[00:00:01]
I'M GOING TO CALL A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.
[CALL TO ORDER]
THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IS GOING TO BE LED BY PHIL, BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE WANT TO SAY, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU.HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DEAR PHIL, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU AND MANY MORE.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT HIM ANYMORE, BUT THANK YOU ALL.
I APPRECIATE IT. OK, LET'S STAND.
PLEASE, EVERYONE, PLEASE RISE.
FACE THE FLAG. ISD FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES.
TERESA, I'LL CALL. MR. CAPOTE HERE, MR. WEINBERG, YOU'RE MR. DELGADO. MR. MYERS. MR. MACLEOD. MR. MORE. MR. JONES. TO JORDAN, I MEAN, SORRY, MR. JORDAN, MR. JORDAN CHANDLER MR. PAR. THE MS. MIRAGE. ADOPTION OF MINUTES THAT EVERYBODY GET TO READ IT, I'M NEED A MOTION FOR THAT
[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
SECOND SESSION. I BET.HAVE IT. UM, BEFORE WE GO INTO PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF ESTABLISH IT REALLY QUICK FOR TODAY AND FOR FUTURE MEETINGS, OUR VICE CHAIR, PHIL WEINBERG, WILL BE KEEPING ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE SPEAKER ORDER, WHETHER US, THE COMMISSIONERS OR THE RESIDENTS.HE IS THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE CALLED.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ANY ARTICLES, DIRECT THEM TO ME AND I'LL HAVE THE CHARTER OFFICERS ANSWER THEM FOR.
YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ATTENTION BECOMES THE CHAIR AND WHEN WE HAVE, YOU WANT TO SPEAK. RAISE YOUR HAND AND PHIL WILL ACKNOWLEDGE YOU.
ALLOW ALL SPEAKERS TO GET THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS ACROSS.
AND LET'S BE COURTEOUS WITH ONE ANOTHER, AND I THINK THAT'S A NORM THAT HAS FOLLOWED MEETINGS. WITH THAT PUBLIC COMMENTS, ANYTHING TO ADD, BILL.
YEAH. I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION AS THE MEETINGS PROGRESSED AFTER SOMETHING HAS BEEN ADDRESSED AND PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT AND YOU HAVE YOUR VOTE AT THE AT THIS MEETING.
WHAT IF THERE WAS QUESTIONED LATER THAT YOU CAME BACK? BUT WAS THERE ANY WAY OF READDRESS TO BRING IT BACK? I WAS WATCHING YOUR BYLAWS.
SO WHAT WAS THE CAPABILITY TO REDRESS AFTER AFTER A VOTE HAS BEEN PASSED? BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS BEFORE WHERE? WELL, WE VOTED ON THAT ONE LAST TIME.
BUT SINCE THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ITEM, WHAT I DIDN'T SEE ANY MECHANISM FOR REDRESS OUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAD TO.
ANY ITEM THAT THE COMMISSION VOTES ON CAN ALWAYS BE BROUGHT BACK AND BE RECONSIDERED, ESPECIALLY IF ANYTHING IS.
SOMEBODY WANTS TO BRING UP ANY ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE FROM EITHER THE COMMISSION OR THE PUBLIC, SO THERE'S ALWAYS THAT OPTION.
THEY CAN'T. I JUST WANT TO MAKE.
SORRY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE ON THE PROCESS IF WE'RE DEALING WITH ONE SECTION.
IS THERE PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THAT ONE SECTION, IS THERE ONLY PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THE BEGINNING OR CAN IT BE AT THE END? HOW DOES THAT WORK WITH EACH ITEM? YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON JUST KIND OF ANYTHING RELATED TO THE CHARTER CAN BE DONE UNDER THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AND THEN INDIVIDUALS CAN COMMENT ON EACH ITEM AS IT IS BEFORE IT IS CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION.
SO THERE'S ALWAYS AN OPEN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO STEP UP AND SAY, OK.
OKAY. IN TERMS OF THE REVIEW, ARE WE GOING IN LINE BY LINE HERE OR ARE WE BECAUSE WE READ IT AT HOME? HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO EACH ITEM? WITHIN THREE, OH, ONE, TWO THREE LIKE THAT, OK?
[00:05:01]
AND WE COULD SAY NO, THAT.WE'RE ONLY GOING TO STICK TO THE ONES THAT WE REALLY WANT TO DISCUSS, THE ONES THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS, WHICH JUST IT'S A DONE DEAL IN A SENSE.
GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. I HAVE A QUESTION IN READING THROUGH.
THE SECTIONS THAT WE WERE ASSIGNED.
COUNCIL MEMBER. AS FAR AS I KNOW FROM.
DICTIONARIES THAT I'VE REVIEWED, COUNCIL MEMBER IS NOT A WORD.
MY QUESTION IS, IS THIS? SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO FLORIDA, IS THIS SOME FORM OF STATE OF THE ART USAGE IN FLORIDA BECAUSE EACH TIME I SEE IT, IT'S COUNCIL MEMBER, IT'S NOT A WORD.
I LOOK IT UP AND IT'S NOT A WORD.
SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THAT'S IN THERE DELIBERATELY OR IT'S JUST AN ERROR THAT'S BEEN MISSED.
IT'S VERY MUCH DELIBERATELY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, WHETHER SOMETIMES STATUTE CASE LAW, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS MEMBERS OF COUNCIL OR COUNCIL MEMBER.
[NEW BUSINESS]
ANY DISCUSSIONS ON SECTION THREE POINT ZERO ONE FORM OF GOVERNMENT? YOU KNOW THAT THE CITY OF PALM BAY IS A CITY MANAGER, COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT.OK. UM, SECTION TWO IS 3.0 TO CITY COUNCIL AND COMPOSITION.
I. SECTION THREE POINT THREE COMPENSATION, ANY COMMENTS THERE? MR. CHAIR, YES.
UM. AFTER REVIEWING THIS ON THE COMPENSATION PACKAGE, THAT'S I LOOKED AT THIS AND I SAW WHAT I DID IS I COMPARED THE CITY OF PALM BAY, OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES IN POPULATION, AND I LOOKED AT SOME AREAS LIKE PALM BAY'S SIXTEENTH IN POPULATION IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND I LOOKED AT SOME OTHER CITIES CLEARWATER, LEHIGH ACRES AND DEL RAY.
AND IN TERMS OF THEIR COMPENSATION RATE, WE'RE AT TWENTY THREE AND 12, I BELIEVE.
TWENTY THREE FOR THE MAYOR, 12 FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
OTHER CITIES ARE AT TWENTY SIX AND TWENTY TWO, THIRTY EIGHT AND THIRTY FOUR, THIRTY AND TWENTY FOUR. SO MY PROPOSAL HERE IS TO INCREASE THE RATE FROM THE MAYOR FROM TWENTY TO TWENTY FIVE AND FROM COUNCIL FROM 10 TO 20.
THAT WOULD BRING IT MORE COMPARABLE TO EVEN CITIES THAT ARE OF LESSER POPULATION THAT WOULDN'T EVEN BRING IT UP WHEN I LOOKED AT CITIES THAT ARE LIKE.
POPULATION IN THE STATE SOMETIMES JUMPS DRASTICALLY.
UM, SO I WAS LOOKING AT THIS PROPOSAL JUST TRYING TO INCREASE THE RATES OF SOMETHING FAIRLY COMPARABLE TO WHAT OTHER CITIES IN THE STATE HAVE.
ANY COMMENTS THAT MR. MACLEOD, MR. CHAIR? I ALSO DID SOME REVIEW AND SOME COMPARISONS.
AND I WOULD I WOULD AGREE WITH FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBER THAT PALM BAY IS.
COMPENSATION FOR ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR IS BELOW THE LEVEL COMMENSURATE WITH ITS SIZE AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
I DID SIMILAR CALCULATIONS THAT I CAME UP WITH THE SAME.
THE NUMBERS ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND I AS I TOOK THE AVERAGE FOR THE STATE. AND AVERAGE IS ABOUT 30000.
YOU KNOW, FOR COUNCIL MEMBER, SO WE'RE WAY BELOW IT.
[00:10:03]
AND I ALSO FEEL THAT GIVEN THAT WE'RE GROWING RESPONSIBILITIES THAT ARE INCREASING, THAT IT WOULD BE WISE TO RAISE THE COMPENSATION, I THINK THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE MORE.ZERO PARTICIPATION BY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR IF THEY WERE COMPENSATED IN A FAIR MANNER CONSISTENT WITH.
OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS IN THE STATE.
MR CHANDLER. MR. MAYOR, MR. CHAIR, EXCUSE ME NOT TO BE REPETITIVE, BUT ALSO DID SOME DUE DILIGENCE IN REFERENCE TO THIS PARTICULAR SECTION OF THE CHARTER.
JUST FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I LOOKED AT WAS ON A STATE LEVEL, BUT ALSO LOOKING AT THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES SURVEY THAT WAS DONE IN TWENTY TWENTY, I THINK, WAS ABOUT FOUR HUNDRED PLUS CITIES THAT WERE SURVEYED, AND THERE WERE SOME POPULATIONS THAT WERE ABOUT 40 50 THOUSAND THAT WERE STILL ABOVE WHAT THIS CURRENT COUNCIL IS BEING PAID.
SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS, BUT I DO THINK THAT THE RATE FOR THE MAYOR IS A LITTLE LOW.
I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP THAT 10 CENTS PER CAPITA DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL. AND MR., YOU WERE YOU WERE THE MAYOR NOT TOO LONG AGO, AND I'D LIKE TO ASK, HOW MANY HOURS DID YOU PUT IN AS AS A MAYOR OF BOMBAY? WOW. ON THE WEEK, ON A WEEKLY BASIS BASIS, I WAS HERE EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY, SO I COULD SAY ABOUT 30 PLUS.
AND THAT'S NOT INCLUDING ALL THE TRAVEL THAT I DID THAT I HAD TO SCALE BACK.
THERE WAS A POINT WHEN I BECAME MAYOR THAT A LOT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WEREN'T AS ENGAGING IN REGARDS TO THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES.
THE I SAID ON THE FLOOR, THE LEAGUE OF CITIES BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
I CHAIRED DIFFERENT COMMITTEES.
I WAS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ON THE MAYORS BOARD.
BRING A LOT OF THINGS TO BOMBAY, BECAUSE ALL THE THINGS THAT I WAS ENGAGED IN, MY PHILOSOPHY WAS THAT I WAS A STRONG PROPONENT FOR THE RACE.
A LOT OF PEOPLE CRITICIZE ME DURING THAT TIME BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THAT I WANTED A RACE FOR MYSELF. I STARTED AT FOUR THOUSAND OR FOUR THOUSAND AS A COUNCILMAN, THEN WENT TO A THOUSAND AS A MAYOR, AND I DID MOST OF THE TIME AS A MAYOR AT EIGHT THOUSAND.
IT WASN'T UNTIL TWENTY SIXTEEN THAT THE RATE CHANGED, SO I REALLY DIDN'T GET THE BENEFIT THAT EVERYBODY THOUGHT, BUT I WAS KIND OF LOOKING AHEAD.
I WAS LOOKING AHEAD FOR PEOPLE LIKE JORDAN OR LIKE KENNY OR ANY PERSON THAT WANTS TO DO THIS JOB. WHY DO PEOPLE LIKE US HAVE A TENDENCY? BECAUSE I'VE SEEN A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES GETTING TROUBLE IS BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING PAID SO LOW THAT THEY TRY TO COMPENSATE.
AND IN LIFE, AS YOU KNOW, AS PASTORS, IT IS EASY, EASY TO FALL.
AND GETTING TO THINGS YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO AND HAS HAPPENED TO COUNCIL MEMBERS HAS HAPPENED TO MAYORS.
I THINK THAT COMPENSATING SOMEONE FOR THE JOB THEY'RE DOING, IT'S IT'S THE NUMBER ONE THING THAT RESIDENTS SHOULD THINK ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHY OF YESTERYEAR, THAT PEOPLE SHOULD VOLUNTEER TO DO THIS. THAT'S OUT THE DOOR.
MILLENNIALS AND THE FUTURE GENERATIONS ARE NOW GOING TO DO ANYTHING FOR FREE.
SO YOU HAVE TO COME TO THAT REALIZATION THAT YOU NEED TO COMPENSATE YOUR COUNCIL AND YOU NEED TO COMPENSATE YOUR MAYOR ACCORDINGLY.
BECAUSE IF YOU ALLOW COUNCIL TO ENGAGE AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT LOOKING FOR FOR MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE, THEY START PAYING MORE ATTENTION TO THE JOB THEY HAVE TO DO.
AS MAYOR, WHAT I DID, I SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? SORRY, IF IT SOUNDS COCKY.
I SAID I'M GOING TO SHOW THE RESIDENTS HOW THIS JOB IS DONE.
I'M GOING TO SHOW THE RESIDENTS ACTUALLY HOW THIS JOB IS DONE, AND I PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO IT, AND I HAVE WITNESSES HERE THAT KNOW HOW MUCH TIME I PUT INTO THIS.
AND THE REASON I DID IT IS BECAUSE I WANTED TO SHOW FUTURE MAYORS THAT THIS IS NOT A PART TIME JOB. EVERYBODY LOOKS TO YOU FOR DIRECTION.
NOBODY COMES HERE AND NO DISRESPECT TO PRESENT CITY MANAGER OR FORMER CITY MANAGER.
THEY DON'T WANT TO TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER.
THEY EITHER WANT TO TALK TO THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE BUCK STOPS.
DEVELOPERS, RESIDENTS, THAT'S WHO THEY WANT TO TALK TO, AND THEN I HAVE TO DIRECT THE QUESTIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK OR CITY ATTORNEY, SO THE DEMAND FOR MY TIME WAS
[00:15:08]
AT ONE POINT.THAT'S WHY I WAS LIKE CONSTANTLY ALL OVER THE STATE, TRAVEL TO TO D.C., TRAVEL TO CALIFORNIA, TRAVEL TO TEXAS, TRAVEL EVERYWHERE BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN I STARTED MEETING PEOPLE AND THAT'S WHEN I WAS ABLE TO BRING THINGS TO PALM BAY.
THAT'S WHEN I WAS ABLE TO BRING STUFF TO PALM BAY AND ALLOW PALM BAY TO GROW, BUT I NEEDED TO SHOW THE RESIDENTS AND COUNCIL THAT IT WASN'T JUST ABOUT THE TRIP BECAUSE BY THE TIME THAT I HAD DINNER, I WANTED TO SLEEP BECAUSE THE NEXT DAY I WAS UP BY SIX O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING BECAUSE I WAS IN ANOTHER MEETING AND SO ON AND SO ON.
SO, YES, VERY BUSY AND MAY ADDRESS ANOTHER QUESTION TO OUR CITY MANAGER.
AS FAR AS AS A TIME, I REALIZING THAT MOST INTERACTION, I WOULD ASSUME, IS BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND THE CITY MANAGER.
