[00:00:02]
[CALL TO ORDER]
UM, AFTER THEY GOT UP.PLEASE RISE. ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES.
THE REPUBLICAN. AND ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE.
HECTARE PROPERTY VICE CHAIR WEINBERG, YEAH, MR. DELGADO HERE, MR. MYERS. MR. MACLEOD. MR. MOORE, YOU'RE MR. JONES. YOU'RE MR. CHANDLER. YOU'RE MR. POTTER. MR MIRAGE.
[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
HE HAD TIME TO REVIEW IT.SECOND. ANY CORRECTIONS DELETIONS? NOT AT ALL. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I, I WILL OPPOSE.
PUBLIC COMMENTS, JUST SO THE PUBLIC.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
PEOPLE HERE. THAN USUAL, YOU WOULD SAY.I JUST WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU COULD EITHER SPEAK NOW OR YOU COULD SPEAK UNDER THE ITEM. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY.
ON WHATEVER ITEM YOU CAME HERE FOR, BUT IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME ON THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. YOU COULD DO SO.
YES. YES, THERE'S THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU. MY NAME IS LAURIE LAFAVE.
I LIVE AT 12 11 GERALDINE NORTHWEST AND I JUST.
BUT I'VE SPOKEN TO A FEW PEOPLE HERE AND AND THEY'RE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE THAT I AM.
I WAS UNABLE TO FIND ANYTHING ABOUT THE MEETING ONLINE.
AND SO I DON'T HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION OF WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN COVERED.
YEAH, SO EVERYBODY I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL THAT INFORMATION IS, BUT IT'S NOT ONLINE, IT'S NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
ONE OTHER THING, AND COULD YOU JUST SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT SO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR IT BECAUSE EVEN WITH THE MICROPHONE, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT.
THANK YOU. I'M A LITTLE LET THE CITY CLERK ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
YEAH, I APOLOGIZE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE AGENDAS OF MINUTES OUT THERE AT THIS TIME.
WE DID HAVE ISSUES WITH OUR VENDOR FOR OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS WITH GETTING INFORMATION POSTED, BUT AS SOON AS WE GET THAT UP AND RUNNING, ALL THE INFORMATION WILL BE OUT THERE.
OK. AND YOU CAN DEFINITELY EMAIL ME TERRY JONES AT PALM BAY, FLORIDA, DOT ORG, AND I CAN SEND YOU ALL THE INFORMATION.
ANYONE ELSE? TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC COMMENTS RIGHT NOW FOR THOSE THEY HAD JUST CAME IN.
YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM THAT YOU'RE HERE FOR.
OK. JUST FOLLOW ALONG ON THE AGENDA AND YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
MY NAME IS RUTH CAULFIELD, 09:35 DOUGLAS STREET SOUTHEAST.
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO MAKING A PROPOSAL TO REPLACE THE CURRENT LANGUAGE OF SECTION 3.2 ZERO SIX TWO.
TO READ A VACANCY OF THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE FILLED BY SPECIAL ELECTION, WHERE THE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY ARE TO CHOOSE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE ON THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD IT BE VACATED.
ORDER OF BUSINESS VICE CHAIR WEINBERG WILL BE THE ONES.
THE COMMISSION OR WHETHER THE CITIZENS.
YOU WILL BE CALLED UP BY THE VICE CHAIR.
[UNFINISHED AND OLD BUSINESS]
LET'S MOVE ON TO UNFINISHED AND OLD BUSINESS.GOING TO START WHERE WE LEFT OFF.
[00:05:03]
ARTICLE THREE, LEGISLATIVE SECTION THREE POINT ZERO THREE COMPENSATION.MAYOR, AT THE LAST MEETING, THE COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT STAFF BRING BACK SOME FURTHER INFORMATION AS FAR AS COMPARABLES AND SUCH, BUT WE HAVEN'T GATHERED ALL THE INFORMATION YET, SO WE WOULD ASK THAT WE JUST CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL STAFF IS ABLE TO BRING THE INFORMATION BACK. UM, IN MOTION TO CONTINUE.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? IF NOT, I'M GOING TO CALL TO THE TABLE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
IN FAVOR. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I OPPOSE.
THREE LEGISLATIVE SECTION THREE POINT ZERO FIVE.
YEAH, I BELIEVE MRS. SMITH, YEAH, ADDED SOME LANGUAGE THAT WE PROPOSED AND PUT IT IN LEGISLATIVE FORM, STATING AS IN ADDITION TO FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS TO ADD THE THE STATEMENT THAT NO CURRENT OR FORMER ELECTED OFFICIALS IN SECTION A IN SECTION B ANY DISCUSSION OF THAT PROPOSAL.
THE DATE WE DIDN'T WE DON'T HAVE A CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED, BUT CERTAINLY IF THIS MOVED FORWARD, IT WOULD WE WOULD UPDATE IT, RIGHT.
THAT 2016 DATE LIKELY WAS WHEN WE ADOPTED IT.
AND SO THIS ADOPTION WOULD BE UPDATED FOR THE DATE SO THAT ANYBODY THAT IS CURRENTLY.
EMPLOYED AT THE TIME WOULD NOT BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.
RIGHT, THAT'S UNDERSTOOD, THAT'S SOME OF THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE.
ANY DISCUSSION? I THOUGHT THOUGHT WE VOTED ON THAT LAST TIME.
SMITH PUT IT INTO INTO A LEGAL FORMAT SO THAT WITH THE WITH THE ADDITION THAT THAT ANYONE WHO IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED PRIOR TO NOVEMBER, YOU KNOW, TO THE CURRENT DATE THAT THIS WOULD BE ADOPTED WOULD BE BASICALLY GRANDFATHERED UNDER IT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO COMMENT ON THIS? SEEING NONE. BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE LANGUAGE PROPOSED BY VICE CHAIR PHIL WEINBERG.
ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I I ALL OPPOSE.
ARTICLE THREE LEGISLATIVE SECTION.
PROPOSE. BILL? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AS THE LANGUAGE STATES AND AS STAFF WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION FROM THE LAST PACKET OF OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE LANGUAGE ON HOW THEY THEY TAKE THEIR VACANCIES AND.
HONESTLY, AFTER READING THEM, I WAS ACTUALLY QUITE ENCOURAGED THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT I PROPOSED WAS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE WAY THAT MANY OF OUR OTHER NEIGHBORING CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TAKE ANY TYPE OF APPOINTMENT ARE NEEDING FOR ANY TYPE OF ELECTIONS MOVING FORWARD. SO THE LANGUAGE THAT I'M PROPOSING IS VERY SIMILAR TO THAT, WHICH IS ALREADY IN IN ORDINANCES IN PLACES LIKE MELBOURNE, SIMILAR TO THAT SIMILAR TO PLACES LIKE WEST MELBOURNE AND ALSO THE OTHER ONES THAT WERE PROVIDED AS WELL.
I WOULD ASK THAT THE REST OF THE BOARD THAT LOOKS AT THIS FAVORABLY ON ON THE LANGUAGE HERE, I HAD NO OTHER CHANGES TO MY.
MY PROPOSAL. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I WILL COME TO THAT BEFORE, AFTER WE HAVE OUR BOARD DISCUSSION AND BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT, THEN WE'LL ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AGAIN.
WE ARE ON THREE POINT ZERO SIX TWO.
ACTUALLY, I HAVE IT WRITTEN OUT FOR EVERYBODY AND I BELIEVE IT WAS DISTRIBUTED.
AND I'D LIKE TO WRITE OR READ THROUGH IT IN AS MUCH AS FOR THE PUBLIC TO TO HEAR.
I BEFORE I READ IT, JUST JUST AS A STATEMENT, IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
[00:10:02]
SUPPORT IN A POSITION YOU CAN GOOGLE AND FIND SUPPORT FOR ANY POSITION, INCLUDING THAT WE DIDN'T GO TO THE MOON.SO JUST BECAUSE ONE CITY DOES SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN THERE AREN'T JUST AS MANY CITIES WHO DON'T DO IT IN THE SAME LANGUAGE.
AND SO I'D LIKE TO JUST GO THROUGH.
THE THOUGHT PROCESS THAT I HAD NO ONE.
UH, HAVING IT THE WAY WE HAVE IT TODAY.
NOT AS WRITTEN. LET ME SAY IN TIMES PAST.
IS BETTER FOR THE DICE AND FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY FOR THIS REASON, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT HAVING A SPECIAL ELECTION, IF IT'S UNDER, IF IT'S BEYOND A YEAR AND THEN IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT APPOINTED IF IT'S LESS THAN A YEAR.
PERSONALLY, I WOULD SAY IT'S ALMOST BETTER THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW FOR THE REASONS THAT I'M ABOUT TO GIVE IN THAT THE DICE CAN WORK WITH FOUR.
IT TAKES THREE PEOPLE TO PASS A LEGISLATION.
AND SO WHETHER THERE'S FIVE PEOPLE OR FOUR PEOPLE, IT STILL TAKES THREE TO PASS A LEGISLATION. SO THESE ARE MY POINTS.
NUMBER ONE, IT IS A PROTECTION FOR THE REPUTATION OF THE DICE.
AND FORGIVE ME FOR THE ERROR IN SPELLING.
I GOT DS IN MY IN MY MIND BEING BILINGUAL AND SOMETIMES I MIX THE TWO TOGETHER.
THEY CALL IT SPANGLISH, BUT IT IS A PROTECTION FOR THE REPUTATION OF THE DICE AND FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ELECT THEIR REPRESENTATIVE.
IT HAS BEEN OFFERED BY PEOPLE THAT WE SHOULD TRUST OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
QUITE FRANKLY, I DO TRUST OUR CURRENT ELECTED OFFICIALS.
I REPEAT, I DO TRUST OUR CURRENT ELECTION ELECTED OFFICIALS AND EVEN SOME OF THE PREVIOUS ONES, I HAD TO THROW THAT IN THERE JUST IN CASE THAT WAS NECESSARY.
BUT HAVE WE FORGOTTEN WHAT JUST TRANSPIRED? TO THOSE WE TRUSTED IN PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION.
THIS IS NOT A LONG THIS IS NOT A SHORT TERM, IT IS A LONG TERM.
THINKING THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING OF IT JUST TAKES THREE BAD APPLES TO MANIPULATE A CITY. WE ALREADY SEEN IN TIMES PAST THAT NOT EVERYBODY WHO IS ELECTED.
WE JUST CAME OUT NO POINT NUMBER THREE, WE JUST CAME OUT OF AN INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY. TO PASS THIS NOW WILL NOT HELP THE REPUTATION OF THE DATE OF THE DICE.
