in 2019 fast forward to last year we did a no confidence vote three of the five Commissioners did a no confidence vote but that went nowhere there was no pressure to do anything about it because to your point the mayor has all the authority in terms of relieving anybody of their duties my the value proposition for a city manager is yeah the city manager still has that Authority but the city manager serves at the pl of this Council so if there's a no confidence vote of any of his director level staff I'm assuming that person sitting in the city manager seat is going to say well there's no confidence there you know there may not be any confidence for me long term and that's where the pressure then becomes hey if they're not doing the jobs properly to the liking of the city council we have the authority to relieve a city manager of their duties if they're not doing you know the will of this Council right now we don't have that wholeheartedly agree so last meeting when I asked about raic you explained it I took it to me wherever I saw the word ratification but it's only for the attorney and the clerk it's with the attorney in the city clerk and a strong mayor form of government which is what you have all other department heads are the hired and terminated by the mayor but I thought that we I thought we decided the word ratification was in there for the fire chief police chief department head ratif just to bring them on okay so that that's so if maybe I'm saying it wrong the police chief mayor uh comes forward says that's my guy I want to have for the police chief only commissioner Becker says okay I I'm for it and the other three don't does the police chief come forward and become police chief okay so then it is for all of them then not just those two soing not firing it's a so then for yes I agree that but there's not the other way okay only so my point that's what I was saying that I just think the power should be equal on all the levels if ratification needed to go in how about to come out yeah it's ratification which includes the mayor then you have the potential for four voting to get rid of and one being the mayor can say no they stay that's the point and so the only place that occurs in the charter is for the city clerk and City attorney the rest of them he can fire but he has to hire with ratification so ratification only applies in the hiring context not in the firing context and even in the firing context for the city clerk and the City attorney it is the city council and he serves at the pleasure of Cliff can you turn your mic on he serves at the pleasure of or she serves at the pleasure of the city council and the mayor so it's not it doesn't use the term ratification that only applies on the hiring side and just just for clarification every every director that I've hired has been a 50 vote just just for even me even you Cliff Albert mck 3603 golden jamro something that Mr bankson just said just now was a very Salient point he mentioned education and I think the lack of Education in the city and myself included is something that we need to address and I understand that we're speaking about the city Charter however when you mention term limits it would be fine if we set term limits when there was a plethora of candidates looking to come into your place but I would hate to think we would lose a candidate our commissioner who had been an exceptional commissioner because we'd set term limits and there was nobody of any substanti substantial quality qualities to replace that person I think one of the things that we need to do is make sure that the public are educated so they can come in here and they can begin to be nurtured into the city so that there always will be candidates so term limits are fine if we have the education and we have the candidates to come forward but there's incumbent seats where there's no contest and what do we do if there's a term limit of 3 years or 6 years or whatever and that person has to resign and there's no one to to fulfill it so that was the first question the recall recall I I agree we're very lucky here because 90% of the time I admire and I agree with our commissioners however there's times that I don't agree with our commissioners and there's no recourse just now except for recall for us to fight a fight with you guys I certainly would never want to be in a position where because I disagree with everyone up here that we'd have to try and recall everyone that just doesn't work so what we really need is a mechanism within the charter that when we don't agree we have a recourse part of that as far as I'm concerned just now I don't know but you know how do we address something when we don't agree with you guys there's no mechanism do we have to go forward with a Judicial Rec call and have something settled in court when we disagree with how the city's handling something and if we do perceive to do that and I go and take legal action against the city the city can then sue me so that's something that that that I think needs to be addressed we need to feel secure that we can disagree with you and we can take legal action or you can take legal action on on our behalf we're not asking you to make decisions on our behalf but what we want sometime is for you to say yeah we don't want to make the decision somebody else should make the decision on your behalf for you that that's one thing that I would think I have a question because I said we're not all educated for me what what is a voter what constitutes a voter in Florida we're we're known as a snowbir state so if someone has a house in California and only spends two days a year in Florida in a popka are they still entit to vote you know there's things that that we don't understand and lack of Education makes it difficult and I understand a lot of these things are handled with ordinances but here's the question if you can't vote because you only spend a certain amount of time as a resident in Florida the converse is if you're a candidate who doesn't spend all your time in a popka are you entitled to be a commissioner [Music] Rod Olson 3156 Rolling Hills Lane uh am I appreciate everything you guys are doing as always um I felt like