BUT THE QUESTION FOR THE CITY COUNCILMAN I KNOW THEY ALSO INTERFACE WITH THE CITY AS FAR AS TIME IS CONCERNED.
IS IT IS IT EQUAL TO OR HALF OF? I KNOW THAT'S A REAL GUESSTIMATE, BUT BUT A SENSE MORE OR LESS WORD THAT GOES.
SURE. I WOULD I WOULD SAY THAT THE MAYOR HAS, IN MY EXPERIENCE, HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE ONE WHO SPENDS MORE TIME THAN THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THAT'S, I THINK, JUST THE NATURE OF THERE'S THERE'S MORE CEREMONIAL THINGS THE MAYOR GETS CALLED INTO AND THERE'S THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR.
JUST MORE FACE OF THE CITY OF REPRESENTATION TYPE THINGS, UM.
BUT I WOULD SAY THAT A LOT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS IN EACH ONE MAKES IT WHAT THEY WANT IT TO BE, RIGHT, BUT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
FOR EXAMPLE, THEY'RE ALL IN THE SAME DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR A COMPLAINT FROM RESIDENTS, SO CITY COUNCIL AT PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, DAWG, EVERYBODY GETS THAT AND A LOT OF THEM WILL.
MORE THAN ONE, WE'LL CALL THE PERSON, RESPOND BACK, COME TO ME FOR MORE INFORMATION.
SOMETIMES I'M THE ONE GIVING THEM THE INFORMATION.
SOMETIMES THEY ARE UM, I COULDN'T GIVE YOU A HARD AND FAST PERCENTAGE, I THINK THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO ME FOR A MAYOR TO BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT THEY ALL CONTRIBUTE A LOT AND THEY ALL HAVE THEIR OWN INITIATIVES.
AND IF THEY'RE VERY ACTIVE AND ENGAGED, THEN THEY'RE VERY THEY'RE VERY BUSY ALL THE TIME, IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER THEIR FULL TIME JOB IS.
I MEAN, I WOULD SEE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO ADD TO THAT, BUT I THINK THAT THEY'RE ALL VERY, VERY BUSY. THEY'RE NOT.
MY VIEWPOINT AT THIS POINT IS IS THAT I LIKE THE THE WAY WE HAVE IT ALREADY ESTABLISHED AS FAR AS PER CAPITA BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT AS THE CITY GROWS, SO INCREASES THE RESPONSIBILITY AND THE EFFORT.
SO NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THAT.
USUALLY, PEOPLE GET A COST OF LIVING INCREASE.
YET FOR SIX YEARS, THERE IS NO COST OF LIVING INCREASE FOR THOSE IN YOUR POSITIONS OR THOSE IN THE POSITIONS OF CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY SET.
SO I LIKE THE PER CAPITA SO THAT AS IT INCREASES, SO SO DOES THE RENUMERATION FOR THE EFFORT. SO, SO I WOULD BE UP TO MAYBE A 50 PERCENT HIKE ON BOTH SIDES SO THAT THE MAYOR GOES FROM 20 TO 30 AND AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM 10 TO 15 AS A THAT GROWS PER CAPITA. CHANDLER.
THE TIME CONSUMPTION FOR COUNCILMAN AND WOMEN, WE ARE PET PROJECTS THAT THEY'RE INVOLVED IN, AND THAT TAKES ADDITIONAL TIME TO FOLLOW THROUGH AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON, AND THAT TAKES PLACE BEHIND THE SCENES SO THOSE HOURS ARE NOT SEEN BY THE PUBLIC.
ONCE AGAIN, NOT TO BE REPETITIVE, BUT I AGREE WITH MR. DELGADO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF INCREASING THE 15 TO 20 THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, CURRENT PER CAPITA IS 10 CENTS.
SO IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A 50 PERCENT HIKE ON THE MAYOR, I WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND DOING A 50 PERCENT HIKE ON THE COUNCIL MEMBER, SO ONCE AGAIN CAPPING THE MAYOR AT 30 CENTS PER CAPITA. AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AT 20 CENTS PER CAPITA.
AND ANOTHER THING IN DOING SOME RESEARCH, A LOT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, OBVIOUSLY, AND MAYORS IN THEIR PARTICULAR CHARTERS ARE CAPPED AT A CERTAIN SALARY.
THERE WAS ALSO SOMETHING INTERESTING, AND I DON'T WANT TO REALLY GET DOWN THIS RABBIT HOLE, BUT I MIGHT JUST THROW IT OUT THERE JUST IN CASE.
SOME OF THE COUNCILS ALSO IN THEIR CHARTERS HAD WHERE?
[00:20:06]
PRETTY MUCH THE SALARY OF THE COUNCIL, IF WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT REMUNERATION OR THE THREE PERCENT COLA THAT CITY STAFF GETS EVERY YEAR AND NOT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, SOME COUNCILS ALSO LEFT IT UP TO ORDINANCE RIGHT AND IT WAS STRICTLY BASED OFF OF WHAT FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES DID IN TERMS OF THE SALARIES TO MAKE THOSE SALARIES COMPARABLE TO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.BUT IT WAS STRICTLY LEFT UP TO COUNCIL IN THE FORM OF CREATING THEIR SALARIES BASED ON ORDINANCE. SO. ANYONE ELSE? OK. GO AHEAD.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING AS FAR AS THERE WAS, THERE'S THE MENTION OF THE PER CAPITA. THAT IS HOW SALARY COUNCIL SALARIES WERE SET INITIALLY.
AFTER THAT, IT IS BASED ON THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX ANNUALLY.
SO OF COURSE, YOU CAN MODIFY THE PER CAPITA, BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THEY STILL RECEIVE MOST OF THE TIME.
SINCE 2016, COUNCIL HAS BEEN RECEIVING AN INCREASE BASED ON THE CPI.
BUT SO THAT'S NOT BASED ON THIS, THE PER CAPITA EVERY YEAR.
THAT'S WHY I WANTED PHIL TO INTERJECT.
YEAH, PHIL WAS ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WHEN THE INCREASE HAPPENED, AND HE HAS THAT INFORMATION THAT HE COULD RELATE THE PROCESS THAT THEY WENT THROUGH TO GET THERE.
LET ME LET ME JUST SPEAK ON THAT MS. CHAIRMAN. SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP, AS SOME OF YOU WELL KNOW, I'M SURE THE 2016 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION I WAS A STRONG PROPONENT OF OF INCREASING THE SALARIES FOR THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS AS THE MAYOR TALKED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT HE DEVOTED TO THE JOB. I I'M VERY, VERY MUCH AWARE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMAN DEVOTE TO THE JOB.
AND ONE OF MY REASONS FOR SUPPORTING THAT INCREASE IN 2016 WAS THE FACT THAT WITH WITH WHAT THE REMUNERATION WAS, IT WOULD RESTRICT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MAY OTHERWISE BE QUALIFIED TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL.
IT WOULD RESTRICT THEM DOING SO BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A FULL TIME JOB.
JUST ABOUT EVERYONE ON CITY COUNCIL HAS A FULL TIME JOB.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, TO TAKE THE TIME AWAY FROM THEIR NORMAL WORK THAT THEY NEEDED TO DEVOTE TO TO SERVING ON CITY COUNCIL AND MEETINGS AND AND OTHER CITY BUSINESS, IT REALLY, REALLY RESTRICTS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO CAN APPLY FOR THE JOB AND WHO REALLY WHO ARE WILLING TO DO THE JOB.
SO, SO I WAS A STRONG PROPONENT OF INCREASING IT AT THAT TIME.
NOW, LIKE SOME OF YOU, I ALSO DID SOME RESEARCH ON THIS AND AND THE CONSENSUS OF MANY MUNICIPALITIES IN FLORIDA IS THEIR WORDING AS FAR AS SALARY GOES RATHER THAN, I WOULD NOT WANT TO GO AHEAD AND SET A SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
BUT LIKE YOU SAID, WHAT MANY MUNICIPALITIES HAVE, THEY HAVE A PARAGRAPH IN THEIR CITY CHARTER SAYING THAT THE SALARY FOR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH SALARIES AS PORTRAYED BY THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES FOR CITIES OF COMPARABLE SIZE.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE NO, PROBABLY BETTER THAT WOULD BE THE FAIREST WAY TO DETERMINE THEIR COMPENSATION IS TO TAKE THE AVERAGE OF FROM THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES FOR CITIES OR THAT COMPARABLE SIZE AND AND BASE THEIR REMUNERATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ON THAT YET AGAIN.
SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
NUMBER ONE, IF IT HAS CHANGED OVER THE YEARS, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT SALARIES ARE AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT THE INFORMATION AND THE NUMBER TWO. THE PROBLEM WITH THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS LEAGUE OF NATIONS LEAGUE LEADERS, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS SAYING I KNOW THAT.
BUT BUT THERE'S JUST SO MANY VARIABLES.
I MEAN, COST OF LIVING IN MIAMI, IT'S NOT THE SAME AS HERE.
THE COST OF HERE IS NOT THE SAME AS ORLANDO.
AND IF IF WE START JUST TAKING SOMEONE ELSE'S VIEWPOINT AND WE'RE TRYING TO APPLY IT TO OUR CITY, IT DOESN'T.
IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT APPLES WITH APPLES BECAUSE IT COULD BE A LOT HIGHER. THEN IF YOU WERE LIVING IN CALABAR AND THEY WERE GOING BY THAT THAT.
THAT POSITION, WE'D HAVE PROBABLY AN ADDITIONAL 500 PEOPLE WHEN IT MOVE TO HOLOPOGON AND RUN FOR, FOR ME, FOR MAYOR, JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD MEAN A FANTASTIC INCREASE IN SALARIES.
SO SO I'M NOT SURE WE CAN APPLY THAT STANDARD FOR THE CASE OF PALM BAY.
PALM BAY HAS ITS OWN CULTURE, ITS OWN.
THE THE AMOUNT OF THE AVERAGE INCOME OF EACH FAMILY MAY BE LOWER THAN OTHER PLACES.
[00:25:05]
I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK IT'S HIGHER IN MOST PLACES, WHICH WHICH IS.SO THE POINT BEING, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN QUALIFY THAT I'D LIKE TO START OFF WITH, WHAT ARE THEY MAKING? AND THEN AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A QUALITY DECISION ON THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE INFORMATION THAT'S GIVEN.
SO THE CURRENT SALARY OF THE MAYOR IS TWENTY THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY TWO DOLLARS AND FIFTY ONE CENTS, AND FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER ELEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND NINETY ONE DOLLARS AND TWENTY FIVE CENTS.
OK. AND THAT'S BASED ON WHAT PER CAPITA? NOW THAT'S BASED ON THEY FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR, THEY RECEIVED A THREE PERCENT SALARY INCREASE BASED ON THE CPI.
OK. AND LET ME RESPOND TO SOME OF YOUR COMMENTS.
FIRST OF ALL, THE SALARIES UNDER THIS WHAT I WHAT I PROPOSED WOULD NOT BE COMPARED TO TO MIAMI. IT WOULD NOT BE COMPARED TO ORLANDO AGAIN.
THE KEY TO THAT, AS IT WOULD BE CITIES OF COMPARABLE SIZE BASED ON POPULATION.
SO CERTAINLY, WE DON'T HAVE A POPULATION OF ORLANDO.
WE CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE A POPULATION OF MIAMI AND SO ON.
I DON'T KNOW. I DO BECAUSE I SAY THAT BECAUSE LET'S SAY THE CITY OF MIAMI, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A CITY OF MIAMI, IT IT.
WE SAY MIAMI, BUT IT INCLUDES 10 OTHER CITIES.
THAT ARE THERE, AND SO THEY MAY THE SMALLER CITIES MAY BE COMPARABLE, BUT THEY STILL HAVE THE STANDARD OF LIVING AS MIAMI.
A. SO TO CUT YOU OFF, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU'RE REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHAT I DID UNDERSTAND. BUT GO AHEAD, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND EXPLAIN IT.
OK. YOU BASE IT ON THE POPULATION.
AND IT'S NOT BASED ON THE POPULATION OF OTHER CITIES BASED ON YOUR OWN POPULATION, IF WE WERE A CITY OF FIFTEEN THOUSAND, THE PER CAPITA WOULD BE BASED ON A CITY OF FIFTEEN THOUSAND. YEAH, THAT'S THE NUMBER YOU'RE YOU'RE LOCKED IN AT AT THE SIZE OF YOUR CITY.
AND YET AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS IS FOR AN EXAMPLE, YOU CAN WE HAVE ONE HUNDRED AND.
TWENTY THOUSAND. THERE MAY BE A SMALLER 120000 PEOPLE CITY RIGHT NEXT TO MIAMI.
IT'S JUST A SMALLER CITY, YET THEIR STANDARD OR THE INCOME FOR THAT CITY WOULD BE A LOT GREATER OR IF I WERE TO TAKE VERO AND VERO BEACH WITH FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I DON'T LIVE THERE. A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM RETIRED THERE THAT HAVE A LOT OF MONEY, IT MAY BE THE SAME SIZE.
YET THEIR INCOME WOULD BE FAR GREATER THAN A CITY OF FAMILIES HERE IN PALM BAY.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, PHIL, BASED ON THAT STATEMENT YOU MADE.
DO YOU HAVE A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF WHAT THE INCOME WOULD BE? NO. YES. I DON'T HAVE THAT SPECIFIC NUMBER.
WE'D HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, WE'D HAVE TO DO THE RESEARCH ON THAT.
BUT BUT TO RESPOND TO WHAT AGAIN, WHAT KEN BROUGHT UP, I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND YEAH, THERE ARE CITIES THAT HAVE A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING AND COST OF LIVING IN THAT KIND OF THING.
BUT AGAIN, THIS WOULD NOT BE BASED ON COMPARING IT TO ONE CITY.
I MEAN, YOU MAY HAVE ONE CITY.
IT'S LIKE ANYTIME YOU DO AN AVERAGE VERSUS A MEDIAN IN ANYTHING, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME HIGH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME LOW.
SO IT WOULD BE A COMPARISON OF THOSE CITIES OF SIMILAR SIZE AND THEN YOU WOULD TAKE THE MEDIAN OF THAT RATHER THAN RATHER THAN LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, ONE ONE CITY THAT HAS A MUCH HIGHER COST OF LIVING. WELL, LOOK AT THE SALARIES FOR THE.
AND I THINK WE HAVE WE HAVE TWO PARTS HERE THAT ARE VERY VALID.
I'M HEARING WHAT YOU HAVE IS VERY VALID.
I THINK THE GREAT THERMOMETER WOULD BE WHAT KAY SAID.
LET'S NOT JUST PUT SOMETHING IN AND DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RESULT IS.
IF IF WE IF WE'RE GOING TO GO ON THE ROUTE OF.
THEN WHAT DOES THAT TRANSLATE TO WHEN IT'S APPLIED TO FLORIDA? SO IF YOU WERE TO APPLY IT AND THEN WE FIND OUT, OH, IT'S 50000 A YEAR? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, VERY POSSIBLY IT WON'T PASS BY THE VOTERS.
