Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Charter Review_07/16/2007VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES JULY 16, 2007 I. Call To Order And Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held its first regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Monday, July 16, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:05 P.M. by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams, who then called the roll: Present were Joseph Capretta, Dottie Campbell, Geraldine Genco, Mary Hinton, and Vincent Arena. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. II. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the agenda. Board Member Hinton seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Board Member Campbell requested switching agenda items 8 and 9, and removing item 10, Any Other Matters, so that item 10 would become Adjournment. The vote on the agenda as modified carried 5-0. III. Appointment of Chair Attorney Randolph opened the floor for nominations to appoint a Chair. Joseph Capretta was nominated by Dottie Campbell. Mary Hinton was nominated by Geraldine Genco. Dottie Campbell was nominated by Vincent Arena. Mr. Capretta and Ms. Hinton accepted the nomination; Ms. Campbell declined. Attorney Randolph passed out ballots for each Board Member to fill in a name and initial. Village Clerk McWilliams announced the results: Mr. Capretta received 3 votes; Ms. Hinton received 2 votes. Attorney Randolph clarified that a motion was not needed since a vote had been taken by ballot. IV. Appointment of Vice Chair MOTION: Board Member Arena made a motion to appoint Mary Hinton as Vice Chair. Board Member Genco seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. V. Establish Meeting Schedule and Time Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 Each member announced days of the week they were available. Friday, August 17 at 2 p.m. was set for the next meeting. A subsequent meeting was set for Wednesday, August 22 at 2 p.m. A third meeting was set for Wednesday, August 29 at 2 p.m. VI. Discussion by Village Attorney of Committee Guidelines Attorney Randolph advised this board was established by Resolution of the Village Council and would automatically dissolve on November 8, 2007. Charter amendments, if any, should be brought to the Village Council by October 11, 2007, so the amendments could be in an ordinance to be placed on first and second reading, and then go to referendum at an appropriate time. Sunshine law requirements were reviewed. Attorney Randolph announced he could provide backup and answer questions; and advised that two items had been brought up-who hired and fired the Village Attorney, and interference with staff -and a member of Council had suggested a Charter Review. Decisions under Robert's Rules of Order would be by majority vote. The Board would be governed by the Sunshine Law until the Board was dissolved, and it was best to distribute material through the Village Clerk. Board Member Hinton suggested it would be best not to discuss Charter Review matters with members of the Council, even though it was permissible under the Sunshine Law. VII. Discussion Of Charter Chair Capretta. announced he had requested the Village Council minutes for the last six months be sent to each Board member, so that Board members would be aware of any issues raised at Council meetings. During a poll of the members, it was revealed that no one had been told by their Council sponsor of specific issues they wished resolved. Chair Capretta advised an item raised in the minutes was who hired and fired the Village Attorney. Board member Arena noted there had been discussion regarding who should be able to use the Village Attorney other than the Village Manager and the Mayor; some felt the Village Attorney should serve at the pleasure of the whole Council. Board member Hinton commented the attorney issue was not in the Charter at this point; so she felt it would be better to review what was there and then discuss any additions. Chair Capretta responded that was his point the Village Council had had an issue with the Attorney, and appointed a Charter Review board to resolve the issue, but it wasn't even in the Charter. Board member Genco expressed her opinion that the Council wanted this board to review the Charter to see if that was something they might want to add. Board member Genco advised she had collected comments while she had been on the Village Council of many things people would like, and she planned to present them to this board for consideration. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 The Village Attorney advised there was no law requiring review of the Charter every five years; Board member Hinton expressed her opinion it was a good idea. Board member Campbell recommended reviewing line by line; then discuss any additions. Chair Capretta commented all of the issues he saw in reviewing the minutes were not in the Charter. Board member Hinton suggested reviewing the Charter with three questions in mind: Does this work; if not, why; and how can we make it better. Board member Hinton asked if all terminology in the Charter that was required by State statute was there. Board member Genco suggested members of the Board should not be speaking to the Village Manager about items they were discussing in Charter Review meetings. Village Clerk McWilliams noted language was included in the resolution that the Village Manager when able to attend the