IT DOES NOT HELP THE REPUTATION OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
IT WILL BE A MEDIA BLITZ NIGHTMARE FOR THE REPUTATION AND THE PROMOTION OR THE DETRIMENT OF THE CITY OF BOMBAY.
IF IT'S LESS THAN ONE YEAR AND THERE'S FOUR ON THE DICE, IF YOU CAN'T PASS IT WHEN IT WASN'T IMPORTANT, THEN IT WASN'T IMPORTANT IN THE FIRST PLACE AND IT CERTAINLY CAN WAIT TO THE NEXT GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ELECTED WITH FOUR ON THE DICE.
IT'S STILL THREE TO ONE VOTE TO PASS.
A DECISION ON OUR CURRENT AND OUR CURRENT HISTORY HAS PROVEN THAT IT IS NOT A DETRIMENT TO THE PROGRESS OF BOMBAY TO HAVE JUST FOUR FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR.
I PULLED UP A 2008 2009 SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY THAT WAS ALSO FOR AN APPOINTMENT VERSUS AN ELECTION FOR A VACATED SEAT THAT CONCLUDED THREE POINTS.
WHEN YOU'RE LIKE WHEN YOU PUT SOMEONE IN THERE, THE INCUMBENT AUTOMATICALLY HAS THE EDGE, MAKING IT NOT A GOOD ELECTION.
THEY CAN ACTUALLY SERVE LONGER THAN THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED, BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO THEY HAVE A TERM LIMIT OF TWO.
BUT THEY ALSO HAVE THE TIME THAT THEY WERE PLACED IN THEIR.
AND NUMBER SIX SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
SEE, THIS IS THEIR DETERMINATION.
THESE THREE THINGS ARE THE DETERMINATION THAT THEY SAID THEY CONCLUDED THAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN VOTED FOR AND NOT PLACED BY BY APPOINTMENT.
THE COST OF AN ELECTION IS NOT A VALID EXCUSE FOR DENYING VOTERS THE RIGHT TO A SPECIAL ELECTION. SPECIFICALLY, THIS IS THEIR WORDING SPECIFICALLY IF THERE IS MORE THAN A YEAR REMAINING IN THE TERM.
[00:15:04]
POINT NUMBER WOULD BE NUMBER SIX, THOUGH IT SAYS SEVEN THERE.ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S GETTYSBURG ADDRESS SAID THAT WE HERE HIGHLY RESOLVE THAT THESE DEAD SHALL NOT HAVE DIED IN VAIN, THAT THIS NATION UNDER GOD SHALL HAVE A NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM. AND THAT GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE.
BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE SHALL NOT PERISH FROM THIS EARTH.
AND THE FINAL POINT AND AGAIN IN THE SUPREME COURT DECISION OF 1970 FOR RICHARDSON VERSUS RAMIREZ CASE, JUSTICE REHNQUIST WROTE, BECAUSE OF THE RIGHT TO VOTE IS OF THE ESSENCE OF A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY AND ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THAT RIGHT STRIKE AT THE HEART OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.
VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT.
SO THE ISSUE HERE AGAIN IS NOT MONEY.
THE ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DINOSAUR THAT IS VOTED BY THE PEOPLE.
AND FOR THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE IT'S OF THE PEOPLE.
AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY SEMBLANCE OF WRONGDOING BY PEOPLE PLACING INTO OFFICE THOSE THAT WERE NOT VOTED FOR.
THE EXCEPTION BEING WHEN THE TIME IS SO, SO SHORT, THERE COULD BE AN EXCEPTION.
BUT AGAIN, I SAY, HEY, THE FOUR HAVE WORKED TREMENDOUSLY.
HISTORICALLY, WE'VE SEEN IT, AND IT'S NOT A BIG ISSUE THAT THERE'S NOT FIVE THAT CAN'T WAIT TILL THE NEXT ELECTION ELECTION.
SO MY POINT AGAIN IS I COMPLETELY AND VEHEMENTLY DISAGREE WITH ANY VARIATION.
PEOPLE, TO A POINT, I DON'T CARE IF THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE DID.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE STATE.
I'M TALKING ABOUT PAMBY THE FUTURE OF THE PALM BAY AND THAT PALM BEARS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT. TO SAY I WANT THIS PERSON TO REPRESENT ME BECAUSE I WAS THE ONE THAT VOTED THAT PERSON IN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I ASKED TO BE PLACED IN THE HAWKS, FOLKS, FOLKS, PLEASE HOLD YOUR PLEASE HOLD, HOLD YOUR REACTIONS TO THAT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD? HAVE ANY COMMENTS? DAVID? TESTING, TESTING. THERE WE GO.
CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT THE COST OF THE SPECIAL ELECTION IS? I KNOW WE HAD THAT I WATCHED, BUT.
A LITTLE LESS THAN TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND.
WAS IT A FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND DURING THE CURRENT ELECTION TIME IS THE COST US AROUND THE LAST ELECTION WAS ABOUT $11000, OK? MAY I ASK QUESTIONS TO WHAT THE GENTLEMAN JUST READ? YES, GO AHEAD. OKAY.
SO YOU SAID THAT LESS THAN ONE YEAR ON THE DICE WITH THE.
FOR PEOPLE THAT IT'S STILL THE SAME BECAUSE YOU STILL NEED THREE TO VOTE.
AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT I HEAR YOU WHEN YOU SAY THAT MONEY ISN'T AN ISSUE, I'M.
SOME OF US TO CONSIDER OURSELVES CONSERVATIVE WOULD PROBABLY DISAGREE BECAUSE TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS ON AN ELECTION FOR A PERSON WHO'S GOING TO GET PAID TO DO THE JOB, I BELIEVE SOMEWHERE AROUND FIVE OR SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS SEEMS GRASP LIKE DRASTICALLY, FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE.
SO ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY? YOU WOULD. I THINK IT WOULD BE OK TO JUST RUN WITH FOUR INSTEAD OF FIVE.
BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING IT'S THE SAME.
TO MAKE SURE YOU HEARD WHAT I SAID.
UH, IF IT'S UNDER A YEAR, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HAVING THEM ELECTED.
AND TO REITERATE WHAT WE SAID IN THE LAST MEETING.
TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY SEVEN IS AN ANOMALY BECAUSE OF HOW IT WAS HANDLED.
NORMAL SPECIAL ELECTION DOES NOT COST THAT MUCH WHEN IT IS DONE PROPERLY AND ON TIME WHERE WE COULD HAVE HAD IT ON NOVEMBER, WHICH MAKES IT TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
BUT MY POSITION IS STILL THAT, WHICH WAS STATED AGAIN BY THE SAN MATEO COUNCIL CIVIL
[00:20:07]
GRAND JURY.THE COST OF AN ELECTION IS NOT A VALID EXCUSE FOR DENYING.
VOTERS THE RIGHT TO A SPECIAL ELECTION.
AND YES, SHE'LL HAVE VARYING OPINION AS TO.
MONEY IS CONCERNED, BUT I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY THAT MORE PEOPLE ARE NOT WILLING TO HAVE THEIR VOTES BOUGHT.
OK. I. I DON'T QUITE GRASP THE CONCEPT OF OF WHAT BEING BOUGHT, BUT THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE. OK.
I'M JUST I JUST WANT A CLARIFICATION ON A.
I APPRECIATE IT. HAPPY TO CLARIFY.
THANK YOU FOR ASKING. ARE YOU THROUGH DAVID? YES. OK, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO ARE ON THE BOARD? NOT YET. WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AFTER AFTER THE BOARD DISCUSSION.
ANYONE ELSE? HEY, LET ME SAY THIS.
SURE. THE CITY CLERK, THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE ABOUT.
TIMING ON ALL TIMING, THAT IS A KNOCK ON THE CITY CLERK, SO I'M GOING TO ALLOW HER TO REBUTTAL TO. UM, FIRST, LET ME CLARIFY THAT THE $11000 AMOUNT THAT IS WHEN WE HAVE A GENERAL ELECTION, NOT A SPECIAL ELECTION.
THE LAST SPECIAL ELECTION THAT WE HAD, WHICH WAS YEARS AGO, WAS A IT WAS OVER $80000.
UM, AND AS FAR AS THIS ONE BEING THE COST BEING SO HIGH, IT WASN'T, OF COURSE, DUE TO AN ERROR ON THE CITY'S PART.
IT WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT COUNCILMAN BAILEY AT THE TIME DID NOT RESIGN IN TIME ENOUGH FOR US TO HAVE THE SPECIAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.
MAN, I DIDN'T MEAN IT ANYWAY TO TO A PLACE OF FAULT ON THE CITY.
MY APOLOGIES IF IT CAME OUT THAT WAY.
BUT THANK YOU FOR FOR MAKING IT CLEAR.
UM, ONE THING, I GUESS, BECAUSE I WANTED TO SAY IN REGARDS TO THE HISTORICAL DATA TO THIS, THIS WHOLE CAME ABOUT BECAUSE OF A FORMER.
COUNCILMEN, THEY USED TO BE ON THE CHART THAT WAS ON THE CHARTER THAT REVIEWED THIS BACK IN TWENTY TWELVE AND IN TWENTY TWELVE, THE CITIZENS SPOKE.
AND VOTED TO HAVE NO MORE SPECIAL ELECTIONS, BECAUSE COUNCILMAN TROY HOLTON AT THE TIME WHEN THE WHOLE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD.
THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY DIDN'T HAVE THIS TYPE OF EXPENDITURE.
THE. VOTE CAME BEFORE COUNCIL, AFTER THE CITIZENS IN TWENTY TWELVE VOTED IN SUPPORT OF NO MORE SPECIAL ELECTIONS.
UM. UH, CAME BEFORE COUNCIL COUNCIL VOTED, BUT IT WAS NEVER ADOPTED, TOTALLY.
THAT WAS THE ONLY HICCUP THAT HAPPENED TO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DISENFRANCHIZING VOTERS.
THAT WAS A NEW FRANCHISE TO THE TWENTY TWELVE VOTERS, THEY VOTED FOR THIS.
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE SPOKE IN TWENTY TWELVE, THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY MORE SPECIAL ELECTION.
THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENED WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT STAFF MEMBER DID IT, BUT IT DIDN'T GET THROUGH.
TO FULL FRUITION, BUT THE VOTERS VOTED.
TO NOT HAVE ANY MORE SPECIAL ELECTION, THAT IS A FACT.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING BEING MADE UP.
IT WENT OUT TO THE VOTERS AND THE VOTERS VOTED FOR IT.
I WANT PEOPLE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THIS, THAT WE'RE JUST A COMMISSION THAT ARE GOING TO BE GIVING. OUR OPINION COLLECTIVELY, WHETHER THE VOTE IS 10, ZERO NINE EIGHT TWO NINE ONE.