AT THE SAME TIME, IT MAY NOT EVEN PASS HERE, WE MIGHT BE SAYING THIRTY THOUSAND MIGHT BE SAYING THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND.
AND YET IF THE LEAGUE ESTIMATES IT AT FIFTY THOUSAND, THEN WE ALREADY KNOW HERE THAT THAT THAT STANDARD WOULDN'T APPLY TO PALM BAY BECAUSE WE MAY WE MAY FEEL HERE THAT THAT'S THAT'S GREAT, BUT IT'S NOT APPLICABLE HERE AND DON'T THINK THAT IT MIGHT PASS WITH THE
[00:30:03]
VOTERS IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHICH MEANS IT DIDN'T CHANGE AND WE'VE GOTTEN NOWHERE.SO I THINK KAY HAS A GREAT POINT IN THAT WE SHOULD FIND OUT IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT PROPOSAL THAT WE WE SHOULD FIND OUT WHAT DOES THAT TRANSLATE TO BEFORE WE JUST VOTE ON IT? YEAH, I THINK AGAIN, THAT WILL BE MY ONLY CONCERN BECAUSE I HEARD, YOU KNOW, THIRTY THOUSAND, I THINK WHAT THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF NATIONS LEAGUE, A CITY.
YOU KNOW, SO WHO KNOWS? SO I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A FORMULA THAT WE CAN COUNT ON BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT TRANSLATES FOR A BUDGET.
SO THE WORDING IS PRETTY BROAD.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF I'LL BE A HUNDRED PERCENT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WORDING, NOT KNOWING WHAT IT MEANS. LET ME INTERJECT, BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, WE'RE DISCUSSING COMPENSATION.
WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A FINAL VOTE TODAY, CORRECT? SO UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE WE'RE TRAVELING, WE'RE PASSING.
IF YOU GUYS WANT TO GO AND HOLD THIS ONE ON HOLD, WE COULD ALWAYS BRING IT BACK.
OK, DO YOU DO MORE RESEARCH LOCKING THE NUMBERS? THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE CHARTER OFFICES THAT YOU COULD SPEAK TO IF WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF WE GO, THE MAYOR GOES FROM TWENTY TO TWENTY FIVE.
FINANCIALLY, WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF GOES 10 TO 20? WHAT DOES THAT TRANSLATE INTO A SALARY? THE DECISION IS NOT GOING TO BE MADE TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY I COULD TELL IT'S EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN PASSION IN REGARDS TO WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THIS.
BUT DO YOUR RESEARCH? MM HMM. AND THEN WE'LL TAKE IT FROM THERE.
I THINK WE HAVE TO FIRST UNDERSTAND WHAT'S IN THE CHARTER.
BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WHAT'S IN THE CHARTER IS INADEQUATE BASED UPON CHANGES.
SO WHETHER WE USE LEGAL STATUS OR WHETHER WE USE A MORE PRACTICAL TERM FOR A CITY OF OUR SIZE, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT ELEVEN THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO THOUSAND IS, WALI SAID.
WHAT IS NECESSARY, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WORKING FOR THE CITY THAT HAVE SALARIES MORE THAN THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL.
THAT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT IN TERMS OF PRACTICALITY.
I JUST HAD A QUESTION IF WE WERE TO USE THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING ON THE AVERAGE OF THE LEAGUE OF CITIES OF COMPARABLE SIZE.
WOULD THAT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IF THEY ARE STRONG MAYOR OR IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE NOT? WELL, THE RESEARCH THAT I DID, YOU KNOW, I LOOKED AT CITIES THAT DID NOT HAVE STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. WITH CITIES WE USE AS YOUR RESEARCH.
THAT SHOULD BE YOUR RESEARCH. NO, NO, I'M TALKING IF WE DECIDED TO USE IT, WOULD THAT THEN BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO LIST AS A CRITERIA LIKE WE CAN ONLY USE CERTAIN? I DID THAT, I DID THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT MY NUMBERS IN COMPARING WHY I CAME UP WITH WHAT I DID IN TERMS OF INCREASING IT BY THE THE NUMBER THAT I DID AND I LOOKED AT AGAIN CITIES THAT WERE HIGHER AND THEN CITIES THAT WERE LOWER.
AND I LOOKED AT BOTH STRONG MAYOR AND NON.
AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THOSE THAT WERE STRONG MAYOR CITIES, THE DISCREPANCY WAS MUCH MORE VAST. HUGE, HUGE.
SO I WAS LOOKING AT THOSE THAT ARE IN THE SAME FORMAT THAT WE ARE HERE IN PALM BAY AND THE NUMBERS ARE FAIRLY CLOSE.
LIKE I MENTIONED, LEHIGH ACRES IS 38 30 FOR NUMBER 18, WHICH IS JUST A, YOU KNOW, WE'RE 16TH AND 18TH IS TWENTY SIX TO TWENTY TWO.
AND THEN IF, AS MR. DELGADO WAS MENTIONING, IF WE LOOK AT CITIES THAT ARE CLOSER TO A LARGER MUNICIPALITY THAT HAD A HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING EVEN A DELRAY BEACH, WHICH IS 61ST THERE, THEN AT 61ST AT WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AT 30 AND TWENTY FOUR.
SO THERE ARE MUCH SMALLER CITY AT 61, BUT THEN THEY WOULD BE REACHING WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT EVEN DISCUSSING.
AND WHAT ELSE, MR. CHANDLER? SO MR. CHAIR, BASED ON THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HAVING HERE.
CAN WE GIVE SOME DIRECTION TO STAFF TO, IN ESSENCE, COME UP WITH SOME COMPARISONS BASED ON THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES MODEL WITH A COMPARABLE SIZE OF COMPARABLE MUNICIPALITY SIZES, IN ADDITION TO THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS DRAFTED HERE BY MR. MOORE. GOOD.
WE WILL BRING IT BACK AND THERE WILL BE.
[00:35:03]
KNOWN AS UNDER OLD BUSINESS NEXT MEETING.DOES DO WE HAVE THE PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO SAY SOMETHING SINCE WE'RE MOVING, IF WE'RE MOVING ON? YEAH.
ONE THING YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER JUST FOR JUST SINCE YOU'RE GETTING READY TO GO, DO SOME MORE HOMEWORK.
INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT POPULATION AND COMPARING TO OTHER CITIES, TAKE A LOOK A PERCENTAGE OF AD VALOREM TAX BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF THE TAXING BASIS, THAT'S WHAT PAYS THE SALARY.
TAKE A LOOK AT THE AD VALOREM TAX FOR THE CITY WITHIN THAT WITHIN YOUR RANGE.
INSTEAD OF SAYING POPULATION, COULD YOU GET A HIGHLY DENSELY POPULATED AREAS THAT AREN'T GENERATING ANY REVENUE, BUT THE REVENUE IS WHAT PAYS THE SALARY? SO LET'S TAKE, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SAY LESS, I CAN SAY I CAN PUT IT OUT THERE.
TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE AD VALOREM TAXES, WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE THAT'S GOING TO GIVE THEM WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME? THEN YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING AS A TAX, AS THE TAX RATE CHANGES AND GOES UP AND DOWN BECAUSE DEPENDING ON SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO LOWER YOUR TAXES, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO RAISE YOUR TAXES. THAT MAKES THE GOVERNING BODY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HOW WELL THEIR CITY SUCCEEDS.
INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING AUTOMATICALLY, I KNOW THE CITY IS COLLAPSING, BUT WE GUARANTEED THEM THE MONEY. WELL, SORRY, GOVERNORS, YOU.
SO IT COMES OUT OF YOUR POCKETBOOK.
LET IT BE JUST THIS IS STRICTLY FOR FOOD, FOR THOUGHT.
MAYBE LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT BASED ON THEIR AD VALOREM INSTEAD OF THE.
POPULATION. OKAY, THANK YOU, BILL.
MR CHANDLER. ONCE AGAIN AND MR. NOT TO BE REPETITIVE HERE ONCE AGAIN, BUT FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT IT, THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITI SURVEY INCORPORATE IT WITHIN.
THOSE STUDIES ARE AS WELL THE AD VALOREM TAX.
LET'S INCLUDE IN THERE AS WELL. SO.
MS. MYERS. WANTED TO GO ON RECORD THAT I'M FOR THE INCREASE IN CASE THERE'S A VOTE LATER ON AND I'M NOT HERE, FOR THE RECORD.
YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU'VE RECORDED YOUR VOTE IN ABSENTIA JUST IN CASE.
BUT I THINK EVERYBODY HAS A VALID POINT AND I THINK THAT OUR CITY IS IS REALLY GROWING.
IN FACT, I SAW A STUDY THE OTHER DAY, AND MAYBE SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN IT THAT WHEN THEY MEASURE THE U-HAUL ONE WAY RENTALS THAT PALM BAY'S LIKE NUMBER TWO IN THE COUNTRY.
AND SO I THINK HIGHER SALARIES ATTRACTS GREATER TALENT AND IS IT'S WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CITY OVERALL. SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF WHATEVER THE CONSENSUS IS OF THE GROUP.
KEN? AND ONE LAST THING, JUST TO THROW A MONKEY WRENCH IN THERE, IF WE TALK ABOUT VACATIONS, IS THAT HERE IN COMPENSATION ALSO OR IS THAT SOMETHING? OTHER THAN, IN OTHER WORDS, I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO BE HERE EVERY OTHER WEEK AND THEN IN BETWEEN. IS THERE A POTENTIAL? AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD GO UNDER COMPENSATION OR NOT, BUT MAYBE ONE WEEK IN JULY THAT THERE'S NO MEETING.
AND AND THAT'S THAT'S THE TIME WHEN IT'S NOT THEY'RE NOT PENALIZED FOR NOT HAVING APPEARED AND THEY CAN ACTUALLY GO TAKE A VACATION AND SAY, I GET TO RELAX FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS JUST TO INTERJECT ON THAT BECAUSE I SAT ON COUNSEL.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD HAVE LOVED.
I KNOW THAT THE COUNTY, IF I'M ACCURATE, THE COUNTY HAS A SHUTDOWN PERIOD EITHER AS JULY OR LATE JUNE JUNE WITH NOT RIGHT.
RIGHT. YOU TAKE ONE MONTH AND THAT MONTH THERE IS BECAUSE THINGS CAN BE BROUGHT TO THE NEXT MONTH WHERE YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T DO ANY ANY COMMISSION BUSINESS.
SO I THINK THAT THAT'S AN ADDED PLUS BECAUSE THERE WERE PLENTY OF TIMES I WANTED TO TAKE VACATIONS, BUT IT WASN'T GOING TO HAPPEN AND THERE WAS NO MONTH THAT I COULD LIKE, REALLY. AND YOU'RE KIND OF TALKING TO YOUR SPOUSE AND YOUR SPOUSE IS, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TIME AND IT'S NOT HAPPENING? SO I I WOULD BE TOTALLY FOR THAT, EVEN THOUGH THAT I'M NOT SITTING THERE.
I WOULD BE TOTALLY FOR THAT BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IT FEELS.
DOES THAT GO UNDER COMP.? NO, NO. IT WOULD BE UNDER THREE POINT ZERO EIGHT PROCEDURES WHICH WILL BE GETTING TO THAT. YES, I WAS ABOUT TO SAY YOU WERE GOING TO GET INTO THAT.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPENSATION COMPENSATION.
YEAH, YEAH. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
MR. MOORE, COULD YOU REMIND US OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED IN TERMS OF THE COMPENSATION JUST SO THAT I? WHICH CITIES?
[00:40:02]
WHEN I LOOKED UP? RIGHT, RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU.REMEMBER THIS COMMISSION THAT ANYTHING THAT'S DISCUSSED HERE STAFF IS GOING TO MAKE COPIES AND PUT IT IN FRONT OF YOU.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, IF SOMEONE HAS BROUGHT FORTH SOMETHING TO THERESE, PATRICIA OR EVEN SUZANNE, ALL THAT INFORMATION.
ALL THAT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO YOU PRIOR TO THE MEETING, SO JUST.
JUST UNDERSTAND IT WHEN I'M WALKING IN HERE BLINDLY.
AND JUST LET ME REMIND YOU, GENTLEMEN AND LADIES, IF YOU IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, PLEASE JUST WAIT TILL YOU RECOGNIZE WHY THE CHAIR THAT WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE CALLING OUT CONSTANTLY. ONE OTHER THING, TOO, AS FAR AS IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DISCUSS AMONG YOURSELVES, YOU CAN'T DISCUSS IT PUBLICLY AND SO THAT WE ALL ARE PRIVY TO WHAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS. AND I SEE PATRICIA SHAKING HER HEAD YET.
REMEMBER THE SUNSHINE THAT THEY WERE GOING OVER? YOU CANNOT PRIVATELY HAVE A CONVERSATION.
EVEN SO, EVEN EVEN HERE, OF COURSE, ONCE YOU LEAVE HERE AGAIN, YOU'LL BE SHAKING YOUR HEAD. EXACTLY.
I'M USED TO HOLLERING WHAT I WAS INDICATING TO MR MOORE WAS THAT HE SHOULD HAVE PUT IN THE NUMERIC AMOUNT FOR THE PROPOSED INCREASES JUST SO WE WOULD KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TWENTY FOUR.
TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED.
SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS.
SO NEXT TIME. THAT'S THE SUGGESTION IF YOU HIT A NUMBER, GIVE THE ACTUAL SALARIES, THEN THIS UNDERSTOOD. SO NEXT TIME WE WALK INTO THIS, WE'RE JUST GOING TO MOVE FORWARD.
WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS BACK UP, SO.
I'M NOT GOING TO BEAT IT OVER THE HEAD ANYMORE.
NEXT IS SECTION THREE POINT ZERO FOR MAYOR AND DEPUTY MAYOR'S DUTIES, I BELIEVE.
IS THERE ANYTHING THERE? EXCUSE ME. NONE, NO.
OK. SECTION THREE POINT ZERO FIVE PROVISIONS.
OK. UH, SECTION THREE POINT SIX VACANCIES, THREE POINT ZERO FIVE THREE.
THERE WAS SOMETHING I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S OK. AS FAR AS SOMETHING, I WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT THAT HOLDING OTHER OFFICE, AS CURRENTLY STATED IN THEIR CHARTER UNDER 3.0 FIVE THREE A, IT SAYS NO FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL NOR ANY RELATIVE OF SUCH FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL SHALL HOLD ANY COMPENSATOR TO POINT OF CITY OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT UNTIL AT LEAST TWO YEARS AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THAT TERM. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, RATHER THAN JUST FORMER CURRENT OR FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A RELATIVE OF YOUR CURRENT CITY OFFICIAL OR RECENT FORMER CITY OFFICIAL WITHIN THE PAST FEW YEARS CAN HAVE A RELATIVE WORKING FOR THE CITY FOR SALARY. ANY ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? YEAH. YES. EIGHT YEAR.
