HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 06F_08/09/2001 "� ...• � .
� •
�
Y .. .:
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
� Post Office Box 3273 • 250 Tequesta Drive, Suite 300
� � Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (561) 575-6200
w\ �' Fax:(S61)575-6203
CHARTER REVIEW BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
JULY 9, 2001
I. Call to Order and Roll Ca11
The meeting of the Charter Review Board was called to order at 9:00 a.m. in the
Village Manager's Conference Room, 250 Tequesta Drive, Suite 300, Tequesta,
. Florida on June 26, 2001. Recording Secretary Betty Laur called the roll, and
the following members of the Committee were in attenda�ce: Jim Humpage, Vi
Laamanen, Edward Resnik, and Robert Cook. Also in attendance was Richard
Berube, who had been appointed as a member but had not yet been ratified by
the Village Council. Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Manager
Michael R. Couzzo, Jr. were also present.
II. Approval of Agenda
Boa�dmember Resnik moved approval of the agenda as submitted.
Boardmember Laamanen seconded the motion, which carried by �manimous 4-0
vote.
III, App�oval of Minutes of June 25, 200� Meeting
Boardmember Resnik moved approval of the minutes of the June 25, 2001
meeting as submitted. Boardmember Cook seconded the motion, which carried
by unanimous 4-0 vote.
IV. Appointment of Officers
Appointment of a Chair was discussed. Village Attorney Randolph advised that
a Chair was needed to conduct the meetings and to report the findings of the
Recycled Paper
►
4
d � �
1
� Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 2
Board to the Village Council, otherwise, staffwould be responsible to report to
tl�e Village Council. Consensus of the Board was to have the Village Attomey
act as Chair for this meeti.ng and to defer appointment of a Cha.ir to the ne�
meeting when a full Board would be seated.
V. Establish Meeting Schedule
Various meeting dates were discussed. Village Attorney Randolph advised that
if Charter amendments were to be placed on a November referendum that the
Village Council must be in a position to ha.ve first reading of an prdinax��e at
their September meeting. Boardmember Resnik suggested assigning a certain
number of pages to be reviewed at each meeting, then to have one more meeting
by the first week in September to confixm the changes.
Boardmember Laamanen made a motion to approve the dates of July 23,
August 2, and August 17 for the next three meetings. Boardmem�er
Humpage seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote.
vI. Discussion by Village Attorney of Guidelines for the Board
The Village Attorney noted most of the members were present at the recent
Village Council workshop regardang the Sunshine Law, and advised that none of
the members should talk to another Boardmember about the business of this
Board unZess �t was at a public meeting, and the Boar�effibers should not
exchange correspondence among themselves. Tlus would not preclude members
talking one-on-one with member of the Village �;ouncil, other residents, any
member of staf�, or the Village Attorney. Village Attomey Randolph advised
that the work of this Board must be completed in ti.me for the Village Council to
adopt an Ordinan�e encompassing the suggestions of the Board by their October
meeting in order to have this ite�n voted upon in the November referendum, vv�ith
first. reading of the prdinan�e in September. This would mean the Board must
report to the Village Council in August, which might require a special meeting of
the Village Council, depending on the progress of the Board. The Villa e
Attorney noted that other guidelines would be pointed out as the work of the
r
•
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 4
Laa�nanen noted annexations were a legal procedure and verified with the
Village Attomey that any annexations subsequent to the original metes and
bounds description were a part of the legal records of the Village should those
descriptions be needed in the future. Boardmember Cook clarified that he was
proposing a motion to bring the description up to date, which would include any
� annexations to date.
Boardmember Cook made a motion to have staff check the accuracy of the
legal description of the boundaries of the Village to bring the description up
to date. Boardmember Humpage seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous 4-0 vote.
Boardmemb�r Resnik made a motion to have the legal description of the
territorial limits of the Village of Tequesta as updated to be appended to as
either A►nnex A or Appendiz A to the Village C�arter. Boardmember
Laamanen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote.
The Village Manager was requested to obtain an estimate from the engineer as
to the approximate cost of updating the iegal deser�ption.
Seetion 1.02. Form of Government
The municipal government provic�ed hereby shall be a Village Council-Manager
government. Subject only to the limitations imposed by the constitutcon dnd laws of this
state and by this charter, all poauers of the Village shall be vested in un elective Council,
hereinafter referred to cts '"I7 Villuge Council", which sl�wcll enact Iocal legisl,cttion, adopt
budge�s, determine policies, and uppointsuch village officictls ds are h,ereinctfter prescribed.
Except us limited in this chctrter, the Village Maruzger shc�ll execute the �Ctws and
administer the government of the Village. All poavers of the Village shull be exercised in the
manner provided by this charter, or if the manner be not provided then in such manner as
may be set forth by ordinan.ce.
None of the Boardmembers proposed any changes to Section 1.02.
r
�
\
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 5
Recording Secretar�s Note: The following fornaat indicates deletions shown by a line
through the deletion and addi�ions shown by underline in the actual Section
(italicized), followed by a description of the discussion/actions of the Board by
which those changes were accomplished,
ARTICLE II. THE VII.LAGE COUNCII,
Section 2.01. Selection, Term and Com�ensation
The Village Council of the Village of Tequestu shall consist of five (5) members avho shall
be elected ut large to Sectts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The Councilmen in Seats 1, 3 and 5 shall be
elected in the even yeurs, and the Councilmen in Seats 2 and 4 shatll be elected in the odd
years. TFee election s1u�U be held on th.e second Tuesday in Murch of each yeacr. Only
qualified electors, as prescribed herein, shall be entitled to vote at such etections.
.
The term of office of euch Councilman shall commence on the next council meeting
subsequent tv the dute of his election and shaU continue for two (2) yeurs thereafter anc�
until his successor is elected arid qualified.
Ectch Village Councilrri.a�n shall be entitled to an annual sala�ry to be fixed by ordinance;
provided, however, he shall not be entitled to uny increuse in salary udopted during the ter�m.
for which he wcts elected.
The can.clidate for euch sectt receiving th.e highest number of votes cust for such office shall
be deemed e�ected to such vf fice regardless of auhether or not such cdndidute shall hctve
received a majority of votes cast. In the event of a tie vote between the candidates receiving
the highest number of votes cast for ctny office the rutmes of all tzed candidates shall be
placed on the ballot and sha�l be voted upon at an ensuing runoff election to be held on the
fourth (4th) Tuesday in March. Such election shall be hetd in the same mctnner ctnd by the
same of ficers holding the previous election.
� ,
. (Ord. No. 189, § Z,
12-31-71; Ord. No. 247, § 2, 2-8-77; Ord. No. 327, § 1, 12-13-83) Editor's note--Ord.
No. 247, § 2, pussed and ddopted Feb. 8, 1977, was ctpproved by the voters dt u
referendum held IVlarch 15, 1977.
Boardmember Resnil� noted that elections needed to be noticed, tiherefore the
language in the last paragraph regarding no notice should be deleted.
s .
+
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 6
Boardmember Laamanen indirated she felt strongly from her municipal
experience that Councilmembers should serve three year terms because it took
new Councilmembers time to learn their jobs and she felt two year terms were
not long enough to allow productivity from the Village Councilmembers.
Boardrnember La.amanen indica.ted that the first year was usually a loss, but the
second and third years could be more productive. It was noted that two years
was the norm within the State and that the House of Representatives only served
2�ear terms. Boardmember Laamanen responded that when the House of
Representatives terms were established governmenti was not as complica.ted as
today, and her suggestion came from many years of experience, and t�sed
negotiations as an example of an item that the Village Councilmembers needed
to understand. The Village Attorney commented that one of the risks of his
chairing the meetings was his saying more than he should and thus involving
himself as a member, but requested the Boardmembers th.ink about the fact that
the Charter amendments must go to referendum and the more substa.ntiative
things changed, the more difficulty might be encountered in getting the changes
approved. Mr. Randolph commented he did not say this to dissuade changes.
from being made but only that tihe $oard should consider the larger picture. It
was clarified that elections were held every year. Boardmember Coo� noted
although Palm Beach County municipalities had stayed with Zyear terms, he had
seen a model code from Florida League of Cities that had 4 year terms. Mr.