BUT COLLECTIVELY, WHEN WE VOTE, WHATEVER WE VOTE ON IS GOING TO GO BEFORE COUNCIL AND COUNCIL IS GOING TO HAVE THE FINAL DECISION.
SOMETIMES I WANT PEOPLE TO FULLY GRASP OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS VOLUNTEERS UP HERE.
ONCE IT'S DECIDED, HERE IT GOES BEFORE COUNCIL AND IN COUNCIL DECIDES IF THEY WANT TO PUT IT ON A REFERENDUM TO THE VOTERS.
I'M JUST GIVING ALL THAT HISTORY, SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS NOT ALL TAKE, IT'S OVER IF THIS CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MAKES A DECISION.
[00:25:02]
BUT THE UNDERSTANDING I WANT YOU TO ALSO KNOW THE HISTORY BEHIND THE VACANCY AND THAT IT WAS VOTED BY THE VOTERS OF PALM BAY BACK IN TWENTY TWELVE.IT WASN'T NO SNEAK PLAN OR ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE, IT WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE.
HICCUP THAT HAPPENED THAT THAT'S WHY THE ONLY REASON THAT THIS IS NOT FULLY ACTIVATED.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS COMMON? JORDAN, QUICK QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD ASK MR. DELGADO A QUESTION HERE IN REFERENCE TO THIS 2008 2009 SAN MATEO COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY DISCUSSION RELATIVE TO AN APPOINTMENT VERSUS A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR VACATED SEAT.
REALLY, WHAT IS THE CONTEXT BEHIND THIS OR HOW DID THIS COME ABOUT? WAS THERE NO CHARTER LANGUAGE THAT EXISTED THAT THEY HAD TO AND IN ESSENCE, APPOINT A CIVIL GRAND JURY TO DISCUSS THIS? OR REALLY, REALLY WHAT IS THE THE CONTEXT BEHIND THAT? YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THEY THEY HAD, OBVIOUSLY, IF IF THE CHARTER WERE TO SAY SPECIFICALLY THAT AN APPOINTMENT IS VALID, THEN THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO DISCUSSION.
IT WAS A A SITUATION WHERE THEY APPOINTED AND AND THE PEOPLE LIKE UNTO THIS LAST TIME GOT UPSET THAT THEY APPOINTED.
AND SO IT WENT TO COURT IN IN THE GRAND JURY AS AS THEY VIEWED THE PROS AND CONS FOR THE POSITION AS PER THE LANGUAGE, THEY DETERMINED THAT INDEED, THE APPOINTMENT WAS WRONG AND THESE WERE THE CONCLUSIONS, THE THREE CONCLUSIONS THAT THEY HAVE IN REFERENCE TO THE TO TO THAT SPECIFIC SITUATION.
SO. DID THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION? YES, SIR, THANK YOU. YEAH.
MR. MR. LET ME COMMENT ON THAT, TOO.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT ADDRESSED.
AS YOU MENTIONED, IT WAS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE CITY CHARTER, WHICH IS WHY IT ENDED UP BEING. IT ENDED UP IN THE GRAND JURY.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? MR. MACLEOD. BRING IT CLOSER TO YOU.
YEAH. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO RESPOND TO MR. DELGADO'S COMMENTS.
WITH RESPECT TO THE CLAIM OF THE.
CALIFORNIA CASE, I DON'T THINK THAT CASE HAS ANY RELEVANCE TO ME.
NOTHING THAT WAS DONE IN THAT CASE AS ANY.
WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO PUT? AND THE LEGAL PRECEDENTS FOR BOMBAY.
THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, YOU MENTIONED THE.
GOOD REHNQUIST STATING THAT THE RIGHT TO VOTE IS FUNDAMENTAL.
NO ONE QUESTIONS THAT, BUT THE CASE THAT YOU CITED HELD THAT CALIFORNIA'S LANGUAGE DID NOT VIOLATE THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT AND THEY COULD DISENFRANCHIZE CRIMINALS.
SO STATING JUSTICE REHNQUIST DOES NOT ADDRESS THE HOLDING OF THE CASE.
NO. YOU SAID YOU TRUST SOME OF OUR.
COUNCILMAN. IF YOU TRUSTED THEM AND YOU WERE AND YOU WERE COMFORTABLE WITH THE COUNCIL.
WHY DO YOU NOT TRUST THEM TO SELECT A REPUTABLE PERSON? AND WHY IS IT THAT? ALL OF A SUDDEN, NOBODY.
WHY SHOULD WE SPEND $80000 OR TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND? THAT'S THE RANGE I'M HEARING TO SELECT ONE SEAT FOR SIX MONTHS.
AH, EIGHT MONTHS. THAT DOESN'T MAKE FISCAL SENSE.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE TO HAVE A CITY COUNCIL.
SELECT A PERSON TO SERVE OUT THE TERM OF SOMEONE WHO VACATED THE SEAT IS UNDEMOCRATIC.
IT IS THE ESSENCE OF DEMOCRACY.
BECAUSE THE BOARD IS VOTING ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE UP THERE TO DO.
OK, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? WAS THAT A QUESTION OR WAS THAT A CRITIQUE? THAT WAS A STATEMENT.
IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS TO MAKE.
NUMBER ONE IS THAT, FIRST OF ALL, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT ARE SERVED, WHETHER IT'S FOR THREE, HOWEVER MANY, IS.
WE ELECT THEM TO BE STEWARDS OF THE TAXPAYERS MONEY.
[00:30:02]
AND FRANKLY, TO SPEND AN EXCESS OF $250000 FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION IS ABSOLUTELY IRRESPONSIBLE. WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO REALLY ARE NOT HAPPY WITH CITY COUNCIL WHEN THEY THEY GO OUT AND SPEND MONEY ON THINGS THAT EVEN SMALLER AMOUNTS OF MONEY ON THINGS THAT THEY DON'T THEY DON'T BELIEVE IN.BUT TO SPEND A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS ON A SPECIAL ELECTION IS ABSOLUTELY SENSELESS AND REALLY IRRESPONSIBLE ON THE BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO THAT.
SECONDLY, I HAVE NUMEROUS NUMEROUS CITIES THAT THAT ADDRESS VACANCIES ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND THESE ARE ALL FLORIDA CITIES.
THESE ARE NOT FROM ANYWHERE ELSE THAT BASICALLY THEIR LANGUAGE IS IS ALMOST EXACTLY WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF MR. MOORE PROPOSES.
AND I WOULD SAY THAT AGAIN, AS FAR AS ABROGATING THE CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO VOTE, THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO VOTE ON THIS.
IT IS THE CITIZENS WHO WILL DETERMINE WHETHER WE CHANGE THIS LANGUAGE.
AND YOU KNOW, A CITY COUNCIL APPOINTS A SOMEONE TO FILL A VACANCY.
SO IT'S THE CITY, YOU KNOW, ELECTORS WHO ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT CHOICE.
IT'S NOT EVER GETTING ANYONE'S RIGHT TO VOTE.
SECONDLY, I WOULD JUST MAKE ONE CHANGE REALLY TO THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE BY MR. MOORE. AND JUST QUICKLY, IT SAYS ALL VACANCY ELECTIONS WILL RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE REGULARLY, REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTIONS.
APPOINTMENTS WILL BE TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION CYCLE. THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM, THE TERM WILL EXTEND TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
I THINK THAT'S SOMEWHAT REDUNDANT SINCE MR. SMITH IS SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
YES, SINCE YOU ALREADY SAYS THAT THE APPOINTMENTS WILL BE TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION CYCLE.
SO I WOULD I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE ELIMINATE THAT LAST SENTENCE.
I DID HAVE ONE AMENDMENT TO THAT THAT I DIDN'T MENTION, BUT ON THE SENTENCE BEFORE THAT, WHERE IT SAID APPOINTMENTS WILL BE TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION CYCLE, I WAS GOING TO ADD THE WORD CITY IN THERE, THE NEXT REGULAR CITY ELECTION SITE. THAT'S.
I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WE'LL JUST WE CAN ADD THAT NEXT SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION. RATHER, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE NATIONAL ELECTION CYCLE.
ANYONE ELSE? MR. DELGADO, I HAVE A QUESTION ALSO.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN IT SAYS IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM? AND MAY I REMIND MR. JEFFREY CLOUD MCLEOD THAT I NEVER SUGGESTED LESS LESS THAN THAT LESSON OF THE YEAR? WE SHOULD HAVE AN ELECTION.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM.
BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF THERE'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM, THE TERM WILL EXTEND TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO IF YOU SOMEBODY FOR SOME REASON RESIGNS OR DIES OR WHATEVER DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME, YOU CAN'T QUALIFY AFTER MAY FOR A NOVEMBER ELECTION, SO THEY WOULDN'T EVEN BE ABLE TO QUALIFY FOR THE ELECTION FOR THAT CYCLE.
SO IT'D HAVE TO EXTEND OUT TO THE NEXT.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY WOULD NOT ONLY FINISH THAT TERM, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE THE NEXT WHOLE TERM, THEY WOULD GO UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
SO, SO IN OTHER WORDS, SO IT WOULDN'T BE A FULL TERM, IT WOULD BE AT MOST TWO YEARS AND SIX MONTHS. SO LET ME SEE IF I GET THIS CORRECT.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF SOMEONE RESIGNED SIX MONTHS BEFORE.
THEN THEY WOULD HAVE A TOTAL OF A TWO YEAR AND SIX MONTHS.
WELL, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE TOTAL SIX MONTHS BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T GET IN WHENEVER THE APPOINTMENT WOULD BE. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THE APPOINTMENT DONE, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
OK, SO SO IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY, THEN NOT ONLY DID IT PASS THE TERM THAT THEY WERE SCHEDULED TO BE FINISHED, BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEONE IN THAT POSITION THAT'S GOING TO LAST FOR TWO MORE YEARS, THOUGH THEY WERE NOT ELECTED FOR THAT POSITION.
NO, IT DEPENDS ON WHEN THEIR TERM IS UP.
THAT'S RIGHT, I SAID NOT ALWAYS FINISH BEFORE A FOUR YEAR TERM IN ORDER TO BE.
YOU CAN COMPREHEND IT AND GRASP IT, NOT ONLY FOR.
MONTHS. THEN THEY COULD SEE I KNOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO IF A PERSON RESIGNED IN JANUARY AND HE WAS ON HIS.
[00:35:05]
LET'S SAY LAST YEAR.YEAH. OK, LAST TWENTY TWENTY TWO.
OK, SO HE JUST RESIGNED AND NOW THE ELECTION IS GOING TO BE UP IN NOVEMBER.
IF THE PERSON IF THE APPOINTMENT CAN BE FROM THEN TILL NOVEMBER, SO THAT MANY WHAT IS THAT 10 MONTHS, 11 MONTHS? IF HE RESIGNS IN MAY OR JUNE, I'LL SAY JUNE AND HIS ELECTION IS UP IN NOVEMBER.
HE WOULDN'T. THE APPOINTMENT WOULD BE UNTIL THAT THE NEXT TERM OF THE CYCLE.
TWENTY TWENTY FOUR. OK, SO SO I'M GOING TO REITERATE THIS IN CASE BECAUSE THERE'S NO ELECTIONS IN TWENTY TWO, RIGHT? I'M. I MEAN, LOOK, LET'S TWENTY THREE TWENTY THREE IS WHEN THERE ARE NO ELECTIONS IN 20.
CAN WE SIMPLIFY THIS? BASICALLY, IF THERE'S A VACANCY AND THE VACANCY IS FILLED BY APPOINTMENT FROM THE MAJOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THAT PERSON WILL SERVE UNTIL THE NEXT SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION PERIOD. OK, THAT'S WHAT DOES THAT.
DOES THAT SAY ONE MORE TIME FOR ME, PLEASE? OK. IF SOMEONE IS APPOINTED TO FILL THE VACANCY BY THE REMAINING CITY COUNCIL, THAT PERSON WILL SIMPLY SERVE UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
OK. AND IF REGARDLESS OF THE TIME.
IF IF THEY QUIT, IF THEY RESIGNED IN JULY.
SO MOE WILL BE APPOINTED TO SERVE UNTIL THE NEXT SCHEDULED ELECTION, WHICH IF IT'S ELECTION YEAR NOVEMBER, IT WOULD BE THAT DIRECT.
OK. NO, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO QUALIFY IN NOVEMBER FOUR IN THAT ELECTION CYCLE.
OR THEY WOULD THAT WOULD THAT WOULD PUT IT RIGHT TO A SPECIAL ELECTION.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID.
WELL, THAT WOULD AVOID A SPECIAL ELECTION UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY.
THAT WOULDN'T BE THAT SAME NOVEMBER.
THE ELECTION WOULD BE THAT NOVEMBER.
THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE, I'M SAYING YOU'VE GOT TO CORRECT THE LANGUAGE.
I'M WAITING TO INTERJECT ON THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO CORRECT THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE THE WHOLE GOAL IS, IS THAT IS THE NEXT ELECTION.
EVEN IF YOU HAVE TO SIT AND WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTION, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE HAVE IN AUGUST, WE HAVE QUALIFICATIONS TO.
SO LET ME SEE IF I GET THIS RIGHT.
IF SOMEONE QUITS, SOMEONE GETS ELECTED AND THEY QUIT THAT YEAR, THEN SOMEONE IS APPOINTED FOR THAT POSITION FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
THOUGH, IF THEY QUIT THAT SAME YEAR OF THE ELECTIONS BECAUSE IT DOES TAKE TIME TO QUALIFY TO BE ELECTED.
IF IT'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS, THEN THEY WOULD SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THAT THAT YEAR, PLUS TWO MORE YEARS TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED ELECTION.
DO I HAVE THAT CORRECT? WELL, PATRICIA, IS THAT HOW IT WOULD WORK? OTHER CHARTERS. FROM THE PACKET THAT I HAD THAT HAD ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE, SO I MISSED WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, ESSENTIALLY.
I THINK WHAT? THE CONFUSION IS.
AND I THINK MELBOURNE HAS A LITTLE LANGUAGE THAT SOME OF THE OTHERS CERTAINLY DOES IS THAT YOU STILL HAVE TO QUALIFY, SO YOU HAVE TO MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS AND MEANING THE QUALIFICATIONS. IF THE RESIGNATION HAPPENED IN JULY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO QUALIFY FOR THE ELECTION THAT SAME NOVEMBER.
SO YOU MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS, AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO RUN UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MUNICIPAL ELECTION, WHICH WON'T BE IN.
TWENTY TWENTY TWO. IT WOULD BE IN TWENTY TWENTY FOUR.
THE THING IS, WHATEVER THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED ELECTION IS, YOU SERVE, YOU QUALIFY, YOU SERVE UNTIL THAT NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED ELECTION.
RIGHT. SO THEREFORE, IF IT'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS, YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO QUALIFY AND RUN FOR THAT ONE. SO YOU'D HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL TWO YEARS LATER FOR THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED ELECTION. THEREFORE, THEREFORE, YOU CAN TELL ME I'M NOT DISENFRANCHIZED WITH MY VOTING BECAUSE THERE'S NO SPECIAL ELECTION.
AND THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE PRESENTED RIGHT NOW SAYS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.
RIGHT TO SELECT WHO'S GOING TO REPRESENT ME UNTIL IT'S CONVENIENT.
FOR THE CITY TO DO SO, AND I'M GOING TO REASON FOR SPECIAL ELECTIONS IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE.
IT'S A MATTER OF RIGHTS TO SELECT.
[00:40:01]
FOR THE PEOPLE.BY THE PEOPLE, MR. VICE CHAIR, MR. MOORE DID I I THINK WE CLARIFIED WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE, SO IT'S SIX MONTHS AND THEN THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTION.
WHAT WE STATED BEFORE, WE GOOD WITH THAT.
THE NEXT GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION JOURNAL, BUT WE DEFINITELY WANT GENERAL IN THERE.
IT DIFFERENTIATES, OF COURSE, FROM SPECIAL.
BUT SO DID EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTION? NOW, MR. MOORE, DID YOU WANT TO READ YOUR PROPOSAL WITH THE CORRECTED LANGUAGE? OK. I BELIEVE WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCIL.
BY APPOINTMENT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING MEMBERS, THAT WAS THE LANGUAGE THERE FROM THE LAST SENTENCE, ALL VACANT ELECTION, ALL VACANCY ELECTIONS WILL RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE REGULAR REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTIONS.
APPOINTMENTS WILL BE TO TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE GENERAL CITY ELECTION CYCLE.
IF THERE IS IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM, WELL, IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE NEXT UNEXPIRED TERM, AND THEN WE'RE DELETING THE LAST SENTENCE AS REDUNDANCY.
AND DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT? OK, BEFORE WE MAKE A MOTION, IF WE CAN HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK, MA'AM. WHEN I COME UP HERE, A PLACE YOU WANT TO PUT.
AND IF YOU WOULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE AMERICAN ZENKO, I LIVE ON SHERMAN STREET, SOUTHEAST AND PALM BAY.
I'VE LIVED IN PALM BAY FOR THREE YEARS, BUT A LONG TIME RESIDENT OF BREVARD AND I MOVED HERE ON PURPOSE BECAUSE I SAW THE CITY HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANT. SO I WANT TO START OFF WITH SAYING THAT'S THAT'S MY GOAL TONIGHT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO MENTION, AND I KNOW THIS IS NOT A QUESTION IN ANSWER, BUT TALKING ABOUT PLACING AN ELECTION, YOU KNOW, PLACING A.
SOMEBODY ON THE BALLOT FOR AN ELECTION IS OUTSIDE OF A CITY CHOICE, I THINK THAT BELONGS TO THE COUNTY THAT THEY TELL US WHEN WE CAN PUT SOMETHING ON A BALLOT OR NOT.
SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT.
RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHETHER WE HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR IF IT'S OVER A YEAR OR NOT IS THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT, THE WAY IT STANDS NOW.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IF IT'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS, THE COUNCIL CAN APPOINT SOMEBODY MORE THAN A YEAR THAN IT GOES TO SPECIAL ELECTION.
I WOULD LIKE US TO LEAVE IT THAT WAY, AND THE REASON I FEEL THAT WAY IS NOT THAT IT CAN'T BE LOOKED AT IN THE FUTURE, BUT THAT THE PEOPLE OF POMPEII VOTED ON THIS IN 2012.
IF YOU WANT TO LOSE THE CONFIDENCE OF THIS CITY, THEN VOTE THIS, SEND IT TO CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ON THE FRONT PAGE IN FLORIDA TODAY AGAIN.
AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT WE'VE BEEN A LAUGHING STOCK THE WAY THAT OUR OUR GOVERNMENT IS GOING, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE US GET BACK WHERE WE SHOULD BE.
OK, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
I'M JENNIFER REID, AND I LIVE AT 1999.
AND YOU COULD LIFT IT IF YOU WANT.
OK, THANK YOU. INSTEAD OF RUNNING OVER THERE.
THANK YOU, GUYS. UM, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME WHEN WE BOIL DOWN TO WHAT REALLY SEEMS TO BE GOING ON HERE IS THAT THE CONCERN IS THAT WHOEVER IS IN POWER, WHOEVER IS IN THE MAJORITY IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THEIR REIGN FOR ANOTHER UP TO TWO OR MORE YEARS WITHOUT VOTERS HAVING ANY ANY SAY IN THAT.
AND THAT'S REALLY CONCERNING BECAUSE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, NOT THE HEART OF A DEMOCRACY.
SO IT JUST PUTS THE MAJORITY AT THAT KIND OF ADVANTAGE.
AND. I UNDERSTAND ELECTIONS COST MONEY.
ONE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE THAT I THINK WOULD BE A LOT MORE PALATABLE TO THE PUBLIC THAT I
[00:45:02]
WISH YOU GUYS WOULD CONSIDER IS HAVING A COMMITTEE THAT IS EVENLY REPRESENTATIVE, BOTH OF, YOU KNOW, BOTH SIDES OF THE POLITICAL AISLE AND HAVING THAT COMMITTEE COME UP WITH SOMEONE WHO THEY WANT TO BRING BEFORE THE COUNCIL.AND THAT WAY YOU'RE PROTECTING AGAINST, YOU KNOW, THE MAJORITY RULING IN FAVOR OF THEIR PARTICULAR POLITICAL PARTY, WHATEVER IT IS.
AND IT JUST REQUIRES AN EXTRA LEVEL OF PROTECTION.
THAT BEING SAID, ELECTIONS COST MONEY, GUYS.
YOU KNOW THEY DO, BUT WE RUN ELECTIONS ALL THE TIME AND WE RUN THEM BECAUSE THEY MATTER.
THE PEOPLE'S VOICE MATTERS, AND IT'S ONE OF THE MOST, YOU KNOW, FUNDAMENTAL BASIC RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE HERE.
AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT IT HAS TO TRUMP.
THAT HAS TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT VALUE THAT WE AS AMERICANS HAVE.