SUE ME. OH, YOU'RE ACKNOWLEDGING ME.
YEAH, SO I DO I DO LIKE THAT STATEMENT WITH CURRENT AND FORMER.
BUT WHAT IF SOMEONE HAS A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AND ARE LOOKING TO TO WORK AS AN EMPLOYEE OR RUN FOR OFFICE? YOU'RE SAYING CURRENTLY THEY WOULD BE BASICALLY THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED, IN OTHER WORDS, THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO CEASE THEIR EMPLOYMENT OR CONTRACT WITH THE CITY, BUT GRANDFATHERED. SO I'M ASKING FOR PERSONS WHO SAY HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AND IS SEEKING TO RUN FOR OFFICE OR SEEKING TO WORK WITH THE CITY.
WOULD THAT IF THEY HAVE A CONTRACT, SO IS THAT CONSIDERED EMPLOYMENT? IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO UNDER UNDER THAT PROPOSAL? OK. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IF, IF.
JOHN SMITH GOT ELECTED AS A MAYOR.
BUT A RELATIVE WAS ALREADY EMPLOYED.
A GRANDFATHERED IN, THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED IN.
DOES THAT NEED TO BE SCRAPPED? DOES IT NEED BECAUSE IF YOU SAY CURRENT, DOES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED ON THE SAME PARAGRAPH TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOT ANY DIFFICULTY?
[00:45:01]
OR FOR THAT MATTER, LET'S SAY THERE'S AN EMPLOYEE, YOU HAVE AN EMPLOYEE AND THEN HIS BROTHER RUNS FOR MAYOR.YOU CAN'T RUN FOR MAYOR BECAUSE THIS PERSON'S ALREADY EMPLOYED AND YOU CAN'T HAVE.
I GOT YOU A LETTER, CITY ATTORNEY, ANSWER THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THAT ONE.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO SPECIFY, BECAUSE CERTAINLY THE GRANDFATHERING IN IT WOULD HELP FOR ANYBODY THAT IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AND COMES IN, BUT IT WOULDN'T.
LET'S SAY THIS PASSES AND SOMEBODY COMES IN TWENTY TWENTY EIGHT IN THAT SITUATION.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE TAILORED AS FAR AS LANGUAGE.
IT CAN BE SOMETHING, WHEREAS IT'S HERE AND THERE IS AN ORDINANCE THAT FURTHER EXPLAINS OR IT COULD BE DELINEATED IN THE ACTUAL CHARTER.
AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THAT SITUATION IN WHICH THE CHARTER ACTUALLY EXPLAINS THAT WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT OCCASION, BUT IT REALLY WOULDN'T BE THE DRAFTING OF IT BECAUSE THAT WOULDN'T BE COVERED BY GRANDFATHERING IF THERE'S NOT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO ADD. AND ANY ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU, PHIL, REGARDING I DIDN'T CURRENT OR FORMER, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO SAY THAT, BUT THE PERSON RUNNING FOR MAYOR, THIS WOULDN'T BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL UNLESS THE PERSON WINS.
AND GETS IN OFFICE, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO LOOK AT.
MY BROTHER HAS BEEN HERE 20 YEARS AND NO, HE CAN'T WORK.
AGAIN, IT WOULD BE COVERED, IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED.
CONSTANTLY SAYING THAT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED IF WE MADE THAT CHANGE.
YEAH. AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DRAFT LANGUAGE SO THAT THAT IS DEFINITELY ADDRESSED. YOU KNOW, BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, I THINK IT SHOULD APPLY TO CURRENT AS WELL AS FORMER EMPLOYEES.
AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN, AS A CITY ATTORNEY, TO COME BACK WITH SOME LANGUAGE THAT DOES ADDRESS THAT SITUATION IN THE FUTURE.
I'D RATHER I'D RATHER DO THAT ADDRESS IN THE CITY CHARTER IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT CHANGE RATHER THAN LEAVE IT UP TO INTERPRETATION AND LEAVE IT UP TO SOME FUTURE ORDINANCE. AGAIN, LET'S BE SPECIFIC WITH IT.
AND IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT INTO THE CITY, CHARTER ADDRESS THAT SPECIFIC TOPIC IN THE CHARTER. ANYBODY, CHANDLER? WELL, THIS IS SOMETHING VERY LIKELY.
WELL, WE WILL. I THINK BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE THINGS AND I THINK YOU HAVE TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE. BUT I WOULD ALSO ADVISE COUNSEL AND WE DO HAVE THINGS WHERE THERE'S A CHARTER PROVISION AND THERE'S ALSO ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN ORDINANCES AS FAR AS OUR HIRING AND OUR PROCEDURES WHERE I WOULD.
NO DIFFERENT THAN WHETHER WE HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND WE ALSO HAVE STATUTES THAT ENACT THEM. EITHER WAY, I WOULD CERTAINLY SUGGEST IN THIS CASE THAT THERE IS, WE SPECIFY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IN THE CHARTER AND THEN YOU HAVE IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES AS WELL.
SO IT IS CLEAR AS FAR AS WHAT OUR HIRING IS AND HOW THINGS OCCUR, AND ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY IN THE ORDINANCES THAT WE ARE COGNIZANT OF.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS, AND WE AREN'T TRYING TO ACTUALLY GET RID OF ANYBODY, AND WE'RE AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS AS FAR AS GRANDFATHERING IN, SO TO SPEAK, WHICH WOULD PROTECT THAT WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW YOU'RE UNCEREMONIOUSLY GETTING RID OF SOMEBODY, BUT YOU MAY BE VIOLATING THAT AGREEMENT THAT YOU ALREADY HAD AS FAR AS HOW YOU GET RID OF CERTAIN EMPLOYEES.
DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THAT? YES, IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY, WE NEED TO GET THE LAWYER ON IT.
WELL, YEAH, IF MR CHANDLER, JUST FOR CLARITY.
SO SO FOR AN EXAMPLE, SAY I HAVE AN UNCLE WHO IS AN ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL AND THERE IS AN OPENING THAT COMES UP FOR A PARKS AND REC LEADER POSITION.
ARE WE SAYING THAT I CAN'T TECHNICALLY QUALIFY FOR THAT POSITION, OR IS THIS STRICTLY DEALING WITH THE POINT? WOW.
YEAH. WHAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THIS PART? THE SPIRIT IS SO PREVENT CORRUPTION, NEPOTISM.
EXACTLY EXACTLY THE POINT MR CHANDLER BROUGHT UP.
YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WANTS TO APPLY.
HE'S GOT, YOU KNOW, HIS UNCLE IS, IS THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
HE WANTS TO APPLY TO BE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION.
BASICALLY, THAT'S NEPOTISM, WHICH GENERALLY SHOULD BE FROWNED UPON.
A DIRECTOR, JUST A RECREATIONAL LEADER OR EVEN.
WELL, JUST AGAIN, NO, I'M GETTING SEMANTICS.
BUT. WELL, JUST ANY EMPLOYEE IN ANY EMPLOYEE.
AGAIN, IT'S IT'S THAT'S THAT'S A FORM OF NEPOTISM AND THAT CAN LEAD TO TO TO TO PROBLEMS. AND IT'S EVEN IF THERE IS NO, YOU KNOW, INTENT, JUST THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IS
[00:50:06]
JUST IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO ELIMINATE THAT.JUST TO GIVE YOU BACKGROUND ON THIS.
THIS WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY FORMER COUNSEL COUNCILMAN BAILEY.
BACK WHEN I WAS STILL IN COUNCIL BECAUSE OF CERTAIN THINGS THAT WERE HAPPENING AND.
HE BROUGHT THIS FORTH, AND HE PUSHED FOR IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE APPEARANCE WAS PERFECT AND CLEAR ABOUT HIRING FAMILY MEMBERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT INTO THE CITY OF BOMBAY.
AND THAT'S WHY THE VOTERS VOTED FOR IT AND WE GET IT THERE.
I THINK THE ONLY WORDING NOW THAT PHIL IS TALKING ABOUT IS FORMER VERSUS CURRENT.
JUST ADDING THEM ON, AND THAT'S IT.
IT'S ALREADY WITHIN OUR CHARTER.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I HAVE A QUESTION, PHIL..
SO IF A PERSON WAS ELECTED AND THEN WORKED FOR, SAY, ANOTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICE, SAY THEY WORK FOR THE COUNTY OR SOMETHING? IS THAT ALSO IN THIS LANGUAGE HERE NOW? NO SEPARATE TOLL. NO, IT'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT AT ALL.
OKAY. IT JUST PREVENTED FROM WORKING FOR THE CITY OR THE CITY.
OK. SO IF I'M A SUPPLIER OF PENCIL TO THE CITY OF PALM BAY AND I SUPPLY PENCILS, BUT THEN I DECIDED, YOU KNOW WHAT? I COULD DO A BETTER JOB IN THE CITY AND I'M RUNNING FOR MAYOR.
HOW DOES THIS AFFECT MY ABILITY TO DO THAT, BECAUSE NOW I'M COMPENSATED BY THE CITY? AGAIN, PATRICIA, THAT ISN'T AFFECTED BY THIS.
THEY'RE DOING BUSINESS WITH YOUR AGENCY WOULD PROHIBIT THAT.
YOU WOULD BE LIKE, CLICK CLICK.
QUICKLY. ANYONE ELSE? OK, I THINK AGAIN, IF YOU WOULD PATRICIA COME BACK WITH SOME MORE APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE AND. AND AGAIN, WE CAN CONSIDER THIS SPECIFIC CHANGE TO THE TO THE CITY CHARTER REGARDING, YOU KNOW, FIVE THREE AT THAT TIME.
ANYTHING ELSE WITHIN THE THREE POINT FIVE? WELL, YEAH, ALSO THAT WOULD ALSO JUST WANT TO MENTION SUBSECTION B AGAIN, THAT WOULD ALSO APPLY TO SUBSECTION B, FORMER OR CURRENT.
IN ALL, FIVE, FOUR, I THINK COUNCILORS SHOULD CONSIDER INSERTING LANGUAGE FIRST TO REVIEW THAT STATES TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
SO THAT IT IS CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT THAT IS MEANT TO PREVENT.
WORST WITHIN THREE POINT FIVE FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
WHAT'S IT JUST? THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT IMPROPRIETY OR THE APPEARANCE THERE.
SO I'M THINKING SOMEWHERE IN THERE WE COULD PUT THAT IN THERE.
SO WHOEVER READS IT UNDERSTANDS THAT WE DON'T EVEN WANT THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
GOT THAT, PATRICIA. ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE COVERED BY THE OTHER CHANGES WE'RE MAKING. YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THERE.
I MEAN, IT WOULDN'T HURT TO PUT IT IN THERE, BUT IT WOULD BE IT WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN IN SUBSECTION A IN SUBSECTION B.
MR. CHANDLER, UNDER SUBSECTION B, I SEE ALMOST EVERY SINGLE RELATIVE, EXCEPT FOR A GRANDCHILD. SO I GUESS WE MIGHT AS WELL ADD THAT, TOO.
AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WE CAN ADDRESS ANY POSSIBLE OR STEPCHILD OR WHATEVER, BUT I THINK BECAUSE IT'S SPECIFICALLY, IS IT AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS RELATED SUCH AS IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY PRECLUDING ANY OTHER RELATIVE, ANY DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY.
I THINK WE SHOULD ADD GRANDCHILD TO IT, THOUGH WE COULD ADD SUCH A.
YEAH, KEN, I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT IT WOULD APPEAR TO ME THAT WHEN YOU JUST SAY APPEARANCE OF EVIL, SINCE THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF WHAT APPEARANCE EVIL OF EVIL MEANS TO YOU AND TO ME, THE THE.
THE GENERALITY OF SUCH A STATEMENT OPENS UP FOR A PLETHORA OF APPLICATION WILL, I THINK THAT'S AN APPEARANCE OF EVIL? WAS THIS AN APPEARANCE OF EVIL? HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHAT APPEARANCE OF EVIL? I THINK I THINK THAT AS IT STANDS, IT'S VERY EXACT RENDER OF ANY SERVICE, FURNISH ANY MATERIAL YOU HAVE.
SOMETHING THAT'S QUANTIFIABLE APPEARANCE OF EVIL IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE REASON WE HAVE THERE IS TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF EVIL.
BUT I THINK ONCE YOU PUT IT INTO A LEGAL DOCUMENT, THEN THEN IT'S A LAWYER'S HEYDAY OF WHAT APPEARANCE IS DEFINED.
[00:55:03]
AND SO I YIELD TO PATRICIA SMITH, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, TO SEE, AM I HITTING A NAIL OR DID I MISS SOMETHING? YEAH, LET ME ADDRESS THAT, KEN.WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY ADDING THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN THE CITY CHARTER. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING TO CHANGE AND TO ADD TO THE CITY CHARTER ARE SPECIFICALLY TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY, NOT USING THAT LANGUAGE. MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT HE SAID.
I THOUGHT, HE SAID. TO PUT IT IN THERE.
OK. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'LL COME BACK AND IF YOU WOULD, WITH SOME LANGUAGE AND THEN WE'LL AGAIN, WE'LL WE'LL ADDRESS THAT.
YES. AND THERE ARE LIKE A LOT, UNFORTUNATELY, OF ETHICS OPINIONS THAT DEAL WITH THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY WHERE ESSENTIALLY THE GRAY AREA WHERE FORTUNATELY FOR SOME, THEY HAVE ACTUALLY ACTUALLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM, FROM DANCING.
AND SO THERE IS ACTUALLY A GOOD BODY OF OPINIONS RELATIVE TO THESE ETHICS AND AS THERE'LL BE SOME GOOD PROBABLY LANGUAGE FOR ME TO PULL FROM, BUT I'LL BRING THAT BACK.
WE CAN DISCUSS IT AT THE NEXT MEETING.
THANK YOU, PATRICIA. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE TIME IS OF ESSENCE, I GUESS.
UH, WE HAVE THREE POINT ZERO SIX ONE.
ANYTHING THERE WITHIN WE'RE GOING TO START IN THE ORDER OF THREE POINT ZERO SIX ONE, THEN WE'LL GO TO THREE POINT ZERO SIX TWO.
ANYTHING TO ADD IN THREE ZERO SIX TWO.
PHIL, YES, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS LANGUAGE THAT IS WAS GIVEN HERE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. I ACTUALLY GAVE THE PROPOSAL ALSO WITH THAT HANDOUT.
I'M LOOKING TO TRY TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE THERE FOR HOW WE FILL VACANCIES AND TRY TO KEEP IT REALLY SIMPLE, MAYBE OVERLY SIMPLISTIC.
HOPEFULLY IT'LL STILL WORK, BUT I'M TRYING TO.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO WORK ON IS TRYING TO ELIMINATE THE CONFUSION OF SPECIAL ELECTIONS AND ELIMINATE THE COST THAT IT WOULD COST THE CITY FOR SPECIAL ELECTIONS.