an all out of water uh it was great having uh three and four up on the board where we could see it and visualize it when you redid the one and two we didn't and I understand steps with it but it'd be nice I'm a visual person if I could see what's being produced it'd be available on the website it would make it much easier you're certainly for me to do it as far as the mayor or strong manager uh position uh I've come from over 40 years I'm like 47 years in health care operations anytime we looked at changing a policy procedure we looked at the structure of what we're going to do for our hospitals our nursing homes our assisted living facilities our Subacute rehab centers we looked at where we're at currently what makes sense we talked to our current people and current managers we looked at companies our similar size and companies that we were growing to so cities you're coming to Growing to and look at what their structure is what's working what's not working it's not going to be a perfect science but either way there I don't with regard to the positions we have the uh Miss bone and we have Mr Shephard uh and uh currently uh currently I know we're filling interim uh with with the aspect of the city manager I think all three of those positions should be rolled I mean all the fire chief the police chief and the CFO should be rolled in with those positions as well so you don't have oh we have a new mayor and now we got a new fire chief new police chief a new CFO for continuity purposes for the community I think that those positions should be incorporated with that as well thank you Eric mock 2439 ver viw drive two things um commissioner Velasquez I tend to agree with you I think most of the time commissioner or commission is one of the first things that I hear when people talk to me you know council is not necessarily a term that I hear very often so I tend to like the word commission and commissioner Becker I like I I in in in reference to 4.04 and your uh value proposition about November you originally brought up the conversation about the amount of Voters that participate and that I as I was listening that seemed to be a very strong Value Point position that you were presenting um if you're wanting to change the date of the election Etc then you have the ability to say okay where is the you know greatest opportunity greatest chance so I heard heard that um if if the statistics prove and I believe they do and you've looked at that um November um that gets the the nonpartisan people they're covered well I have actually had people ask me I'm nonperson can I vote in March and I say well yes you can because this is you know you know you're not going to vote for whoever is running for president but you can vote for what's in a popka and I reassured them over and over you're able to do that um the value proposition that I see is if most people think think or feel a certain way or have a process that I think the November you know election certainly was there um you know attorney Shepard had the or where it did allow for you know if you selected this it did allow um for the commission to determine when the election would be and it didn't stipulate you know August it didn't stipulate March it didn't stipulate November obviously we have presidential primaries um every four years and there it staggers so this is the one that it staggers then in two years there won't be a presidential primary so maybe it's not as a big of a deal to the local people in a popka but um you know I think if you felt like you were going to change something and you wanted to get to a certain date I like November because it's standard and if you weren't as comfortable with that then have it be where you make a determination when that is I'm not suggesting that you won't determine March August or November anyway but it's just just a thought August is summer no one comes out well I summer you know that people are in the summer mood in August yeah anybody else okay so so just quickly are we we considering to put November in in this youall tell me but the all all I care about in terms of here is it's not December so if you say put it as November fine if you say let us have the decision to make and again once that's in the amendment someone didn't ask me this question but I should go ahead and answer it because it might St strike you later I should have asked this which is well if you don't have a specific starter in time U because you can change the election based on qualifying blah blah blah well if that's in the charter then that's the expectation of the voter and therefore also the expectation of the candidate but if it's not in there and there is a specific expectation that's what you can't go around so that's why the or proposition that was Mr mock mentioned is a possibility it would not affect existing terms and people who got elected it would be subject to whenever the term is over around four years based on when we set the election as our convenience to do the biggest issue that second one which we learned from this year earlier and have said I've seen in other places it gets past us on the calendar it says six months we're now at 4 or three and we forgot to do the ordinance and then we are subject to somebody saying well we didn't have enough time or we didn't you know whatever and so so that's why if you said what is the downfall of that freedom it's that you got to make sure you remember the date excuse me but but other than that one other thing I would mention in reference to the comments of the public um there was a specific question about well how do we if we disagree with you how do we solve that well the obvious answer is that's what elections are for um that if the question is what happens before the election if we disagree with you um there is a section we haven't gotten there that's why you not it's not on the tip dripping off your tongues but in section five we will have it next time called initiative and it allows the voters to put together ordinances by petition bring them to you and ask you to adopt them and if you don't take them to the voters to vote on so you have that as well and it's it can be quicker than the next election if