YOU KNOW, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU, MR. KEN DELGADO. I'VE NEVER MET YOU BEFORE.
BUT WHAT YOU WHAT YOU SPOKE TONIGHT REALLY RANG TRUE WITH ME AND I THOUGHT MADE SOME REALLY, REALLY GOOD SENSE.
AND I I JUST HOPE THAT YOU GUYS COULD ESPECIALLY CONSIDER THAT FIRST OPTION IF YOU'RE DEAD SET AGAINST THE COST OF ELECTIONS, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY IS HEAD IN THAT DIRECTION. CONSIDER THAT FIRST OPTION BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE JUST GIVE THE PUBLIC A LOT MORE CONFIDENCE IN AND WHAT'S GOING ON TONIGHT.
OK, THANK YOU. MISS REID. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, MA'AM? HELLO. MY NAME IS JULIE SLATTERY, AND I LIVE ON CRANFIELD TERRACE IN PALM BAY, ACTUALLY LIVED IN THIS CITY SINCE 1978, SO I'VE SEEN A LOT, SEEN A LOT.
THIS IS NOT THE SAME CITY AS IT WAS IN 1978.
MY TWO LOUD. AND IT IS NOT THE SAME CITY AS IT WAS IN 2012.
THIS IS THE BIGGEST CITY IN THE COUNTY.
SORRY. THIS IS THE BIGGEST CITY IN THE COUNTY, IT HAS THE MOST PEOPLE, THE MOST LAND.
AND I HONESTLY TO EVEN CONSIDER DOING THE SAME KIND OF THING THAT THE CITY OF WEST MELBOURNE DOES. THERE'S NO COMPARISON BETWEEN THESE TWO CITIES.
YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR ME PERSONALLY, I AGREE WITH THE YOUNG LADY THAT JUST SPOKE.
I THINK THAT BOMBAY GETS A REALLY BAD RAP, AND A LOT OF IT, I BELIEVE, IS BECAUSE.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DO THIS, BUT PEOPLE NEED TO BECOME MORE INVOLVED WITH THE CITY, RIGHT? LIKE I DON'T IT'S A BIG CITY.
I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY THAT'S UP HERE EXCEPT FOR THE PREVIOUS MAYOR AND KEN DELGADO, BECAUSE HE HAPPENS TO BE MY PASTOR.
BUT. THIS IS A BIG, VERY DIVERSE CITY, IT'S REALLY NOT LIKE ANY OF THE OTHER CITIES IN THIS COUNTY. I LIKE US TO KIND OF TAKE THE LEAD INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT HOW EVERYBODY ELSE DOES THINGS, BECAUSE THE PLAIN TRUTH IS WE HAVE MOST OF THE PEOPLE, WE DON'T HAVE MOST OF THE MONEY. AND THAT'S PART OF THE ISSUE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AS FAR AS ELECTIONS GO.
BUT. I AGREE WITH THIS GUY WHO SPOKE.
THERE'S NOTHING, NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN.
ELECTING YOUR OFFICIALS LIKE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.
OK, SO IF SOMEBODY GETS APPOINTED, I MEAN, WHERE'S THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THAT? WHAT KIND OF HOOPS DO THEY HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH? HOW DO WE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BECOME A.
I'M A GOOD OLD BOY CLUB WHERE PEOPLE JUST KNOW CERTAIN PEOPLE AND, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE OF THE SAME MINDSET, AND SO THEY JUST BRING THEM HERE AND NOBODY ELSE REALLY KNOWS THEM.
IT JUST IS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
I WOULD. I THINK WE SHOULD JUST HAVE ELECTIONS WHENEVER WE NEED TO, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH HERE PREVIOUSLY.
EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
BUT. FOR ME, SPEAKING FOR MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT I KNOW.
AND MOST OF A LOT OF THE PEOPLE THAT I KNOW SHOWED UP TO PROTEST WANTED THE ELECTION, AND I KNOW WE'RE UPSET THAT IT COSTS MONEY.
AND IF THAT MANY PEOPLE SHOWED UP TO VOICE THEIR OPINION AND THEY WON AN ELECTION, THEN THE CITY SHOULD HONOR THAT AND THE DISCUSSION SHOULDN'T REALLY BE ABOUT MONEY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. OK, THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, MA'AM? SHE CAME UP READY. DID YOU SPEAK ALREADY, MA'AM?
[00:50:04]
WELL, IF YOU SPOKE WITH PETER, YOU ONLY HAVE ONE CHANCE, ONE CHANCE TO SPEAK.YES, MA'AM. OK, WELL, THAT'S WHAT I ASKED IF YOU HAVEN'T SPOKEN SPECIFICALLY ON THIS ISSUE, THEN COME ON UP.
NINE, THIRTY FIVE, DOUGLAS STREET SOUTHEAST.
I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE HERE THAT THE FOUNDERS BELIEVED IN ARTICLE ONE, SECTION TWO, THAT WHEN VACANCIES IN THE REPRESENTATION FROM ANY STATE, THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY THEREFORE SHALL ISSUE WRITS OF ELECTION TO FILL VACANCIES.
SO IT WAS FAIRLY CLEAR THAT OUR FOUNDERS OF THIS COUNTRY BELIEVE THAT IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ELECT THEIR.
REPRESENTATIVES, SO IF THERE'S A VACANCY, THEY GET TO ELECT THEIR REPRESENTATIVES.
GO BACK AND READ IT. IT'S IN THERE.
THANK YOU. MISS LETTER. MA'AM, YOU WANT TO SPEAK.
YOU'LL BE NEXT, SIR. HI, LAURIE LAFAVE, 12, 11, GERALD CIRCLE, AGAIN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD TO WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS SAYING, I KNOW SOME PEOPLE WANT TO SAVE MONEY, BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THE PERSON WHO GETS SELECTED AND PUT IN COULD COST US A LOT MORE MONEY THAN WHAT IT WOULD CAUSE FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION BASED ON THEIR VOTES.
OR GOD KNOWS WHAT IS GOING TO COME THROUGH WHILE THEY'RE IN PLACE.
THAT ARE ALSO AND I'M NOT WILLING TO GIVE UP MY VOTE.
NAME IS PAUL SLATTERY, I LIVE AT 16 SEVENTY ONE CRANFIELD TERRACE, SOUTHEAST BOMBAY.
I SAT IN THIS ROOM MANY YEARS AGO, HARDLY ANY OF YOU EVER HEAR WHEN THEY CUT TAXES IN THE CITY. SO YOU REMEMBER THAT? BUT HERE'S THE ISSUE.
IT MIGHT COST YOU A FEW DOLLARS FOR AN ELECTION.
IT MIGHT COST YOU 10 TIMES AS MUCH WHEN YOU GO TO COURT ON IT.
BECAUSE IT WILL GO TO COURT BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED TO SPEAK FOR WHO THEY WANT IN OFFICE. THEY DON'T WANT SOME DELEGATES.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU IN THERE FOR A WHILE.
IT'S TO THE PEOPLE JUST LIKE MR. DELGADO'S AND I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR.
AND HE'S ALWAYS BELIEVED IN IT'S THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE.
IT'S NOT FIVE PEOPLE, SIX PEOPLE, SEVEN PEOPLE.
SO THINK ABOUT IT, IF IT DOES, IT WILL GO TO COURT.
I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT IF THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WANT TO SPEAK, THEY DON'T WANT YOU GUYS TO SPEAK FOR THEM.
THEY WANT TO SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU REALLY HAVE ELECTION IN THE MIDDLE OF A THING? WHAT'S THE CHANCES? WHAT'S THIS THE SECOND TIME IN 20 YEARS? YOU KNOW. THIS IS NOT A NOT A BACK AND FORTH.
WE DON'T RESPOND TO QUESTIONS.
NO, SIR. OK. I THINK IT'S ONLY MAYBE TWICE AND SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS. THAT'S ASTRONOMICAL.
THERE'S NO WAY IT WILL EVER BE THAT WAY.
SO JUST THINK ABOUT IT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING, BUT WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL. I KNOW.
NO, YOU SAY YOU PRESENT IT TO THE COUNCIL, BUT THIS IS ABOUT THE PEOPLE AND NOT ABOUT JUST WHAT THE GOOD OLD BOYS AND YOUR TAKE CARE OF IT.
BILL. FIVE EIGHTY 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST.
THE REASON THIS PUBLIC GOT SO EXCITED ABOUT THIS SPECIAL ELECTION.
BECAUSE THIS CURRENT CHARTER HAS THAT IT WILL BE BY ORDINANCE.
CORRECT. THE FACT THAT IT WAS SAID BY ORDINANCE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE SAID THERE WOULD BE A SPECIAL ELECTION IF MORE THAN SIX MONTHS, I MEAN LESS, IF LESS THAN SIX MONTHS.
YOU WOULD BE A POINT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR, YOU WOULD HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
SO WHAT WHAT DID THEY WHAT HAPPENED WITH OUR SITTING GOVERNMENT WAS THEY DECIDED, WELL, WE HAVE THE CHOICE AND THE OPPORTUNITY.
WE CAN CHANGE THE ORDINANCE TO GIVE US WHAT WE WANT INSTEAD OF THE CHARTER SAYING WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO BECAUSE IT SAID BY CHARTER.
SO WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY THEN PRESENTED SAID, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE OUR CITY OR
[00:55:02]
OUR ORDINANCE.THAT REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE THAT REQUIRES TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. WELL, WHEN THE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY HEARD THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO CHANGE THEIR ORDINANCE AS IT WAS IMPACTING ON THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE, THEY CAME OUT IN STORM.
WE COULD NOT FILL THE CHAMBERS OF THOSE CITIZENS THAT WERE WILLING TO COME OUT, SEE THEIR GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THEY WERE CHANGING IT WHERE THEY LOST THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE.
HOPPER, WHY HOW OR ANYTHING ELSE, IT WAS A SIMPLE FACT THAT THEY WERE GOING TO LOSE THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE.
THAT'S WHAT GENERATED THE HATE AND DISCONTENT SO WE CAN BLAME IT ON ALL KINDS OF STUFF FROM THE PAST HISTORY AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT CURRENT IMPACT AND CURRENT HISTORY, AND THE HISTORY WAS LAST YEAR.
THEY SIT IN COUNCIL, TRIED TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE TO DEPRIVE THE CITIZENS OF A RIGHT TO VOTE. SIMPLE LINE SO THAT WHEN THIS WHEN THE CITIZENS CAME OUT IN STORM, THAT WAS TO TELL YOU AND I HOPE YOU WERE PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THE POPULATION WAS SAYING, THAT WE WANT TO VOTE. IT IS OUR RIGHT TO VOTE.