Charter Review board meetings would be present as a resource. Attorney Randolph noted it was not a violation of the Sunshine law for a member of this board to consult the Village Manager, and he should be used as a resource unless the board decided they did not want individual members going to him to ask individual opinions; however, the Manager usually served in that regard. Discussion ensued regarding where in the Charter the Manager was given authority to hire and fire the attorney; there was nothing in the Charter. Board member Genco commented the Village Council was responsible for personnel policies, ordinances implementing things, resolutions, and adopting the budget; someone else could implement them but Council was responsible, and there was a lot of misunderstanding of what Council was responsible for versus what the Manager was given to implement. When Council looked to the Charter these things were not there; and this board could establish items for the Council to follow. Vice Chair Hinton agreed that defining powers of the Council was very important, but it was also extremely important to be sure each item worked, and the Charter Review board must look at every item as to how it affected both Council and members of the community. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved that the Village Attorney review the existing Charter for Statutory compliance. Board member Campbell seconded the motion. Roll call vote was as follows: Joseph Capretta for Mary Hinton for Vincent Arena for Dottie Campbell for Geraldine Genco for The motion was therefore passed by unanimous 5-0 vote. Chair Capretta noted the language in the oath might be one thing the Board should consider. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 Attorney Randolph indicated he would provide backup materials from the last Charter review board and a model charter to members of the Board. Attorney Randolph advised any change to amend the Charter would require a referendum. Section 1.01- Attorney Randolph confirmed the model charter would have a concise description of Village Council Manager form of government. Discussion ensued regarding manager and mayor forms of government. Section 1.02 -Board member Hinton requested this section be tagged and brought back to the next meeting. Board member Campbell noted there was a typo 3 lines up from the bottom. Section 2.01 -Board member Hinton commented this would be the place to expand terms if that was recommended. Board member Genco noted in the third paragraph there was an annual salary issue, which made Council members employees, and suggested language to make it clear it they would be non-employees and receive 1099 forms. Another issue raised by Board member Genco was to possibly increase the $250 per month pay for Council members. Discussion ensued. Attorney Randolph indicated the other municipalities he represented did not pay a salary, only a per diem to reimburse expenses. Board Member Campbell stated the third paragraph was postponed. Board Member Campbell referred to the second paragraph, and expressed her desire to keep the election the second Tuesday of March each year. It was agreed there was no reason to change it. Board member Hinton brought up run-off elections and her opinion that 50% + one vote should win, or go to runoff. The board requested the attorney provide information on smaller communities regarding this matter. This paragraph was postponed. Section 2.02 -There were no questions. Section 2.03 - Board member Genco requested that language be placed in the charter that if a Council member did not take the oath then the position was deemed vacant. Village Attorney Randolph advised it did not need to be stated because there was a mandate by charter to do it. Board member Genco responded they had gotten into trouble with Mr. Dalack not taking the oath because the Charter had not stated the position was deemed vacant. Board member Hinton asked if a vacancy could be declared if the person got elected and went to prison before they took the oath. The board agreed the oath of office was good. Section 2.04 -Board member Genco discussed removing members from office if they missed meetings being in the old charter, and that it had been removed. Village Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 Attorney Randolph advised it had been removed from the charter because someone could only be removed with a recall. Board member Campbell asked if language could be added to the removal section-"or legal proceeding". Chair Capretta recalled there had been discussion at the previous Charter review about a Council member missing meetings and that the conclusion had been he could not be removed because he had been legally elected. Attorney Randolph indicated he would review what had been discussed at the last Charter review regarding this issue, and his question to himself would be how to fill the office if someone did not take the oath. During ensuing discussion, Attorney Randolph indicated he would see about defining vacancy and forfeiture, and report back. Attorney Randolph referred to minutes of the last Charter Review board where he had advised that State law did not allow a Council to vote out its own members. Section 2.06 -Mayor and Successors. Board member Genco suggested replacing the word Mayor with Chair to get rid of the ego. Other members preferred to stay with Mayor. Section 2.07 -Board member Campbell asked for language consistency throughout the Charter