you choose to do that so it's it's just another check or balance if you want to talk about that well commissioner Vasquez as well thank you for that um we had discussed just parking lotting this on the side to get a little more feedback on dates things like that just to make sure there's a comfort level okay unless you think was no no I just was asking was it your it's in the parking lot yes it's okay so unless you have anything for me uh I'm happy to say good night well one one one thing unless somebody else has got something I I um as everybody knows yesterday Wednesday the absentee ballots dropped for this election and there was a a post on the apopa citizens for honest government and I wanted Cliff to go over it obviously need to try to stay out of this as much as I can but I thought because of the timeliness of this post that uh and some people have been asking around about I wanted Cliff to weigh in on that sure I I I will start by saying I've not read the post but it has been brought to my attention from a number of different folks um do you know about this is this right I got I started getting phone calls about it yesterday and I said no that that hasn't happened the gist of the post I'm led to believe I didn't I didn't even know the we I don't know what's on Facebook I'm not not sure where it's at but it is essentially that a candidate for the purpose I guess he doesn't mind he's here Mr mock uh has been disqualified by the state of Florida or through some mechanism because he currently serves on the planning board and therefore he can't run for office that's the gist of what I'm told the post says if I'm off please forgive me but that's the gist of it that he's disqualified and the reason that that is so obviously false on its face is a the state has no power to do that where it's a local election it's cover by the municipality and our election supervisor clerk is sitting in this chair and if she didn't do it it didn't happen and the only way that happens is with the court challenge which has not been filed to my knowledge and if it had been there would be a trial it be a hearing it it'd have to be in Rapid succession which they are they're expedited but but that's it's it's not a thing that the state takes you off the ballot even if it were true that he was ineligible that requires a challenge once he has qualified for office which he did so that's the facts just to be sure though I called Bill cows not recognizing or remembering that he retired two weeks ago but he was nice enough to return my call and direct me to a guy named Steve Hines who is the essentially supervisor of election interim whatever and I said uh Mr Hines I I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this but I want to be able to say that I spoke to somebody in your office today is this true is this happen he said it is pants on fire false Malarkey was another word he used so it is not true there's been no disqualification of any candidate on this ballot and again for a benefit anybody listening it would only happen with court action that's how it goes thank you Cliff with that we'll close Hold On Let's uh choose our next date when are we meeting again March do you want to do the one after that then too uh wait meeting let's just let's just wait till March let's not get too far ahead we did two last time before you hit that g wait wait wait what's the pleasure of the board what what day for March I I prefer to wait till March and set the date I want to get that far ahead commissioner nessa's point we set the last time two meetings forward so well when is it in March March is that mid meeting so March 13th March 13th hold on a second City Char I don't see why we wouldn't just do the same thing trying to do so then for April let's have it so whoever you know passed the election let's do it for April so we have April so March 13 is the city Charter and then April did you say March 15 13 13 okay and then um April let's set a date for April I think the the 10th would be most logical because it's that mid Wednesday between the two meetings okay so then that would be the city Charter on April 10th okay both not available today so that the 10th should be if I'm not mistaken a parking lot Mr Smith stud is not available that okay so what's another date on that week that weekend because that's the midweek what date are you available that week I'm not available any more to the week of the 22nd okay um [Music] convenient all right we can do the 23rd all right so um 23rd yeah yes no what about the I guess we can do the 16th my last my last official meeting is the 17th that's why I'm making that's why I make those comments okay so oh my apologies um but it's a pleasure of the board do we do a second one in March then 26 27 28th is that enough time for you to I just need I need a date I can check and if I'm open I'll do it just I just need to know what date I'm check understood March 27th okay March all right let's while we're on it let's see the 13th well I mean it's it's already on here for Charter re for the 13th and so that what's the next one you want me to check the 27th well the the thing being right so the March 13th meeting we're going to get through the last two articles right and then we have a parking lot I don't think you would want to be abbreviated in terms of a cycle to try and get the next meeting going because after the six articles that's going to be really where kind he's going to get a better clear understanding of what the the council's temperature is to really start putting pen to paper about what he has to do well how about the third of April then which right after city council mean if you want to make it along so the first so the first uh the first city council meeting is April 3rd right we can do and then third one is the 17 that will work for me April 3D just aend to the end of the meeting okay yeah we have the afternoon apka meeting yeah and uh yeah I'm free that day okay okay so we're going to do that for three April 3rd at after city council will set it for five you know may or may not have a gap but set it for five and try to make that work got it all right sense okay that yeah close public he you said that