SO WHAT MY LANGUAGE THAT I'M TRYING TO PROPOSE IS, IS THAT WE WOULD HOLD ANY TYPE OF VACANCY ALONG WITH CONCURRENT REGULAR ELECTIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR THE CITY.
SO AS AS EVERYBODY CAN SEE, READ MY LANGUAGE VACANCY SHALL BE FILLED BY APPOINTMENT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING COUNCIL MEMBERS.
ALL VACANCY ELECTIONS WILL RUN CONCURRENT WITH REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTIONS.
APPOINTMENT WILL BE TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION CYCLE. SO IF WE HAVE CITY COUNCIL ON REGULAR ELECTIONS, IF IT'S NOT AN ELECTION FOR A CITY COUNCIL, THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE AN ELECTION FOR THAT PERSON AT THAT TIME SO THAT WE WOULD SPARE THE CITY THAT EXPENSE.
AND THEN IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM, THE TERM WILL EXTEND TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
AND WHEN I WAS THINKING THERE IS IF THEY DON'T QUALIFY BY MAY, BUT THEN SOMETHING HAPPENS IN MAY, AND THAT'S SIX MONTHS TILL THAT NOVEMBER, WHEN THAT ELECTION ACTUALLY IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN WITH THE REGULAR SCHEDULED ELECTION FOR THE CITY, THEN IT WOULD EXTEND OUT TO WHEN THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION WOULD BE.
SO THESE ARE MY PROPOSALS TO TRY TO HELP THE CITY AND AND I KNOW NOT JUST MYSELF, BUT A LOT OF THE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY OR, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO.
GET RID OF THAT, KEEP IT SIMPLE, KIND OF KIND OF GRANULAR.
JUST TO INTERJECT BEFORE YOU GO, BECAUSE I WANT TO GIVE SOME HISTORICAL BACKGROUND BECAUSE I SAW THAT THIS BECAME A VERY HEATED CONVERSATION, BUT I FROM MY POSITION AS I SAW IT ON THE SIDE, I DIDN'T ENGAGE.
I ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO.
BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THERE WAS A THIS JUSTICE DONE TO THE RESIDENTS THAT VOTED.
THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS DISGUST.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT, AND I SAY IT SO PASSIONATELY, IS BECAUSE VOTERS VOTED IN 2012.
IT WAS. FORMER COUNCILMAN TREY HORTON.
WHO BROUGHT THIS FORTH? SO THERE WOULDN'T BE A COST TO THE CITY BECAUSE HE HAD SEEN IT HAPPEN IN THE PAST WHEN HE WAS SITTING ON COUNCIL PRIOR TO COMING BACK IN 2014.
IT WAS VOTED BY THE VOTERS, THE VOTERS SAID YES.
THE REASON THAT HAPPENED, IF YOU GO BACK TO NOVEMBER OF 2012 OR DECEMBER TIMEFRAME OF 2012, COUNCIL APPROVED IT.
I WAS THERE WITH ALL THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
COUNCIL APPROVED IT BECAUSE I BECAME MAYOR AT THAT TIME.
IT WAS KEN GREEN, MICHELLE CHRISTINA, SONORITY MYSELF.
[01:00:04]
AND HARRY.AND WE APPROVE WHAT THE VOTERS DID SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.
AND ALL THE COUNCIL NEEDED TO DO IS BASICALLY INSTITUTE THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS VOTED BY THE VOTERS. THAT'S ALL THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.
THERE WAS NO IMPROPRIETY, THERE WAS NO UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
NOBODY'S RIGHTS ARE BEING VIOLATED BECAUSE THE VOTERS VOTED ALREADY.
THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENED WAS THAT SOMEBODY FORGOT TO TAKE IT HOME TO BRING IT BACK TO US SO WE COULD FINALIZE WHAT WAS VOTED ON.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT HAD HAPPENED.
BUT BECAUSE THERE IS NO INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE SITTING ON THE DAIS RIGHT NOW, THAT'S WHERE THE WHOLE CHAOS BEGAN AND PEOPLE STARTED THROWING THINGS OUT THERE AND SAYING THINGS. I JUST DIDN'T DECIDE TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE I'M ALLOWING PEOPLE TO DO THEIR JOB. BUT IF THEY WOULD HAVE DONE THEIR JOB AND DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO DO THE RESEARCH ON THE SUBJECT MATTER, THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE TRAVESTY THAT THEY DID TO THE VOTERS OF 2012 IS TREMENDOUS BECAUSE THE VOTERS VOTED FOR THAT.
AND TO SAY NOW, 10 YEARS LATER, THAT, OH NO, IT HAPPENED AND IT'S ILLEGAL AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES THAT PEOPLE WERE USING, THAT WAS RIDICULOUS.
AND I'M GIVING YOU THE BACKGROUND BECAUSE TREY HOUGHTON WAS THE ONE WHO BROUGHT IT FORTH.
AND THE REASON WAS TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM OF HAVING OFF-YEAR ELECTIONS THAT WERE GOING TO CAUSE THE CITY 80 TO ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE SPENDING.
AND I SAW THE NUMBER THAT CAME OUT FOR THIS ELECTION THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN MARCH.
AND THAT WAS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF WHY TRADE CAME UP WITH THAT IDEA, BECAUSE HE SAW IT IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN THE COUNTY.
SO HE WANTED TO CORRECT THAT ISSUE.
IT WASN'T DEMOCRAT, IT WASN'T A REPUBLICAN.
IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND THE VOTERS VOTED.
AND ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT FINE TRADE AND ASK THEM THE QUESTION BECAUSE HE WOULD ANSWER IT FOR YOU BECAUSE HE SAID ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD.
HMM. YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED IN 2012 HAPPENED IN TWO THOUSAND TWELVE, AND I WAS HERE IN 2012. THERE ARE SPECIAL ELECTIONS ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES AND I DON'T I KNOW A LOT OF A LOT OF. TALK WENT BACK AND FORTH DURING THAT TIME, BUT WE'RE HERE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY TWO, AND THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS JUST SIMPLY THIS THE BALANCE BETWEEN WHEN APPOINTMENT IS IS NECESSARY.
WHETHER I MEAN, WE HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY FOUR YEARS.
DOES IT COST MONEY? YES, IT DOES.
WHY? BECAUSE IT COSTS MONEY, IT COSTS THE CITY MONEY, IT COSTS THE COUNTY, MONEY IT COSTS THE UNITED STATES MONEY AND WE'RE GOING.
WHAT I'M SAYING TODAY IS THAT.
AND THE REALITY IS, IS THAT IF IT'S.
THEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I WANT REPRESENTATION BY VOTE.
DOES IT COST THE CITY SOMETHING? YES. HOW OFTEN DOES IT HAPPEN? VERY FEW AND FAR BETWEEN.
BUT AS WE COULD SEE, THE FACT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE JUST INSERTED, WHETHER IT WASN'T FULFILLED OR NOT, WHETHER WE MESSED UP.
OK, BUT WE'RE HERE TODAY AND TODAY MORE AND MORE, I'M REALIZING THAT.
WHO I PUT UP THERE OR WHO GETS UP THERE IS A PEOPLE'S MATTER UNLESS THE TIME FRAME IS SO SHORT AS IT BECOMES INCONSEQUENTIAL, I.E.
OK. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO RUN FOR OFFICE ANYWAY.
AND SO IT GIVES THEM TIME TO RUN FOR OFFICE, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
BUT AT THIS POINT, AND THE VOICE OF TODAY, REGARDLESS OF 2000 TROY TRADE, DID IT.
OK? TREY DID. IT WAS UNANIMOUS.
I DON'T KNOW. BUT IN TWO THOUSAND EIGHT OR TWO THOUSAND AND SIX, IT WASN'T THAT WAY.
SO ARE WE DOING A DISSERVICE TO THE VOTERS OF TWO THOUSAND SIX BEFORE THEY CHANGE THE CHARTER TO WHERE IT WASN'T REQUIRED?
[01:05:01]
IT'S IRRELEVANT.WE'RE HERE TODAY AND TODAY THE PEOPLE ARE SAYING OUR VOTE IS NOT FOR SALE.
THAT'S WHY WE BUDGET WE BUDGET FOR IT, SO THAT IN THE YEAR TWO THOUSAND THIRTY TWO, WHEN THE NEXT PERSON RESIGNS BEFORE IT'S TIME, WE HAVE THE HUNDRED THOUSAND FOR THE SPECIAL ELECTION. IF WE HAD DONE IT QUICKER, WE COULD HAVE HAD IT DONE FOR NOVEMBER.
BUT BECAUSE WE DILLY DALLIED, WE WE THERE'S A LOT OF PROCESSES THAT'S REQUIRED TO GET IT TO HAPPEN. AND NOW IT'S IN MARCH.
BUT THAT'S THAT'S NOT THE PEOPLE'S FAULT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS, IF WE COULD HAVE DONE IT QUICKER.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT IN MY VIEW.
UNLESS IT'S SO SHORT THAT IT BECOMES IRRELEVANT.
AND I'M GOING THE FILLING OF THE VACANCY SHOULD GO BACK TO WHAT IT USED TO BE WHERE IF IT WAS MORE THAN A YEAR? THERE'S A SPECIAL ELECTION.
AND IF WE GET THE PROCESS, HE'S READY TO GO SO THAT WHEN IT DOES HAPPEN, WE CAN IMMEDIATELY FILE FOR IT, DO IT, DO THE DUE DILIGENCE, THEN WE DO IT.
BUT BUT AGAIN, IF IT'S SUCH A HOT BUTTON AS IT WAS, YOU MIGHT FIND THAT.
NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO TO THIS SEEING, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LIKE IT IF WE'RE BACK TO.
ELECTORS ELECTING OUR ELECTORS, WHICH ISN'T WHAT THIS COUNTRY WAS MADE OUT OF, THIS COUNTRY WAS MADE OUT OF PEOPLE ELECTING WHO'S GOING TO REPRESENT THEM.
SO I GO BACK TO SEVENTEEN SEVENTY SIX AND IT WOULD BE A DISSERVICE TO THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES TO MAKE THIS A REPUBLIC.
AND AND AND I DON'T WANT TO DO ALL THE DISSERVICE TO THE PEOPLE WHO SHED THEIR BLOOD TO GIVE US THAT FREEDOM TO VOTE.
MR. DELGADO, I DEFINITELY DO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM RELATIVE TO THIS, BUT IN REALLY RESEARCHING THIS ISSUE AND YOU KNOW, I WAS, LIKE MANY OTHERS, WAS VERY TUNED IN TO THIS PARTICULAR HOT ITEM, WHICH WAS UNDER AN IMMENSE LEVEL OF SCRUTINY.
I WOULD BE AGAINST REVERTING BACK TO THE LANGUAGE PRE NOVEMBER SIX, 2012, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I BELIEVE IN FOLLOWING SOMEWHAT OF A PRECEDENT.
MR. MURATA, LIKE YOU LOOKED AT A LOT OF THE MUNICIPALITIES AND LOOKED AT SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS CONTAINED WITHIN THEIR CHARTERS.
AND SEVEN OUT OF THE 16 MUNICIPALITIES THAT I LOOKED AT, THERE WAS REALLY THIS OVERARCHING THEME.
THOSE CITY COUNCILS POINT REALLY ON UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTION, RIGHT? AND SO. I ALSO REALLY DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT WITH THE WAY THAT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE SITS AS OF NOW BECAUSE IT GIVES COUNCIL THE AUTHORITY TO EITHER MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE AS IT IS RIGHT, IF THERE'S LESS THAN A YEAR WITHIN AN INDIVIDUAL'S TERM, THEY LEAVE, RESIGN OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, THEN COUNCIL CAN APPOINT.
RIGHT. BUT IF IT'S MORE THAN A YEAR, OBVIOUSLY THERE SHOULD BE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY DISAGREE WITH THAT LANGUAGE, AND I DISAGREE WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED BY COUNCIL. NO OFFENSE.
FORMER AMERICAN CITY ORDINANCE 2012 DASH 47, WHICH REALLY PUT US IN THIS ISSUE THAT WE'RE IN TODAY. THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE AND SO MR. MORE. I WAS ACTUALLY WORKING ON A PROPOSAL VERY SIMILAR TO THIS THAT YOU HAVE PROVIDED HERE TODAY. AND I WOULD BE MORE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
LET COUNCIL APPOINT UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTION.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, STEALING THE PEOPLE'S VOTE.
I WOULD JUST HOPE THAT WE ALSO WOULD TRUST THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO WE VOTED AND PUT UP THERE TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.
THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE VOTING FOR.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I STAND BY THAT I WOULDN'T REVERT BACK TO THE LANGUAGE AS INDICATED FROM PRE NOVEMBER SIX, 2012.
I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT MORE OVER THIS LANGUAGE HERE.
MR. MOORE. BUT JUST GLANCING OVER IT, I DO THINK THAT I COULD SUPPORT SOMETHING RELATIVE TO THIS. AND ONCE AGAIN, IT'S BASED ON WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING, AND I KNOW WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT BE SAYING. WELL, WE'RE NOT MELBOURNE, WE'RE NOT WEST MELBOURNE.
BUT SOMETIMES I BELIEVE THAT WHEN YOU DO THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, YOU STICK OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. AND SO I THINK WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO MOVE FORWARD IN A
[01:10:06]
MANNER THAT I PERSONALLY BELIEVE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.SO. ANYONE ELSE? OK. A JEFF GORDON, I HAVE ONE QUESTION WHEN ONE SAYS TO ME, I DISAGREE WITH SOMETHING WHOLEHEARTEDLY, I'M EXPECTING TO HEAR AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT EXACTLY YOU DISAGREE WITH. YOU JUST SAID YOU AGREED WITH.
IF IT'S LESS THAN A YEAR, NOT A POINT, THEN YOU SAID YOU DISAGREE WITH THE LANGUAGE I JUST WRITTEN WHERE YOU DIDN'T SAY WHAT? MS. GENERALLY, I AGREE WITH THE WHAT ORDNANCE 20, 12, DASH, 40, SEVEN THAT WAS PASSED, BUT I DISAGREE WITH THE LANGUAGE IN THE CURRENT IN THE CURRENT CHARTER, EXCUSE ME THAT STATES THAT THAT COUNCIL BY ORDINANCE HAS THE ABILITY TO APPOINT SOMEONE IF IT'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS OR I JUST DISAGREE WITH THAT LANGUAGE IN GENERAL.
I JUST STRICTLY BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE AN APPOINTMENT UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTION OR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED GENERAL ELECTION.
THAT IS THE CLARIFICATION THAT I SAW.
I WAS JUST DEFINITELY GOING TO ECHO YOUR THOUGHTS.
I REVIEWED THIS, AND I ALSO BELIEVE IN BEST PRACTICES.
YOU KNOW WHAT IS AROUND US DOING WHAT MAKES SENSE? AND I'M NOT SURE OF THE COST TO THE CITY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN TELL US.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FOR THE SPECIAL ELECTION, BUT I AM.