WE CAN SAY ALL KINDS OF REASONS.
WELL, THIS IS GOING TO COST YOU SOME MONEY.
I I'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE MEETINGS A LONG, LONG TIME, LONG TIME.
I THINK LONGER THAN ANYBODY AT THIS TABLE COULD HAVE BEEN COMING TO THESE MEETINGS AND I MEAN ANYBODY AT THIS TABLE.
RIGHT. HOW LONG? HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN COMING AFTER AND DURING AN, I AGREE, QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS, A LOT OF MONEY.
BUT I'VE ALSO WATCHED BECAUSE I'VE BEEN COMING ALONG ENOUGH THAT I'VE WATCHED THE PERSON THAT'S SITTING UP ON THAT GUY IS UP THERE.
IT'S BEEN MORE THAN A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS THAT DID NOT HAVE TO BE SPENT BECAUSE FOR VARIOUS REASONS THAT MY TIMER.
OK, ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, BILL.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? MA'AM. HEIDI, HEIDI.
AND I LIVE AT NINE, FIVE EIGHT CUSTER STREET NORTHWEST.
I'VE NEVER BEEN TO ONE OF THESE MEETINGS, AND I'M NOT VERY ELOQUENT, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT IN THE PAST SEVERAL.
MY CONFIDENCE IN OUR ELECTION PROCESS HAS DIMINISHED.
BUT I STILL VALUE THAT PROCESS AND I STILL VALUE MY RIGHT TO VOTE.
IF WE'RE GOING TO GET RID OF THE ABILITY TO VOTE FOR OUR CITY COUNCIL.
THEN WHERE DOES IT STOP? WHERE DOES IT STOP? WHO DO WE WE JUST LET.
ANYBODY DECIDE WHO'S GOING TO REPRESENT US? I WANT TO HAVE A SAY.
THIS IS MY PERSON GOING TO WIN.
I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE NOT.
BUT I WANT TO GET TO VOTE, AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
OK, THANK YOU, MA'AM. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK, MA'AM? GOOD EVENING, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE ON LISTENING TO US AND TAKING THIS TIME.
I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT I WAS HERE IN JULY OF LAST YEAR WHEN THERE WAS AN ATTEMPTED APPOINTMENT OF OF AN INDIVIDUAL TO THE VACANT SEAT IN LIEU OF THE SPECIAL ELECTION THAT'S HAPPENING ON MARCH 8TH AND AND I WAS HERE BEFORE AND I SPOKE BEFORE.
WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO A SIMILAR SITUATION IN A WAY.
AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE STILL LIVE IN A REPUBLIC.
THIS IS A REPUBLIC FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE.
THESE ARE IMPORTANT RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE THAT PEOPLE HAVE FOUGHT AND DIED FOR.
SO WE NEED TO KEEP THAT PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE SET A STRONG PRECEDENT AS TO WHERE WE GO FROM WITH THE CITY. I'M A NEW RESIDENT.
I LIVE AT FIVE THREE FOUR DAVIDSON STREET.
I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE APRIL OF TWENTY TWENTY ONE.
AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL, CHARMING TOWN.
THE PEOPLE ARE AMAZING HERE AND I TRUST THAT THAT YOU HERE WHO ARE VOLUNTEERS AND ALL THE COUNCIL PEOPLE WHO ARE ELECTED ARE APPOINTED WITH A SACRED, A SACRED DUTY.
[01:00:02]
AND I TRUST THEM AND YOU TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS WITH GREAT WISDOM, THROUGH PRAYER, THROUGH DISCERNMENT, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE APPEAL TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY THAN JUST JUST WHAT YOU CAN SEE, FEEL AND TOUCH AND HEAR.AND SO I JUST WANT TO UM, I JUST WANT TO IMPART UPON YOU THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DECISION THAT YOU HAVE THAT I COMPLETELY DISAGREE THAT ANYONE SHOULD, THAT WE SHOULD CHANGE THIS CHARTER TO MERELY APPOINT SOMEONE.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT AND NOT JUST KIND OF TAKE THIS, YOU KNOW, LIGHTLY. IT MEANS A LOT AND MAKES, YOU KNOW THE DECISIONS THAT YOU MAKE AFFECT ALL OF THE CITIZENS HERE.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUGGESTION.
PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT THE FINANCIAL ASPECT OF IT.
PERHAPS YOU COULD SET UP A CONTINGENCY FUND FOR THESE TYPES OF ELECTIONS THAT IT'LL HAPPEN VERY OFTEN.
YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN BEGIN TO PLAN FOR AS THIS CITY IS JUST EXPLODING.
I SEE IN THE SHORT TIME I'VE BEEN HERE.
SO MAYBE, PERHAPS THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER, BUT I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND HAVE A GOOD EVENING. OKAY, THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK? THERE.
WHITE, 13, ON ONE STREET, SOUTHWEST.
I WANT TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT WITH REGARDS TO THE.
SEEMING DISDAIN FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY A SPECIAL ELECTION WOULD COST THE CITY AND THEREFORE TAXPAYERS, BECAUSE IF IT COSTS THE CITY, IT COSTS TAXPAYERS.
I AGREE THAT THE AMOUNT FOR THIS SPECIAL ELECTION IS EGREGIOUSLY HIGH.
THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR THAT.
SOME MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WITHIN THE CITY'S CONTROL.
BUT REGARDLESS, THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT.
THEN ELECTING ELECTED OFFICIALS AS.
THEY ALL ARE. THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVES, THE ENTIRE IDEA OF THE POSITION IS TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE.
IF THE PEOPLE DON'T CHOOSE YOU, YOU DO NOT REPRESENT THEM.
I IN THE RECENT COUNCIL MEETINGS, THEY'VE SPENT OVER $6 MILLION IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS.
I'M NOT SURE THE EXACT NUMBER. I JUST KNOW IT'S HIGHER THAN THAT.
IN TWO MEETINGS, FIVE POINT THREE MILLION DOLLARS IN TWO MEETINGS, ONE VOTE FOR EACH AMOUNT TO TWO LARGE AMOUNTS THAT TOTALED THAT MUCH ON A LIST OF ITEMS THAT DID NOT MAKE IT INTO THE BUDGETS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.
EVEN THOUGH WE MADE WE SET THOSE BUDGETS THAT THREE OR SO MONTHS AGO.
AND COUNCIL DID NOT DISCUSS ANY OF THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ON THOSE LISTS, AND WHEN THE FIRST LIST WAS BROUGHT AND IMMEDIATELY APPROVED, THEY ASKED THE CITY MANAGER TO COME BACK WITH ANOTHER LIST OF AN ADDITIONAL $2 MILLION OF REQUESTS AND THEN DIDN'T DISCUSS THOSE ITEMS EITHER BEFORE APPROVING IT.
I DO NOT THINK THE CONCERN FOR THE CAREFUL SPENDING OF PALM BAY TAXPAYER DOLLARS IS AT THE ROOT HERE. AND IF IT IS, WE ARE VERY CONFUSED.
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO SPEND MONEY ON.
AND. WE ARE NOT BEING CAREFUL ELSEWHERE.
SO I. AND MADE VERY CONCERNED AT THE IDEA OF STARTING THAT CAUTION WITH THE FREEDOM TO ELECT OUR REPRESENTATIVES.
MY MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO HAVE ONLY.
AN APPOINTMENT IN THE CASE OF THE COUNCIL BEING REDUCED BELOW QUORUM.
IF THERE CANNOT BE A QUORUM, THEN AN APPOINTMENT NEEDS TO BE MADE AND A SPECIAL ELECTION SHOULD BE HELD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
ASIDE FROM THAT, I THINK A COUNCIL CAN OPERATE WITH FOUR MEMBERS, IT HAS, IT IS.
I THINK THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THAT AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME NECESSARY TO WAIT BEFORE AN ELECTION CYCLE IS NOT THAT LONG.
WE DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION THE MONTH BEFORE THE REGULAR ONE.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE SOLUTION, AND TO REACT TO WITH THIS RIGHT AFTER FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE SHOWED UP TO PROTEST, THIS BEING CHANGED IN THE ORDINANCE AND TO SAY, WE'LL PUT IT IN THE CHARTER NOW. WERE YOU NOT LISTENING? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, SIR? IT'S JOE FITZGERALD, LAWRENCE, 13, 90, ASHVILLE CIRCLE SOUTHEAST.
I WAS HERE IN JULY AND THE RESPONSE FROM THE.
CITIZENS OF THIS TOWN WAS UNANIMOUS.
[01:05:01]
WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE AN APPOINTMENT.I BELIEVE THAT WAS VERY CLEAR AND COMMUNICATED VERY WELL WITH REGARD TO THE PRICE OF THE ELECTION. YOU CAN'T REALLY PUT A.
PRICE ON THE CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO VOTE.
PEOPLE HAVE DIED FOR THAT, GIVEN US THE OPPORTUNITY TO TO VOTE AS A COUNTRY, AS A TOWN, AS INDIVIDUALS.
OK, THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? THERE. MY NAME IS AMY INTERCOUNTY.
THESE BARMBY. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR INTENTION TO RAISE THE PRICE ON LAND.
WELL, THIS IS NOT HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PRICE OF LAND.
IT'S NOT A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING.
THIS IS A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? YOU KNOW, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE CHAIRMAN FOR ANY MOTION.
MR. VICE CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSAL OF THE.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE BILL THAT I SAW THE ARTICLE THAT I SET FORTH.
WOULD YOU READ IT FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? INCLUDE INCLUDING THE LANGUAGE BY APPOINTMENT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING MEMBERS, ALL VACANT ELECTIONS WILL RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE REGULAR REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTIONS. APPOINTMENTS WILL BE TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM UNTIL THE NEXT GENERAL CITY ELECTION CYCLE.
IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM.
IF THERE ARE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING IN THE UNEXPIRED TERM.
THERE'S ANY CORRECTIONS YOU WANT TO MAKE THE LIGHT LANGUAGE.
WE ARE IN DISCUSSION, SO IF THERE'S ANY CORRECTIONS YOU WANT TO MAKE TO THE LANGUAGE OR YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT IT.
MR CHANDLER, THE ONLY LANGUAGE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT PARTICULAR CHARTER AMENDMENT IS IF THE COUNCIL SHALL FAIL TO FILL A VACANCY WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER IT OCCURS, THEN THE CLERK SHALL IMMEDIATELY CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OR VACANCIES. YOU HEARD THAT, PHIL.
OK. YEAH, SO SO THE LANGUAGE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO YOUR AMENDMENT IS IF THE COUNCIL SHALL FAIL TO FILL A VACANCY WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER IT OCCURS, THE CITY CLERK SHALL IMMEDIATELY CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OR VACANCIES.
