Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Workshop_Tab 01C_11/07/2007VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES JULY 16, 2007 I. Call To Order And Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held its first regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Monday, July 16, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:05 P.M. by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams, who then called the roll: Present were Joseph Capretta, Dottie Campbell, Geraldine Genco, Mary Hinton, and Vincent Arena. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. II. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the agenda. Board Member Hinton seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Board Member Campbell requested switching agenda items 8 and 9, and removing item 10, Any Other Matters, so that item 10 would become Adjournment. The vote on the agenda as modified carried 5-0. III. Appointment of Chair Attorney Randolph opened the floor for nominations to appoint a Chair. Joseph Capretta was nominated by Dottie Campbell. Mary Hinton was nominated by Geraldine Genco. Dottie Campbell was nominated by Vincent Arena. Mr. Capretta and Ms. Hinton accepted the nomination; Ms. Campbell declined. Attorney Randolph passed out ballots for each Board Member to fill in a name and initial. Village Clerk McWilliams announced the results: Mr. Capretta received 3 votes; Ms. Hinton received 2 votes. Attorney Randolph clarified that a motion was not needed since a vote had been taken by ballot. IV. Appointment of Vice Chair MOTION: Board Member Arena made a motion to appoint Mary Hinton as Vice Chair. Board Member Genco seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. V. Establish Meeting Schedule and Time Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 Each member announced days of the week they were available. Friday, August 17 at 2 p.m. was set for the next meeting. A subsequent meeting was set for Wednesday, August 22 at 2 p.m. A third meeting was set for Wednesday, August 29 at 2 p.m. VI. Discussion by Village Attorney of Committee Guidelines Attorney Randolph advised this board was established by Resolution of the Village Council and would automatically dissolve on November 8, 2007. Charter amendments, if any, should be brought to the Village Council by October 11, 2007, so the amendments could be in an ordinance to be placed on first and second reading, and then go to referendum at an appropriate time. Sunshine law requirements were reviewed. Attorney Randolph announced he could provide backup and answer questions; and advised that two items had been brought up-who hired. and fired the Village Attorney, and interference with staff -and a member of Council had suggested a Charter Review. Decisions under Robert's Rules of Order would be by majority vote. The Board would be governed by the Sunshine Law until the Board was dissolved, and it was best to distribute material through the Village Clerk. Board Member Hinton suggested it would be best not to discuss Charter Review matters with members of the Council, even though it was permissible under the Sunshine Law. VII. Discussion Of Charter Chair Capretta announced he had requested the Village Council minutes for the last six months be sent to each Board member, so that Board members would be aware of any issues raised at Council meetings. During a poll of the members, it was revealed that no one had been told by their Council sponsor of specific issues they wished resolved. Chair Capretta advised an item raised in the minutes was who hired and fired the Village Attorney. Board member Arena noted there had been discussion regarding who should be able to use the Village Attorney other than the Village Manager and the Mayor; some felt the Village Attorney should serve at the pleasure of the whole Council. Board member Hinton commented the attorney issue was not in the Charter at this point; so she felt it would be better to review what was there and then discuss any additions. Chair Capretta responded that was his point-the Village Council had had an issue with the Attorney, and appointed a Charter Review board to resolve the issue, but it wasn't even in the Charter. Board member Genco expressed her opinion that the Council wanted this board to review the Charter to see if that was something they might want to add. Board member Genco advised she had collected comments while she had been on the Village Council of many things people would like, and she planned to present them to this board for consideration. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 The Village Attorney advised there was no law requiring review of the Charter every five years; Board member Hinton expressed her opinion it was a good idea. Board member Campbell recommended reviewing line by line; then discuss any additions. Chair Capretta commented all of the issues he saw in reviewing the minutes were not in the Charter. Board member Hinton suggested reviewing the Charter with three questions in mind: Does this work; if not, why; and how can we make it better. Board member Hinton asked if all terminology in the Charter that was required by State statute was there. Board member Genco suggested members of the Board should not be speaking to the Village Manager about items they were discussing in Charter Review meetings. Village Clerk McWilliams noted language was included in the resolution that the Village Manager when able to attend the Charter Review board meetings would be present as a resource. Attorney Randolph noted it was not a violation of the Sunshine law for a member of this board to consult the Village Manager, and he should be used as a resource unless the board decided they did not want individual members going to him to ask individual opinions; however, the Manager usually served in that regard. Discussion ensued regarding where in the Charter the Manager was given authority to hire and fire the attorney; there was nothing in the Charter. Board member Genco commented the Village Council was responsible for personnel policies, ordinances implementing things, resolutions, and adopting the budget; someone else could implement them but Council was responsible, and there was a lot of misunderstanding of what Council was responsible for versus what the Manager was given to implement. When Council looked to the Charter these things were not there; and this board could establish items for the Council to follow. Vice Chair Hinton agreed that defining powers of the Council was very important, but it was also extremely important to be sure each item worked, and the Charter Review board must look at every item as to how it affected both Council and members of the community. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved that the Village Attorney review the existing Charter for Statutory compliance. Board member Campbell seconded the motion. Roll call vote was as follows: Joseph Capretta for Mary Hinton for Vincent Arena for Dottie Campbell for Geraldine Genco for The motion was therefore passed by unanimous 5-0 vote. Chair Capretta noted the language in the oath might be one thing the Board should consider. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 Attorney Randolph indicated he would provide backup materials from the last Charter review board and a model charter to members of the Board. Attorney Randolph advised any change to amend the Charter would require a referendum. Section 1.01- Attorney Randolph confirmed the model charter would have a concise description of Village Council Manager form of government. Discussion ensued regarding manager and mayor forms of government. Section 1.02 -Board member Hinton requested this section be tagged and brought back to the next meeting. Board member Campbell noted there was a typo 3 lines up from the bottom. Section 2.01 -Board member Hinton commented this would be the place to expand terms if that was recommended. Board member Genco noted in the third paragraph there was an annual salary issue, which made Council members employees, and suggested language to make it clear it they would be non-employees and receive 1099 forms. Another issue raised by Board member Genco was to possibly increase the $250 per month pay for Council members. Discussion ensued. Attorney Randolph indicated the other municipalities he represented did not pay a salary, only a per diem to reimburse expenses. Board Member Campbell stated the third paragraph was postponed. Board Member Campbell referred to the second paragraph, and expressed her desire to keep the election the second Tuesday of March each year. It was agreed there was no reason to change it. Board member Hinton brought up run-off elections and her opinion that 50% + one vote should win, or go to runoff. The board requested the attorney provide information on smaller communities regarding this matter. This paragraph was postponed. Section 2.02 -There were no questions. Section 2.03 - Board member Genco requested that language be placed in the charter that if a Council member did not take the oath then the position was deemed vacant. Village Attorney Randolph advised it did not need to be stated because there was a mandate by charter to do it. Board member Genco responded they had gotten into trouble with Mr. Dalack not taking the oath because the Charter had not stated the position was deemed vacant. Board member Hinton asked if a vacancy could be declared if the person got elected and went to prison before they took the oath. The board agreed the oath of office was good. Section 2.04 -Board member Genco discussed removing members from office if they missed meetings being in the old charter, and that it had been removed. Village Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 Attorney Randolph advised it had been removed from the charter because someone could only be removed with a recall. Board member Campbell asked if language could be added to the removal section-"or legal proceeding". Chair Capretta recalled there had been discussion at the previous Charter review about a Council member missing meetings and that the conclusion had been he could not be removed because he had been legally elected. Attorney Randolph indicated he would review what had been discussed at the last Charter review regarding this issue, and his question to himself would be how to fill the office if someone did not take the oath. During ensuing discussion, Attorney Randolph indicated he would see about defining vacancy and forfeiture, and report back. Attorney Randolph referred to minutes of the last Charter Review board where he had advised that State law did not allow a Council to vote out its own members. Section 2.06 -Mayor and Successors. Board member Genco suggested replacing the word Mayor with Chair to get rid of the ego. Other members preferred to stay with Mayor. Section 2.07 -Board member Campbell asked for language consistency throughout the Charter when referring to Ordinances and Florida law. Village Attorney Randolph recommended an ordinance regarding special meetings, and in the Charter to refer to ordinance rather than Florida law. Attorney Randolph indicated he would look at the language about two members independently calling a special meeting. Village Clerk McWilliams read the Code of Ordinances Section 2-32 regarding special meetings; that three days notice must be given, and the Mayor and Manager could call a special meeting. Attorney Randolph advised the charter and the ordinance should be made consistent. Pert Towne asked regarding 2.02 if the language could be changed from resident of the Village to property owner of the Village, and was told no, that would take a constitutional vote; the Supreme Court had dealt with that. It was clarified that 2.07 was being postponed only to look at the requirement of two members calling a meeting and then to perhaps make a recommendation to the Village Council that they needed to get their ordinance up to date, consistent with the Charter. Section 2.08 - Board member Campbell asked about a super majority vote. Village Attorney Randolph explained that whatever was required by State law did not need to be mentioned since it took precedence over the Charter. State law would state the number of votes required. Board member Hinton requested that any items requiring a super majority vote be well defined. Board member Hinton asked if there had ever been a problem with the requirement that when only three Council members were present they could not vote on anything except to adjourn, unless their votes were unanimous. Board member Arena reported he had been at a meeting where that Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 6 happened-all three had to vote unanimously. It was agreed this was not a problem and not to make a change. Board member Campbell reported that because there were discrepancies in referring to how the law was stated: law, Florida State law, Florida law; she had asked the Village Clerk,who had checked with Village Attorney Hawkins; his opinion was that the law should be referred to in the Charter as law of Florida State. Board member Campbell commented she had a problem with that, and asked for something that sounded better. Attorney Randolph advised he would use "as determined by laws of the State of Florida", but if there were no substantive changes he would not recommend going to referendum for that. Section 2.09 -'There were no changes. Section 2.10 - Board member Campbell stated this section was fine with the change on Florida law. Discussion ensued regarding allowing poll workers to be registered voters of Palm Beach County rather than limiting them to residents of the Village. Attorney Randolph advised he would check with Attorney Hawkins, who had indicated to the Village Clerk that this might be changed in the Charter. It was agreed to recommend to Village Council to pass an ordinance allowing poll workers to be from Palm Beach County as opposed to Village of Tequesta residents only. Section 2.11 -Board member Campbell commented there was no reference to investigations and inquiries in the charter, and questioned what they were. Attorney Randolph advised there were other models provided, and he would provide a model the Board might want to use. Attorney Randolph also advised Council should not be kept from asking questions of employees or department heads; however, should not be ordering them around, and the language could be modified to be more specific. Board member Hinton commented one of the biggest problems with Charters of the Council Manager form of government was abuse. She agreed with Board member Campbell that words like investigations and inquiries opened cans of worms. She explained that Jupiter had added a whole section of prohibitions and she felt it really needed to be looked at. Attorney Randolph read an example from Jupiter Island's Charter; Board member Hinton read the wording from Jupiter's Charter. Board member Genco discussed the responsibilities and functions of the manager and felt that went hand to hand. Board member Genco advised she would like to compare Sections 2.11 and 3.03, and have an idea of where things needed to be defined. Her biggest issue when she was on the Village Council had been the interpretation of this language, which she felt was unclear and needed to be defined. Board member Hinton commented it needed to be defined very, very well, and it made it easier when you had to re-hire another manager, and also very helpful when you had to tell another member of the Council to back off, that they were violating the Charter. One must have a very significant black and white document in front of them to present that case; to make sure there was a separation and lines were not folding into each other. Charter Review Board July 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 7 Council member Genco asked everyone to provide good examples for 2.11 and 3.03, forwarded to the Village Clerk for exchange. Attorney Randolph indicated he would provide examples. Board member Campbell asked to have the Tequesta Indian placed on the corporate seal. VIII. Communications from Committee Members There were no communications from Committee Members. IX. Communication From Citizens There were no communications from citizens. X. Adjournment Upon motion by Board member Hinton; seconded by Board member Arena, and unanimously carried 5-0, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 17, 2007 I. Call to Order and Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Friday, August 17, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:18 P.M. by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams, who then called the roll: Present were Vice-Chair Mary Hinton, Dottie Campbell, Geraldine Genco. Chair Joe Capretta arrived at 2:20 P.M. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. II. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the agenda; Board Member Genco seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously 3-0. III. MINUTES 1. Approve of the July 16, 2007 Minutes Chair Capretta arrived at 2:20 p.m. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the July 16, 2007 Minutes; Board Member Genco seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously 4-0. Village Clerk McWilliams advised the Board she received a letter from Mr. Arena who regretfully removed himself from the Committee; each Board Member was provided a copy of the letter. She stated she called Council Member Turnquest who appointed Mr. Arena and requested he make another appointment as soon as possible. Attorney Randolph handed out a redlined version of the 2001 Charter Board and minutes showing what changes were previously made. V. New Business 12. Discussion on Meeting Schedule • Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 2:00 p.m. • Wednesday, August 29, 2007 - 2:00 -.p.m. (Mr. Randolph has conflict) Board Member Genco suggested the Board wait to reschedule the upcoming meetings since a new Board Member would be joining the Board. She stated she would not be able to attend Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 the August 22 meeting as scheduled. Board Member Campbell felt the August 29 meeting should be rescheduled. Board Member Genco mentioned the Village Council stated the attorney did not need to attend all the Charter Review meetings due to costs. She felt the Charter Board was tasked to deal with the concepts and then have the attorney fine tune the concepts for legality purposes. She explained she went through what the Board did during the last meeting and took language from other municipal charters and incorporated into the Village charter for the Board to review. She commented if the Board continued to be burdened looking at case law then the Board would not finalize the process. Board Member Hinton believed the attorney needed to be at least one other meeting during the process and noted she did not have a problem with meeting on August 29 withput Mr. Randolph. Board Member Genco agreed there should be another meeting with the attorney present, but later in the process. She mentioned receiving a lot of concerns from residents while on Council was whether the Village Manager should live in the Village and noted this was a concept issue and did not take the attorney to help decide. Board Member Campbell asked if she found this requirement in other charters to which she responded she found it in one other charter. Board Member Campbell commented there was a short time frame to complete the project and did not want to spend a lot of time on concept and then find there were legal issues; she was more comfortable if the attorney attended every meeting. Chair Capretta noted legal advice was needed on almost every item during the last meeting. Board Member Genco pointed out nothing was accomplished and mentioned the Board could pull the wording directly from other charters where their attorney's had already reviewed the legalities of the wording; she felt if their attorneys approved the language it was good language to which Board Member Campbell disagreed. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved that the attorney be present at all Charter Review Board meetings. Board Member Hinton asked Board Member Genco what her objection was with the attorney being present. Board Member Genco stated legal opinion was not going to change what she was asked to do, which was to address concept and she did not believe case law was needed to discuss concept. Chair Capretta stated there were portions in the Charter that he would not consider changing and questioned Board Member Genco bringing up other municipal charter wording and felt she wanted changes. Board Member Genco noted the Board charge was not to change the Charter, it was to make a collective decision as to whether the Board wanted to make a change and there was not to be any preconceived notions. Chair Capretta believed Board Member Genco had preconceived notions due to previous comments regarding the Village Manager living in the Village. Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 Vice-Chair Hinton seconded the motion on the table; motion carried 3-1 with Board Member Genco in dissent. Chair Capretta and Board Member Campbell explained the Board had already delayed meeting a month due to Board Member Genco's previous commitment and did not want to accommodate further delays. Chair Capretta stated he did not see the need to have a full quorum at meetings if it was not possible. Vice-Chair Hinton preferred to reschedule the August 22 meeting since the Board only had four members at this time. Detailed discussion ensued. Consensus of the Board agreed to hold the next meetings on August 22, 2007 and August 31, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. Board Member Genco stated for the record that she felt it was inconsiderate to reschedule for the attorney but not a fellow committee member and Board Member Campbell noted for the record that the Board had accommodated Board Member Genco for five weeks to date. Board Member Genco handed out a copy of work she had prepared on the charter incorporating language from other municipal charters. Board Member Campbell asked that all handouts indicate who distributed the item and the date. Board Member Genco explained the red line indicated a strike out and the yellow highlight denoted an addition. Board Member Campbell asked if the source of the red comments were listed for each specific comment and Board Member Genco stated she could reference and pointed out the three municipalities she used were Wellington, Boca Raton and Palm Springs. IV. Unfinished Business 2. Statutory Compliance of Existing Charter Attorney Randolph advised the Village Charter was in statutory compliance per state law. 3. Model Charter Attorney Randolph noted this was provided for information only for the Boards reference. V. New Business 11. Discussion of Charter Section 1.02 -Form of Government Attorney Randolph explained this was provided for information only and did not see the need for a change unless the Board wanted to change the Village's current form of government. Board Member Genco asked that wording "policies and" be added in the second to last sentence, "Except. as limited in this Charter, the Village Manager shall execute the policies and laws..." Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 Discussion ensued on word smithing and taking the charter to referendum; Attorney Randolph suggested keeping track of minor changes and should major changes not be made that would require a referendum, then the minor changes would not be made; however if it went to referendum then the changes would be made. Consensus of the Board agreed to the change. Section 2.01 -Council Salary Attorney Randolph explained the major issue was whether Council would be reimbursed for expenses or paid a salary. He noted it did not matter if it was called a salary or compensation. Board Member Genco stated she believed Council Members should be entitled to receive reimbursement for authorized travel and per diem expenses and mentioned a time when she was denied reimbursement. Board Member Campbell questioned if this should be in the Charter. Chair Capretta noted this Council had always acted as a volunteer organization on a token salary. Board Member Hinton agreed that Council should be authorized to receive travel reimbursement for pre-authorized trips and asked if it needed to be addressed in the Charter or in Council Procedures. Attorney Randolph advised it did not need to be in the Charter and if it was placed it in the Charter it could not be changed from time to time, if needed, and suggested it be incorporated in Council Procedures. MOTION: Board Member Hinton moved to recommend to the Village Council that Council Members shall be entitled to receive reimbursement as outlined by State Statute for authorized travel and per diem expenses incurred during the performance of their official duties and be placed in the official Council Procedures and not in the Charter; Board Member Genco seconded,• motion carried unanimously 4-0. Section 2.01 - Determining Successful Candidate Not addressed. Section 2.02 Qualifications and Disqualifications MOTION: Board Member Hinton moved to approve as written with the typo changed; seconded by Board Member Campbell; motion carried unanimously 4-0. Section 2.03 Oath of Office Board Member Genco explained she added language to this section because when she was elected to Council they did not seat her at the first Council Meeting subsequent to the election and had her remain on the sideline until the following month. She stated the Charter was vague and felt it needed clarification. Board Member Hinton agreed wording to seat the Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 member elect, at the next Council Meeting needed to be in the Charter. Village Clerk McWilliams stated it was currently in the Charter and Board Member Genco stated it was under Section 2.01, however the wording was not clear. Attorney Randolph read the wording from Section 2.01, "The term of office of each Council Member shall commence at the next Council meeting subsequent to the date of the Council Member's election." Chair Capretta felt the wording was clear. Detailed discussion ensued. MOTION: Board Member Genco moved to adopt Section 2.03 as currently written without any amendments, changes or addendums; motion seconded by Board Member Campbell; motion carried 4-0. Section 2.04 Removal and Recall MOTION: Board Member Genco moved to adopt Section 2.04 as is; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried 4-0. Section 2.05 Vacancies and Forfeiture of Office Board Member Genco explained she added the word vacancies and the language forfeiture of office. She noted the highlighted language was pulled from three municipalities which were generally identical except "misses five consecutive meetings or eight meetings in any one- year period" was six meetings instead of eight. Board Member Hinton stated her notes showed the Board needed to address the person that was sworn in and never showed up. Chair Capretta stated it used to be if someone missed three meetings they were out; Board Member Genco stated it used to be this way until the last Charter Review Committee removed the language. Attorney Randolph recommended the following language, "a person that was elected or appointed to Village Council shall forfeit office if he or she fails to take and subscribe to the Oath of Office as provided in Section 2.03 of this Charter within 30 days of commencement of office." He read the Jupiter Charter language under Section 4 (b) and his language outlined in his letter. Board Member Genco asked Mr. Randolph what he would recommend should remain or be removed from the wording -she recommended. Attorney Randolph advised item (1) was good; he was concerned with the wording in item (2) and felt there were many opportunities for a Council Member to violate the code of ethics unintentionally such as failing to file your disclosure requirements annually. Board Member Genco felt they would have to be convicted of this violation and not based on an assumption. Board Member Hinton suggested the wording be convicted of a crime. Attorney Randolph pointed out a Council Member could unknowingly vote on an item that they had a conflict on and go to the Commission on Ethics and be found guilty. This would then create a vacancy on the Council. Board Member Hinton suggested that if someone was found guilty of a crime and Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 6 their civil rights had not been restored wording would be more applicable. Attorney Randolph suggested the wording convicted of a felony during the term of office. Chair Capretta suggested the attorney review this section and all that had been discussed and bring back proposed language. MOTON: Board Member Hinton moved to direct the attorney to write new terminology for the forfeiture of office which would include failure to take the oath, lacking qualifications under the Charter, being convicted of felony during their term in office, and missing three consecutive regular meetings with a total of six missed regular meetings per year; Board Member Genco seconded; motion carried unanimously 4-0. 2.06 Mayor and Successors MOTION: Board Member Hinton moved to approve Section 2.06 as is; Board Member Campbell seconded; motion carried unanimously 4-0. 2.07 Appointment of Leal Counsel and Auditor (New Section suggested by Board Member Genco) Board Member Genco suggested including a new section to the Charter where the Council appointed the attorney and auditor and asked the attorney if this was the appropriate placement. Mr. Randolph stated he would have to look at the entire Charter in context to determine the appropriateness of placement. Mr. Randolph stated that if the Charter was going to be changed it would be a good idea to place the language of appointment of the attorney and auditor into the Charter; however if a change to the Charter was not going to be made, it was his opinion that Council was tasked with the appointment of the attorney. He stated legal counsel was not a department head and was not an employee and not hired and fired by the Village Manager. He stated the Council had always appointed the attorney and had the right to hire and fire the attorney because the position did not fit into any of the classifications under the Village Manager. He stated for clarification purposes this was the place to put it and this was the most common Charter language. Chair Capretta asked if a Council Member could contact the attorney and ask for a legal clarification; Mr. Randolph strongly recommended this not be placed in the Charter but rather in Council Procedures. Board Member Campbell mentioned previous committee members contacting the attorney and driving up costs. Board Member Hinton suggested this could be addressed under Council policy if the Charter did not have to go to referendum; however she would like to see specific language in the Charter if it went to referendum. Board Member Campbell suggested the Council appoint the attorney and the manager authorize contact with the attorney. Mr. Randolph stated that would be done through Council Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 7 Procedures. Board Member Hinton stated she wanted the position hired by Council and what was done after that would be a policy decision. Discussion ensued on the Village Attorney appointing outside counsel as needed in special circumstances for situations outside their expertise such as the Dalack case. MOTION: Board Member Genco moved to adopt the language as 2.07 -Appointment of Legal Counsel and Auditor, "The Council shall appoint legal counsel, as it deems necessary, to serve at the pleasure of the Council and to act as legal advisor to the Village and to all its officers on matters relating to their official duties. The Council shall engage a certified public accounting firm to prepare and submit to the Council an annual audit" and the attorney would review for legal su~ciency; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried 4-0. The Board took a five minute break. 2.07 Meetings (Needs to be renumbered) Board Member Genco suggested adding parliamentary procedures into this section. Board Member Campbell felt this should be placed in the Council Procedures. Board Member Hinton pointed out there had been case law against placing this within Charters and Attorney Randolph agreed. Board Member Genco requested Ordinances be referenced in the Charter similar to the Florida Statutes being referenced. Detailed discussion took place regarding the reference. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to not include the ordinance reference in the Charter; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried unanimously 4-0. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to approve Section 2.07 -Meetings with the state law references to be removed if taken to referendum; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried unanimously 4-0. Attorney Randolph noted the state law references would be removed for to be placed before the electors; however would be automatically placed back in during the codification process. 2.08 Quorum (Needs to be renumbered) MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to approve Section 2.08 as is; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried unanimously 4-0. 2.09 Ordinances and Resolutions (Needs to be renumbered) MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to approve Section 2.09 as is; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried unanimously 4-0. Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 8 Board Member Genco asked if the state law reference would be stricken and Attorney Randolph reiterated there would be no references in the document that goes to the electors; however the state law references would automatically be placed back in during the codification process. 2.10 Electors and Elections (Needs to be renumbered) Board Member Genco pointed out that in her research many other municipalities made a point of noting that elections were to be non-partisan. Additionally, she stated the Village Charter did not address how quickly one was to be certified following the election. Board Member Hinton clarified Board Member Genco was requesting language requiring the Clerk certify the total number of votes cast by each person including absentee within three days of the election. Village Clerk McWilliams stated she did not have the authority to certify the results until the Supervisor of Elections Office provided the numbers, which might not be within a three day period. Mr. Randolph stated this was generally handled by Ordinance. Board Member Campbell stated she did not want the non-partisan issue in the Charter. Board Member Genco asked if the Supervisor of Elections Office had a timeframe in which to count the absentee ballots; Village Clerk McWilliams explained the Elections Office certifies the numbers, forwards them to the municipalities and then the Clerk in turn immediately presents the numbers to Council through a resolution to certify the results. Board Member Campbell explained absentee ballots were not generally counted until the morning after the election. Board Member Genco asked Board Member Campbell if there were any issues with time delays and if there should be any concerns with absentee ballots. Board Member Campbell stated it had never happened and Clerk McWilliams advised the Village would not have control over this; additionally, she stated she did not sign certificates but signed the Resolution certifying the election results. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to approve Section 2.10 as is, seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried unanimously 4-0. 2.11 Interference with the Administrative Department (Needs to be Renumbered) Board Member Genco explained she was replacing the portion she struck out with the portion highlighted in yellow and the language was taken from the Boca Raton Charter because it was the most concise. She wanted the committee to review this section because the issue of a Council Member asking the Finance Director what the general balance for IBR 624 and where the did the money come from had been prohibited and Council were not allowed to ask specific questions. She felt that in order to allow Council to do their jobs properly they should be allowed to ask questions. Board Member Hinton stated that under the Village Manager form of government, Council did not have the authority to go directly to the department heads. Board Member Genco stated the wording gave the Manager the supervision and provided thresholds for what a Council Member could ask for versus interference; she did not believe it was interference to ask the Finance Director a question. Mr. Randolph stated that it was not interference under Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 9 the Charter as written. Board Member Genco stated this had not been interpreted correctly and Mr. Hawkins had not taken a stand on this interpretation. Mr. Randolph stated the Board needed to ensure that Council Members were not directing department heads; and if a Council Member asked a question and it required research a Council Member should not make the request because it would be considered interference. He noted a simple request such as providing a copy of last years budget was okay. He stated the current language was typical and conceptually allowed Council to ask questions of a department head just not require them to do additional work. Board Member Campbell asked if a Council Member was able to obtain copies of documentation free of charge and Attorney Randolph explained the Council Member would generally go through the Manager who would ask the department head to obtain the copy and it would generally be provided free of charge. Village Clerk McWilliams stated it would be free if used for purposes of Village related work, but for election purposes or personal issues such as a permit request, they would be charged. Board Member Hinton stated she would limit even more what a Council Member could request of a department head. Board Member Genco asked that the Board strongly consider her language and asked that this section be brought back at August 31 meeting. Board Member Hinton stated she did not have a problem waiting and felt this was important to the Charter and the Village's form of government. Board Member Campbell had always been able to work well with the Manager and staff. Board Member Hinton stated she always went through the Manager due to the Charter requirements and staying within the town manager form of government. Attorney Randolph mentioned department heads could feel harassed or intimidated by Council Members requesting information. Consensus of the Board agreed to postpone the item until the August 31 meeting. V. New Business 11. Discussion of Charter The Board reviewed the previously reviewed sections of the Charter. No new sections were discussed. VI. Communications from Committee Members There were no communications from Committee Members. Charter Review Board August 17, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 10 VII. Communications from Citizens There were no communications from citizens. VIII. Adjournment Upon motion by Board Member Campbell; seconded by Board Member Genco, and unanimously carried 4-0, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 22, 2007 I. Call to Order And Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held its first regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, August 22, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:08 p.m. by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams, who then called the roll: Present were Chair Joseph Capretta, Vice Chair Mary Hinton, and Board Member Board Member Dottie Campbell. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. II. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of the agenda. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. III. Approval of Minutes of August 17, 2007 Meeting MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the minutes of the August 17, 2007 meeting as submitted. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. IV. Unfinished Business 2.01 -Selection, Term and Compensation -Determining Successful Candidate Attorney Randolph advised regarding two items brought up by Board Member Campbell: regarding elections, in 2.01 of his document, which was the old charter language, it was not prescribed wherein what a qualified elector was, so he needed to research and either take that out or add language to define a qualified elector. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved to direct Attorney Randolph to define for the charter a qualified elector and leave the verbiage "as prescribed herein". Discussion ensued. Vice Chair Hinton advised her motion was to include verbiage "Only qualified electors as prescribed by State statute shall be entitled to vote at such election". Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 IV. Unfinished Business (Con't) Attorney Randolph commented Board Member Campbell had pointed out in Section B-4 there was nothing about approved absences. Vice Chair Hinton agreed there should be approved absences for things such as a Council member being called to Iraq; there should continue to be a provision for approved absences approved by the Village Council. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved to provide for approved absences and to direct the attorney to write the appropriate language. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Board Member Campbell asked the meaning of "to serve at the pleasure". Attorney Randolph responded it was totally discretionary; one could be fired at a moment's notice without cause. Attorney Randolph asked if the Board had agreed to delete the state law references when presented to the electorate; when codified everything would go back in. Village Clerk McWilliams advised she had twice noted this in the minutes. Vice Chair Hinton commented interference was not going to be discussed until Board Member Genco could be present; however, she wanted to make the language regarding interference as succinct and black-and-white and as strong as possible because the more interference by elected officials getting involved with department heads the less of a Village Manager Council form of government you had; it went to the basis of the form of government. Attorney Randolph advised the language "except for purposes of inquiries or investigations" was too vague and there was more appropriate language in other charters. Board Member Campbell commented Board Member Genco was recommending that the Village Manager, the auditors, the lawyers, and the Village Clerk all be appointed by the Council, and department heads be ratified; and asked if that wasn't taking all the power from the Village Manager. Vice Chair Hinton stated she was not in favor of ratifying department heads based on the type of government, but couldn't imagine the manager hiring a department head without the Council knowing who that person was. Chair Capretta stated while he was on council the manager never hired a department head without first letting him know - it didn't go before council, however he let the council know; Vice Chair Hinton stated that was her point. Vice Chair Hinton indicated Council being informed was a good thing, but changing the law to require ratification would weaken the charter. Vice Chair Hiton expressed her opinion the Village attorney and auditor should be approved by Council, but not the Village Clerk. Ms. Cyrese Colbert, previously a Clerk of the Village, thought the Clerk was approved at the reorganization meeting in April; Attorney Randolph explained the charter specifically called for the Clerk to be hired by the Manager. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 IV. Unfinished Business (Con't) Vice Chair Hinton asked Attorney Randolph if his firm was the litigator for the Village; Attorney Randolph advised for slip and falls the Village had special attorneys. Vice Chair Hinton discussed the costs of Jupiter lawsuits of $700,000 in one year, and asked if it was a problem for the Village Attorney to be considered the litigator as well, because it was a problem for Jupiter. Attorney Randolph responded he did not recall it ever being a problem. V. New Business Discussion of Charter 3.01 = Village Administration Defined -The members of the board indicated no problem accepting 3.01. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of 3.01 as written. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Attorney Randolph noted there were comments on 3.01 from another member of the board; the board indicated they had read those comments. 3.02 -The Village Manager -Appointment, Removal, Qualifications, Vacancy. Board Member Campbell asked about the manager serving at the pleasure of council but serving on a contract; Attorney Randolph advised he did not see a problem with this since Council had the right to place provisions within the contract. Council could not put in a contract that said the Manager would serve for 10 years because they had to be able to get rid of him at any time. Vice Chair Hinton referred to the second sentence in 3.02, stating she had no problem with keeping it afour-member majority vote to fire a Village Manager as opposed to a majority. Chair Capretta noted that had specifically been added. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 3.02 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 3.03 -Village Manager -Functions and Powers Vice Chair Hinton discussed the head of the utility was not usually the Village Manager, but instead someone with that specific knowledge, but stated she felt this was fine. Board Member Campbell questioned Board Member Genco's point on manager residency and did not feel it was feasible. Chair Capretta did not feel with today's mobile society it was feasible. Vice Chair Hinton advised Jupiter required adjacent residency. Chair Capretta expressed his opinion if you wanted to get the best you could not require local anymore. Vice Chair Hinton commented you would be tying someone to your local market value. Village Attorney Randolph mentioned Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 V. New Business (Con't) the old charter had required the manager to become a resident within 6 months, which was stricken. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of 3.03 as written. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 3.04 -The Village Clerk Village Clerk McWilliams was asked if she saw anything she felt should be changed; she responded she had concerns with Board Member Genco's suggestion she be appointed by the Village Council, and she was willing to explain those concerns. The board members indicated that was unnecessary. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of 3.04 as written. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 3.05 -Department Heads Board Member Campbell asked about establishment of departments by ordinance. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 3.05 as written, and to direct the Village Clerk to ensure there was an ordinance to cover the establishment of each department, and if not, to recommend the Village Council approve one at another time. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 4.01 -General Powers There was no discussion. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of 4.01 as written. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 4.02 -Annexation of Contiguous Territory There were no problems expressed. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 4.02 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 V. New Business (Con't) 5.01-Powers of the Village Council Vice Chair Hinton suggested health safety and welfare be moved to 1, 2 and 3. Board Member Campbell asked about # 8 and asked what relief of the poor was, to which. Attorney Randolph responded it was archaic language, but it allowed Council to make charitable donations. Board Member Campbell asked if it was necessary; she did not like the language. Attorney Randolph explained it was not necessary because the Council could do what was necessary for the public purpose. Vice Chair Hinton proposed deleting the relief of the poor and leaving the rest. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of 5.01 with the change to delete relief of the poor and to leave the rest. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Vice Chair Hinton requested 5.01 be revisited, stating the Village did not maintain a sewage system. Board Member Campbell advised there were about five homes in the Village still on a septic tank, and asked if there were still potable water wells. It was suggested if the Village had an agreement with ENCON to leave the verbiage in. The question arose whether garbage pickup could be deducted on income tax. The Village Clerk was directed to see if garbage pickup was on the tax bill. 5.02 -Limitations There were no comments. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 5.02 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 5.03 -Tax Assessment; Lew and Collection There were no comments. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 5.03 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.01- Power of Initiative Vice Chair Hinton commented this was mainly statute, which Attorney Randolph confirmed and explained language was added at the last Charter review. Board Member Campbell asked about how signatures on petitions were verified. Village Clerk McWilliams explained she sent the petitions to the Supervisor of Elections, who certified them according to their voter roll. Board Member Campbell asked how John Smith, Jr. would be distinguished from John Smith, Sr. if he forgot to add the Jr. to his signature, if they both lived at the same address; and asked if she signed Mrs. Dottie Campbell if that was a genuine signature; and whether if a doctor added Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 6 V. New Business (Con't) his title if that was a genuine signature. Village Clerk McWilliams believed the signature had to match the one on the voter registration, but was to call the Supervisor of Elections office to find out. Board Member Campbell advised she was not saying to make a change, just to understand. Ms. Cyrese Colbert suggested adding the wording for approval; the Village Clerk suggested certified. Board Member Campbell indicated she thought "registered voters" on the top line of page 10 should say either certified or approved registered voters; and where the language was "genuine signatures" should either be certified or registered. Consensus was to use "registered voters as certified by the Supervisor of Elections Office" as recommended by the Village Clerk. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.01 as amended with the wording just presented by the Village Clerk. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.02 - Power of Referendum The same wording was in this section as in 6.01. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.02 as amended with the wording explained by the Village Clerk for 6.01. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.03 -Form of Petitions Vice Chair Hinton asked Attorney Randolph to review this section because people can now be paid to collect signatures, and asked that be checked for compliance. Vice Chair Hinton commented the Supervisor of Elections wording needed to be placed into this section also. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.03 as amended with the wording explained by the Village Clerk for 6.01, and to send it to Legal for compliance, removing the other language. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.04 -Filing, Examination and Certification of Petitions Board Member Campbell pointed out atypo - "byte" should be "by the". MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.04 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Charter Review Board August 22,-2007 Meeting Minutes Page 7 V. New Business (Con't) 6.05 -Amendment of Petitions There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.05 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Village Clerk McWilliams asked to clarify the type of days where there was aten-day deadline. Consensus was to incorporate "business days" into sections 6.04 and 6.05, and Attorney Randolph would check this during his compliance review. 6.06 -Effect of Certification of Referendum Petition There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.06 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.07 - Consideration by Village Council Board Member Campbell noted the number 60 should be in parentheses. Attorney Randolph advised "registered voters" was enough description because they would be determined by the Supervisor of Elections. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.07 as written, with 60 placed in parentheses. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.08 -Submission to Electors Board Member Campbell pointed out 60 should be in parentheses. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.08 as written, with 60 placed in parentheses. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.09 -Form of Ballot for Initiated and Referred Ordinances There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.09 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 8 V. New Business (Con't) 6.10 -Availability of List of Qualified Electors Board Member Campbell asked about the fee for the list of voters. Village Clerk McWilliams reported she would obtain the list from the Supervisor of Elections and pay for it, and then charge that same fee. Vice Chair Hinton advised it could be downloaded and the fee paid. Board Member Campbell felt there were probably 10% errors on the list, and discussed problems removing those who had died from the list. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.10 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.11 -Results of Elections There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.11 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 6.12 - Repealing Ordinances; Posting In response to the question where things were posted, Village Clerk McWilliams advised she posted on the display board in the lobby, which was required, and on the website, which was not required. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 6.12 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 7.01-Constitutionality There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 7.01 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 7.02 - Public Meetings Vice Chair Hinton disliked the word "reasonable" and suggested this word be eliminated. Board Member Campbell had a problem with the whole portion, and questioned the word citizens, since everyone was allowed to speak. Attorney Randolph suggested the following verbiage: All meetings of the Council shall be open to the public pursuant to the provisions of State law. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 9 V. New Business (Con't) MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 7.02 with the wording changed to reflect the verbiage of the attorney. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 7.03 -Conflict of Interest Vice Chair Hinton asked if there was anything that prohibited people from representing clients in front of the Council within a year. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 7.03 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. 7.04 -Effect of this Charter There were no questions. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of 7.04 as written. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Section 2.01- Selection, Term and Compensation Village Clerk McWilliams mentioned when she was preparing the 8/17/07 minutes it reminded her of previous discussions of the Council salary portion in the Charter and noted some had said it was confusing; and commented if the Village Council voted a salary increase for themselves then a Council Member such as Pat Watkins would not be eligible for the increase since she had just been re-elected within the past year. She mentioned this could happen to any member of the Council. Vice Chair Hinton expressed her opinion that Council needed to be properly compensated and also reimbursed for travel, and asked the verbiage to be stricken. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved to amend Section 2.01 to place a period after the word ordinance and strike all the rest of the verbiage in that paragraph. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Vice Chair Hinton and Board Member Campbell had no problem with Council being reimbursed but indicated that should be done in the rules and not in the Charter. Board Member Campbell asked if there was an ordinance that provided for the determination of the annual salary. Attorney Randolph reminded the Board of their decision to recommend that the language suggested by Board Member Genco be included in the ordinance. Charter Review Board August 22, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 10 V. New Business (Con't) Village Clerk McWilliams advised that also on section 2.01, Determining a Successful Candidate, in the very first meeting there had been discussion on whether they wanted the candidate to receive the highest number of votes or the majority. Discussion ensued. Consensus was to address this matter at the next meeting, along with the interference issue, which were the only two items left. Meeting Schedule The next meeting was announced for Friday, August 31, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. VI. Communication From Citizens There were no communications from citizens. VII. Adjournment Upon motion by Vice Chair Hinton; seconded by Board Member Campbell, and unanimously carried 3-0, the meeting was adjourned at 3:39 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 5, 2007 I. Call to Order and Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held its regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, September 5, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:10 p.m. by Recording Secretary Betty Laur, who then called the roll: Present were Chair Joseph Capretta, Vice Chair Mary Hinton, Board Member Dottie Campbell, Board Member Geraldine Genco, and Board Member Russell Von Frank. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Recording Secretary Betty Laur. Village Clerk Lori McWilliams arrived at 2:16 p. m. II. Approval of Agenda Mr. Randolph stated he wanted to make a correction to the minutes following the approval of the Agenda. Ms. Genco advised the numbering of the Charter was no longer correct due to the addition of the attorney and auditor item and stated Item 2.11 under "Unfinished Business" should be 2.12. She asked to add discussion on Item 3.02 to the agenda. Ms. Campbell pointed out Item 3.02 was approved as written during the August 22, 2007 meeting and Mr. Capretta explained the Board would readdress the item. MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of the agenda as amended. Board Member Campbell seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. III. Approval of Minutes of August 22, 2007 Meeting Ms. Genco pointed out that Section 7.04 did not have a motion or a second for approval and believed as a matter of procedure this needed to be adopted. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of the minutes of the August 22, 2007 meeting as submitted. Vice Chair Hinton seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 Vice-Chair Hinton asked if she needed to put a motion up to reconsider Item 3.02 for discussion so that Board could vote again. Mr. Randolph advised that was not necessary. IV. Unfinished Business Mr. Randolph provided a redlined version of the Charter changes to date. Section 2.01 -Selection. Term and Compensation He explained the Charter read, "only qualified electors as prescribed herein be entitled to vote at such elections" and it was noted by Board Member Campbell that nothing was prescribed within the Charter as to the qualifications. Therefore, he suggested adding, "as prescribed by State Statute." Board Member Campbell clarified that everywhere the Charter referred to "State Statute" that it would be written "under the laws of the State of Florida" for consistency. Consensus of the Board agreed to use the wording "State Statute" at the recommendation of Mr. Randolph. Mr. Randolph noted the next change was to the paragraph that read, "Each Village Council Member shall be entitled to an annual salary to be fixed by ordinance; provided, however, a Council Member shall not be entitled to any increase in salary adopted during the term for which such Council Member was elected," and explained that from "... provided, however" forward was deleted and the paragraph would end at "... fixed by ordinance." Board Member Genco clarified that the Board was okay with the Council voting for their own salary increase and Board Member Hinton pointed out it was done this way by the Legislators and Board Member Campbell did not want anyone to be penalized. Section 2.02 -Qualifications and Disqualifications Board Member Genco pointed out the word "holoP' should be inserted in Section 2.02, "No person shall be eligible to `hold' any elective office..." Section 2.05 -Vacancies Mr. Randolph explained he was to review the language of Section 2.05 Vacancies and noted the new language would read, "...misses three consecutive regularly scheduled monthly meetings where such absences are Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 not approved by the Village Council in three successive months or six regularly scheduled monthly meetings where such absences are not approved by the Village Council in any one year." Section 3.05 -Department Heads Attorney Randolph explained previously the Board voted to approve as written, however the Clerk was to make sure there was an ordinance regarding Department Heads and everything else on that page was approved as written. Section 5.01 -Powers of Village Council Mr. Randolph explained subsection. (8) was changed from "the relief of the poor, and for" to "for the support of any charitable purpose designated by the Village Council." Section 6.01 -Power of Initiative Mr. Randolph noted the wording "as certified by the Supervisor of Election's Office" was added. Section 6.02 - Power of Referendum Mr. Randolph noted the wording "as certified by the Supervisor of Election's Office" was added. Board Member Genco asked if there was a difference between the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections and the State Supervisor of Elections and should the wording note "Palm Beach County." Vice-Chair Hinton stated the County provided the certification. Board Member Campbell stated the document from the Supervisor of Election's Office that was sent by the Village Clerk, which read, "... the voter's registration is a registered signature. It is compared to the signature on the petition. They say it is checked to verify ..." and asked if the wording should be verify or certify. Vice-Chair Hinton agreed that the wording should include "Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections." Village Clerk McWilliams arrived at 2:16 p.m. and took over for Ms. Laur. Section 6.03 -Form of Petitions Mr. Randolph pointed out the word "genuine" was deleted. Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 Board Member Campbell mentioned the Election's Office was asked how John Smith, Jr. would be distinguished from John Smith, Sr. particularly if they lived at the same address and they responded the signatures were compared to those on file and suggested the Village revise the form to include the birth date. She explained the birthdates were on the forms received by the Election's Office; however it was hard at times to locate the correct one. Discussion ensued on the downside to residents wanting to provide their date of birth. Board Member Hinton stated the signatures were being verified by the Elections Office and did not believe a birth date was needed. Section 6.04 -Filing, Examination and Certification of Petitions Board Member Campbell noted that the (s) following "persons" should be consistent throughout. Mr. Randolph noted that anytime the number of days was referenced "business" days would be inserted. 6.07 -Consideration by Village Council Mr. Randolph explained numbers would be placed in parenthesis for consistency. Board Member Campbell inquired on the word "certification" being used and Mr. Randolph explained he did not believe there was a difference between certification and verification. Village Clerk McWilliams agreed to check with the Supervisor of Elections Office for the correct wording. Section 7.02 -Public Meetings Mr. Randolph explained the wording, "and the rules of the Council shall provide that the citizens of the Village shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heard at such meetings in regard to any matter pertaining to the Village," and replaced with, "pursuant to the provisions of state law." Vice-Mayor Hinton asked if it the public's opportunity to speak was part of state law and Mr. Randolph concurred to which Ms. Hinton clarified she wanted to ensure the state statute provide for their ability to speak. 7.04 -Conflict of Interest Chair Capretta asked Clerk McWilliams about the motion for this item. Ms. McWilliams pointed out the Recording Secretary had a motion and vote listed and she thought it was a typo and should have been 7.04 rather than 7.03. Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 1. 2.01 - Selection, Term and Compensation - Determining Successful Candidate Mr. Randolph explained this item was brought up at the first meeting by Vice- Chair Hinton. He mentioned discussion ensued at that meeting regarding the candidates for each seat receiving the highest number of votes. Board Member Genco stated the original discussion was that the Board was going to go with who won the majority and the alternative was to look at 50% plus one. Vice-Chair Hinton felt it was becoming vogue to put a teaser candidate in the race; thereby winning the race with small percentages. However, when discussed all the way through, it was mentioned the Village run-offs traditionally had a small voter turnout and voiced she was good either way. Board Member Genco said she saw Vice-Chair Hinton's point, and agreed a dark horse could be thrown into the race to cause the vote to swing; this probably had happened and could happen again. She asked if the burden of running a run-off election, with a low turnout, was worth avoiding the complication. Chair Capretta felt the process should remain unchanged. Board Member Genco pointed out that if the wording was changed it would discourage throwing in the dark horse. Vice-Chair Hinton felt that when five candidates run head up and one received 50% plus one of the vote then they would be the official winner; but she could argue both sides of the issue. Board Member Genco noted that with the last election, Mr. Arena was a good candidate and came close, but the bottom line was he lost because Mr. Paterno received the most votes, not necessarily the majority; and everyone was upset that he did not win by the majority. She felt candidates would be more serious about why they were running and who they were running against if the wording was changed to dissuade the third candidate. Vice- Chair Hinton commented it was a major charter change. Mr. Randolph pointed out that if this was a controversial item and all the other items were non-controversial and the whole Charter was placed up for amendment, residents could vote the Charter down due to controversy. Board Member Genco said the Council would have to discuss this as well and if they received more public input that this was something that should not be done then they would not include it in the Charter. She suggested proposing Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 6 the change and letting the Council decide. Board Member Campbell commented on the costs of a run-off election and felt the highest number of votes had worked well. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of Section 2.01 as written; Board Member Genco seconded; motion carried 5-0. 2. 2.11 - Interference with Administrative Department (will be Section 2.12 once the Charter is renumbered) Board Member Genco heard from the Board at the last meeting that this section needed more clarification and based on her experience being on Council agreed. She brought examples with her where she asked had for specific information, such as the garbage removal and hurricane related costs and could not receive it because she had to deal with the front office. She noted every request had to go through the Manager. She stated an investigation was different from an inquiry and said an inquiry was a request for records that were readily available and did not see any purpose for having to go through the Manager's Office for routine public records. She questioned why a Council Member should be denied getting a public record because of the word inquiry. Chair Capretta clarified the question was how a Council Member received the information they wanted and he said they have to go directly through the Village Manager. Vice-Chair Hinton remarked this went to the heart of village government and concerned her. She understood Ms. Genco's issue; however stated that under a strong manager form of government it would open a Pandora's Box if Council started dealing directly with department heads. She felt if the Manager was not providing Council with information it was a manager issue not a governmental issue. Board Member Genco stated it was not dealt with because of the word "inquiry" and if he was on vacation or did not answer his phone she could not get the information. She indicated this was the reason she quit because she was a financial professional and when she requested financial information she wanted that information without alteration; and when she asked for it, it was altered because they decided she did not need that information or felt it was not important. Vice-Chair Hinton stated there were four people sitting at the table that had served as Tequesta elected officials. She said it sounded like this was not a problem with the procedure in the government but the person administering Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 7 the procedure. She strongly felt if the Manager was not providing the information a Council Member requested then someone needed to address that person and not the form of government. Board Member Genco stated the Finance Director understood what she wanted, but unfortunately, the Manager did not and therefore she never received the information she needed. She felt as a Council Member she had to make financial decisions and if someone decided to get information about her and it comes out publicly where she was on a witness stand testifying someone could say she requested and received this information and was happy with what she received. She said they could question her about not knowing the difference between this and that and she would be dead on the witness stand. Vice-Mayor Hinton advised she would be dead on the witness stand because of the person that provided her with the information and not with the form of government. Board Member Genco stated she could not argue in court and blame it on someone else. Board Member Campbell asked what the process was for filing a request and asked if there was a form to fill out. Clerk McWilliams stated it was not a requirement to fill out a form; however she fills one out to know exactly what was requested. Board Member Campbell asked Board Member Genco who she was mad at the Clerk or the Manager. Board Member Genco stated the Manager and noted she had a list of 30 things she requested over a two year period from the Manager and never received. She stated those were all reports that other departments had that she would use to judge if they really needed the budget or staff, if they were addressing issues properly. She stated just because the Manager believed she should not have the records did not mean she should not and she argued with Mr. Hawkins until she was blue in the face and he would not back her up. Vice-Mayor Hinton agreed if a Council Member requested information they should receive it; however this sounded like a person problem and not a government problem. Board Member Campbell told Board Member Genco she had the reputation of asking for more reports of more detailed things and had practically in some instances crippled the operation of Village Hall. Board Member Genco rebutted that she had not requested anything burdensome to the Clerks and none have ever told her the requests were unreasonable or difficult. Board Member Campbell agreed with Vice-Mayor Hinton that the Board could not change the Charter because of the person involved and must keep the mechanics of the government in place. Board Member Genco argued the Board was changing it to meet the person there but not the person with the Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 8 ultimate liability -which was Council. She pointed out an instance where Council directed the Manager to involve the Finance Director on negotiation issues and he did not. She referred to the recently approved CPI index of 4.4% given to employees and noted there was no backup provided and questioned how Council could vote on something without backup. Chair Capretta commented that Board Member Genco was unusual and needed three times more information than the average Council Member. He said if other Council Members had the same problems they would have changed Village Managers; but it was never an issue and it was not an issue with him. He stated he would not change the Charter to accommodate Ms. Genco's inability to get information from the Manager. He commented on the $200 that Board Member Genco declared the Council owed her and the discrepancy on being elected and sworn in late and stressed these were not Charter issues. Board Member Genco stated the $200 were for phone calls when she was out of the service area on Village business. Vice-Mayor Hinton stated as a resident it was disconcerting to her that the Manager would go out of town and not appoint a replacement. Board Member Genco stated he did not have an Assistant Manager. Vice-Mayor Hinton agreed but said it was usually given to the Clerk or someone and Chair Capretta stated the Manager always appointed someone. Board Member Genco asked if there was better language than inquiry or investigation and Mr. Randolph noted the model charter and Jupiter, Jupiter Island, the Town of Palm Beach and Manalapan all used the same language. Vice-Mayor Hinton felt a Council Member was allowed to ask for a financial statement from a department head as long as it was not an inquiry or investigation. Board Member Genco advised the Manager with Council's support had chosen to say that a Council Member could not make this request. She questioned why a resident could receive the information but not a Council Member and felt this was making a Council Member a lesser citizen. Board Member Campbell asked Board Member Genco what her standing order was for public record requests. Board Member Genco stated she had paid approximately $10.00 over the last eight months for record requests. Board Member Campbell communicated it was her understanding Ms. Genco received the same information that was distributed to the media to which Board Member Genco replied she did review the same information. She referred to a document the Manager did not copy to Council which she felt should have been copied and asked the Clerk to copy Council. She said she Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 9 did not burden anyone any more than anyone else and noted the Clerk maintains a copy of all her requests and the Manager was copied on all her requests. She questioned why the Manager was watching what she requested for public information. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved approval of Section 2.11 (2.12 when renumbered) as written; Board Member Von Frank seconded; motion carried 4-1 with Board Member Genco in dissent. Village Clerk McWilliams distributed information to the Board regarding the election where Board Member Genco felt she was not properly sworn in. Board Member Genco stated she was wrong and the information provided was correct. She said she was unable to get Clerk Manganiello to certify her. Board Member Campbell commented this was under the old administration. 3.02 -The Village Manager -Appointment, Removal. Qualifications, Vacancy Board Member Genco stated she had a copy of the Village Manager's contract that allowed the Manager to receive six months' severance and one additional month for every year served and 19% in pension benefits. She noted the majority vote of Council Members to appoint the manager was not the same as the number to remove him. However, if he decided that three Council Members did not support him, he could quit and still collect the severance pay, thereby literally firing himself. Vice-Mayor Hinton advised this was a contractual issue and had nothing to do with the Charter. Chair Capretta mentioned the contract was negotiated by Mayor Resnik and the contract was subsequently unanimously approved by Council. Board Member Genco stated they approved it without reading it because Council did not have a copy of the contract. Vice-Chair Hinton stated she wanted to see a supermajority of four and see it consistent with how many to hire. MOTION: Board Member Campbell moved to approve Section 3.02 as written; seconded by Board Member Hinton; motion carried 4-1 with Board Member Genco in dissent. Board Member Genco asserted the contract was written to tailor one person rather than the Charter. Vice-Chair Hinton stated the item addressed her concern that it take four to hire a manager and four to fire him. Board Member Campbell noted the contract could be different for the next Village Manager and did not belong in the Charter. Vice-Chair Hinton asked what the term of the contract was and Chair Capretta advised five years. Board Member Genco responded that Mr. Charter Review Board September 5, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 10 Randolph stated at the last meeting that a contract could not be for five or ten years and had to be reviewed annually as regulated per state statute. Mr. Randolph answered Council could not bind future Councils and that as long as there was a provision for severance Council .would not be bound by the contract. Vice-Chair Hinton asked if this contract would fall under that statute and Mr. Randolph advised it would not because there was a provision that allowed future Councils to terminate the contract. Chair Capretta pointed out that the Council did not previously have the supermajority requirement and Mr. Couzzo requested this be placed in the contract. V New Business Mr. Randolph asked how the Board would proceed from this point forward and Chair Capretta explained the Clerk or attorney would type the Charter up with the changes and bring back to the Board for one final meeting to review the final product. Board Member Campbell mentioned for the record the Board previously discussed the suggestion that the Village Manager and/or other employees be residents of the Village and that it was agreed that they were not required to be residents. The next meeting was scheduled for September 19, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. VI. Communications from Citizens None VII. Adjournment MOTION: Vice-Chair Hinton moved to adjourn the meeting at 3:12 p. m. and Board Member Genco seconded; the motion carried unanimously 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2007 I. Call To Order And Roll Call The Village of Tequesta Charter Review Board held its regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Village Hall, 345 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, September 19, 2007. The meeting was called to order at 2:00 P.M. by Chair Capretta. Village Clerk Lori McWilliams called the roll: Present were Chair Joseph Capretta, Vice Chair Mary Hinton, Dottie Campbell, Geraldine Genco, and Russell Von Frank. Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. II. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Vice Chair Hinton moved approval of the agenda. Board Member Von Frank seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. III. Approval of Minutes` MOTION: Board Member Hinton moved approval of the September 5, 2007 meeting minutes... Board Member Von Frank seconded the motion, Board Member Genco asked to withhold ..approval until 5.01 and 3.05 could be discussed; the motion and second were withdrawn and after discussion the motion was changed by Vice Chair Hinton. to approve the minutes as amended according to the audio of the September 5, 2007 meeting. Motion was seconded by Board Member Von Frank and carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. IV. Final Review of Redlined Charter Attorney Randolph reviewed the changes as shown on the redlined 3 version: The first change had been to make "Florida law" consistent throughout, so the only change from the last time on page 1 was the change to "Florida law" in 2.01. In 2.02 the word "hold" was inserted. The Board indicated they wanted to review all changes made, not just since the last time. Attorney Randolph reviewed the changes: Charter Review Board September 19, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 2 1.02 - added "policies and" 2.01- added "Florida law" and removed "each Village Council Member shall be entitled to an annual salary to be fixed by ordinance". 2.02 - Inserted the word "hold"; deleted from the document going to the voters the State law references; however, that would be added back in during codification. 2.05 - Vacancies - "forfeiture of office" had been a big change; additional wording was added to clarify #4: 3 consecutive .regular monthly meetings where the absences have not been approved by Village Council. Attorney Randolph clarified for Vice Chair Hinton that this would necessitate a referendum. Boazd Member Genco voiced issues with the wording in #4 not reading correctly and asked that the wording be changed to "within" three (3) consecutive months or six regulaz monthly meetings. Discussion ensued, following which Village Clerk McWilliams read the language for #4: "misses three consecutive regulazly scheduled monthly meetings, in three successive months, where such:. absences are not .approved by the Village Council, or" And #5: "Misses six regularly scheduled monthly meetings where such absences are in any one year period." The Village Clerk advised she would type the wording as discussed aril bring it to the boazd so they could see it in black and white. The language passed out by Village Clerk McWilliams, with the addi#ion of "Misses" as the first word in #5 was agreed upon. Legal Counsel Addition Section number was left blank under appointment of legal counsel and auditor to make sure it was put in the right place; Attorney Randolph felt it was in the right place and stated it would be re-numbered. It was new language which the Board had approved. Attorney Randolph stated he had been asked to.point out that at the 2001 Charter Review Commission meeting, ` the previous Charter had stated "the Village Council shall have to power to retain and appoint an Engineer, an Attorney, and additional officers as the business of the Village may require." Going to the highlighted section #2, the reason stated for that being deleted was "Village advisors such as the Engineer and Attorney '-aze retained by the Village as the business of the Village requires; they aze not staff employees of the Village and should not be given permanency in the Charter." The Board felt that should stay in; the Council should hire all attorneys that worked on behalf of the community. Discussion ensued regazding how faz this would go; Village Clerk McWilliams pointed out it was in Council Procedures #8, as discussed at the 8/17/07 meeting to be a recommendation for Council Procedures. Attorney Randolph asked whether the intent was that this was to apply just to the hiring of the legal counsel of the Village or to go further to mean any attorney hired for the Village. Attorney Randolph reported the language used by Jupiter. Legal fees were Charter Review Board September 19, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 3 discussed, it was noted those would be addressed under policies and procedures. Vice Chair Hinton stated her position was that legal fees were a large part of the Village expenses and she felt the Council should approve any attorney because they were ultimately responsible for the money. Board Member Genco stated she was comfortable with the language the Board had decided on. 2.08 -Florida Law should be changed to a small "1" -Florida law. 3.02 -Attorney Randolph pointed out the line on page S was not meant to be a line- it had occurred in the copying process. Page 6 had no lines; page 7 was clear. 5.01 - #8 "the relief of the poor, and for" was deleted. 6.01 -Attorney Randolph advised that Village Clerk McWilliams had talked to the Supervisor of Elections, who said the word "certified" should be used in the phrase "as certified by the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Election's office". 6.02 - the word "certified" should be used in the phrase "as certified by the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Election's office". 6.03 - The word "genuine" was removed. 6.05 - The word "business" was added in front of "days" in two places. 6.07 - 60 was placed in parenthesis to be consistent with the way it had been dealt with. in other .places. 6.08 - 60 was placed in parenthesis to be consistent with the way it had been dealt with in other places. 7.02 - Changed to read:-.All meetings of the Council shall be open to the public pursuant to the provisions of Florida law. Chair Capretta noted the big changes were the Council would hire the legal counsel and the auditors. Chair Capretta commented this was to be presented to the Village Council by him or Vice Chair Hinton at the October 11 meeting, giving them the proposed changes to the Charter recommended by the Board and telling them the Board had seen a lot of other issues that needed clarifying. Charter Review Board September 19, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 4 Village Clerk advised she was seazching for an ordinance on the establishment of each department and if not found, a recommendation would be made to Council to create and approve such an ordinance. V. Discussion on Items Recommended to be Placed into "Council Procedures". Board Member Hinton suggested for Item 6 (page 3 of 4) to add "and phone" expenses. Board Member Genco stated there was a resolution adopted for employees regarding reimbursement for mileage, etc. and she thought a resolution should be presented for Council approval for travel and per diem for Council members. Vice Chair Hinton asked to have telephone reimbursement'added to that resolution. Board Member Genco asked for a set of recommendations including the Charter amendments for presentation to Council, and that' for Item 6 Council adopt a resolution or amend the existing resolution for Council. Chair Capretta felt a procedure or resolution could be done and left up to the Council. Boazd Member Hinton felt this discussion told Council the boazd recommended this. Boazd Member Genco expressed her opinion that the format of the.... presentation should be to have Chair Capretta make recommendations to the Council for charter amendments; Board Member Hinton indicated she felt these changes were procedures and not charter amendments. Attorney Randolph recommended the Chair of this committee should write a letter to the Village Council, signed by all members of the Charter Review Board, containing the proposed changes,... and also list other items that were discussed and recommended, ;and the Village Council would decide if it should be a resolution. MOTION: Board Member Genco moved approval of the Village Attorney's recommendation. Board Member Hinton seconded the motion. Attorney Randolph indicated he needed to review the list to be sure everything was included. Other items the Board had discussed were mentioned, such as looking at the code to be sure it was consistent, looking at Council salaries, and that Council might want to clarify ,what inquiries or investigations were. Attorney Randolph commented he had been looking at the list of the four items while this discussion was taking place, and saw nothing additional that needed to be included. Motion carried 5-0. VI. Communication From Citizens There were no communications from citizens. Charter Review Board September 19, 2007 Meeting Minutes Page 5 VII. Adjournment Upon motion by Board member Genco; seconded by Board member Von Frank, and unanimously carried 5-0, the meeting was adjourned at 3:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori McWilliams Village Clerk