I ACTUALLY LIKE THIS THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED CLARITY.
NOTHING TO MUDDY THE WATERS A LITTLE BIT.
SO I'M I'M SUPPORT OF THIS AND ANYONE ELSE MR. HERE FOR TERESA TO EXPLAIN THE YELLOW.
THE SECOND I JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I PUT THAT HIGHLIGHTED LANGUAGE IN THERE BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THE CHARTER READ PRIOR TO 2012.
OF COURSE, EVERYTHING WAS THEN DONE BY ORDINANCE, AS STATED BY MR. CHANDLER, WHICH DOES STATE THAT IF IT'S LESS THAN A YEAR.
THIS, OF COURSE, PRIOR TO TWENTY TWELVE, IT STATES, HAS A SIX MONTH TIME FRAME.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT TO ALL OF YOU JUST SO YOU CAN SEE HOW IT READ PRIOR TO BEING TAKEN OUT OF THE CHARTER.
ALSO, THE CITY ATTORNEY, I GAVE EACH OF YOU A COPY OF WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THEIR LANGUAGE AS FAR AS THE VACANCIES FOR YOUR REVIEW AS WELL.
AND AS FAR AS THE COST OF THE SPECIAL ELECTION, MS. K, IT IS JUST SHY OF TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND.
COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? JUST SHY OF TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND.
CHANDLER, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
I WAS I WAS LOOKING AT THE WRONG THING, SO I MISSPOKE IN TERMS OF SUPPORTING WHAT MR MOORE HAD PUT FORWARD, BECAUSE I MAYBE IS THAT IN THE AGENDA PACKET HERE? WELL, IT'S ON THIS THING.
OH, OK, I DON'T I DON'T HAVE ONE.
OK, I'M SORRY. I WAS LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR PACKET WITH THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGES, BUT ON TOP OF IT'S OK.
OK. AND WHAT ELSE? A COUPLE OF COMMENTS I WANT TO MAKE.
NUMBER ONE IS RESPONSE TO SOME.
AKIN'S COMMENTS IS FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, SARCASTICALLY, I SUPPOSE, HE SAID, WELL, WHY DON'T WE JUST ELIMINATE THE GENERAL ELECTIONS? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO AVOID THE COST OF A SPECIAL ELECTION, FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, NOBODY IS PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE GENERAL ELECTIONS.
IT WAS GENERAL PETRAEUS, I UNDERSTAND.
BUT BUT TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION, YOU HEARD WHAT THE COST IS.
IT'S OVER $250000 TO FILL THE TEMPORARY VACANCIES.
IT'S AN ABSOLUTE FOOLISH WASTE OF THE CITY'S MONEY.
NO ONE, I THINK I THINK IN THIS PAST CASE, WITHOUT TRYING TO INSULT ANYONE, I THINK THE CITY HAS A TENDENCY SOMETIMES TO ACCEDE TO A VOCAL MINORITY OF PEOPLE.
AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, TO RESPOND TO CANDY WAS TALKING ABOUT, WELL, HE FELT THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TO TO TO DECIDE.
AND I AGREE WITH THAT, ACTUALLY.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE TURNOUT FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION, IT'S INCREDIBLY MINIMAL.
AND SO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE BY HAVING A SPECIAL ELECTION AT A COST OF OVER $250000 IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A VERY, VERY SMALL MINORITY OF CITIZENS ELECTING A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER. SO RATHER THAN DO THAT, RATHER THAN DO THAT, I ABSOLUTELY WOULD SUPPORT MR. MOORE'S PROPOSAL.
YOU KNOW, LET LET THE EXISTING CITY COUNCIL, WHO WERE ELECTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS OF THE CITY FILL THAT SEAT UNTIL THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION, WHERE AGAIN, THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS CAN THEN DECIDE.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
IF WE HAD AN IN NOVEMBER, HOW MUCH WOULD THE COST ME?
[01:15:06]
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT COST WOULD BE, THE LAST GENERAL ELECTION WAS APPROXIMATELY $11000.AND IF WE HAD A SPECIAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, LIKE WE HAD TRIED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, THE COST WOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED IF WE WOULD HAVE HAD AN ELECTION THIS PAST NOVEMBER.
YES, THIS OR THIS NOVEMBER COMING UP.
AND, YEAH, THE PERSONAL VEGETABLE.
YEAH. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER THAN THE TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A COUNTYWIDE ELECTION, THE ELECTIONS OFFICE STILL WOULD HAVE BEEN HOLDING ELECTIONS COUNT THROUGHOUT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH CHEAPER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT COST WOULD BE.
THANK YOU. SINCE IT'S SIGNIFICANT LOWER, WE REALLY CAN'T USE TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND AS A A BENCHMARK OF WHAT IT WOULD COST.
NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY IT IS NOT THE CITY'S MONEY.
THIS IS NOT THE CITY OF PALM BAY'S MONEY.
THESE ARE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY THAT WERE GIVEN TO THE CITY TO ASSUME THAT THE TAXPAYER NO LONGER HAS ANY SAY SO IN REFERENCE TO WHAT HAPPENS IN THE CITY, THEN WE WOULDN'T NEED COUNCIL MEETINGS.
WE HAVE COUNCIL MEETINGS BECAUSE REGARDLESS, THE PEOPLE STILL HAVE A VOTE.
IF IF PEOPLE CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE IN A SPECIAL ELECTIONS, THAT'S THEIR CHOICE AS MUCH AS IS THEIR CHOICE FOR MIDTERM ELECTIONS.
WE DO NOT NOT HAVE MIDTERM ELECTIONS BECAUSE THE VOCAL FEW ARE GOING TO HAVE A VOICE IN THE MIDTERM. YOU HAVE MIDTERM ELECTIONS BECAUSE YOU HAVE MIDTERM ELECTIONS.
IT VERY POSSIBLY IT WILL BE A FLASHPOINT AGAIN IF WE TURN AROUND AND WE SAY THIS IS THE CITY'S MONEY, WHEN EVERYBODY IN PALM BAY KNOWS, NO, YOU TOOK THAT MONEY FROM MY MONEY.
I'M THE ONE THAT'S SPONSORING YOU AND I VOTED YOU IN.
AND IN THAT I VOTED YOU IN THE VOCAL POINT WAS WE DON'T WANT YOU TO DO IT.
SO IF WE MADE A MISTAKE IN 2012, WE TURN AROUND AND WE DO A U-TURN AND WE PUT IT WHEN THERE WAS NO PROBLEM.
IF IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY LESS, THEN WE SHOULD AIR IN THE SIDE OF THE VOTER, NOT ON THE SIDE OF WHAT IS CONVENIENT OR LESS EXPENSIVE TO THE CITY.
SURE, WE HAVE DISAGREEMENTS HERE AS CAPOTE SO WELL SAID LAST WEEK OR TWO WEEKS AGO, WE ALL HAVE SOME DISAGREEMENTS.
AND AND AND SO IT COMES DOWN TO A CONSENSUS MAJORITY UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE BRING BACK THE COMPENSATION, JUST LIKE THIS DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW.
IT WINDS UP, IT'S A DISCUSSION.
I'M FEELING THAT THIS NEEDS MORE TIME BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO BACK AND FORTH AND WE HAVE TIME AND TIME IS GOING TO WORK AGAINST US BECAUSE WE'VE STILL GOT TO GET TO TWO MORE ARTICLES.
OK. SO I WOULD SAY, OR I'LL LET YOU COME UP.
UM, BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, I THINK THAT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO DOVE INTO MORE TO GET IT THERE.
JEFFREY? GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISAGREE.
I DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT THAT THE VOTERS ARE SILENCED.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
WE VOTE FOR A CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE CITY.
WHY NOT LET THEM MAKE A SIX MONTH DECISION FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY TO SAVE THE CITY SOME MONEY? OUR MONEY THAT YOU'RE SAYING WE SHOULDN'T SPEND.
YOU ASKED ME THE QUESTION, I'M MAKING A STATEMENT.
OH, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING A QUESTION.
THE RESPONSE TO YOUR CLAIM THAT THE VOTERS HAVE BEEN SILENCED IF WE DELAY THE ELECTION.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S ACCURATE AT ALL.
AND I THINK THAT'S A JAUNDICED VIEW.
WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO THIS DISCUSSION, AND YOU STILL NEED TO ANSWER HIS QUESTION, IF I MAY. IT WASN'T A QUESTION, IT WAS JUST A STATEMENT HE WAS JUST RESPONDING TO.
YOU HAVE NOT. MR. CHAIR, I HEARD OF WHAT THEY'RE THAT MADE IT A QUESTION.
WELL, I HAD AND THE ANSWER IS VERY SIMPLE.
IF THE PERSON I ELECTED TO BE ON THAT SEAT.
[01:20:01]
RESIGNED EARLY.AND THEN YOU APPOINT THE PERSON WHO'S GOING TO REPRESENT ME.
THEN YOU HAVE VIOLATED MY RIGHT BECAUSE I ELECTED THAT PERSON ON THAT SEAT.
AND NOW THREE OTHER PEOPLE THAT I DID NOT VOTE FOR ARE GOING TO TELL ME WHO'S GOING TO BE IN THAT SEAT? WHEN I HAD THE VOTE.
TO PUT THAT PERSON ON THE SEAT, AND SO ABSOLUTELY YOU ARE SILENCING MY VOTE BECAUSE I VOTED FOR THAT PERSON.
YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME WHO GOES ON THAT CHAIR BECAUSE YOU DID NOT VOTE FOR HIM.
SO, NOAH, I MAY NOT HAVE VOTED FOR YOU IF YOU WERE ON THE OTHER SEAT.
WHO KNOWS? ALL I KNOW IS THAT I VOTED FOR THAT PERSON.
MY RIGHT TO VOTE IS FOUNDATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
AND IF SOMEONE MOVES OFF AND THEY REPRESENT ME, THEN I CHOOSE WHO REPRESENTS ME, NOT SOME, SOME OTHER PERSON.
IT COULD BE EVEN CALLED NEPOTISM MR. VICE CHAIR. OK, I'VE GOT IT JUST REAL WONDERFULLY.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON. WELL, I JUST WANT TO EDUCATE EVERYBODY ON APPOINTMENTS.
THE GOVERNOR ACTUALLY APPOINTED TWO PEOPLE FOR BROWARD COUNTY AND DIDN'T ALLOW THEM TO PUT FORTH AN ELECTION FOR THAT.
SO THERE ARE TWO PEOPLE SITTING IN BROWARD COUNTY.
I THINK IT'S COUNTY COMMISSION RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR IN BROWARD COUNTY, AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
SO APPOINTMENTS HAPPEN ALL THE TIME AND APPOINTMENTS FOR SOMETIMES A LONGER PERIOD OF THAN A YEAR IN SOME SITUATIONS.
SO THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE, UNFORTUNATELY, AND IT CAN BE RARE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT HERE, IF IT'S A PERSON WHO RESIGNS OR A DEATH.
BUT AS EVEN THIS IS NOT AN APPOINTMENT FROM AN OUTSIDE BODY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN APPOINTMENT FROM OUR OWN CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE WHO WE HAVE ELECTED TO SERVE THE ENTIRE CITY. SO AGAIN, MY LANGUAGE IS VERY SIMPLE IN TRYING TO KEEP IT IN IN THE VEIN OF MAKING SURE THAT ALSO THE VOTERS CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH AN ELECTION.
WHEN WE DO PUT FORTH SPECIAL ELECTIONS AT DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS, IT COULD BE WHENEVER YOU KNOW AND WE WANT TO GET VOTER TURNOUT LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN AS MUCH WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SPECIAL ELECTIONS AT ANY POINT IN TIME.
SO I'M TRYING TO DO IT SO THAT IT IS SUCCINCT AND CONCURRENT ON A TIME PERIOD THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THE VOTERS UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING.
AND LIKE I SAID, THE LONGEST TIME PERIOD IS GOING TO BE IF THAT JUST HAPPENS TO BE RIGHT AFTER A MAY WHEN THEY MISSED THE DEADLINE.
SO BUT EVEN IF IT WAS A FOUR YEAR TERM, THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND AT LEAST THAT YEAR AND A HALF AND NOT BE ABLE TO SERVE MORE THAN THAT TO HAVE TO SERVE FOR TO GET VOTED IN FOR THAT. SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE OF MAKING SURE THAT THE VOTERS ARE BEING HEARD AND ALSO THAT THEY ARE.
WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT IS CONSISTENT FOR THE VOTERS AND SOMETHING THAT IS BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
OK, WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO JUST I'M GOING TO ADD JUST TWO THINGS REAL BRIEFLY AND THEN GOT TO LET. MR. BATTEN COMMENT IS NO.
ALL WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO CHANGE THE CITY CHARTER, SO HAS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEM TO APPROVE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT GETS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS.
AND GUESS WHAT? IT'S THE VOTERS WHO DETERMINE IT.
SO AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT LOSING THEIR VOTE.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON ANY CHANGES TO THE CITY CHARTER.
BILL, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY.
YOU PRESS A BUTTON ON THE LEFT.
THERE YOU GO. THIS CITY IS OUR CITY.
OVER HERE, THIS IS HOW THEY DO IT.
I'VE LIVED HERE LONGER THAN ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM, I THINK.
THROUGH THE CITY OF. WATCH THE GULF AND WATCH MY GOVERNMENT GO UP AND DOWN SOMETIMES.
I DON'T WANT TO BE GOVERNED BY.
WELL, THIS IS HOW THEY DO IT SOMEPLACE ELSE.
I WANT IT TO BE MY CITY, NOT SOMEBODY ELSE'S CITY.
THAT'S THE FIRST THING. I GET SO ANGRY WHEN I SAID, WELL.
THEY DON'T LIVE HERE AND I DON'T LIVE THERE, I LIVE HERE, SO I DON'T WANT TO BE COMPARED TO SOMEBODY ELSE OR SAY I'M A PALM BAY RESIDENT AND PROUD OF IT.
NUMBER TWO? IT WAS BY ORDINANCE WHEN THE CHARTER WAS WRITTEN, IT SAID IN ACCORDANCE BY ORDINANCE. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T GO AND LOOK UP AND SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE IS.
[01:25:03]
AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT MAKES A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED WHEN YOU GO TO READ THE CITY CHARTER. IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN WRITING IN THE CHARTER, THEN WHAT ARE YOU COMPARING IT TO? IT GETS VERY COMPLICATED AND VERY HARD TO FIND IT SOMETIMES.IN THE CHARTER, YOU SAY HOW YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS PART OF THE PROBLEM, IT WAS IN ACCORDANCE TO ORDINANCE.
WHO HAS CONTROL OVER THE ORDINANCES? THEY DO. THEY WRITE YOU ON AS THEY WANT.
THEY'VE ALL DONE IT. AND THAT WAS PART OF THE PROBLEM IN THIS ELECTION.
WILL THIS CHANGE THE ORDINANCE BEFORE WE HAVE THE ELECTION? WHAT IS THE RESULT? THE ORDINANCE HAS TO BE PRESENTED HAS TO BE.
THE PUBLIC HAS TO HAVE A TIMELINE, HAS TO BE WAITING.
EACH ONE OF THOSE STEPS HAS TO HAVE A TIMELINE LIMIT ON EACH ONE OF THOSE FUNCTIONS.
FURTHER AND FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE EIGHT BALL WITH A DEAD SHOT.
SO THAT'S PART OF IT. IN YOUR CHART.
HE'S GOING TO GO. BUT IN YOUR CHARTER, YOU MIGHT NOT EVEN HAVE TO SAY THEY APPOINT SOMEBODY. YOU MIGHT HAVE IT IN YOUR CHARTER WHERE YOU SAY AUTOMATICALLY, IF THERE'S A VACANCY, IT IS FILLED BY THIS PERSON.
ALREADY REPRESENTED, WE WON'T HAVE THIS THING THAT WE'RE NO VACANT TIME.
WE KNOW IF SOMEBODY'S NOT THERE ANYMORE, WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE SOME INDIVIDUAL NOT DESIGNATED BY THEM IF SOMEBODY THAT'S ALREADY PRESENT THAT FILLS THAT SEAT.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOMEBODY TO GO INTO THE.
MOVING ON TO HALF STAFF UNDERSTANDS THAT.
WHERE IS THAT? BUT WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT EVEN FURTHER.
SECTION THREE POINT SEVEN CITY CLERK ZERO.
ANY CHANGES AND NONE? OK, MADAM CITY CLERK, I THINK WE ALL HAVE A CONSENSUS.
OKAY. UM, SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THAT AND NOW WE'RE GOING INTO.
ANYTHING WITHIN THE THREE POINT EIGHT? THERE'S NOTHING THREE POINT ZERO EIGHT ONE.
THAT'S WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF HAVING A ONE MONTH SABBATICAL.
WHICH, AS YOU AS MR BOARD MENTIONED, COMMISSION DOES HAVE A ONE MONTH SABBATICAL.
I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR A WHOLE HELL OF A LOT OF REASONS.
NO ONE IS OLD CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
FIRST OF ALL, THEY HAVE FULL TIME JOBS, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE FAMILIES CURRENTLY AS IT EXISTS, WHERE HAVING YOU KNOW, TWO MEETINGS A MONTH EVERY MONTH FOR FOUR 12 MONTHS GIVES THEM NO TIME FOR THE FAMILY, YOU KNOW, TO TAKE VACATION.
NOT ONLY THAT, BUT GIVING THEM A ONE MONTH SABBATICAL IN ORDER TO DO THAT WILL ALSO GIVE CITY A CHANCE TO RECHARGE.
I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO ASK OUR CITY MANAGER AND OUR CITY CLERK, AS WELL AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY, HOW MUCH TIME THEY SPEND A MONTH PREPARING, JUST PREPARING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. SO I THINK I THINK, YOU KNOW, GIVING HAVING A ONE MONTH SABBATICAL, PROBABLY IN THE SUMMER, ALLOWING THEM TO COUNCIL MEMBER TO GO ON VACATIONS WITH THEIR FAMILIES, I THINK IS NOT ONLY GOOD FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, I THINK IT'S GOOD FOR OUR CITY STAFF AND AND AS A RESULT, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR FOR THE RESIDENTS OF BOMBAY.
MR. SURE. YEAH, I I AGREE WITH THAT WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
DO YOU THINK THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF WHICH EXACT MONTH? OR CAN WE JUST SAY SUMMER TIME? THE RESIDENTS WOULD WANT TO KNOW.
IN JORDAN, I THINK TYPICALLY THE MONTH THAT HAS TAKEN OFF IS TYPICALLY JUNE FOUR COUNTY AND EVERY OTHER SINGLE MUNICIPALITY.
THEY'RE WITH THE MUNICIPALITIES OR COUNTY THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH.
YEAH, I WOULD AGREE THAT WE SHOULD MIRROR THAT TIME OFF SO THAT EVERYBODY IS OFF.
[01:30:02]
YEAH, KEN, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE ABOUT IT IN ANY FORM OR FASHION.I THINK IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO HEAR FROM THE THREE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT ARE WORKING, WHETHER WHETHER FOR FAMILY REASONS, IT'S BETTER TO HAVE IT, MAYBE FROM MID-JUNE, AFTER ALL OF THE PEOPLE ARE GRADUATING AND THERE'S THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER THROUGH JULY 4TH, ALL THE WAY TO JULY 15TH, IF THAT WOULD BE A BETTER FIT FOR THE FAMILY, I KNOW THERE MAY BE SOME DIFFICULTY BECAUSE NOW THEY CAN'T CONNECT WITH THE THE THE THE BREVARD COUNTY. BUT I'M MORE INTERESTED IN THE WELL-BEING OF FAMILY THAN I AM IN IN THE BREVARD COUNTY. IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO HEAR FROM THEM WHAT THEY WOULD PREFER AS A BENCHMARK OF WHAT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL FOR THOSE WHO ARE WORKING.
RECENT. DID YOU COULD I JUST SAY THAT GIVING US IF WE GET A MONTH OFF, I AM GOOD WITH ANY TIME I GET A MONTH OFF.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.
SO YEAH, BUT YEAH, WELL, I GUESS THE THE THE UM, IT'S HARD TO GO FOR A SPECIFIC DATE BECAUSE WHAT I THINK ABOUT IS MY STAFF WITH KIDS AND KIDS THAT ARE IN SCHOOL AND WHEN DOES THE SCHOOL YEAR END? THAT SEEMS TO FLUCTUATE A LITTLE BIT BASED ON DO WE HAVE HURRICANES AND WE USE OUR HURRICANE DAYS, ET CETERA.
IF WE HAVE AN ENTIRE MONTH, THOUGH, WHERE WE DON'T HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING THAT SHOULD PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY FOR EVERYBODY, WHOEVER NEEDS WHATEVER.
IF THEY HAVE KIDS STILL IN SCHOOL AT THE BEGINNING OF JUNE, THEY'LL STILL HAVE THE END OF THE MONTH WHERE THEY CAN HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AND GO AWAY WITH THEIR FAMILY.
SO I THINK IT'S A WIN EITHER WAY, AND I'M FINE EITHER WAY.
AND WE'RE NOT IN THE HEIGHT OF HURRICANE SEASON, SO I THINK JUNE IS WAY BETTER THAN LATER ON. YEAH, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS KEN'S PROPOSAL, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU HAVE KIDS IN SCHOOL IF YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE THEM A MONTH'S SABBATICAL AND SPEND AS MUCH TIME WITH THE FAMILY AS POSSIBLE.
SO IF YOU KNOW SCHOOL ISN'T LAID OUT UNTIL AFTER THE FIRST WEEK OF JUNE OR SO, LIKE IF WE MAKE IT LIKE FROM JUNE 15TH THROUGH JULY 14TH, IT WOULD ALSO GIVE THEM A FOURTH OF JULY TOGETHER. I THINK, YOU KNOW, BEING THAT SPECIFIC WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.
AND AGAIN, IT WOULD GIVE THEM, YOU KNOW, A FULL MONTH SPEND WITH THEIR FAMILIES.
WHAT ARE SOME THOUGHTS ON THAT? OK. OH, I ACTUALLY IT SOUNDS GOOD, BUT I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO GO WITH A SPECIFIC MONTH, THE MONTH OF JUNE TO BE IN COORDINATION.
I KNOW FOR ME I WOULD IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR ME TO PLAN, LIKE IF I'M, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO PARIS OR SOMETHING, I'M GOING WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME.
AND ALSO KNOWING THAT I'M NOT CONFLICTING WITH COUNTY OR ANY OTHER THINGS.
SO FOR JUST BY LOOKING AT IT, I DON'T.
OF COURSE, I'M NOT WORKING IN THE CITY, BUT I JUST THINK COORDINATING WITH THE COUNTY WOULD BE GOOD. WE KNOW IT'S MONTH IN JUNE.
YOU KNOW, THE 15 TO THE 40 JUST SOUNDS A LITTLE BIT QUIRKY TO ME.
SO I THINK ONE MONTH OFF, IT'S ONE MONTH WE KNOW WE START BACK.
THE NEXT MEETING IS THE FIRST OF JULY, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST THURSDAY IN JULY.
SO. AS A CONSENSUS, BECAUSE WE CAN MOVE FROM THIS BECAUSE EVERYBODY SEEMS THAT WE'RE THERE, THE CONSENSUS IS THE WHOLE MONTH OF JUNE.
OR IS THERE A CONSENSUS TO GO MID JUNE TO MID-JULY? WHAT'S THE FLAVOR? I WOULD GO WITH THE MONTH OF JUNE, THEN IF THAT WERE THE CASE, ESPECIALLY SINCE, YOU KNOW, AS I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT, IT OFFERS THEM THE FACT THAT JULY 4TH IS A HOLIDAY ANYWAY. AND SO THEY WOULD GET A DOUBLE BLESSING BECAUSE THEY JUST CUT OFF THE MONTH OF JUNE AND THEN THEY CAME IN AND OH, IT'S JULY 4TH WEEKEND.
AND THAT MIGHT JUST BE A DOUBLE BONUS FOR ALL THE WORK THAT THEY DO IS FOR STAFF TO WORK FOR THAT JUNE. YES, GOOD, I LIKE IT.
I LIKE TO MAKE A SPECIFIC MOTION TO TO AMEND SECTION THREE 08 ONE TO TO READ THE CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS AT LEAST TWICE EACH MONTH, EXCEPT FOR THE THE MONTH OF JUNE, WHERE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOT HAVE ANY MEETINGS.
I THINK WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED IT.
WELL, AT LEAST WE GOT ONE THING SOLVED.
THERE, SECTION THREE POINT ZERO NINE PETITION TO AMEND THE CITY CHARTER OR ADOPT OR
[01:35:02]
REPEAL ORDINANCE.DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? ON THREE OH, NINE, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S AT, BUT I KNOW THAT IF YOU'RE IF YOU HAVE A I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PETITIONS, WHERE ARE THE PETITIONS TO OK, THAT'S WHERE I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION.
ANYTHING THERE? YOU KNOW, WELL, MOVING ON TO ZERO NINE TO.
AND THE QUESTION IT MAY IT MAY CIRCLE BACK TO 309 ONE.
BUT WHEN IT SAYS A NUMBER OF SIGNATURES, IT SHOULD BE 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY. A.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT REGISTERED VOTERS? DOES THAT MEAN HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THE CITY? WHAT DOES THAT SPECIFICALLY MEAN? REGISTERED VOTERS? YES, IT'S REGISTERED VOTERS.
LET US I WOULD SAY IT MEANS REGISTERED VOTERS, YEAH.
AND IT. SWAGIT REGISTERED VOTERS JUST LETTING THE LEGAL OF IT.
THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO DO. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T THE POPULATION BECAUSE THEN THEN IT WOULD BE LIKE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, SUGGESTIONS.
ACTUALLY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE ONE IF YOU READ SOME CHAPTER ONE UNDER THREE HUNDRED NINE TO IT, AT LEAST ALL PITCHERS MUST BE SIGNED BY AT LEAST 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY. AND IT GOES ON TO SAY PETITIONS TO PROPOSE OR REPEAL ORDINANCES MUST BE SIGNED BY AT LEAST FIVE PERCENT.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD AND IT SHOULD BE 10 PERCENT ACROSS THE BOARD IF YOU CAN'T GET 10 PERCENT OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS TO PETITION TO CHANGE AN ORDINANCE. YOU SHOULDN'T CHANGE IT.
ANY ANY THOUGHTS, COMMENTS OF A QUESTION, IT'S THE.
DO YOU KNOW? AGAIN, TALK ABOUT THE SPIRIT.
WHAT WAS THE DO YOU KNOW WHAT SPIRIT OF THE FIVE PERCENT WAS? WHY IS IT HARDER TO GET? IT REALLY WAS JUST ALMOST A NEGOTIATION BECAUSE THERE WAS A SEGMENT THAT WANTED TO REALLY DECREASE THE THE PETITION AMOUNT.
AND I THINK IT WAS MORE OR LESS A COMPROMISE WHERE IT DIDN'T SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASE THE PETITION AMOUNT BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO SOME OTHER LANGUAGE THAT WE WERE REFLECTING UPON.
AND SO IT WAS THERE WAS MORE FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE I THINK THE AUDIENCES WASN'T ACTUALLY SOMETHING WHERE THERE WAS A STATUTORY REFERENCE FOR US.
SO THEY KIND OF GAVE THEM THIS PART.
IT WAS ESSENTIALLY HOW I INTERPRETED IT.
CERTAINLY, THE MAYOR CAN TELL YOU, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT WAS MORE OR LESS A COMPROMISE AMONG A COUPLE OF GROUPS.
BUT AS I SAID AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN'T GET 10 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS TO REPEAL AN ORDINANCE AS WELL AS AS WELL AS TO CHANGE THE CITY CHARTER, THEN THEN IT SHOULDN'T BE CHANGED. AND NO ONE IS, OF COURSE, AS FAR AS CHANGE IN THE CITY CHARTER, THE 10 PERCENT THAT WOULD TRIGGER A SPECIAL ELECTION.
AND ALTHOUGH YOU KNOW A CHANGE, AN ORDINANCE WOULDN'T REQUIRE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
BUT STILL, AGAIN, IF YOU CAN'T GET 10 PERCENT OF THE OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS TO TO REPEAL A PROPOSED ORDINANCE, IT SHOULDN'T BE REPEALED.
JEFFREY, MY QUESTION IS, DOES THE FIVE PERCENT REQUIREMENT TRIGGER A SPECIAL ELECTION? IT DOES, OR IT DOESN'T.
ALL RIGHT, SO BECAUSE IT'S A CITY COUNCIL APPROVES OR AND REJECTS, YOU KNOW, ORDINANCES.
IF I'M INTERPRETING IT CORRECTLY, THE 10 PERCENT THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE CHARTER IS BECAUSE IT'S MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN THE CHANGE IN THE OIL.
WELL, THAT WAS THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WE HAD WHEN WHEN THAT WAS WHEN THAT WAS INSTITUTED.
BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN'T GET 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTORS, IT SHOULDN'T.
I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH, I WOULD I WOULD CONCUR.
UH, SMALL GROUPS OF PEOPLE CREATING A LOT OF A LOT OF PROBLEMS, IF YOU CAN'T GET 10 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE, THEN I THINK I THINK THEN IT MIGHT BE A FRIVOLOUS EFFORT TO TAKE AN ORDINANCE AWAY. WHAT ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD? AND I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO TO CHANGE THREE POINT TWO SUBSECTION ONE THE LAST PARAGRAPH TO READ PETITIONS TO PROPOSE OR REPEAL ORDINANCES MUST ALSO BE SIGNED BY AT LEAST 10
[01:40:03]
PERCENT OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS AS OF THE LAST PRECEDING MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION.IF YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING, NO.