HOW SIMILAR TO THE MELBOURNE CORRECT WAS THAT WE HAD TO GET IT OUT? OKAY. A.
THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE CHARTER FOR HOW SOON AN ELECTION CAN BE CALLED BY THE COURT.
WOULDN'T THOSE RULES HAVE TO APPLY TO ANY CALL FOR ELECTION? IT'S HARD TO HEAR YOU WITH YOUR MASK, SO THEY'RE NOT MAKING SENSE OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, PULL THE MICROPHONE DOWN.
MY QUESTION WAS ARE THERE RULES FOR THE TIME FRAME WITHIN WHICH ELECTIONS ARE TO BE CALLED BY THE SINCLAIR? AND WOULD THIS 30 DAY ADDITION? VIOLATE ANY OF THOSE RULES.
[01:10:09]
RIGHT, THAT RIGHT NOW, THE WAY THE CODE COURT CURRENTLY READS, WHICH IS ENACTED BY ORDINANCE, IT STATES THAT WE ARE TO HAVE AN ELECTION NO LESS THAN 90 AND NO LONGER THAN HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS.BUT THIS WILL BE A CHARTER AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD THEN THAT WOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THE CODE. CORRECT.
WHAT IS PLACED IN THE CHARTER? KNOW, DID YOU WANT TO AMEND YOUR YOUR MOTION, MR. MOORE? FIRST, FIRST OF ALL, BEFORE WE DO THAT, ONE MORE TIME, MR. MACLEOD. I THINK MR. MOORE WANTS TO AMEND HIS MOTION.
SO WOULD YOU WOULD WITHDRAW YOUR SECOND SO THAT MR. MOORE CAN AMEND HIS MOTION DRAWN? KNOW, SO THE LANGUAGE WOULD SAY IF THE COUNCIL SHALL FAIL TO FILL A VACANCY WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER IT OCCURS, THE CITY CLERK SHALL IMMEDIATELY CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OR VACANCIES.
IMMEDIATELY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN CALL IT AN ELECTION IMMEDIATELY.
IT'S GOT TO BE TIME TO PUT THINGS IN PLACE.
PAPER BALLOTS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, SO I WOULD OBJECT TO THE IMMEDIATE.
OK. I'M WAITING FOR THE LEGAL TO SPEAK ON THAT.
WELL, THE CLERK CALLING FOR THESE SPECIAL ELECTION ESSENTIALLY IMMEDIATELY WOULD BE FOR HER TO PASS THE INFORMATION ON TO THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS WHEN THE ACTUAL ELECTION IS SET IN THE TIME FRAME THAT'S COMPLETELY WITHIN THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS PURVIEW.
THIS WOULD JUST MEAN THAT SHE, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, WE'LL GET IT TO THE SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS WHO WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION BASED UPON HER OWN LAWS AND RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT SHE HAS TO ABIDE BY.
AS FAR AS MAKING SURE BALLOTS ARE IN PLACE, THE TIMING AND WHATNOT.
I ASK HOW THAT VACANCY IS FILLED BY THE COUNCIL IN 30 DAYS, IS IT DONE AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING? YES, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CERTAINLY JUST LIKE YOU ALL, IF YOU'VE GOT TWO OR MORE PEOPLE MAKING DECISIONS ON COUNCIL.
IT'D BE SUBJECT TO THE SUNSHINE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT A PUBLIC MEETING.
SO WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT ALSO LANGUAGE THAT'S GOING TO BE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VAGUE AN OPEN TIME PERIOD OF 30 DAYS IN THE MONTH OF JULY.
POSSIBILITY THAT THAT COULD NOT HAPPEN IN THE MONTH OF JULY.
CORRECT. NO, THAT'S NOT THE MONTH.
WELL, THAT'S ANOTHER ANOTHER CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER TIME, BUT IT'S NOT JULY.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO BE ABLE TO MEET THAT THEY WILL CAUSE SPECIAL ELECTION.
A SPECIAL MEETING WOULD BE CALLED SUCH A THING WOULD HAPPEN.
BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE WHICH WILL ALLOW COUNCIL NOT TO HAVE MEETINGS IN JUNE, BUT IT WOULDN'T PROHIBIT COUNCIL FROM HAVING MEETINGS IN JUNE IF THIS WERE TO COME UP AND WHEN THOSE 30 DAYS COUNCIL WOULD BE FREE TO CALL A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING TO ADDRESS THE APPOINTMENT. OK.
IS IT THEN WOULD IT BE TOO MUCH, THOUGH, TO TO FEEL THE SAME? WOULD IT BE TOO MUCH JUST TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE IN? IT SAYS IF THIS DOES HAPPEN DURING THAT TIME IN WHICH THE COUNCIL IS NOT MEETING THAT IT CAN BE 60 DAYS ONLY BECAUSE IF WE'RE SAYING THAT, I KNOW THIS IS A DIFFERENT TOPIC, BUT IF WE'RE SAYING THAT WE WANT TO GIVE THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT OPPORTUNITY TO TO HAVE THAT MONTH. WE SHOULD PROBABLY DO WHAT WE CAN TO HOLD TRUE TO THAT, IF POSSIBLE.
I WOULD I WOULD LIKE 60 DAYS OF MR. CHANO WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT.
THAT'S FINE. I WOULD STILL HAVE THE FLOOR WHEN IT COMES TO EMOTION.
OK, SO I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION SO THAT.
I READ THAT SENTENCE OVER, READ THE ENTIRE MOTION, PLEASE.
BY APPOINTMENT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING MEMBERS, ALL VACANCY ELECTIONS WILL RUN CONCURRENT WITH THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY ELECTIONS.
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ELIMINATE THAT LAST LINE.
AND IF THE COUNCIL SHALL FAIL TO FILL A VACANCY WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER IT OCCURS, THE CITY CLERK SHALL CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OR VACANCIES.
THAT IS YOUR MOTION. YEAH, THAT'S MY MISSION.
I NEED A SECOND. OK, NOW IT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE THE VOTE IS RENDERED.
[01:15:01]
RENEE SMITH. IF THIS IF THIS DOES MOVE FORWARD AND LET'S JUST ASSUME THAT IT PASSES ALL THE WAY THROUGH, DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY INVALIDATE THE ORDINANCES THAT WERE VOTED ON IN 2012? YES, YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE CONFLICT WITH THE CHARTER VISION, ALTHOUGH IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE VOID AS A PRACTICE, WHAT WE DO IS WE HAVE COUNCILS AS FAR AS LEGAL, COME FORTH AND ACTUALLY REPEAL THINGS THAT ARE IN CONFLICT.BUT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S APPEAL OR NOT, YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE ISN'T SUPERIOR TO THEIR CHARTER. SO WHATEVER THE CHARTER SAYS IS WHAT IS VALID.
SO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IN 2012 BECOME IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.
WE DON'T CARE WHAT THEY VOTED ON BECAUSE IT WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
WELL, THE ONLY WAY THIS PROCESS OF THIS BECOMES IN THE CHARTER IS IF THE PEOPLE VOTE ON IT. I MEAN, IF THE PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE FAILED. I MEAN, IF THE PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT, IT WILL FAIL AND THE CHARTER WILL STILL STAY AS IT IS, AND IT WILL STILL BE BY ORDINANCE.
IF THE PEOPLE FIND IT ACCEPTABLE, THEY WILL VOTE FOR IT AND WE WILL HAVE IT IN THE CHARTER. HOW IT PROCEEDS.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE DO HERE OR WHAT COUNCIL DOES.
NOTHING HAPPENS UNLESS PEOPLE, WE HAVE THE MAJORITY VOTE FOR IT.
IT'S JUST THAT SO MANY PEOPLE MADE REFERENCE TO WHAT PEOPLE VOTED FOR, AND NOW APPARENTLY IT WAS NO LONGER IMPORTANT.
YOU KNOW, YOU KEEP MAKING STATEMENTS THAT.
YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS IS AN ONGOING PROCESS.
IT'S BEEN IN PLACE EVER SINCE BOMBAY HAS BEEN A CITY AS CONSTANT, JUST EXPLAINED AT ANY TIME. A COMMISSION SUCH AS THIS CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDLESS OF WHAT A PRIOR ORDINANCE SAYS.
IF THE COUNCIL AGREES, IT GOES TO THE VOTE AGAIN.
SO YOUR ARGUMENT ABOUT DISENFRANCHISEMENT IS NOT A VALID ONE, BECAUSE THIS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING WILL BE VOTED ON IF THE COUNCIL ACCEPTED.
AND IT'S BEEN LIKE 10 PEOPLE HAVE SAID THE SAME THING.
NOT UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS NOT PERMANENT.
THAT'S ALL I WANT TO MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND.
ALL RIGHT. I KNOW THIS IF WE GO BACK AND FORTH, SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO, I'M GOING TO CALL IT. OK.
HUMP. I WAS GOING ASK FOR POTENTIALLY A ROLL CALL VOTE, BUT I THINK THAT'S FINE.
I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO BE HARD.
WE'RE ALL HERE. BUT THAT'S ALL IN FAVOR.
WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM FOUR, ARTICLE THREE, LEGISLATIVE SECTION THREE POINT ZERO EIGHT PROCEDURES MEETINGS.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT WAS BEING TALKED ABOUT REGARDING IN JULY OR JUNE, BUT THIS IS FOR THE JUNE. YOU NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE.
UH-HUH. NO, WE I MEAN, WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE PART OF IF ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE.
REGARDING COUNCILS HAVING JUNE OFF, NO.
GILBERT AND FIVE EIGHTY SIX OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST.
EVEN DURING THE LAST DISCUSSION, WE CAME UP.
IF GILBERT AND 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST, EVEN DURING THE LAST DISCUSSION, IT CAME UP WELL, WHAT IF IT'S DURING THE BREAK WHEN EVERYBODY'S GONE, BUT THIS HAPPENS? WELL, YOU JUST SAW RIGHT THERE, THERE WAS NOBODY HERE TO MAKE A DECISION.
SO THEY SAY, WELL, WE'LL JUST WAIT 30 DAYS WHEN THE VACATION IS OVER AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND MAKE A DECISION.
SO THAT RIGHT THERE, EVEN WITHIN ITS OWN DISCUSSION TONIGHT, YOU SAW WHERE THERE'S A POTENTIAL PITFALL IN EVERYBODY BEING GONE AT THE SAME TIME.
NEXT THING WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY, TONGUE IN CHEEK.
WELL, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WANTS TO HAVE A MONTH OFF AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE IT'S EASIER FOR THEM TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S GOING TO DO IT.
