Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_05/10/2001 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 250 Tequesta Drive Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (561) 575-6200 Fax: (561) 575-6203 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES MAY 10, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Village Council held a workshop meeting at 399 Seabrook Road, Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, May 10, 2001. The meeting was called to order at 5:35 P.M. by Mayor Geraldine Genco. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, Recording Secretary and Acting Village Clerk. Councilmembers present were: • Mayor Geraldine Genco, Vice Mayor Joseph N. Capretta, Councilmember Russell von Frank, and Councilmember Sharon Walker. Also in attendance were: Village Manager Michael R. Couzzo, Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Acting Village Clerk Betty Laur, and Department Heads. Councilmember Basil E. Dalack arrived at 5:37 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice Mayor Capretta made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Councilmember von Frank seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. IV. PRESENTATION BY JOHN C. RANDOLPH, VILLAGE ATTORNEY, OF AN ORIENTATION-REVIEW WORKSHOP FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS Village Attorney John C. Randolph reviewed the Sunshine Law, which basically • stated that all meetings of this type of public body had to be conducted at an open Recycled Paper VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 2 ----------------------- meeting. which meant that two or more members of the body could not meet outside of a public meeting to discuss business that reasonably, forseeably, might come before the body. The meetings must be held at a place available to the public, minutes must be taken of the meeting, and reasonable notice of the meetings must be given. The Village Attorney commented that even though the Sunshine Law is very short and seems very simple, there are more cases reported in the State of Florida regarding the Sunshine Law than most other laws in the State of Florida. Mr. Randolph commented that it seems very simple to require that two or more people shall not meet outside of a public meeting but there were always questions, and what was meant was that Councilmembers could not talk to anyone on the Village Council outside a public meeting about Village business, either in person, on the telephone, or in writing. The Village Attorney advised that the penalties relating to the Sunshine Law were such that an unintentional violation could be anon-criminal infraction; or if shown to be intentional would be a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable by jail and or fine. Mr. Randolph advised that usually did not happen-that he had known the States Attorney to prosecute blatant violations of the Sunshine Law but the primary concern for violation was that any action taken at a public meeting which may come about as a result of violation of the Sunshine Law could be rescinded and of no effect. An example was a case during the 1960's which was a landmark case involving the Town of Palm Beach. The Town of Palm Beach was amending its zoning ordinance and wanted input from the community in regard to what the community wanted to see in the ordinance, so they appointed a committee to get together and then advise the Council as to what they wanted to see in the ordinance. The Committee met in people's homes, and did not take minutes-they met outside the sunshine. Because they were strictly advisory they believed they did not have to comply with the Sunshine Law. The Town of Palm Beach adopted their recommendations aspart ofthe zoning ordinance, there was a lawsuit, and the whole zoning ordinance was thrown out because their action had been initiated as a result of a violation of the Sunshine Law. The Town Council argued their actions had been in the sunshine; however, the Supreme Court stated that you cannot ratify in the sunshine something that has been conceived in the dark. Attorney Randolph cautioned that the Village Councilmembers must not only be very careful not to violate the law, but also to avoid any perception of violation. Attorney Randolph advised it was not a violation of the law for two or more of the Councilmembers to go out to lunch • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 3 together, as long as they did not talk about Village business; and that it was not a violation to mingle at the Village Hall but they should not speak about Village business unless they were on the microphone and being recorded. Mr. Randolph stressed it was a violation for two or more members of the Village Council to stand in the Village Hall and talk about Village business without it being part of the record, even if they whispered to each other on the dias about Village business and it were not recorded it would not be in the sunshine and therefore would be a violation of the Sunshine Law. Even a perfectly innocent whisper could create perception in the minds of others by the actions taken. Attorney Randolph advised there were many things to consider regarding the Sunshine Law which there would not be time to mention tonight. One of the things to consider was that private ballots could not be taken. A vote could be taken by ballot but the ballot must be signed and that ballot would be made part of the public record. If a variance or special exception were to be entertained by the Village Council, a member of the Council could go to the site as an individual, • but two or more members could not visit the site as a Council unless they gave public notice of the meeting and had minutes taken. Two members could visit the site without it being a violation only if they had no conversation. Attorney Randolph explained that part of the Sunshine Law had to do with voting, and the law provided that unless a member of the Village Council had a conflict of interest they were required to vote on an issue, and could not abstain from voting, which was a matter handled by the Ethics Commission. The way it had been handled at past Village Council meetings was that if a Councilmember remained silent on a vote it was counted as an affirmative vote on the public record. The attorney explained that a person could not abstain from voting just because it involved their neighbor and they were embarrassed to vote or if it were on an issue that was controversial. It was legal to abstain if a member had a conflict of interest, a conflict that would inure to the special private gain of the individual or by someone by whom that individual was employed or had an association or relationship, or by someone who was a member of the Councilmember's family. Attorney Randolph commented he could not advise a Councilmember as to whether he or she had a conflict of interest, but he could relate the law so that the Councilmember could make a determination as to whether it inured to their private gain or loss. The Village Attorney advised that if a Councilmember had . a conflict of interest they must declare that conflict orally at the meeting, and must say, "I have a conflict,(and give the reason)", and within 15 days must file VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 4 a conflict of interest form with the Village Clerk to be filed with the State. Village Attorney Randolph commented there was not a violation of the Sunshine Law if a Village Councilmember talked one-on-one with staff or with the attorney or with any constitutients; but it was a violation if the Village Manager or someone else called to poll a Councilmember as to how they were going to vote at a particular meeting. Attorney Randolph explained it was not a violation of the Sunshine Law for a Councilmember to send a memo relating to Village business to the Village Manager and then for it to be distributed to others--so long as that memo was not used as an opportunity for someone to respond back to that memo out of the sunshine. The Village Attorney recommended that Village Councilmembers not send memos to each other, even if it was just a memo saying, "I anticipate talking about such-and-such at the next meeting". In order for there not to be a perception of violation of the Sunshine Law, the Village Attorney recommended that any memos be sent to the Village Manager and to let him take care of the distribution. Attorney Randolph advised there • were times when a Councilmember as a single person could be in violation of the Sunshine Law, if a Councilmember was delegated the authority to make some decision or take some action on the part of the Council, that Councilmember would be subject to having a public meeting. An example could be if a Councilmember were designated to talk to the Village Manager and make a decision regarding his salary or something else, that meeting with the Manager would be subject to being held in the sunshine. Any time the Council delegated authority to a Board to act on its behalf, that Board would be subject to the Sunshine Law, even if it were only an advisory board that only made recommendations to the Village Council. People could be delegated to perform fact finding, and a Councilmember could be appointed to do fact finding and come back to the Village Council who would make the decision, and that would not be subject to the Sunshine Law. The Village Council could have a private meeting with their attorney if there were pending litigation, which would be a closed door session, and there must be strict adherence to the parameters. The meeting must be recorded by a Court reporter, and at the conclusion of the litigation the transcript would be made available to the public, only certain people could attend the meeting, reasonable notice must be given, etc. This type of meeting could not be done when thinking about litigation, only if the litigation . was pending. • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 5 Village Attorney Randolph commented that the other law closely aligned to the Sunshine Law was the Public Records Act, which basically had the same effect: any documents prepared that were official business of the Village were public records, which meant notes or memoranda by Village Councilmembers that were related to anything the Councilmembers brought to the Council on which a decision was to be made was public record, and e-mail was public record. E-mail was not to be destroyed except in accordance with the State of Florida laws that specify when and how those records may be destroyed. The fact that a record was in draft form did not except it from being a public record. If it was something prepared for Village business, it was public record, and the Village Councilmembers should recognize that and recognize the strict interpretation that the Courts give to both the Sunshine Law and the Public Records Act. Village Attorney Randolph advised the Courts would not amend these laws by virtue of their decisions in the judicial process, and had said time and time again that if • there were to be an exception it must be done by the Legislature. The Village Attorney recommended the Councilmembers obtain a copy of a book which he stated contained case law decisions and Attorney General opinions for the Sunshine Law and the Public Records Act. Mayor Genco stated that the State of Florida had a searchable Internet site on judicial decisions regarding the Sunshine Law. Attorney Randolph discussed quasi judicial hearings, and explained that the Village Council was sitting in a legislative capacity when they passed Ordinances, Resolutions, and motions. When making application of criteria set forth in the Village Code they were acting in a quasi judicial capacity. Village Attorney Randolph explained that certain parameters must be followed: a quasi judicial hearing would be a public hearing, of which notice was given, but the Village Council would be acting as judges when hearing certain variances and special exceptions. The Village Attorney explained that when these matters were heard, the Village Council could not just make the decision they believed was best, but must apply the facts and the criteria set forth in the ordinance and act accordingly. If a decision should be appealed it would be heard in Court by a panel of three judges and the law that the judges would look at in determining whether the decision should be sustained or not was whether there had been competent substantial evidence on which to make a decision, not on whether there had been a preponderance or weighing of evidence as in a civil case. If there was competent evidence before the Council to allow a decision based upon the criteria, then the courts would normally sustain the decision; but the Council • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 6 must also make sure they followed the applicable law and that they had not violated due process by not allowing cross examination. Attorney Randolph commented it was not required to swear in witnesses before a quasi judicial hearing but he believed it was a good idea just to let them feel the aura of the fact that it was a quasi judicial hearing. Also, any exparte communication must be announced at quasi judicial hearings. That meant that if a Councilmember had talked to anyone about the particular application being heard they must announce the name of the person to whom they had talked and must report the subject matter discussed. Attorney Randolph explained that until recently the law did not allow exparte communications, but had been changed as a result of the legislature being barraged with complaints from elected officials that they could not have conversations with their constitutients. The legislature then allowed the law to be changed so that elected officials could have those communications but required they be disclosed at the public hearing so that the applicant and others . would have the opportunity to know what had been discussed so they could address that; and the decision at a quasi judicial hearing must be based on the information presented at that hearing. The judges in review would look for that and if they did not see anything on the public record to sustain the Village Council's opinion and believed the decision had been based on communications with someone that was not announced at the hearing, they might overturn the ruling. Village Attorney Randolph advised that this Village had a strong Village Manager type of government, which meant that the Village Manager took care of the day-to-day operations of the Village. The Village Council was to establish policy and the Village Manager was to effectuate that policy. The Charter was very similar to other Charters involving a strong Village Manager form of government, and stated clearly that the Village Council shall not give direction to anyone within the Village Manager's office. Attorney Randolph explained that the Village Manager's functions were listed in the charter, which stated he oversees Department Heads and the employees, which meant that Village Councilmembers should not give direction to those Department Heads. Attorney Randolph advised that Village Councilmembers could make inquiries, but recommended those inquiries be made through the Village Manager in order to make for a more efficient operation of government so that the Village Manager could then filter those inquiries to the people with the time or expertise to answer VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 7 those questions. The Village Attorney advised the Village Council that the Village Manager and staff were here to serve them and should respond to their reasonable requests, but the Village Councilmembers should take into account the intent and meaning of the Village Charter which established the Village Manager form of government with the Village Manager in charge of running the day-to- day operations of the Village, keeping in mind that the Village Council was the policymaker and should direct the Village Manager on the policy and then let him do the work. Mr. Randolph commented there was not time to continue, and called for questions on the items he had discussed. The Vice Mayor asked how many states had the Sunshine Law, to which the Village Attorney responded there were a lot of states that did not have it, although more and more were getting it, and the law applied to county and local governments; however most if not all of the states that had the Sunshine Law did not apply it to themselves at the State level. The Village Attorney noted there had been attempts from time to time to make a change so that it would apply at State level, but that had not been accomplished to date. Mr. Randolph commented that there were a lot of complaints about the Sunshine Law and a lot of attempts had been made to do away with it, but expressed his opinion that would never happen with the press and public being interested in open government. Vice Mayor Capretta commented the biggest potential violation he had seen was what he called the messenger system, where a Councilperson told one resident something which was passed from one resident to another and then to another Councilperson, commented that the Village Manager was in a key position to violate in this manner; and asked the Village Attorney to advise regarding the law on the messenger system. Village Attorney Randolph responded, just remember you can't do indirectly something you are not allowed to do directly, so a Councilmember could not have discussions that they knew were going to allow them to communicate with one of the other Councilmembers. Mayor Genco commented she had sent the Village Attorney a case history that made it very clear that a go between, including the Manager, was not allowed. Mayor Genco commented that two ~ committees--a Citizens Advisory Board and a Charter Review Committee--were being proposed, and questioned whether the Sunshine Law would apply to those committees, to which Attorney Randolph responded that it would apply. Mayor Genco questioned Attorney Randolph's definition of "village business". Attorney Randolph explained that anything that would reasonably come before the Village Council for discussion or action was village • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 8 business. Mayor Genco requested clarification on discussing items with the Village Manager, to which Attorney Randolph responded that under the Sunshine Law there was nothing that precluded any one of the Councilmembers from meeting one-on-one with the Village Manager, with any of their constitutients, or with the Village Attorney. Mayor Genco questioned the Village Attorney regarding Village Councilmembers being polled on how they planned to vote. Mr. Randolph explained that it was not a violation of the Sunshine Law if someone who had an application before the Council lobbied the Council and tried to figure out how they were going to vote, and other individuals might be interested in how the Council would vote on a particular matter, but he believed those people should not be advised how a Councilmember planned to vote -especially in quasi-judicial matters-because the Councilmembers were not supposed to make up their minds ahead of time but were to base their decision on what was heard at the hearing, The Village Attorney advised that a Councilmember might decide how they were going to vote on a particular ordinance and if someone in the community asked how they were going to vote they could be told; but staff should not ask how the Councilmembers planned to vote. Mr. Randolph advised that staff should not tell the Village Councilmembers anything that anybody else had said. If one Councilmember discussed village business with Village Manager Couzzo, he should not indicate to another Councilmember the feelings of that Councilmember, since that would be doing something through the back door that could not be done through the front door. Mayor Genco summarized that the Councilmembers were allowed to speak with the Village Manager regarding day-to-day business items if they had questions, and asked if the Councilmembers were not supposed to direct the Village Manager as to what he would do on a case-by-case basis, day-to-day. Village Attorney Randolph responded not if that was business of the Village-that Mr. Couzzo was supposed to do what the majority of the Councilmembers directed. Mr. Randolph explained that it became very difficult for the Village Manager and for the Village Attorney because they found it hard to say "no" to the Council; but if a Councilmember called Mr. Randolph saying they would like him to do something for the next meeting, it might take five hours of his time, and he did not feel like he should be billing the Village for that time if it was something that all of the Council had not directed him to do, so he would be accommodating and • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 9 ----------------------- try to give information he knew or had available, but if it was a matter of policy and the Councilmember was directing the Village Attorney, that should not happen and that also should not happen with the Village Manager or with any of the Department Heads or staff. Vice Mayor Capretta questioned the Council's relationship with developers and Councilmembers meeting individually with developers, and the Village Attorney responded there was nothing wrong with meeting individually. Vice Mayor Capretta described a typical situation regarding a developer such as had recently happened when Gary Van Brock had informed Mr. Capretta that he had changed his concept from condominiums on a parcel of land to an office park, and Mr. Capretta might have indicated whether he was in favor of such a concept. The Vice Mayor questioned if he would need to disclose that conversation when the project was presented. Attorney Randolph advised that the conversation must be disclosed if the application was aquasi-judicial hearing where the code criteria • was to be applied in granting approval. Attorney Randolph cautioned that even though the Vice Mayor may have told Mr. Van Brock whether he favored the concept, the Councilmembers must be very careful about that since in a quasi- judicial hearing they were to base their decision on the evidence as presented to them at the hearing. Vice Mayor Capretta expressed his opinion that the reason the Sunshine Law had been passed in the first place was so that public officials would not get involved with contractors and developers without the public knowing what they discussed; and the Sunshine Law was to prevent collusion. Attorney Randolph advised there could not be any collusion if the conversation was just between one Councilmember and adeveloper-that the only time there was collusion was if the Councilmember discussed this with another Councilmember outside a public meeting, and the law was designed to do away with the smoke-filled room and back room politics. Attorney Randolph clarified that what he had said about not directing individually the Manager, Village Attorney, or staff on policy matters also applied to people outside-that a Councilmember should never take a position for the Council which was not the position that had been acted on by the Council. Village Attorney Randolph clarified that a Councilmember could state their personal opinion about something but could not go out and say that the Council was going to do thus and so when they did not know that was the case. . VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 10 Peggy Verhoeven questioned if a person wanting to lobby could speak to all the Councilmembers individually since when that matter was presented they would know what they had said individually but they would not know what the other Councilmembers had said. Village Attorney Randolph clarified that the Councilmembers could be spoken to on a one-on-one basis, but the Councilmembers should be asked if they wanted to discuss the item; and many Councilmembers in other communities took the easy way out by stating they would listen to everything at the Council meeting and did not want to talk outside the public meeting. Mr. Randolph stated this was a matter of personal preference and there was nothing to preclude a Councilmember from talking one-on-one with a constitutient. Mrs. Hutchinson asked if a conversation with the Village Manager became public record, to which the answer was no, but that if there was a written communication that did become public record. Mayor Genco asked if a • conversation between a resident and the Village Manager was public record, to which Mr. Randolph responded, not unless it was recorded. Harold Taylor asked if members of the proposed Citizens Advisory Committee who violated the Sunshine Law would be subject to a misdemeanor charge, to which Mr. Randolph responded they would be subject to the same penalties as anyone else. Mr. Taylor asked if there had been any cases where an advisory board member had violated the Sunshine Law and the matter had ended up in civil court with people being sued directly. Mr. Randolph responded yes, and that the matter could be in civil court because of an allegation there had been a violation of the Sunshine Law, and what could happen was if the party suing prevailed the judge was required to award attorney fees to the prevailing party. If a person brought a claim and did not prevail, and the claim was found to be specious or unfounded, the judge could award attorneys fees or not. The law also provided that the person who had violated the Sunshine Law might be required to pay attorneys fees. Mr. Hutchinson questioned if individual Councilmembers were not to direct the activity of the Village Manager. Mr. Randolph clarified not in matters of policy and of directing the Village Manager or Village Attorney to do work, and not in matters that should come before the full Council. • Ian Helmsby, Managing Director of Operation Explore, explained that his • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 11 ----------------------- company provided organizational leadership development and team building services, and was based in Palm Beach Gardens. Mr. Helmsby explained he had come here from England in October last year and had aCPA/accounting background; and his firm had been recommended to the Village from work they had done for Councilmember Walker's husband's firm. Mr. Helmsby reported he had attended a Council meeting November 24, 2000, and in December had interviewed approximately ten of the Village senior staff following the change in Village Manager. Mr. Helmsby commented he was not present to get at anybody, but to pass on messages and ask questions. Mr. Helmsby indicated that he had attended the November 24, 2000 Council meeting to see how the Council operated before talking with the senior staff. Mr. Helmsby commented the meeting had been very frustrating since the meeting started at 7 p.m. but it was 7:24 before any business was properly conducted. For 24 minutes the Council had discussed the agenda, which was submitted to each Councilmember well in advance, and it was not good PR to discuss something for 24 minutes that should • have been agreed to before the meeting, with 50+ people sitting in the audience just listening to a discussion of the agenda. Mr. Helmsby commented there had obviously been some conflicts at that time on the Council, but one of the good things agreed upon that night was that communication between the Council and the public needed to improve, and with committees and workshops such as this one he understood that it was improving. Discussions with the senior staff had been regarding the shift in management style of the Village Manager, from micro managing to a style where the Manager was a delegator rather than a doer. Many of the senior staff had taken pains to indicate it was time for a new management style and most indicated they were open to a new method of working. Some of the senior staff had expressed negative reactions to interdepartmental interaction because of lack of communication between the departments. All the senior staff without exception had been aware of the split in the Village Council at that time, and felt that split was a drag on the Village's operations. Mr. Helmsby indicated he did not know whether it really was a drag on operations but that was the perception of the people working for the Village. The March election had resulted in a change in the Village Council composition and a change to a Lady Mayor, as she would be called in England, and the former Mayor would have been called Lord Mayor. Mr. Helmsby questioned whether with the change in • composition of the Village Council there was a change in the way the Village Council worked and whether there was a change in the attitude regarding the • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 12 ----------------------- conflict in the Council. Mr. Helmsby asked the Council to consider the public perception, which would come from the meetings, or the media, and public perception was reality whether it was or wasn't, because the reality of how the public perceived the Council was from what they saw at the meetings and read in the media. Merging the Council's perception of how they believed they operated with the public's perception of how they believed the Council operated needed to be aligned; and Mr. Helmsby expressed his opinion that it had not been aligned and that the Council had not realized that when they expressed a desire for more communication in November. Mr. Helmsby indicated that recent letters to the editor and reports in the local newspaper had not expressed any desire to change. Mr. Helmsby asked if the Village Council perceived that they now operated as a team and if there was ever a consensus. Mayor Genco stated she would like to feel the Council was a team and that their primary objective was what would benefit the most people of the Village; which was difficult because the minority as well as the majority must also be represented. Mayor Genco • commented that she would like to think of the Council neither as a majority or a minority, just as a Council, with each member listening to 5,000 people. Mayor Genco commented every now and then a member must take up a banner for a special interest group but that did not mean the whole Council would determine that was the right thing to do; which could be a personal upset for her not to have something she wanted to come to fruition but she also had to realize that the other four people had a right to their opinions and she might not get her way. Mayor Genco stated she was working very hard toward the Council being a team. Councilmember von Frank commented he had learned over many years to keep an open mind and listen to the other person because when you kept an open mind you were learning something. Mr. Helmsby explained that teams were developed by going through stages of brainstorming, forming and reforming, and wondered whether the Sunshine Law and the infrequency of the Council meetings restricted the forming and reforming process and whether the Council was ever allowed to get to the brainstorming stage where they could throw out ideas. Mayor Genco commented the Council could do that but it was a long process, and was difficult because the meetings were generally three hours long and 20 or 30 things had to be decided in those three hours, and was a reason why workshops were used for brainstorming and why Councilmembers came to meetings with preconceived • determination of an outcome because the Councilmembers did their homework independently and had no opportunity to share that homework with other • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 13 Councilmembers. Mr. Helmsby wondered if coming to the meeting with items already researched prevented proper participation at the meeting. Mr. Helmsby explained that his company when holding meetings with their customers requested the participants to sign onto a full value contract, meaning everyone listened all the time and spoke when they needed to speak, and everyone was 100% responsible for the decisions made at that meeting whether they agreed or not, and everybody respected the other people's views, and there was no sniping, backbiting or talking out of turn outside the meeting. Mr. Helmsby wondered if the Village Council had this sort of full value contract since when Attorney Randolph had been speaking he had noticed that occasionally one or two of the Councilmembers sort of "checked out" for five minutes or so, probably because they had heard this discussion before and felt they knew what the outcome would be; and he stressed that each one needed to listen all the time because people needed to have their views respected, and commented that body language was just as easy to read as what came from a person's mouth and if one was sitting there with eyes closed, arms crossed, etc., it told the speaker that person was not interested or felt the speaker's remarks were of little value. Mr. Helmsby commented this was difficult to control, but it had been noticable tonight in just a short period and he felt it should be reinforced. Councilmember von Frank commented that the Sunshine Law was somewhat restrictive but gave Councilmembers a greater opportunity to go out and talk to the people and get a better understanding of their thinking, and the Council was trying to satisfy their needs and wants. Mr. Helmsby commented regarding Mayor Genco's earlier statement of having to make 20 decisions in a meeting and questioned what percentage of decisions should be made. Mayor Genco commented the Council were conduits for input by the people, and must use their own discretion and that was what should be brought to the table so there could be discussion regarding the representations of the different people of the Village. Mayor Genco commented she had difficulty dealing with one extremely outspoken person who spoke louder than the other 2,000 and questioned how to weigh that into consensus building. Ms. Helmsby asked if that affected the decisions the Council would make rather than the policy the Council made; and questioned if he asked Mr. Couzzo what percentage of decisions were made by the Council that Mr. Couzzo felt he should make, whether he would have the same answer as the • Council to that question. Mr. von Frank responded it depended on how inflexible one might be and in taking each party independent of another that was asking a • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 14 ----------------------- question to which he could not provide an answer. Councilmember von Frank commented he listened to each agenda item and considered its impact to the community, because his first consideration was the community. Mr. Helmbsy indicated he was wondering if there was a way to streamline the agenda so that it ended up without 30 points on the agenda to deal with at a meeting and maybe an advisory committee or one of the employees could deal with some items for the Council. Mayor Genco commented she was hoping that the proposed Citizens Advisory Committee would be an outreach to get some consensus from the public before an item came before the Council, and give the Council projects that they could proceed with quickly. Vice Mayor Capretta commented he had been on the Village Council for 13 years and there had been dozens and dozens of discussions regarding how to improve communications and get better input from the public. The Vice Mayor advised that he knew a lot about 3/4 of the people who were attending this meeting because they were the ones who attended 90% of the meetings, and they were interested in government, but had their own • opinions. Vice Mayor Capretta indicated that out of approximately 25 people at this meeting, 20 were people who attended all the time, and the other five must be the public, who could be present for a particular reason-curiosity, not much on TV tonight, or there could be an agenda item in which they were interested. Vice Mayor Capretta questioned how an advisory committee could get input from the public any better than the Council could, commented that only when the Village Hall was packed was the public really represented, and that either was when there was a controversial issue such as closing a school or when somebody had "packed the house". Councilmember Capretta commented that the whole problem was how to know what the public really wanted, explained that not even a quarter of the Village's population ever voted in an election, and that when he first was elected to the Village Council Presidents of the Homeowners Associations attended the meetings as a group, and others attended as representatives of certain groups. The Vice Mayor expressed hope that practice would return some day. Mr. Capretta commented that the United States had the lowest voter turnout of any country and had trouble with chads and all sorts of things. Vice Mayor Capretta commented that the real issue was to get participation, and that if people did not come to the meetings but voted for you they must be happy with what you were doing; however, that was frustrating for • a Councilmember. Vice Mayor Capretta suggested a way of getting people to come to discuss an item was to hold a workshop on that one item, such as the • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 15 location of the new Village Hall. Vice Mayor Capretta commented that the most controversial item ever discussed was when there was a decision to split a lot. Mayor Genco commented that the Vice Mayor's comments had given her an idea, and requested to the Village Manager when packets were mailed to the Village Council that the agenda portion be mailed to Presidents of Homeowners Assocations with an invitation to attend the meetings. Vice Mayor Capretta commented the Town of Jupiter had afull-time person who created charter neighborhoods in areas where there were no homeowner associations so that every part of the town would have a voice, and recommended the Village artifically create charter homeowners associations in older sections of town which had no homeowners associations. The Mayor agreed, and requested that the Chamber of Commerce also be added to the Homeowners Association list to receive the agenda, and commented that other charter associations would be formed. Mr. Helmsby commented he understood the need for polling the opinion of the public and guessing