MAYOR. WELL, YOU AND MINE TOO, SUBJECT TWO AND THREE.
YOU'VE STILL GOT TWO AND THREE.
YEP, YOU HAVE STUFF TO ADD THERE.
WELL. NOT TO MICHELLE, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE DOES SPECIFICALLY, BUT BUT IT'S PRETTY, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
HOWEVER, THERE'S SOMETHING I WANT.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT PETITIONS AT LENGTH IN REGARDS TO ANOTHER CHAPTER THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE FRANKLY, I'LL PUT THIS MILDLY AS POSSIBLE.
I THINK THERE WAS A CHANGE MADE TO THE CITY CHARTER DUE TO A PETITION WHICH DID NOT FOLLOW DID NOT FOLLOW THE LAW.
AND I'M GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THAT IN THE FUTURE, BUT NOT NOT RIGHT NOW, ALTHOUGH IT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO TWO TO THREE POINT TWO OF THE.
WE ARE MOVING TO ZERO, NINE THREE.
ANYTHING THERE? ZERO, NINE, FOUR. ZERO, NINE, FIVE.
ONE ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS.
SECTION THREE POINT ONE ONE, OH, OH, YOU FEEL YOUR EARS BURNING, PATRICIA. OK.
WELL, ONE THREE. ONE, ONE, FOUR.
YOU ESCAPED THAT SAFELY, DIDN'T YOU? A SECTION THREE POINT ONE TO.
ANYTHING TO ADD THERE, NO COMMENTS OR COMMENTS.
ARTICLE FOR. I WAS TOLD THAT WE COULD WE COULD.
WE HAVE FROM SIX TO EIGHT, CORRECT.
OK, JUST SO WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING WE COULD PUSH CERTAIN THINGS OUT, JUST LIKE WE DID WITH. SO WE'RE JUST BEGINNING, WE HAVE UNTIL THE END OF MAY.
WE'RE GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS.
GUARANTEED. SECTION FOUR POINT ZERO ONE TO THE RIGHT CITY MANAGER. FOUR POINT ZERO ELEVEN.
YOU MAY WANT TO. JUST CHANGE A LITTLE BIT OF THE LANGUAGE THERE ON FOUR POINT ZERO ONE ONE. HOWEVER, SHOULD THE MANAGER CHANGE RESIDENCY SUBSEQUENT TO HIS OR HER APPOINTMENT? THE LAWYER MAN, AN ATTORNEY AT HAND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S YEAH, IT IS KIND OF REDUNDANT. OK, SO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC LINE THAT YOU WANT TO PROPOSE AND A MOTION.
WELL, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE JUST ADD THE LANGUAGE SUBSEQUENT TO HIS OR HER OR HER APPOINTMENT. IN FOUR POINT ZERO ONE ONE.
[01:45:02]
ANY DISCUSSION? I I'M GOING TO CALL IT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I I WILL OPPOSE.QUESTION. AND JUST AN EXPLANATION IS WHAT I NEED.
WHAT IS THE SURETY BOND FOR AND HOW MUCH DOES IT COST? ACTUALLY, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD ELIMINATE, ESSENTIALLY, WE HAVE A PROVISION THAT SAYS BUY, BUT WE IS CALLED OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS LIABLE.
WE BUY INSURANCE THAT COVERS THE CHARTER OFFICERS AND ALSO THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THAT IS JUST A BETTER METHOD OF DOING IT.
WE WE LOOKED AT BOND AND WAS LIKE, OK, WE CAN.
FIGURE OUT, AND I CAN'T REMEMBER, I HAD THE RISK MANAGER LOOK AT BUYING THE MOUSE, BUT THEN WE ALSO SAW THAT ALTHOUGH WE WOULD BE GETTING A BOND, WE ACTUALLY PAY FOR THE SAME THING THAT IS COVERED BY THE INSURANCE THAT WE DO.
SO WE'VE KIND OF. WE TALKED TO THE CITY MANAGERS, WE LET THEM KNOW, HEY, YOU'RE COVERED, BUT IT'S JUST IT WOULD BE JUST AN ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO TO PROVIDE A DUPLICATE COVERAGE AND AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET DUPLICATE PAYMENT.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING CERTAINLY THAT RISK WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO GOING AWAY BECAUSE IT'S JUST EASIER AND MORE PRACTICAL.
IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE'VE HAD A LONG TIME TO COVER IT BY INSURANCE.
I BELIEVE IT'S COVERED BY OUR LIABILITY POLICY, CORRECT? WE HAVE AN INSURANCE POLICY JUST FOR YOU.
SO BASICALLY, TO HAVE THIS IN THE CITY CHARTER IS JUST ABSOLUTELY REDUNDANT.
SO I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REMOVE FOUR POINT ONE FOR OUR SECOND.
I WANTED TO MAKE THE MOTION, BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
I'LL SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ON THE BOND.
SECOND THAT FOR MR. OGATA, I AM JUST CONCERNED THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME EXPLANATION AS TO WHY IT'S BEING REMOVED. IT WAS PROVIDED BY WHAT? WHEN WE REMOVE IT? OH, OK. OH, I UNDERSTAND.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD ONE QUICK THING WHEN I SAW IT, I WAS WONDERING IF SHE HAD TO PROVIDE HER OWN BOND BECAUSE IT TIES IT ALL THE TIME.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS A MUNICIPAL.
YEAH. WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO CALL IT ALL IN FAVOR.
POWERS AND DUTIES NEEDING TO ADD THERE A B.
NOTHING. MAX IS ZERO ONE SIX SUPERVISION OF DEPARTMENTS.
DOES THE CITY MANAGER SEE ANYTHING HERE THAT'S MISSING? NO, ACTUALLY, AFTER I REVIEWED IT AGAIN, I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING NEW TO ADD SO.
OK. SECTION FOUR POINT TWO, ACTING CITY MANAGER.
WILL POINT ZERO THREE PERSONNEL SYSTEM ANYTHING TO ADD THERE? SECTION FOUR POINT ZERO FOR FISCAL YEAR.
IT IS WHAT IT IS, YOU CAN'T CHANGE.
YEAH, IT'S JUST AN EXPLANATORY, REALLY SECTION FOUR POINT ZERO FIVE INDEPENDENT ANNUAL AUDIT. I HAVE A QUESTION.
GEOFFREY, WHY IS THERE NOT A SPECIFIC TIME SET FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO TO CONTACT OR ENGAGE THE AUDITORS? IT JUST SAYS PRIOR TO.
AND I AND I'M LOOKING AT A SITUATION WHERE IF THERE'S SOMETHING AMISS, THE CITY MANAGER COULD DELAY THE.
THE SERVICES OF THE AUDIT, SO THAT THE AUDIT IS NOT COMPLETED BY THE TIME THE MISDEEDS ARE DISCOVERED, SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE SHOULD BE A SPECIFIC TIME, LET'S SAY THREE
[01:50:01]
MONTHS BEFORE THE FISCAL YEAR, SOMETHING THAT LIKE.WANT TO ADDRESS THAT? YEAH, JUST BRIEFLY, WE ACTUALLY ARE ALSO GOVERNED BY THE STATE AND WE HAVE TO SUBMIT OUR ANNUAL AUDIT TO THEM BY CERTAIN DEADLINES THAT THEY ESTABLISH.
SO THERE'S ALREADY KIND OF LIKE A CHECK AND BALANCE IN PLACE FOR THAT.
SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YOU WOULDN'T NEED THAT ADDED TO THE CHARTER BECAUSE IF WE FAIL TO SUBMIT OUR RESULTS OF OUR AUDIT TO THE STATE, THE STATE WILL COME AFTER US AND LET US KNOW. AND WHEN ELSE? SECTION FOUR POINT ZERO SIX FIND FEES.
THERE. ARTICLE FIVE QUALIFICATIONS AND ELECTIONS, SECTION FIVE POINT ZERO ONE. NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS TO ADD THEIR.
YET WHEN I START SEEING FLIERS AND STUFF LIKE THIS THAT COME OUT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT. RUNNING FOR ELECTION ALL OVER HIS PLASTERED, WHAT THEIR POLITICAL, WHAT THEIR POLITICAL PARTY IS, WHAT THEIR POLITICAL VIEWS ARE IN THEIR FLIERS THAT I'M RECEIVING.
I'M RECEIVING THINGS THAT ARE PAID FOR BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OR PAID FOR BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
AND IT'S GOT THIS INDIVIDUAL'S NAME ON IT.
WE'RE ENDORSING THIS PERSON AT THAT MOMENT.
IT STOPS BEING NONPARTISAN BECAUSE THAT PUTS PEOPLE ARE SEEING IN THE FLIERS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO CORRECT IT, BUT IF IT'S GOING TO BE NONPARTIZAN.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE. THEN YOU GET A REAL.
BOARD PARTY LINE AUTOMATICALLY OUT THE WINDOW.
THAT'S HOW EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS.
PATRICIA, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT, THE LEGALITIES OF THAT? YES, CERTAINLY WE CAN TELL THE CANDIDATES NOT TO IDENTIFY, BUT THERE IS NOTHING THAT WE CAN DO ABOUT OTHER GROUPS BEING ABLE TO EXERCISE THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND SAY WHO THEY SUPPORT OR ENDORSE A CANDIDATE.
YOU KNOW, BASICALLY WHAT THIS DOES IS THAT'S ON A BALLOT, YOU WON'T SEE YOUR POLITICAL PARTIES IDENTIFIED, AND THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT THIS ACCOMPLISHES, AND IT PREVENTS THE CANDIDATES THEMSELVES FROM FROM FROM DOING THAT.
AND, YEAH, JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS THERE A PENALTY IF THEY VIOLATE THAT? AS FAR AS THE PERSON RUNNING FOR OFFICE SUPPOSED TO BE NONPARTISAN AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY THEY ANNOUNCE A DEMOCRAT OR I'M A REPUBLICAN OR I'M A LIBERTARIAN? IS THERE A PENALTY FOR THAT? WELL, GOOD TO HEAR.
NO, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT THEY KNOW IT IS NONPARTIZAN AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT ON THE BALLOTS.
TYPICALLY, I HAVEN'T SEEN AN ISSUE AS FAR AS THE CANDIDATES.
YOU KNOW, THEY MAY FILE CERTAIN BELIEFS BUT NOT SAYING, HEY, I'M THIS, AND THEY USUALLY WILL SAY, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THIS IS A NONPARTISAN RACE, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY EASY TO FIND OUT WHAT ANYBODY'S POLITICAL PARTY IS TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE REGISTERED AND SELECT ONE.
SO PEOPLE TYPICALLY VERY EASILY FIND THIS INFORMATION OUT WHETHER THE POLITICIANS SAY WHAT PARTY THEY ARE OR NOT.
YEAH. SO THERE'S CURRENTLY A LOCAL BILL THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
WOULD THAT SUPERSEDE THE LANGUAGE IN THIS CHARTER IF THAT LOCAL BILL PASSED? YES. OK. AND JUST SO EVERYBODY WHO'S AWARE OF THE LOCAL BILL WOULD THEN PUT PARTIZAN AREN'T ON ON THE BALLOT FOR NONPARTISAN RACES.
IT WOULD BASICALLY INVALIDATE THAT SECTION.
I DIDN'T QUITE GRASP WHAT HE SAID.
I WANT TO EXPLAIN UNCLE BILL BEING PROPOSED RIGHT NOW, AND THE STATE IS TO HAVE A PARTIZAN R OR D NEXT TO YOUR NAME ON ALL NONPARTIZAN RACES IN BREVARD COUNTY, ONLY AFFECTING BREVARD COUNTY, RIGHT? OK. FIVE, ZERO TWO.
[01:55:05]
ZERO FOR ONE.ZERO FOUR ONE WHERE IT SAYS IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE IN A SPECIAL OR REGULAR ELECTION IN WHICH TWO OR MORE CANDIDATES ARE SEEKING THE SAME VISIT, SAME DESIGNATED SEAT ON THE COUNCIL, A RUNOFF ELECTION WILL ONLY BE HELD IF BREAKING THE TIE WOULD DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
HOW CAN YOU DETERMINE IF A RUNOFF ELECTION WOULD DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE? ESSENTIALLY, YOU CAN'T THAT'S WHAT THE RUNOFF ELECTION IS FOR.
I THINK THE RUNOFF IS THE DETERRENT.
WELL, THAT'S MY POINT, YEAH, I KNOW.
AND YEAH, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH, I MAKE A MOTION TO TO JUST ABSOLUTELY JUST ELIMINATE THE THE THE PART REFERRING TO, YOU KNOW, A RUNOFF ELECTION WILL ONLY BE HELD IF BREAKING THE TIE WOULD DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE THAT FROM THE FIVE OH, FOUR POINT ONE.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT ALL OPTIONS AND SOMEHOW.
IF THERE ARE THREE CANDIDATES.
THEY ARE SEEKING THE SAME DESIGNATED SEAT.
AND TWO CAME UP WITH FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE VOTES.
OK, SO YOU'RE JUST SAYING THE SAME THING, BUT JUST IN DIFFERENT WORDS.
WELL, NO, THIS IS REFERRING TO THAT IF YOU ONLY ARE GOING TO HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION, IF IT WOULD DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
WELL, OF COURSE, THAT'S WHY YOU HOLD THE RUNOFF ELECTION.
MR. MOST MR. VICE-CHAIR ON THE SECOND.
CAN I GET. PATRICIA, ARE WE SEEKING JUSTICE TO STRIKE IF BREAKING A TIE WOULD, SO IT WOULD A RUNOFF ELECTION WOULD ONLY BE HELD TO DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
ARE WE JUST GOING TO STRIKE THE IF BREAKING THE TIE WOULD? CORRECT? OK. MY QUESTION WAS, IS THIS LANGUAGE THAT'S COMING FROM THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS OR IS THIS CONCURRENT WITH WHAT THEY HAVE FOR ELECTIONS? SO IF WE DELETED THE LANGUAGE OF THAT, STILL BE WITH WHAT THE SUPERVISOR HAS FOR THESE ELECTIONS. WELL, THE PROCEDURE WOULD BE A RUNOFF ELECTION TO DETERMINE THE WINNER.
YES. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR SAY I WILL OPPOSE.
SECTION FIVE POINT ZERO FIVE RECALL ANYTHING THERE.
OK. SECTION FIVE POINT ZERO SIX ELECTION DISTRICTS, VOTING PRECINCTS ZERO SIX ONE.
I THINK THERE. WE GOT TO WOW ON THE MARKER.
WHOA. WELL, WELL DONE, MR. CHAN. NO, WE PLANNED IT THAT RIGHT? COME ON. HEY, IT'S YOUR BIRTHDAY.
HEY, WITH THAT MEETING ADJOURNED.
OUR NEXT THING WILL BE NEXT MEETING THE FEBRUARY 8TH.
6:00 P.M..
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.