YOU KNOW, ONCE YOU ONCE YOU CRACK THAT EGG, THE JUICES START TO COME OUT.
SO REMEMBER THAT THERE IS A NEGATIVE TINGED WITH IT.
I DON'T FEEL SORRY FOR MY COUNSEL THAT'S UP THERE.
THE PEOPLE I FEEL SORRY FOR IS THE STAFF THAT HAS TO TRY TO MAKE THAT MEET THEIR APPOINTMENTS ALSO.
THAT'S WHY I FEEL SORRY FOR BUT EVERYBODY THAT'S MAKING THESE DECISIONS PICK THE JOB THEY
[01:20:03]
WANTED TO WORK IN, AND THIS HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THE PITFALLS OF TRYING TO FIND TIME OFF.BUT IN ORDER TO SAY TAKE THE ENTIRE MONTH OF JUNE OFF, EVERYTHING SHUTS DOWN.
BY BATTENS DECISION, THAT WOULD BE A BAD CHOICE, AT LEAST HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO MAKE A DECISION. WHAT IF THAT HAPPENS TO BE IN HURRICANE SEASONS? HAVE SOMEBODY HERE THAT CAN MAKE A DECISION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? YOU DON'T CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE CHAIRMAN.
I NEED A MOTION FOR JUNE OFF FOR COUNCIL.
MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND SECOND BY MR. CHANDLER. ANY DISCUSSION COMMISSION? YES, I CAN. I'M IN FAVOR FOR VACATIONS AND ALL THAT, AND I THINK BILL BATTEN DOES BRING UP A GOOD QUESTION WHETHER.
THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF LANGUAGE.
OR EMERGENCIES AND OR MAYBE IT SHOULD BE SPLIT SO THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN A FULL 30 DAYS, WHICH WOULD THEN.
IN SOME FLEXIBILITY, JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME COMFORT SINCE I SET UP THERE, YOU'RE ON CALL TWENTY FOUR SEVEN.
EVEN IF YOU HAVE THAT MONTH, EVEN IF QUOTE UNQUOTE, THEY SAY YOU HAVE A MONTH OFF.
BUT THE REALITY IS IT MAY NOT WORK OUT LIKE THAT BECAUSE THAT PHONE CALL COMES FROM THE CITY CLERK'S CITY ATTORNEY.
AND THEY SAY, MAYOR, YOU NEED TO COME IN.
CITY COUNCIL, YOU NEED TO COME IN BECAUSE WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS.
THE CITY NEVER SLEEPS IS JUST A WAY OF SAYING, JUST LIKE THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAD THE MONTH OF JUNE OFF, BUT IT IS UNDERSTOOD WHEN YOU'RE SITTING IN THOSE SEATS THAT YOU'RE ON. TWENTY FOUR SEVEN.
AND THE BEEPER IS ALWAYS GOING OFF AND THE BEEPER IS ALWAYS GOING.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT TIME IT IS.
YEAH. AND AND TO THAT POINT, THOUGH, IT SAYS SPECIAL MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS MAY BE HELD AT THE CALL OF ANY COUNCIL MEMBER SO THAT.
KIND OF ALLEVIATES THAT ISSUE THAT IF THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY CORRECT, THAT THEY COULD STILL CALL IT IF NECESSARY.
WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO CALL IT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I.
OK. IS IT APPROPRIATE TO REITERATE WHAT THE CHAIRMAN SAID, BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A CONCERN THAT THERE MAY BE LAPSES? BUT. THE CHARTER PROVIDES FOR CALLING AN EMERGENCY MEETING AT ANY TIME.
BUT IT NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT SO THAT WE DON'T GET MISS, NO.
COUNCIL NOTIFIES THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE OUT OF TOWN AND THEY HAVE THEIR CELL PHONES WITH THEM IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY THAT THEY NEED TO GET BACK.
SO THAT'S THAT PROVISION IS THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DO YOUR JOB AND YOU DO IT CORRECTLY. NEW BUSINESS. LET ME GET TO THE NEW BUSINESS SIDE, NEW BUSINESS NO.
[NEW BUSINESS]
ONE REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE CITY CHARTER ARTICLE EIGHT PUBLIC SAFETY.SECTION EIGHT POINT ZERO ONE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
IS THERE ANYTHING THERE? WE SHOULD HAVE ONE. THAT'S IT, EXACTLY.
SO NOTHING TO ADD, NOTHING FROM THE AUDIENCE.
OK, LET'S GO TO SECTION EIGHT POINT ZERO TWO.
FIRE DEPARTMENT FALLS UNDER THE SAME BLANKET.
RIGHT WILL COME INTO THE NEXT MEETING DATE WOULD BE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22ND AT SIX P.M..
BUT WHAT I ARTICLE NINE, OH, THERE WAS I MISSED THAT ONE.
[01:25:03]
NINE AND 10, I THOUGHT IT WAS DONE.OH, ONE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
SECTION NINE POINT ZERO TWO BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSION.
ANYTHING TO ADD THERE FROM THE COMMISSION.
NOT. MOVING INTO SECTION, THOUGH.
OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST UNDER BOARDS AND COMMITTEES.
WE'VE ALREADY SEEN WHERE SOME OF THEM ARE STAGNANT AND WE DON'T HAVE PERSONNEL SHOWING UP. I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING IN IN THERE THAT SAYS A REVIEW TO MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF BOARDS AND COMMITTEES WHERE WE CAN'T GET CITIZENS AND VOLUNTEERS TO FILL THIS, TO FILL THEM.
STAFF STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ORGANIZING AND PUBLICIZING, BUT NOTHING'S HAPPENING WITH THEM. I DON'T.
IT MIGHT NOT BE IN THE CHARTER, BUT IT MIGHT COME OUT OF ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING THAT SAYS IF THEY'RE BECOMING STAGNANT, WE HAVE A WAY TO DO AWAY WITH THEM.
OTHER THAN CHARTER REVIEW, VICE CHAIR, I'LL RESPOND TO THAT BILL, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU READ THIS, THERE'S NOTHING THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS CHARTER THAT SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT DISBAND A AN ADVISORY BOARD.
AS YOU KNOW, THE LAST ADVISORY BOARD THAT WAS DISBANDED, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN BROUGHT BACK, WAS A YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD BECAUSE THEY COULD NEVER GET PEOPLE TO SERVE ON IT.
SO, SO CITY COUNCIL AT THEIR AT THEIR THEIR DESIRE IF THEY WANT TO ELIMINATE AN ADVISORY BOARD, ALL EXCEPT FOR PLANNING AND ZONING, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE ONLY BOARD THAT'S ADVISORY BOARD IS REQUIRED BY LAW.
THE CITY COUNCIL CAN DISBAND ANY OTHER ADVISORY BOARD.
ANYTHING ELSE ON NINE POINT ZERO TWO? IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO ARTICLE 10 TRANSITIONING SCHEDULE SECTION TEN POINT ZERO ONE CONFLICT LAWS AND ORDINANCE, ANYTHING TO ADD THERE JUST AN INQUIRY.
THERE'S A LOT OF PREEMPTION LAWS THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, AND I DIDN'T KNOW HOW ANY OF THOSE IMPACT.
THE CHARTER VERSUS ORDINANCES, SO IF WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A PREEMPTION LAW THAT SAYS THAT WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING AND THEN WE HAVE SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER THAT SAYS WE CAN DO THAT EVEN WHILE IT'S BEING LITIGATED ON THE VALIDITY OF THAT, WHAT HOW DOES THAT IMPACT? IF THERE IS A STATE STATUTE AND THE CHARTER PROVISION IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE STATE STATUTE, THE STATE STATUTE WILL CONTROL OVERRIDE.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE THERE IS A HIERARCHY IF THERE IS A.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING AS FAR AS FEDERAL IT CONTROLS, YOU GO FROM FEDERAL TO STATE, WHETHER IT BE THE STATE CONSTITUTION OR THE LAWS THAT ARE PASSED BY THE LEGISLATIVE THING, YOU GET TO THE CITIES CHARTER AND THEN ORDINANCES AND THEN RESOLUTIONS BEING AT THE BOTTOM.
BUT THERE IS A BUILT IN HIERARCHY AS FAR AS IF THERE IS A CONFLICT.
MM HMM. YEP. AND SO TO THAT WHICH I KNEW AND TO THAT IF THERE IS AN THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEING LITIGATED ON ITS VALIDITY.
DOES THAT STILL ALLOW THE CHARTER OR THAT TO REMAIN IN PLACE? AND WHAT IF? WHATEVER THE STATE STATUTE SAYS, UNLESS SOMEONE IS ABLE TO GO INTO COURT AND ENJOIN THE ENFORCEMENT, IF YOU JUST GO AND YOU CHALLENGE IT, IT IS GOING.
WHATEVER HAS BEEN PASSED WILL TAKE EFFECT IT.
IF YOU SEEK AN INJUNCTION AND YOU'RE GRANTED AN INJUNCTION, THEN WHATEVER THE COURT ENJOINS WILL NOT BE ENFORCED, BUT IT IS IN FORCE UNTIL IT IS EITHER REPEALED OR ENJOINED BY A JUDGE.
THAT KIND OF GOES TO TEN POINT TWO PENDING MATTERS, I WAS KIND OF WONDERING HOW PENDING MATTERS WORKS THERE. ALL RIGHT.
GOING INTO SECTION TEN POINT ZERO TWO PENDING MATTERS.
NO. SECTION TEN POINT ZERO THREE.
AND SUCH AND TEN POINT ZERO FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
[01:30:01]
NOTHING. NOTHING.OK. NOW, NOW IS TRUTH THAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY BEFORE I GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF.
OUR NEXT MEETING DATE WOULD BE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22ND AT SIX P.M.
FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN THE AUDIENCE, THAT IS OUR NEXT MEETING AND WE HOPE THAT OUR WEBSITE OR WHAT NEEDS TO GET DONE TILL THE INFORMATION GETS OUT THERE TO THE PUBLIC WILL BE THERE. SO FOR THOSE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT DIDN'T GET THE INFORMATION ALL THE TIME, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE.
SO WITH THAT, WHICH KNOW, COULD YOU LIST THE ARTICLES WE'RE GOING TO COVER? I GUESS NEXT MEETING WE WILL HAVE ARTICLE SIX, WHICH IS TAXES AND FEES, AND ARTICLE SEVEN, WHICH IS CITY BORROWING.
AND WE WILL ALSO HAVE A PRESENTATION BY OUR CONSULTANT REGARDING FEES.
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD FROM LEGAL? NO. OK WITH THAT.
EVERYBODY GET HOME SAFE AND MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.