Humpage commented he hated to see a lot of turmoil in any municipality as had
happened in the Village, and it seemed that every election turned things around
and caused turmoil. Boardmember Humpage commented he believed there was
some merit in the suggestion, since he did not know if a Councilmember could
be effecti�e even in two years. To implement the proposal, Mr. Humpage
suggested ir would not be started immediately but, for example, in 2005 so that
future administrations would know it was coming. The process would then be
to rotate the following procedure: hold an election one year, then the next, and
the third year not to hold an election. Discussion ensued, in which it was
noted that with 3 year terms election costs would be reduced by 1/3, plus staff
time would be saved, that elections were becoming more expensive, and
communities were looking at this to save money; and that the reason for
considering a change would be to get full potential from the elected
representatives. Mr. Humpage noted that term limits of two terxns would then
allow a Councilmember to serve s� years. It was clarified that this Boaxd was
r
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, �U01
Page 7
making recommendations to the Village Council, who would consider the
recommendations and could approve or rnake changes. Boardmember
Laamanen expressed her opinion that it w�s imperative that the Vrllage Council
understand the reasoning behind the recommeridations made by this Board.
Boardmember Resnik commented that every recommendation must have an
explanation. The Vill�ge Manager explained that detailed minutes of tk►e
meetings would be provided to the Councilmembers and that duplicate tapes
could be provided if desired. Village Manager Couzzo noted that Tamara.c had 3-
year terms, and explained that the nature of their politics was different than here
and it was so much work for staff to hold elections that they had decided to save
election costs by not holding an election every year. Boardmember Humpage
commented that by waiting unti12005 to implement 3 year terms, no presently
seated party would gain politically from this Board's thought process; that 2006
could be the first election for 3 year Cerms, and that way nobody would be
affected immediately; and it would not appear to be palitical. Village Manager
Couzzo indicated staff could research this in South Florida communities to see if
there were any cities with 3 year Councilmember terms, and bring their findings
back to the Board. Boardmember Resnik indicated he would like to know how
many communities had terms longer th�n two years. Boardrnember Humpage
requested at the same time to see if the other municipalities had term limits.
1�ie Village Attorney commented that the Florida League of Cities might have
this information. Mr Couzzo commented that the report wou�d be distributed to
the Boardmembers to allow time for review before the next meeting, and it
would be the first item on the agenda for the next meeting.
Boardmember Cook questioned if there would be any merit to having voting
districts. It was pointed out that the Village had two precincts, created by the
Supervisor of Elections according to population, but no districts. It was noted
that there was over-representation on the Village Council from the Country
Club, which had been discussed many times; however, the negative to having
districts was not being able to get people living in those specific areas to run for
Village Council. Boardmember Resnik commented that with approximately
2500 voters there could only be two districts. Boardmember Humpage
commented there could three di.stricts and then the other two seats could be at
large-three candidates would have to live within their districts and the other two
could live anywhere in the Village. It was agreed that there were dra.wbacks, that
the difficulty would be getting people to run, that many people wer�t north and
w
.
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 8
did not want to run, and that it would be e�ensive, and could be left to rhe next
Charter Review Board to review.
Boardmember Resnik suggested replacement language for the last sentence af
the last paragra.ph of Section 2.01to state: The new Councilrrxember(s) elected in
the runoff election shall be sworn and t�,ke office at a special Council meeting
held no later than the last day of the month of the runoff election.
Boardmember Humpage disagreed since in the second paragraph of this section
it already st�.ted that the term of each Councilman shall commence on the ne�
Council meeting subsequent to the date of election. The other Boardmembers
commented that was the sta.ndard and Mr. Resnik's language would create a
different standard, because Mr. Resnik's proposal would l�ave the winner of the
tie vote being sworn in before anyone else. Boardmember Cook referred to the
second paragraph regarding term of office, and described a scenario in which
someone was ele�ted on the second Tuesday and was to begin at the ne�
Council meeting which could be the second Wednesday, the last day, or the next
month-but whenever that meeting occurred his or her twayear term would
begin. If seated on the last day of March, the term would expire the last day of
March two years later, so the next person elected could not take office until two
years after March 31, which would not work. Boardmember Resnik explained
tha� apparendq erroneously, he had b�en under the impression that when an
election was held on the second Tuesday, the newly elected Councilmembers
came to the next Council meeting on the third Thursday of the month, were
sworn and took office, and could wait until April to take office. Mr. von Frank
commented that he had taken office on April 12, so his term would run two
years from April 12. Mr. Berube commented that with a date certain, it would
be known there would be enough time between the election and that date Co
hold a runoff election. Boardmember Humpage commented the runoff election
had to occur on the 4th Tuesday of Maxch, and all of the elected officials would
be seated at the next Council meeting. Boardmember Cook asked if it were
theoretically possible thaC there would noti be aa 4th Tuesday in March; the
response was it would not matter if the requirement was to take office at the
next Council meeting. It was pointed out there had never been a tie, but there
could be, and that the last election was very close. Mr Humpage stated whether
there was a ti� or no tie, the Councilmembers should be seated at the same time
and not two weeks apart. Discussion ensued. The Village Attorney commented
changes needed to be made because there was confusion during the last election
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Ntinutes
July 9, 2001
Page 9 ,
about the wording, particularly i� regard to who would be seated if there was a
special meeting subsequent to the election, but a special meeting was still the
ne� meeting of the Village Council, so those elected would be seated then
because the Village would not want to have a lame duck Councilperson voting
on matters before the next regular Coauncil meeting. How to change the
wording to effect this was discussed. It was decided to delete the last sentence in
the last para.graph and to rely on the language in th� second paragraph. 1VIr.
Cook noted there could be a scenario where a Councilmember would be elected
and take office at the ne� Council meeting, before the previous
Councilmember's twayear term had been completely served. Mr. Humpage
noted a quick fu� for this p�roblem would be to change "and" to "and/or" so that
the last part of the second paragraph would read "......shall continue for two (2)
years thereafter and/or until his suecessor is elected and qualified," In regard zo
the language regarding a tie vote at the end of the paragra.ph, Boardmember
Resnik suggested Ianguage that in the event of a runoff the regul�r Village
Council meeting be deferred until after the runof£ During discussion of this
suggestion, Mr. Humpage noted that could allow a Iame duck to vote if a special
Council meeting was called. Mr. Cook described a hypothetical situation where
a Councilmember decided not to run again, the twa new people who ran tied,
and the regular Council meeting occurred before the 4th Tuesday, which would
allow a lame duck vote because there had not yet been a runoff, but commented
this might be too hypothetical to address. Mr. Berube noted the Village might
have to live with this but at least it had been mentioned and it was important
that the Village Council know it had been considered.
Village Attorney Randolph reviewed the proposed chanpes to Section 2.01: in the
second paragraph to change the second "and" to "and/or" ; and to delete the
last two sentences in the last paragcaph.
Boardmember Humpage made a motion to accept the following changes to
Section 2.01 as reviewed by the Village Attorney: in the second paragraph to
change the second "and" to "and/or" ; and to delete the last two sentences in
the last paragraph. Boardmember Resnik seconded the motion, which
carried by unanimous 4-0 vote.
Village Attomey Randolph noted that staff was to look into term limits in other
towns and what towns had 3-year terms.
r
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 10
Boardmember Resnik commented he ha.d two general recommendations: To
change "Councilman" to Councilmember" wherever it appeared throughout the
Charter; and to change the heading to say Tequesta Charter at the top of each
page instead of Tequesta. Charter on one page and Tequesta Code on the ne�rt. It
was explained that the heading was printed by the publisher and the Village had
no control over the publisher. Suggestions regarding the easiest way to make the
entire document gender neutral included scanning or downloading the document.
Boardmember Resnik made a motion to make the wording of the Charter
gender neutral. Motion was seconded by Boardmember Laamanen and
carried by unanimous 4-0 vote.
Section 2.02. Ouali�cations and Disqualifications
No persan shall be eligiblz to uny elective of fice of the Village unl.ess he shall be a registered
voter und resicient of the Village. Any Village Councilman a.uho ceases to �iossess these
qualificc�tions shall forthwith forfeit his office.
Unless otherwise provided by this Chctrter, no Village Councilman shall hold dny oth,er
public office in the Vi�l,ctge. '�
�
�
���
Any candidate seeking eizction as Councilma.n shall file with the Villuge Clerk a written
notice to such effect from and including noon on the lust Tuesd�y in Januury to and
including noon on the second Tuesday in February in the yeur of the election, and shall pay
such filing fee as set by ordina.nce. Such notice slutll be signed by ctt least fifty (50)
registered voters of the Village of Tequesta und slu�Il state the seut number to v.uhich he
seeks to be elected, his plctce of residence, his age und any other datu required by Iaw.
(Ord. No. 255, � 1, 7-26-77; Ord. No. 327, § 2, 12.13-83)
Mr. Humpage re€erred to Section 2.07 which indicated Councilmembers could
hold other offices, while Section 2.02 indicated they could not. Village Attorney
Randolph advised that it was general law that there could not be dual office
holding, and he be�ieved the Board would elirninate that language in 2.07 when
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Fage 12
indicated that use of the phrase so help me God is optional in the tcxking and subscribing
of the oath of office.
The Village Attorney noted that the words "so help me �od" were optional
under law. The Board indicated they wished no changes to Section 2.02.
Section 2.04. Removal.
Any member of the Villuge Council of the ViUage m.cty be removed frorn, of�ice cxnd deprived
of the right to serve as such official for misfeusance, nonfeasance, malfeasance or any
conduct of an immoral or criminaci rtacture committed avhile holding of fice. Failure to uttend
three cvrisecutive regultzr meetings of the Cauncil without being excused by suid Council
r s1 also be grounds for removccl.
But, before any such officidl shull be remm.cwwed and denied the right to perform his official
duties, u written compiaintshctll be filed with and presented to the Viliuge Council by some
ci�izen or tct�cpacyer of sacid Village, setting forth in reasonable detail the of fense of which th.e
said official is charged. Such complaint shall be considered by the Villuge Council, ctnd if
such Courticil shall determine that the offense charged is of such nature and gravity as to
corastitute a ground, or cause, for the removal of such official, the Council shall thereupon
set cz dczte for the heuring of the said complaint and direct the chief of police, or some other
officer of the Village, to give the officictl so charged written notice of the dctte of trial and
also deliver to him a copy of t.h.e camplaint so fi�ed.
Upon the trial of such complaint, testimony shall be heard by the Council, both in support
und in defense of the charges rr�ac�, and bath the complaina.nt and defendant shalt have
the right to be represented by counsel; und, if a majority of the members of the Council
' slutll find ctnd determine thctt such officic�l is gutlty of either or all of
th,e of fenses as charged in th.e complaint, the Council s}u�ll thereupon r�dopt u resotution
removing such official and depriving him of the right to perform his official du�ies dnd
declaring his office vucacnt; und the suid officiul shull no langer have the privilege of
performing his of ficidl duties, his of fice shull be vucated ctnd his successor shctll thereafter be
selected in the manner provided herein.
Upon the trial under the provisions of this section, all witnesses shall give testimony under
oath and any member of the Council present dt such hearing, or the � Mctnu�er, or
the Vill,ctge Clerk sluzll be authori�ed to administer oacths.
w
•
�harter Review Boa�rd
1V�eeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 13
Village Attorney Randolph e�lained that FS Section 100 .361, Municipal Recall,
stated: The provisions of thi.s act shall apply to cities and charter counties
whether or not they ha�e adopted recall provisions...and......All municipal charter
and special law provisions which are contrary to the provisions of this act are
hereby repealed to the extent of this conflict. Attorney Randolph explained that
this therefore replaced this section of the Charter, and that it was better than
having a Councilmember go to trial before the Village Council, etc. Mr.
Randolph indicated he would provide copies of Section 100.361 to the members
of the Board. Boardmember Cook commented that the present pro�ision was
not a recall provision, that no vote was required of the electorate to remove
somebody for malfeasance, misfeasance, et�., it was a vote of Counci�, which was
different than a recall. Attorney Randolph commented he had not thought of
that and it was a good point, but his guess wou�d be the State would say you have
devised a way to remove a person from office which was contrary to the way they
had indicated a person could be removed. Boardmember Cook disagreed, since
the Governor could remove a City Councilmember without a recall election, so
the Legislature clearly recognizes that there is removal of public officials and
there is reca.11 of public officials. Village Attorney Randolph commented
according to what Mr. Cook was sayittg there could be a scenario where the
Village Council could remove someone from office and you could have a
muriicipal recall election where the electorate could remove someone from
office. Without further research, the Village Attorney indicated he thought the
State would say their provision took precedence because both were intending to
do the same thing, buti the State had adopted a system by w'hich someone could
be removed from office. Attorney Randolph indicated research would be needed
to determine whether the State Statute pre-empted something called removal and
not recall, and asked if the Board would want to keep this section in the Charter
if the State law did not pre-empt this section. Failure to attend three
consecutive regular meetings of the Council being grounds for removal was
discussed. Boardmember Laamanen indicated she did not believe missing
meetings because of illness was in the same class as malfeasance, etc., and missing
meetings should be in the hands of the local Council. Boardmember Cook
indicated his position was that a very ill person who could not attend meetings
was neglecting their duty under the State statute and disagreed that one could say
the State statute pre-empts neglect of duty for malfeasance, etc.,except for neglect
�
�
Charter Review Board
1Vleeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 14
of duty by missing meetings. Village Attorney Randolph indicated if the Board
wanted something more in the Charter other than missing a meeting 3, 4, or 5
times, or replacing someboc�y who was ill in office and could no longer perform
their duties, then reseaxch would be needed to see whether the st�tute pre-
empted. Village Atrorney Randolph indicated research could be done to see if
there were any AGD's that existed on this. Boardrnember Cook indica.ted he
would be more interested to learn if there was a ca.se on this. The Village
Attorney clarified that Boardm,ember Cook was asking whether the Village
wanted to have a provision that did not require an election where the Village
Council made a determination that someone had been incompetent in office,
and leave the existing provision. Mr. Cook indica.ted he wou�d only suggest that
be considered if it were not in opposition to a clear mandate ftom the Courts of
Florida. Village Attorney Rartdolph commented if it was the will of this Board to
have the Village Council put someone out of office for something the Village
�ouncil determined was incompetence then research would have to be done.
Baardmember Humpage asked who would make the detertnination under State
law for disciplinary action or removal, to which the Village Attorney responded it
would be the citizens, the electorate. The process was described. Boardmember
Cook indicated the Boarcl did not need to do anything regarding the process
since it was set by State law, but that the question was whether the Board wanted
additional removal power vested in the City Council, if possible, if it was legal.
Mr. Resnik commented this would allow the Council to try the person rather
than taking it to the electorate, which he favored. Mr. Humpage commented if
he were a Councilperson and did something considered rnalfeasance and if this
wording were removed from the Charter, the only way he could be removed from
office would be by the State Statute, taking hirn before the electorate. Mr. Cook
indica.ted he was in fa�or of keeping the wording currendy in the Charter.
Boardmember La.amanen indicated she thought any such procedure should
involve a public hearing. Mr. Humpage commented on the next page it stated a
public hearing was required. It was the consensus of the Board to leave the
language of 2.04 in the Charter. The Board discussed the number required to
vote to determine a guilty verdict, and decided that omitting the words "present
at such hearing" would accomplish ha�ing three members of the Council
required to vote in favor of declaring someone guilty; and the accused would be
allowed to vote. Mr. von Frank questioned what would happen if one member
of the otiher four was sick or out of town and one of the three called a special
meeting; then it was discussed that including wording ,"other than the accused"
h
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 15
whi�h would take care of that problem. The Village Attorney advised the Village
did not have the legal right not to allow the accused to vote. After all of the
discussion, it was clarified that the language as it existed would allow two people
to vote out the accused if only three were present; if the wording "present at such
hearing" was stricken zh�n a majority of the Council, or three votes, would
always be required.
Boardmember Cook, referring to the last paragraph, asked if the Mayor could
administer an oath. It was decided to change "Mayor" to "Manager" since the
Village Manager could administer the oath of office, and section 2.03 contained
the language "oath befare t�e Village Manager". The fact that this would be a
quasi judicial hearing was discussed.
Boardmember Resnik made a motion to eliminate the wording "present at
such hearing" in the next to th� last paragraph; and insert "Manager" instead
of "Mayor" in the last paragraph. Boardmember Humpage seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote,
The meeting reconvened following a short break.
Section 2.05. Vacuncies.
In the event of a a�acancy on the Villu.ge Council beca�use of death, resignation, removal
from or forfeiture of office, ctnd the i�eriod of the vacctncy will be more t}utn three months
the Villacge Council �+ shall within 30 datis dppoint a substitute until the next general
Village election in Mctrch. If the beriod of vctcancv is three months or less, the Village
Council mct�v in its diseretion, appvint ct substitute unril the nact gen.eral election in Mareh.
Criteria relactin.� to the selection of this individual shall be established by Ordiru�nce
Boardmember Resnik noted that the way the language was now, the Village
Council may or may not appoint a successor for a deceased or orherwise absent
Councilmember, but no time period was specified, which could elimination of
one Councilmember for extended periods of time with only four voting
members, which might lead to numerous tie votes without a fifth person to break
a tie. Boardmember Resnik there�ore suggested inserting after the word office
the phrase: "and the period of the vacancy will be more than three months",
changing "may" to "shall", and adding a second sentence: "If the period of
�
�
Charter Review Board -
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 16
vacancy is three months ox less, the Village Council may appointi a substitute
until the next general election in March." Mr. Resnik e�lained that the whole
purpose u�as to mainra.in five members on the Council if the periodwas going to
be more than three months, and allow the Council to appoint someone if less
than three manths. Boardmember Laamanen suggested adding "within 30 days"
following "shall". Boardmember Resnik agreed, and commented that this
situation had occurred in the past, when Councilmember Cameronwas sickwiCh
cancer and missed many meetings and was nevex replaced until he died; another
time when Ron Mackail retired, and anather rime when Mr. Meder moved away.
Baardmember Resnik made a motion to make the following changes to
Section 2.05: Insert after the word "office" the phrase: "and tihe period of
the vacancy wi11 be more than three months", change "ma�' to "shall withiti
30 days", and addaing a second sentence: "Tf the period. of vacancq is three
months or less, the Village Council may, in its discretion, appoint a substitute
until the next general election in March." Boardmember Laamanen
seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 40 vote.
Wade Griest commented that when Alex Cameron passed away, ther� were seven
names on the ballot to replace him, and Mr. �riest was one of the ca.ndidates.
Three of the others he had spoken to afterwards had indicated to him that they
did not knovv how they ca.me to be on the ballot. Mr. Griest e�lained that the
Mayor at that time said Mr. Griest was not qualified beca.use he had not been
intervi�wed by a Councilmember, which was true-he had been recommended as
a former Mayor, and as a result Mr. Griest was not to be voted on, only the other
six, and Vi�lage Attorney Randolp� had at thar time said tihat anyone in the
room could fill the vacancy. Mr. Griest commented this had been very
embarrassing to everybody, including him, and three of the people on the ballot
did not even know they were considered. Mr. Griest commented there should be
something in the Charter about how they pick a substitt�te. Village Attorney
Randolph commented this was the bare bones of what would be done, that if
indeed the Village Council decided when someone was out of office that they
would like people to submit names and they would only consider names
submitted within the 30 days, they could do thar because there was nothing in
tbe Charter that precluded it. The Village Attorney coxnmented that the
question raised by Mr. Griest was whether the Board wanted to be rhat definitive
in this provision as to tell the Council the mechanics of how they should do it.
�
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes �
JuYy 9, 2001
Page 19
shall be appointed, and suggested replacing "and" with "anc�/or" until a
successor shall be appointed as had been done in a prior section. The Village
Attorney clarified that the term "militaxy law" as used in this section meant the
Ma"qor vvould act in times of emergency.
Boardmember Resnik made a motion to delete the word "regular" in the first
line of Section 2.06, delete "of said municipality" in the third and fowrth line,
delete "of said municipalit�' in the fourth and fifth l�ne, add "/or" to "and"
in the bottom line, and delete "when directed to do so by the Village
Council", and add after the word "party", "as approved by vote of Village
Council". Boardmember Humpage seconded the motion, which carried by
unaniinous q-0 vote.
� � n� n n,.�. • t�•ti nr.�.
�'C7�G�TD'L .1 A .l " [zrr'�-
.—.-. .�a=�.� - - - - - -- - - — - --- - - - -
)
� ) 7 ) �
)
� ) 7
� � .
I ,
f
/
���''�:
I �
) . . . J )
��
Boardmember Resnik proposed deletion of the words "A Treasurer, a T�
Assessor, a Tax Callector" in the description of Village Officers, and deletion of
�
�
Charter Review Board
Meet�ng Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 20
"for a term of one year and" beca.use he believed one year was too short a term
for Village Officers to serve and was not consistent with good management. The
Village Attorney advised that one�year terms were typica.l The Village Manager
commented that although many municipalities used one-year terms it was not a
Charter requirement. Boardmember Resnik commented having to be re-
appointed each year placed a strain on the individuals, not knowing if their jobs
would continue. Boardmember Laamanen inquired regarding tenure, to which
the response was there was no tenure for any position Village Attorney
Randolph explained that Florida was an "at will" state and unless there was
something in the Village Charter ox in an Ordinance givix�g someone security in
tiheir position, anyone could be terminated without cause. Boardmember
Humpage recommended deletion of the words "for a term of one year and".
Boardmember Resnik commented there was adequate provision in the Charter
for terminating Village employees, and these employees should be hired by
contract. Village Manager Couzzo indicated he had been hired by contra.ct but
the contract was subject to this provision. Boardmember Resnik responded he
did not understand that. Boardmember Resnik commented if the Village
Manager and Village Clerk were hired by contract they should not be
reappointed every year. Mr. $erube commented Mr. Couzzo had to move ta
Tequesta, move his family, change schoals, etc., and one year later would not
know if he had a job, which was a perfect e�mple of why this should be deleted.
Others on the Board indicated they would not take a job under those
coriditions.. Boardmember Humpage commented that regarding the 3�ear terms
which were going to be revisited, new Councilmember von Frank would only
have 11 months in office before he had to decide whether to reappoint the
Village 1vlanager, which was not fair to that Counciltnember or to the Village
Manager. Mr. Resnik commented the contract should carry. Village Attorney
Randolph commented the contract was subject to these provisions; that he
thought it was good not to have to reappoint each year; but advised the Board
not to give up that the Manager served at the pleasure of the Village Council,
Boardmember Resnik responded that was adequately covered. It was agreed to
delete "At the regular meeting subsequent to the date of the annual election".
Boardmember Cook asked whether the Village Council needed to appoint the
Village Clerk. Boardmember Resnik e�lained that at one time the term
"Village �fficers" was defined as the Village Manager and Village Clerk and three
other positions which were later deleted by State law, leaving only the Village
M�nager and Village Clerk as officers. Boatdmember Laamanen asked if the
r
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 21
Village Clerk had to be certified. The Village Manager e�lained that the job
description, which he had written, required the Village Clerk to be certified
within six months of date of hire. Boardmember Caok noted that the previous
Village Clerk had not been certified for many years but did an excellent job. It
was agreed that under a strong manager form of government the Manager should
appoint the Village Clerk as well as the other employees. �Tillage Attorney
Randolph commented it might be difficult to make a11 these changes to the
existing language, and distributed a sample Charter that the Board might
consider instead. Boardmember �ook cor�mented if the Village Manager was
going to appoint the Clerk, Section 2.07 was not needed at all. Village Attorney
Randolph agreed, and advised that this could be re-addressed under the Powers
and Duties Section 3.02.
Boardmember Cook mad.e a motion to delet� Section 2.07 in its entirety
subject �o readdressing it in Section 3.02. Boardmember Humpage
commentecl the ability to appoint the Village Manager could be addressed at
the beginning of 5ection 3.01. Boardmember Laamanen seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vate.
Mr. Berube had to leave at this point, but requested one of the next meetings
begin at 4 p.m. It was decided to hold the Monday, July 23 meeting at 4 p.m.,
keep the August 2 meeting at 9 a.m., then regroup and decide the time for the
August 17 meeting on August 2.
��;9�---�e�
,
� , ,' ,
, ,
,
The Village Attorney advised that this section was not needed, that under this
Section anyone handling money would be bonded, but it was not necessary.
Boardmember Humpage made a motion to delete Section 2.08.
.
•
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 22
Boardmember Resnik seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 40
vote.
Section 2.09. Miscellaneous Powers; Meetin�s.
The Village Council
� ,
� shall meet at leust once per month. � �
Special meetings shacll be held when cal�ed by the Mayor, Munager, or independently by any
two members of the Villuge Council. The amount of notice for special meetings sluzli be
determined by the Village Council by ordinance.
Boardmember Humpage commented the Supexvisor of Elections was the judge of
elections, not the Village Council. V�llage Manager Couzzo indicated the
Council had the final word and could disagree. Boardmember Cook noted tihat
the wording regarding powers was redundant since it was covered by State law,
and what was needed in Se�tion 2.09 was how often meetings were held and how
special meetings could be called; and suggested deleting wording in the first
paragra.ph following "The Village Council" so that the entire paragraph would
read as follows: "The Village Council shall meet at least once per month."
Discussion ensued regarding the second paragraph as to how two
Councilmembers could ca.11 a special meeti�g without violating the Sunshine
Law. Boardmember Resnik commented he looked at this as being done at a
regular Council meeting rather than outside a public m.eeting. Discussion
ensued. Iti was pointed out that a resident could call all the members of the
Council and request a special meeting and if two of the Councilmembers
independently called the Manager, not communicating with each other, to
request a meeting it could be called; or one Councilmember could rall the
Manager and then the 1�Ianager could call another member to ask for their
support. Viltage Attorney Randolph advised there was a provision in the
ordinance , 217, Special Meetings: "Special meetings may be called at any time;
however, at least three days notice must be given. Such notice may be by
announcement at a regularly scheduled Council meeting or may be in writing
signed by the Village Manager or Mayor. If notice is given by mail, it shall be
mailed to the residence of each Village Councilman and the notice period shall
•
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Fage 23
begin on the date of mailing. Contents of the above described notice shall be
placed in a conspicuous place in the Village Hall." Attorney Randolph nored that
did not mention two Councilmembers. Boardmember Laarnanen indicated
notice should not be required in event of an emergency such as a humca.ne. Th�
Village Attorney advised there was no reference to an emergency meetirig but it
was implied that ca.11ing a special meeting was for something special, and if
emergenc� was mentioned who would determine what was or was not an
emergency. Boardmember Laamanen indicated that within 24 hours would be
an emergency. Boardmember Humpage indica.ted he wanted to keep language in
the Charter indicating a special meeting could be called by two Councilmembers,
which would prevail over the O�dinance. Village Attorney Randolph noCed that
the next section in the ordinance said: "If all Councilmen consider the matter to
be taken up at the special meeting to be urgent and of sufficient irnportance to
the welfare of the Village, the 3 days notice set forth in Section 217 may be
waived by unanimous consent of all fi�e Councilmen," which meant all five
would have to be called to determine an emergency. Village Attorney Ra.ndolph
commented the Village would ha�e to look at amending their Ordinances later,
but now the Board needed t� determine if it was important for the provision
relating to two Councilmembers and the Mayor calling a meeting to remain in
the Charter. Boardmember Humpage commented that his a�enue to get
something done was to go to all tlie Councilmembers to request a special
meeti�g and if two of them felt it was worthwhile dieq would call the Manager.
Mr. Resnik indicated he was uncomfortable authorizing two members to call
special meeting without clarifying they could not discuss it between themselves.
Boardmember Cook suggested the following language: "Special meetings shall
be held when called by the Mayor, Manager, or independently by any two
members of the Village Council." It was discussed that the Manager should be
able to call a special meeting because he would know there was an emergency, It
was decided not to change the wording "The amount of notice for special
meetings shall be determined by the Village Council by ordinance." The Village
Attorney noted that if the Board had extra time after review of the Charter had
been completed, they might start eiiminating some items which were not really
necessary.
Boardmember Laamanen made a motion to amend Section 2.09 so that the first
paragraph would be: " The Village Council shall meet at least once per month."
and the second paragraph would be: "Special meetiings shall be held when called
s
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 24
by the Mayor, Manager, or independently by any two members of the Village
Council. The amount of notice for special meetings shall be determined by the
Village Council by ordinance." Boardmember Resnik seconded the motion,
which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. -
Section Z.10. �Juorum.
A mujorit�+ of the members of the Council shall constitute ct Quorum to do business, but no
action shali be taken except to adjourn, Quhen only three members are present unl.ess their
votes ure unanimous; provided, h.oa.vever, in the event of a vacancy of ta.vo members of the
Villdge Cou�n.cil, under the provisions of Section 2.05, then und in that ee�ent d mctjority of
the rerr�tining members o the Cnuncil may ac� A majority o f those present may adjourn
from time to time and compel the atten.dance of absent members in such a manner und
under such penalties as muy be prescribed by ordinance.
,
me�
Village Attorney Randolph commented this section said business could not be
done wirh three people unless the vote was unanimous, and this was basically
boilerplate language. Boardmember Humpage commented it had recently come
up about when a person excused himself from voting, and asked what "official
conduct" meant. The Village Attorney suggested the whole last sentence of
section 2.10 be deleted since it was covered by State law, and that the language
regarding official conduct was antiquated since the State law said one could only
excuse oneself fram voting when a matter inures to one's special or private gain
and the State law prevailed.
Boardmember Laamanen made a motion to delete the last sentence in Section
2.10. Boardmember Cook commented that the word "quortun" did not need
to be capitalized, which might have been just a typographical error.
Boardmember Htunpage seconded the motion, which carried by utianiinous 4
0 vote.
c,,,.�:..�. � > >
.
•
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
�
Page 25
> > ,
a �
�
� , ,
{�]-�tt�t+�� w� ,.� r..�� t... ..,T i� �.. in a��z�� fi c ���,�
; ��;
[Superceded by State LaavJ
The Village Attorney advised that Section 2.11 should be eliminated since itwas
covered under Florida law.
Boardmember Laamanen made a motion to delete the entire Section 2.11. -
Boardmember Cook seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0
vote.
�m '.�--E�ee�e�e�
• • • , , [Superceded by
State Laav]
The Village Attorney advised tihat Section 2.12 should be eliminated since itwas
covered under Florida law. It was noted that citizens would be concerned with
Sections 2.11 and 2.12 being deleted, and a suggestion was made that when the
Charter was printed with the strikeouts that on that version it would state under
each section [Superceded by State Law) as information to the citizens� not to be
printed on the adopted version.
Boardmember Laamanen made a motion to delete the entire Section 2.12,
but to include the following explanation under Section 2.11 and SecY.ion 2.12:
[Superceded by State Law] . Boardmember Humpage seconded the motion,
which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote.
9
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 26
Section 2.13. Interference With the Administrutive Depctrtment
Neither the Council nor uny of its members shall in uny rruznner dictate the uppointment or
removal of any Village of ficers or employees avhom the Manager or his subordinates ure
empowered to uppoint, but the Council shall have the power to rernove the Viltage
Maruxger as provided by this Charter and may express itx views ctnd discuss all matters with
the Manager. Faccept for the purpose of inquiries or investigations undez this Chrtrter, th.e
Council and its members shall deal auith Village officials and employees solely through the
Manacger and neither the Council nor its mernbers shall give orders to any such o�ficials or
ernployees either publicly or private2y.
�oardmember Laamanen questioned the purpose of this section, which the
Village Manager explained was so that legislati�e people would not function in
an administrati�e capacity Boardmember Cook commented it was to avoid
micromanagement, and also that it was very important that the Councilmembers
did not individually call the Village Attorney to request research that was not the
wish of the entire Council. Boardmember Resnik commented the chain of
command could be detrimental to the Village Manager if he did not ha�e a good
assistant who could run interference for him beca.use all the Councilmembers
called him and he could be on the phone constandy. Boardmember Resnik
expressed his opinion that a system of an assistant to the Manager should be set
up that people understood, an assistant who could help the Villag� Manager by
taking problems, get them resolved, and get back to the people, but that person
must be responsive. The Village Manag�r responded that this section protected
employees because if a Councilmember requested an employee to do something
they were not going to say they wouldn't do it; and it held the Manager
accountable, provided division of separation of government, and a distinct
understa.nding for the employees, otherwise there was no order. Mr. Couzzo
clarified that each Department Head was a second in command. Boardmember
Resnik questioned if Mr. Couzzo agreed tihat every Councilmember who desired
support from one or more of the departments under Mr. Couzzo's control
should go to Mr. Couzzo and not to the Department Head. The Village Manager
responded that was the way the Charter read, and he agreed with it because
there was separation of powers. The Village Attorney commented the Village
Manager should tell his Department Heads what to do as opposed to a politician
coming in and telling them what to do. Having a Deputy Manager was
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
gage 27
discussed. Boardmember Laamanen commented that when she was an
Administrator she had a Deputy A�ministrator who acted on her behalf. The
Village Manager commented a deputy could be hired tomonow, but it was a
matter of cost and whether one was really needed. Boardmember Laamanen
explained that Councilmembers could go to her Department Heads to request
items but the Department Heads then had to check with her. Boardmember
Humpage asked why . not just go through the Manager in the first place.
Boardmember Humpage noted that the Village Attorney had said in his
presentation on the Sunshine Law that t�e Council was like an executive branch
and policymakers; while the Manager was the engineer of the railroad who ran
the day-to-day activities, and he believed it should stay t�at way.
The Board made no changes to Section 2.13.
ARTICLE III. VILLAGE OFFICERS
Section 3.01. Th.e Villa�e Mdnct�er Ap ointment, Removal,.�uctlificutions, Disabilitx.
The Villacge Council shall appaint a Village Mdnager aa�ho shall be the Chief
Administrative Officer uruier the direction and supervision of the Village Cvuncil. The
manager shalt be chosen by the Council sol�ly on the busis of his administrutive and
executive qualificcttions.
�
�1�ge�`
Notauithstanding the provisions of Section Z.07, the Villacge Manager sha.�l he appointed by
af firrrEative vote of at least four members of the Council, dnd must be removed by u like
vote of said Councit.
At least thirty days before such removal may become effective, the Mdnuger slutll be
furnished with a formal s�cttement in the form of a resolution passed by a majority vote of
ctt �east four members of the Council stating the Council's intention to rernove him ctnd the
reasor�s therefor. Upon passage of a resolution stating the Council's intention to remove the
Manctger, the Council may s�uspend him frorn duty, but his pdy shall continue until his
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 28
removal shall become effective us herein described. In cuse of the absence or disabiizty of the
Maru�ger, the Council rr�y c�esigrtate ct qualified udministrcttive officer of the Village to
perform the duties of the Manager during such disability or absence.
Boardmember.Resnik commented that he did not understand the requirement
that the Village Manager live in the Village. Boardmember Resnik commented
that elected officials must live in the Village, but someone hired for a position
was hired to do a jab and so long as he performed his duties and was in his job
location when he should be, where he lived should be of no concern, and �e did
nat understand the requirement. Boardmember Resnil� comrnented that over
the past few monrhs there had been articles in the newspaper regarding t�he City
Manager of Palm Beach Gardens living in Wellington when they had a
requirement he live in Palm Beach Gardens. The issue had come up as to why
this requirement was there if he did his job. Research had indieated that the
key requirement was that it was there because in time of natural or manmade
disaster , civil strife, or any ather conflagration that created a possible �iazard to
residents, rhe Manager had to be present to control staff: Mr. Resnik
commented if �rhe Village Manager li�ed tivithin reasonable distance to allow him
to reach his place of business within a reasonable time to do the job he had to do
in an emergency which occurred outside normal business hours, that would be
fine. Boardmember Resnik suggested the following language to begin with the
second sentence in the section: "The Village Manager shall be chosen by the
Council solely on the basis of administrative and executive qualifications. The
Village Manager need not be a resident of the Village at the time appointed;
however, if the Manager lives more than two hours normal dri�ing time from
the Village, then it will be necessary to become a resident withi� s� months of
the date of such appointment and remain a resident while serving as the Village
Manager." Boardmember Resnik commented it made no difference where the
Village Manager lived so long as he could be at the Village Hall or Emergency
Operations Center within a reasonable time in the event of an emergency.
Boardmember Resnik continued witlz his proposed language "The Village
Manager should be required to be at the Village Hall or th� Emexgency Action
Center within two hours of notification of any and all periods of national or
manmade disaster or civil strife affecting the Village and its residents and remain
there until the all clear is sounded." Boardmember Laamanen commented that
when the Charter was enacted, today's technology did not exist-there was no
►
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001
Page 29 .
such thing as a cell phone-but she thought the reason for the requirement had
been the idea that if the Manager lived in the town he would know more about
what vt�ent ori; however, she considered that to be a fallacy since she had worked
as a 1Vlanager for 22 years and cared more about doing the job right simply as a
matter of personal pride, which was a trait she saw in Mr. Couzzo.
Boardmember La.amanen expressed her opinion it was not essential for the
Manager to live in the Village to do a good job. Boardmember Cook agreed,
commenting this was out of the scope of reality, since the Manager could live on
Point Drive and be two minutes away but that was in the County and he could
not li�e there. Also, if a new Village Manager should be hired for Jupiter Island,
where would he get the $2 million thaC a house on the island would cost.
Boardmember Cook commented he did not think the Village Manager should be
required to live in the Village an�. if there was any limitation he suggested miles,
not hours, although he did not think that was needed either. Village Manager
Couzzo suggested adding miles by motor vehicle since someone could interpret
getting ro the Village within two hours by airplane. Boardmember Resnik
commented he had used two hours simply as a reasonal�le time, after the
Manager rece��ed notifica.tion. Village Manager Couzzo commented in the event
of a hurricane it was his job to be present and he would bunk in for the duration
Village Attorney Randolph commented if the Board did not think it was
important for the Manager to be a resident that it was his suggestion not to put
anything in the Charter, and when hiring a Manager just say to him that he
should live within two hours xather than placing it in the Charter..
Boardmember Resnik commented he recognized that so he had added another
duty that would preclude this requirement but levy the requirement on him to be
here within a reasonable time. Boardmember Resnik commented that some
people would look at this who wanted the Manager to live in tihe Village, but his
job was to run the Village when there was a disaster and he should live within a
reasonable distance to provide for efficient operation of the Village at all times.
Village Manager Couzzo clarified that he was the head of the Emergency
� Operations Center, but the Fire Chief was in charge of fire emergencies and the
Police Chief was in charge of police emergencies, they had the e�ertise to act in
tihose emergencies and he would not tell them how to handle them.
Boardmember Resnik indicated the main thing was for him to be here when
needed. Boardmember Humpage e�pressed his opinion that the Manager should
not be required to live in the Village, and commentied that in a category 4
hurricane the FEMA guidelines were for the fire and paramedics to leave town
�
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9, 2001 �
Page 30
with their equipment so that when the storm was over they could return and
have equipment to work with. Board�ember Humpage agreed that things had
changed �.�lot since this requirement was placed in the Charter, the Village
Council still hired the Village Manager, and i� two candidates were equal tihey
. might make their choice on which one lived closer, but he believed that language
should be stricken from this section.
Boardmember Cook made a motion to delete the last sentence in the first
paragraph of Section 3.01. Boardmember La,amanen seconded the motion,
which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. �
Discussion ensued regarding whether a sentence should be add�d that the
Manager shall reside within reasonable distance to provide for efficient
operation of the Village at al1 times, to make this change more palatable to some
people. The Village ACtorney advised against inserting any language, indicated
that he was not looking at how this would sell to the community, but that it was
more professional to leave it out, because if the Manager did not perform, the
Village Council could get rid of him. The Board decided to lea�e in the language
that it required four members of the Council to remove the Village Manager.
Sectio�. 3.02. Villac�e Manager Functivns and Powers
The ViU,ccge Mdrutger shall be the supervisor and manctger of all public business and affdirs
of the Villdge, but shall be responsible to the Village Council for the Administration of all
the affairs of the Village coming uru�er his jurisdiction. His powers and duties shaU be cts
follows:
(1) To see that all terms and conditions i.mposed in favor of the Village or its
inhabitants in any public utility franchise are faithfully kept a�d
performed; and upon knowledge of any violation thereof to call the same
to the attention of the Village Council.
(2) To supervise the management and control of all public utilities owned by
the municipality and be charged with the management and operations of
all public works and departments in accordance witli the ordinances or
resolutions of the Village Council.
�
�
Charter Review Board
Meeting Minutes
Ju�y 9, 2001
Page 31
(3) To be responsible for the supervision of all departments of the Village and
to see that the laws and ordinances of the Village are enforced.
(4) To attend all meetings of the Village Council and of its committees, if
requested, with the right to take part in the discussion but without having
a vote, and to file at the regular meet�ngs of the Village Council in each
month a�.et�e�: report of � lus actions during the preceding month.
(5) To recommend to the Council for adoption such measures as he may
deem necessary or expedient in the interests of the �illage, to keep the
Village Council fully advised as to the financial condition and needs of
the Village, and to submit for its consideration an annual budget.
(6)
�
��� ,
�
a�ea� ITEMS (6) AND ('7) ,ARE TO BE MERGED WITH THE
FOLLOWTNG LANGUAGE AS PROVIDED BY THE VILLAGE
ATTORNEY : The Village Mana�eY shall appoint and when deemed
necessarv for the Qood of the i�illa e suspend or remove all Villa,ge
emplovees and appointive administrative o�cer-s provided or by or
under this Cha�ter or by Ordinance except as otherrvzse provided by law
this Charter o� personnel rzcles ado tp ed by Qrdinance o�Resolution and
the Village Mana e�r m_ar�utl�orize anv administrative o acer subject to
the VillaQe Mana�er's direction and su pet-vision to exer cise these
�owers with �-es�ect to subordinates in that o ice�'s depat�tment o�ce
or agencv. The Villa�e Mana�eY may authorize anv administrative
o�cer sub�ect to the Villa�e Manager's direction and supervision to
exercise these powers with �espect to subordinates in that o�cer's
depa�tment, o ace or agency.
(8) To act as purchasing agent for the Village; authorized to make all
purchase of supplies and to approve all ��^��-� ��s purchase orders for the
�
. Charter Revi�w Boa�d
Meeiigg Mi�ute�
J�ay s, Zooi
Page 32
payment of same. In the capacity of purch�.sing agent he sh�li cbnduct a11
sales of personal property which the Council may authorize to be sold as
having become unnecessary or urifit far Village use. A11 p�archases and
sales�sh�l confo� t9 such regulations as the Villa�e S:ou�cil �.n� fro�
time to tYme prescribe.
(9) To make contracts on behalf of the Village for th� fumishing of materi�ls
a�a:d,gerformance oflab9r;provided, h�vev�r, that no suc� co�trac� sh�l
obligate the Village for a sum greater �than .
, . allowed bv Ordinance , and provided, further, also that such
con�racts s�iall be presented to t�e Village Council at the next regular
meeting after the execution or awarding thereof for action thereon by_ t�e
Village Council.
(Ord. No. 367, § 1, 4-28-88}
(10) To prep�re and submit to the Village Couricil, within ninety (90) da.ys
af�er-th� cl9ses�f �aeh�iscalyear, a com�let� report of the operati� an�
business of the Village for the preceding fiscal year. (Ord. No. 255, § 7,
_ 7-26-77)
Boardmember Resnik asked why the Village Manager could only sign
contracts up to $5,000. Village Manager Couzzo responded he could sign
eontracts up to $5,000 �bt�.t st� had �o have �hem appravec�-by the uil�ag�
Council. The Board reviewed each duty, and made no changes to (1), (2)
and (3). During review of (4), Boardmember Humpage commented that
the Villag� Manager's report had been the subject of recent controversy;
t�a� the repor� �ar years ha� been a two-page report highlighting the major
issues and goings-on withiri t��€�till�g-e;� but r te�Mr. Couzzo's report
had turned into a daily diary a�id a waste of time, wasting more time doing
that than ft�nctioning as a Manager. Boardmember Humpage commented
the report should be key issues and not a diary, and looking at the re�orts
for the past 12 years and the reports today was a difference of night and
day. Boardmember Resnik asked why it had changed; Village Manager
Couzzo responded the Council had asked for more detail. Boardmember
Laa.manen commented this was difficult because what one might consider
essential, another did not. Boardmember Humpage suggested removing
the words "detailed" and "all". It was suggested to replace "deta.iled"
with "comprehensive". Discussion ensued regarding defuutions. The
�
Charter Review Baard
Meeting Minutes
.��� 9, 2001
Pa� 34
there had been Village Council committees which the Village did not
have—Mr. Couzzo had to do it all by himself and it was a lot of
responsibility, and he must be given leeway to do his job. Consensus of
the Bo�d ��as-tolne�ge i�s �fi� an:d��7) �tea�of�epa ' � e�s
from Department Heads. Mr. Couzzo clarified that he delegated the
responsibility of hiring policemen and firemen to the Chiefs. Village
Attorney l�ando�ph quo�e� fxam another charter: "Th� Village Manager
may��.`lioriz� anya.d�ni.�-istr�,�'�ve��cer�bject-t�_the.�illa�� 1V�ager;s _
direction and supervision to exercise these powers with respect to
subordinates in that officer's department, office, or agency."
Boardmember Cook commented Riviera. Be�e� vczas infamous_ fot firing
policen�en,- an� l��- w�.s r� c�ox�a.�le �vitli �t114�in� 'Pc�l.ice�'ref t9
fire-a policeman, but wanted the Manager to Iiave to consent. The ViYlage
- Manager_ c�-rsnen�ed �a�t w�,s �uha�_ was _pxarcl�ed. -�'his_i�e�i w�s
discussed. further. � �
(8) Boardmember Humpage made a motion to merge items (6) and (7� to
address both employees and department heads with exact language as
provided by the Village Attorney: The Village Manager shall appoint
and wlien de�med .necess,a�y�r.-t3ie�d�tl�e-il'�lla�e,.�u�fd o�
remove all Village employees and appointive administrative officers
provided for by or under this Charter .or by Ordinance except as
othe�w�se prauided by la�u,_ tl�is �harter orger,�or�nel_ rule,�_a�dQg�.l��
Ordi�nce orResolutien, u�d�h� V Ila�ge�ar�nger r�nac,y.,au�'ho�a�
administrative officer subject to the �llage Manager's direction and
supervision to exercise these powers with respect to subordina�es in
that offtee�',� de�Zar,rt�tteri.� Qf�e ar. age��y , The Village Manager may
ar�ttho_riz-e �,� �uuy admia�i.�t�Y.e �C.er subjec,t to th.e _YZla�e
tl�anager's direction and supervision to exercise these powers with
respect to subordinates in that officer's department, office or agency.
Boardmember Res�ik seeo�ded #he motio�, w}�eh car�ied b�
unanimo�ts 4-Q vote.
Village Attorney Randolph indicated he must lea�e for another
appointment. Boardmember Resnik asl��d �a� h� remai� to.comment on
� Mr. Resnik's suggestion t�o add another duty to those of the Village
M�,.r�agez: �`T�a �e co�inu�sly ��a1la�le�x-t-�ie �I-}llage H� or�lill�
Emergency Actiot� Center dur��g periods of national or manmade disaster
�
Charter Review Ba�rd
Meeting Minutes
3�� 9, �{�01
Pa,g+e 3�
or civil strife to dixect and manage the activities of a11 Village sta.ff,
agencies, in protecting lives and properiy of all Village re�idents. �.f such
an emergency occurs during non working hours, the Village Manager wi11
repc�t to�te �lillage I�alk o�.x�� EAC vyit�in 2-�iou�.s-bf ��ei'vir�atic�
emergency and remain there until the all clear is received. `�ie Manager
wi11 maintain contact with the Mayor and or �lice Mayor keeping them
advised of the status of the emergency." Village Attorney Ra,ndolph
advisell-fih�asxoo�eta�d-to�e'in�a�: Chart�,.�n�1��C�nc�-eou�
require that at any time. Village Manager Couzzo commented the
emergency might require moving farther inland. Village Attorney
Ra�dolph left at this point.
During discussion af item (8) Boardmember Cook inquired if there was a
voucher system in the Village, and eaLpressed concern that purchases were
made without vouchers. The Village Manager indicated that concern was
vali�l �a�eause� purcl�ses �d�en nna�l.e-by cred.i� ca,r�, bu�.��.11_tl�a� vv�,s
changing and purchase orders would be used according to a very defined
set of guidelines. Discussion ensued. It was clarified that purchase orders
s�ould be used #'or �udgeted it�s �o a�oid go�g ove� �e a�o�rrts
buc�g��e�.
Boardmember Resnik made a motion to change "vouchers" to
"purchase orders" in item (8). Boardmember Laamanen seconded the
motion, which carried �by unanimous 4.Q vote.
During discussion of item (9), Boardmember Laamanen felt the $5,000
figure was too low for current times and that the amount should be
reviewed every 5 years based on current economics in effect at that time.
Bo�.�dme�b�r Corak Ma�a�e� co�ld� not�buy �
new palice car if needed without Council approval. Boardmember
Humpage commented there was a photocopier right down the hall that
was about to blaw up and a new one cost $8,100, and by Charter, the
Vivagelulanager c�.d-�ot�.we � to�en�l.t�ata�xiou.x�t so cou]d
not replace the copier without waiting for VilIage Council approval.
Councilmember Cook commented everything was not required to be bid
in the State of Florida. Mr. Coua�o indicated there were not emergencies
th�����uires���rim�a�e �.ur.c�iases, and he had nQ.�ac� a�r�lem ��h
�
Charter i2eview Baard
Mee�iag lt�i�ute�
Jul� 9, 2001
Page 37
avhich, are ar ma.y be required by h,im by this Chct.rter or by any Lctav of the Stdte or
by any ordinance of the sdid municipctlity, have the custody of all the general
records, boolcs and documents of the Village, and s��l perform such further duties
cts c�r�e�im�c�d u_�rt hir�.-by.�-Cou�, b� �reso�i�on, Q�dinci,nc�or �a.vis�. ,
(Ord."No. 255, § 8, 7-Z(�-77) � -
Boardmember Humpage noted that the Village Clerk did not work with
-%�rfnits,�'rnce �ha� �azas ucaw_dene�-fhe_�epartn�ent�f—Com�n�
Development. Pu�lic records were c�iscussecl. �
$oardmember �Htunpage made a motion to delete the last sentence in
the�stparag�r� of�€etio�.�3 �ar�a�b�r-�i.esnil�-seconded�th� ,
motion, whic� carriec� by unanimous 4-0 vote. ��
Sect�on �.07. Depctrtment and Directors
There sluzll be separate deprzrtments as estublished by th,e Village Counci� by
ordinctnce upon recommendation of the Village Manager. Euch separate
department head shall be appointed by the Vi�ge Manager and approved by the
Villa Cpun�i.l..�ach�partr�,ent sha.11 b,esu��to t�.e.gen�t-�su�e�ri ctr�
co�:�al by �he Vi�la.ge 1VIr�..nuger, but shall be direct�y supervised ac�tc� controlled by
the person in chctrge thereof, who shall have the tit�e appropriate of the functions.
It was noted t�iat the Village Manager had provided language for the
repl.�menx-wc�r.�i�_,g�'or�e.�er�-�6) ar��l-(7).f�r'-�he �l-�l� Iv�a�ger'.s
duties whicl� should also be used here. It was requested the first sentence
be left in Section 3.07. Boardmember Cook suggested Section 3.07 be
tabled to the next meeting.
'V�. Communication from Citizens
There �ere ao communications from cittzens.
IX. Any Other Matters
�
+
�
Char�er Review Bvarrd
Meeting Minutes �
Jui� 9, 20f}� ,
Page 38
T�e�e �er� no� other matters to eo�e be�o�e the Board.
�. Adjournment
The meeti.ng was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. upon motion by Boardmember Resnik,
seconded by Boardmember Laamanen, and unanimously carried by 4-0 vote
Respectfully submitted,
,
°� ,. -- �'a�c��
Betty Laur
Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
Mary V�ol tt
Village Clerk
Date Approved:
'�-��-01