their input; but his goal was to improve the effectiveness of the Council meetings because the perception was that the Council meetings could be improved. Mr. Helmsby discussed how to get to improved meetings with the different types of personalities of the Councilmembers and explained that a person's personality could not be changed, but could be assessed by a Myers Briggs type indicator which in his case would classify him as an introvert, a thinker, and a judgmental person, which told everyone he was quiet, practical, logical, and liked to decide things in a logical order. Mr. Helmsby noted that the President was totally opposite, a blue sky, didn't like details, and flitted from subject to subject. Mr. Helmsby noted that in all the arguments or disagreements the Council had had, for example, over the past year, there was only one common factor, which was the Councilmembers, and each would always have a conflict with a person they did not understand, so that understanding the personality of the other members could help each Councilmember react in a better way, and understand better how and why each person made their decisions. In terms of the Council meetings, Mr. Helmsby summarized that the dignity of everyone-- Councilmembers and residents--should be preserved and protected; the focus should be on issues and not on personalities; other people's views should be • listened to rather than coming to the meeting prepared and thinking one knew what the person speaking was going to say and writing one's notes for the next • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 16 ----------------------- time while the speaker was talking rather than listening; should not expect to change another person's behavioral style; and should express an independent view even if it was in the minority because the majority needed to hear the minority viewpoint. Mr. Helmsby indicated he was trying to show that residents could see things were not perfect and he was asking the Village Council on behalf of the residents to see what they could do to improve that, and that consensus and understanding the other person's point of view was a big part of this. Mayor Genco asked what were one or two tricks to building consensus, to which Mr. Helmsby responded that depended on who was present in the meeting and how those people were handled. Mr. Helmsby indicated he knew there was a process that must be followed for running Council meetings, but explained that his firm had a process for running a meeting called a real time process; which was designed to point people in the right direction; and explained that particular roles were appointed within a meeting or particular roles in terms of functions for reporting to that meeting so that there was an organized way of presenting the • information which was helpful in pointing the meeting in the right direction. Mayor Genco asked the Village Attorney if the Council had a problem it needed to address if the problem could be divided up for each Councilmember to do background investigation on a portion of the problem and report back at a Council meeting. The Village Attorney responded that a task could be given to a particular Councilperson who would then report back to the Council. Mr. Helmsby noted that then a particular person would be needed to funnel the information and bring the group to consensus, which in this case would be the Mayor. Mr. Helmsby commented that in general if each Councilmember had a part of the problem they would all hopefully be on the same side of the problem, and to be aligned with a central decision maker or controller would allow a quicker decision. Mayor Genco asked for the best advice Mr. Helmsby could give the Council. Mr. Helmsby responded: to listen and respect everyone but make your point as well. Peggy Verhoeven indicated she found this workshop very exciting and suggested a seminar of 3-4 hours on the Sunshine Law. Mrs. Verhoeven commented she had heard more information on that tonight than in the past seven years. Ms. Verhoeven commented to Mr. Helmsby that this country and England were two different cultures and he had been most enlightening and fascinating • VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES May 10, 2001 PAGE 17 ----------------------- Harold Turner read an article regarding whether the IAAA should be an active player in shaping U.S. elective power policy, which stated citizens had a right to be a part of the decision making process and as knowledgeable citizens could raise pertinent issues that might not otherwise be considered. Mr. Turner commented everyone needed to listen to everyone's ideas. Mr. Helmsby commented that things such as improvement of meetings, understanding personalities, and interactions could not be finished in 45 minutes but would take a long time to sort out. Mayor Genco commented some people had strong opinions about people who were speaking, and requested if one had strong opinions to please speak only when it was their turn to speak and otherwise to stay in their seat and be quiet because it was embarrassing to have comments, booing, or heckling when someone was speaking, and it went against the dignity of the Village Council. V. ADJOURNMENT Vice Mayor Capretta made a motion to adjourn the workshop meeting. Councilmember von Frank seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Therefore, the workshop meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Betty Laur Acting Village Clerk • DATE APPROVED: C-~~ -- CSI