when referring to Ordinances and Florida law. Village Attorney Randolph recommended an ordinance regarding special meetings, and in the Charter to refer to ordinance rather than Florida law. Attorney Randolph indicated he would look at the language about two members independently calling a special meeting. Village Clerk McWilliams read the Code of Ordinances Section 2-32 regarding special meetings; that three days notice must be given, and the Mayor and Manager could call a special meeting. Attorney Randolph advised the charter and the ordinance should be made consistent. Pert Towne asked regarding 2.02 if the language could be changed from resident of the Village to property owner of the Village, and was told no, that would take a constitutional vote; the Supreme Court had dealt with that. It was clarified that 2.07 was being postponed only to look at the requirement of two members calling a meeting and then to perhaps make a recommendation to the Village Council that they needed to get their ordinance up to date, consistent with the Charter. Section 2.08 - Board member Campbell asked about a super majority vote. Village Attorney Randolph explained that whatever was required by State law did not need to be mentioned since it took precedence over the Charter. State law would state the number of votes required. Board member Hinton requested that any items requiring a super majority vote be well defined. Board member Hinton asked if there had ever been a problem with the requirement that when only three Council members were present they could not vote on anything except to adjourn, unless their votes were unanimous. Board member Arena reported he had been at a meeting where that Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 6 happened-all three had to vote unanimously. It was agreed this was not a problem and not to make a change. Board member Campbell reported that because there were discrepancies in referring to how the law was stated: law, Florida State law, Florida law; she had asked the Village Clerk,who had checked with Village Attorney Hawkins; his opinion was that the law should be referred to in the Charter as law of Florida State. Board member Campbell commented she had a problem with that, and asked for something that sounded better. Attorney Randolph advised he would use "as determined by laws of the State of Florida", but if there were no substantive changes he would not recommend going to referendum for that. Section 2.09 -There were no changes. Section 2.10 - Board member Campbell stated this section was fine with the change on Florida law. Discussion ensued regarding allowing poll workers to be registered voters of Palm Beach County rather than limiting them to residents of the Village. Attorney Randolph advised he would check with Attorney Hawkins, who had indicated to the Village Clerk that this might be changed in the Charter. It was agreed to recommend to Village Council to pass an ordinance allowing poll workers to be from Palm Beach County as opposed to Village of Tequesta residents only. Section 2.11 -Board member Campbell commented there was no reference to investigations and inquiries in the charter, and questioned what they were. Attorney Randolph advised there were other models provided, and he would provide a model the Board might want to use. Attorney Randolph also advised Council should not be kept from asking questions of employees or department heads; however, should not be ordering them around, and the language could be modified to be more specific. Board member Hinton commented one of the biggest problems with Charters of the Council Manager form of government was abuse. She agreed with Board member Campbell that words like investigations and inquiries opened cans of worms. She explained that Jupiter had added a whole section of prohibitions and she felt it really needed to be looked at. Attorney Randolph read an example from Jupiter Island's Charter; Board member Hinton read the wording from Jupiter's Charter. Board member Genco discussed the responsibilities and functions of the manager and felt that went hand to hand. Board member Genco advised she would like to compare Sections 2.11 and 3.03, and have an idea of where things needed to be defined. Her biggest issue when she was on the Village Council had been the interpretation of this language, which she felt was unclear and needed to be defined. Board member Hinton commented it needed to be defined very, very well, and it made it easier when you had to re-hire another manager, and also very helpful when you had to tell another member of the Council to back off, that they were violating the Charter. One must have a very significant black and white document in front of them to present that case; to make sure there was a separation and lines were not folding into each other. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 7 Council member Genco asked everyone to provide good examples for 2.11 and 3.03, forwarded to the Village Clerk for exchange. Attorney Randolph indicated he would provide examples. Board member Campbell asked to have the Tequesta Indian placed on the corporate seal. VIII. Communications from Committee Members There were no communications from Committee Members. IX. Communication From Citizens There were no communications from citizens. X. Adjournment Upon motion by Board member Hinton; seconded by Board member Arena, and unanimously carried 5-0, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk