Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Call to Order]

[00:00:06]

>> CITY CLERK, IF WE COULD CALL THE ROLE PLEASE. IT IS DECEMBER 3 OF 2019 AT 4:00 P.M. MADAME CLERK, IF WE COULD CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

MICROPHONE ]. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF WE COULD ALL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

[Items 4 & 5]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND WHY WE'RE HERE, THE CHARTER VIEW PROCESS AND THE EXPECTATIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. SO, CHAIRMAN, IF YOU WOULD START US OFF?

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE MET A COUPLE OF TIMES AND HAD SEVERAL KOFTIONS. -- CONVERSATIONS. I WANT TO FILL YOU IN ON WHERE WE HAVE BEEN, WHERE WE'RE GOING, AND HEAR FROM YOU. SO, AS OF THIS POINT, WE DID HAVE A MEETING WITH MS. TIPTON, FROM FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES WHO GAVE US SORT OF THE LAY OF THE LAND IN TERMS OF WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING, TRENDS THAT ARE OUT THERE AS FAR AS CHARTERS AND MUNICIPALITIES. WE HELD A DISCUSSION WITH THE MEMBERS OF THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS FROM 2007. MS. TAM IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE. WE WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE FOUR? THREE PEOPLE WHO ARE THE REMAINING THREE FROM THAT COMMITTEE COME AND SHARE WITH US BOTH THEIR SUCCESSES, THEIR FRUSTRATIONS, WHAT THEY DID, WHERE THEY WERE ABLE TO SUCCEED AND MOVE FORWARD. SO, WE LEARNED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT FROM THAT SESSION. IN RESPONSE TO ONE OF THEIR FEEDBACK ITEMS, WHICH WAS THEY HAD HOPED FOR MORE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT, MORE PUBLIC INPUT TO THE PROCESS AND TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE COMMUNITY IS COMING FROM, BECAUSE THIS REALLY GOVERNS THE COMMUNITY, THE CHARTER DOES. WE FORMED A COMMUNICATION SUBCOMMITTEE. AND THAT WAS MR. CLARK, MR. -- AND THEY CAME UP WITH SOME PRETTY BIZARRE IDEAS, AND THAT INCLUDED THE VIDEO WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE LATER, AFTER I LEAVE.

BUT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT SCHEDULING PERHAPS SOME ADDITIONAL EVENING MEETINGS TO BE ABLE TO GET MORE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SET UP AN E-MAIL FOR US ALL SO THAT WE CAN ALL GET STRAIGHTFOWARDED FROM HER, INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. THAT INFORMATION IS ALL ON THE WEBSITE. THERE WAS A PRESS RELEASE GIVEN SO THE PRESS RELEASE AND THE VIDEO ARE ON THE WEBSITE NOW. AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT GOD AWFUL VIDEO, THEN WE MIGHT DO THAT FOR YOU. IF YOU PAY ME...

ALSO, SO FAR WE HAVE REVIEWED SECTIONS ONE THROUGH EIGHT OF THE CHARTER. I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY MUCH OF WHAT IS THERE WILL REMAIN. IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, IT WILL BE MORE ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. BUT WE DO RESERVE THE RIGHT AS WE GO THROUGH THE REST OF THE CHARTER, AND IF WE RECOMMEND SOMETHING LATER CHANGES THAT WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT SECTIONS ONE THROUGH EIGHT AGAIN. THE PLACE THAT -- THE OBJECTIVE THAT THE GROUP HAS IS THAT WE BE COMPLETED WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS BY JUNE OF 2020. WE ALL BELIEVE THAT TO BE A FAIRLY AMBITIOUS GOAL, I THINK. TO THE EFFECT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BREAK DOWN THE WAY WE LOOK AT THE CHARTER IN THE FOUR MAJOR AREAS. ONE AREA IS ELECTION ISSUES. SO, MANY OF US HAVE GOTTEN FEEDBACK FROM FOLKS THAT WE TALK TO IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY BELIEVE TO EXIST WITHIN THE ELECTION IN TERMS OF RUN OFFS, IN TERMS OF SEATS AND HOW MEANINGFUL THEY ARE OR AREN'T IN THE FUTURE. SO, THERE'S A WHOLE

[00:05:06]

CLUMP -- I LIKE TO USE THE TECHNICAL TERMS. THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION OF THINGS THAT DEAL WITH THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES AND THEY ARE KIND OF RELATED TO EACH OTHER. ONE IS TO MAKE ONE CHANGE IS NOT NECESSARILY MEANINGFUL UNLESS YOU MAKE ANOTHER ONE. SO, WE'RE BREAKING THAT ONE DOWN. THE OTHER ONE IS GOALS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AND THAT'S REALLY TO DELINEATE BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND THE CHARTER OFFICERS AND AMONG THE CHARTER OFFICERS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON WHOSE JOB IS WHAT AND HOW THAT SHOULD OPERATE. WE HAVE SOME SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS LISTED IN THE CHARTER, AND WE WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE TO SEE WHETHER THAT'S STILL VALID, SHOULD IN OF THAT CHANGE, SHOULD THERE BE OTHERS? SHOULD THERE BE NONE? SO IT'S SORT OF IN THAT CATEGORY. AND THEN WE HAVE A MORE GENERAL CATEGORY THAT'S MADE UP OF THINGS LIKE THE PREAMBLE AND SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE NOT IN THE CHARTER RIGHT NOW THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FEEDBACK MAYBE SHOULD BE. AND EXAMPLES OF THOSE WOULD BE A CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CHARTER OFFICERS. AND ALSO A POSSIBILITY OF CITIZENS BILL OF RIGHTS. THESE WERE IDEAS THAT WERE EXPRESSED BY THE PRIOR REVIEW COMMITTEE. THOSE IDEAS DID NOT MAKE IT PAST THE COMMISSION IN ORDER TO GO TO REFERENDUM, WHICH IS ANOTHER THING THAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT. TODAY WE WANT TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE CHARTER OFFICERS AND FROM ALL OF YOU IN TERMS OF WHAT YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE IN THIS GROUP, IF YOU HAVE IN. IN TERMS, NOT NECESSARILY SPECIFICS, BUT WHERE YOU WANT US TO GO, HOW FAR DO YOU WANT US TO GO OR NOT GO? WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY RESTRICTIONS IN MIND. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS COMMISSION WILL ALLOW ANY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE DO MAKE TO GO TO REFERENDUM. OR AT LEAST HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. IN THE PAST, BECAUSE THE CHARTER DEMANDS THAT TODAY. THE CHARTER DEMANDS THAT YOU APPROVE THE REFERENDUM. SO, WHAT WE MIGHT BE DOING IS COMING BACK AND RECOMMENDING THAT THAT'S NO LONGER A REQUIREMENT. I PERSONALLY FIND IT -- I THINK THAT THE COMMITTEE THAT DID THIS BEFORE FOUND IT FRUSTRATING THAT THEY HAD DONE AS MUCH WORK AS THEY DID AND THE COMMISSION SAID NO, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO REFERENDUM. OUR SENSE IS THAT THE CHARTER IS TRULY A DOCUMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND HOW AND EXPRESS THEIR DESIRES ON HOW THEIR GOVERNMENT SHOULD OPERATE. SO, OUR FEELING IS THAT ONE CONDITION AT A SNAPSHOT POINT IN TIME SHOULD NOT NECESSARILY DETERMINE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT LOOKS LIKE FOR THE REST OF INFINITY AND BEYOND. OKAY? SO WE'RE HOPING TO MAKE THIS AS TRANSPARENT AS WE WEIBULL C -- WE POSSIBLY CAN. HOPEFULLY WE WILL REMAIN ENGAGED AND INVOLVED IN WHAT WE'RE DOING. OUR MEETINGS ARE

THE -- WHAT IS IT? THIRD -- >> FOURTH TUESDAY OF EVERY

MONTH. >> FOURTH TUESDAY OF EVERY MONTH AT 3:00 HERE. IT WILL NOT BE HAPPENING ON CHRISTMAS EVE. SO, WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING SCHEDULED IN JANUARY TO MAKE UP FOR THE CHRISTMAS EVE MEETING, AND THE DATE FOR THAT ONE -- SOMEBODY HELP ME? JANUARY 13TH AT 3:00 HERE IN THE CHAMBERS. AGAIN, WE WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD SCHEDULE SOME ADDITIONAL MEETINGS FOR THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR PUBLIC INPUT. BUT WE'RE ALSO PUTTING EVERYTHING OUT THERE FOR FOLKS TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING ON THE WEBSITE AND OUR E-MAILS ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU. SO,ER THAT'S -- THAT WAS THE CRUX OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN, WHERE WE'RE HOPING TO GO, AND WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE FEEDBACK FROM ALL OF YOU ON WHETHER THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU. WHETHER WE COULD BE DOING SOMETHING IN PARTICULAR

DIFFERENTLY OR INSTEAD OF. >> FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT INADVERTENTLY I WAS AT YOUR LAST MEETING. AND I WANT TO EMPH EMPHASIZE, I BELIEVE, WHAT WAS YOUR CALL TO THE COMMITTEE'S DESIRE THAT THOSE MEETINGS BE TELEVISED. I WOULDN'T THINK THAT THE COST WOULD BE EXCESSIVE AT ALL TO TELEVISE THE MEETINGS. I GUESS THAT'S UP TO US. SO, DO WE

[00:10:03]

WANT TO DO THAT? HOW MUCH DOES THAT COST?

>> I'M NOT SURE. CAROLYN MIGHT KNOW WHAT THE PER MEETING

IS -- >> PER MEETING, IT'S $125 FOR A STATIC MEETING AND 150 MOVE TO THE SPEAKERS. ALSO, IF THERE IS CLOSED CAPTIONING, IT'S $1.75 PER MINUTE AND IF WE CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE THEM CLOSE CAPTIONED, IT WILL BE -- POST PRODUCTION WITHIN THREE TO FIVE BUSINESS DAYS TO INCLUDE CLOSED CAPTIONING.

>> I JUST RECOMMEND AND LOOK FOR CONSENSUS THAT WE TELEVISE THE MEETINGS. AND THE CLOSED CAPTION -- THAT IT BE RECORDED, THE LESSER COST FOR THE CLOSED CAPTION.

>> THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF DELAY IN GETTING THE

CAPTIONING DONE. >> THAT'S FINE. I MEAN THE POINT IS TO GET IT OUT. SO, THAT'S DONE?

>> OKAY. >> WE'RE ALL GOOD?

>> I HEAR CONSENSUS. >> CLARIFICATION ON THE LAW. WHEN YOU SAID -- WHEN YOU LOOKED TO ME WHEN YOU SAID SO STATE LAW REQUIRES CHARTER -- THERE'S ONLY A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS TO THIS. THE BOUNDARIES AND SO FORTH.

BUT YOU'RE AMENDING THE CHARTER PROVISION? THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY IS THE ONE WHO SENDS THOSE BALLOT QUESTIONS TO THE VOTERS. SO, THE LAST COMMISSION THAT DEALT WITH CHARTER AMENDMENTS, THEY JUST TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO ACCEPT OR NOT ACCEPT SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. SO THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THE COMMISSION SEND THOSE.

>> YOU SAID THERE WERE FOUR ISSUES?

>> YES. >> YOU SAID THE FIRST WAS ELECTION ISSUES? THE SECOND WAS RISKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES? AND

THE THIRD WAS OTHER ISSUES? >> THE SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS

THAT ARE LISTED. >> WHAT IS THE FOURTH?

>> THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS LISTED.

>> I THINK --

>> YOU SAID THERE ARE FOUR ISSUES. THEN YOU ONLY LISTED

THREE. >> ELECTION ISSUES, ROLES AND

RESPONSIBILITIES -- >> THE PREAMBLE.

>> SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS LISTED IN THE CHARTER.

>> PREAMBLE, CODE OF ETHICS, AND CITIZENS BILL OF RIGHTS. THAT'S ONE GENERAL CATEGORY. SO, ON THE CODE OF ETHICS ISSUE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LAST TIME THE CITY COMMISSION. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO FILE A COMPLAINT, WHAT HAPPENS WITH IT LOCALLY? SO IF WE WERE TO RECOMMEND A CHANGE TO THAT, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO ALSO RECOMMEND WHAT THAT PROCESS

WOULD LOOK LIKE. >> YOU KNOW, I DON'T -- I WOULD SUPPORT BASICALLY WHAT THE CHARTER COMMITTEE COMES UP WITH, THE RECOMMENDATION. BUT I WOULD BE CAREFUL TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA GO TO THE BALLOT, A GENERAL ELECTION. AND I WOULD BE CAREFUL, IF I WERE YOU, TO MAKE SURE WHAT ARE THE IMPORTANT THINGS AND TO DEAL WITH THOSE. AND I THINK YOU OUTLINED THEM, YOU KNOW? ONE THING I HEARD AT THAT LAST MEETING WAS, YOU KNOW, THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. AND I WOULD, YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD BE MY FIFTH YEAR AS A COMMISSIONER AND SIX YEARS ON THE PAB, AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY REALLY ARE. IF THAT IS YOUR GOAL AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AN OUTREACH, I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE CITIZEN SURVEY, WHICH WAS STATISTICALLY 1,000 PEOPLE, AND THAT ACTUALLY KIND OF IS THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. YOU KNOW? WHICH 91% SAID THIS IS THE GREATEST PLACE IN THE WORLD, BUT THEN A BUNCH DIDN'T LIKE US. BUT I THINK -- MY POINT IS TO LOOK AT THAT CLOSE. IF YOU'RE GONNA -- IF YOU'RE GONNA DO WHAT THE CITIZENS ARE, TAKE THE EFFORT TO REALLY GO OUT. DON'T JUST LISTEN TO ONE OR TWO PEOPLE. THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ON THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT, AND I THINK MR. CLARK, YOU MADE A CASE ABOUT THE CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT, THAT IT SHOULD REMAIN. AND YET THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ELECTED MAYORS. SO, THERE'S THIS KIND OF -- A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM IS DIFFERENT. AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH IT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT. IF YOU WANT A CITY MANAGER AND THEN A STRONG

[00:15:01]

MAYOR, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THAT CHARTER? JUST DEFINE THAT

MORE. THAT'S ALL. >> I DO WANT TO THROW OUT THERE, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT ALSO CAME UP DURING THAT DISCUSSION, A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT REQUIRES A PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, BECAUSE THE STRONG MAYOR OBVIOUSLY IS USUALLY A POLITICAL FIGURE AND DOESN'T ALWAYS HAVE EXPERIENCE.

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT OUR SYSTEM IS -- THAT THE CITY MANAGER SYSTEM IS A GOOD SYSTEM FOR US. I JUST EXPERIENCED A BUNCH OF STUFF IN JACKSONVILLE WITH THE STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM, AND I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO BE THERE.

>> I DON'T THINK THE DISCUSSION IS WHETHER WE WOULD CHANGE FROM TOWN MANAGER TO A STRONG MANAGER. IS IT APPOINTED BY YOU ALL AS A STRAWMAN POLL OR DO THE VOTERS ACTUALLY SELECT IT?

>> MORE SPECIFIC DUTIES FOR THE MAYOR?

>> YEAH. AND I THINK ALONG THE LINES, LIKE THE 2007, A LITTLE MORE THAN CEREMONY, NOT PURELY STRONG MAYOR, BUT MAYBE A VOICE OF STRATEGIC VISION OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. I THINK -- AND SO I THINK THAT POSSIBLE CONCEPT AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ELECTED OR THOSE OTHER WAYS, I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS TALKED YET. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE ELECTION SIDE. I THINK WE REALLY SAID WE WANT TO KEEP THE SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT, JUST MAYBE SOME

TWEAKS. >> WHEN I SAT THROUGH THE MEETING AND BASICALLY, I WOULD SUPPORT WHAT THE CHARTER COMMISSION COMES UP WITH. BUT AGAIN, WARNING: DON'T MAKE IT TOO HARD FOR THE PEOPLE THAT THEY WILL REJECT EVERYTHING.

>> I THINK THE BIGGER POINT WE WERE TRYING TO MAKE WITH THAT WAS LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE IF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN OR NOT. RATHER THAN ANY GROUP OF US.

>> UH-HUH. >> WHY WERE THE SUGGESTIONS REJECTED BY THE LAST COMMISSION? DID THEY ARTICULATE WHY THEY DECIDED NOT TO ADD IT TO THE REFERENDUM?

>> NOT IN EVERY CASE DID THEY -- I'M GOING TO TURN TO MS. TAM WHO WAS PART OF THAT COMMITTEE. WAS THERE ANY RATIONALE PROVIDED?

>> IN SOME CASES, THEY JUST FELT IT WAS UNNECESSARY. THERE WAS NO REASON TO HAVE TO HAVE A WAS PROVIDED BY THE STATE. I THINK THEIR MOTIVATION WAS MOVING, DOING AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THE CHARTER. KIND OF GOING TO WHAT AS IF THERE WAS TOO MUCH SHAKING, EVERYTHING WOULD BE

REJECTED. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> SO THERE WERE THINGS RECOMMENDED LIKE A CHANGE IN TERM THAT WAS ACTUALLY ACCEPTED BY A LATER COMMISSION AND VOTED TO YES BY THE PEOPLE. AND THAT'S BEEN IMPLEMENTED. SO, THERE WERE OTHER THINGS THAT WERE KIND OF LINKED TOGETHER, ONE OF WHICH WAS THE SEAT STRUCTURE, GROUP STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE TODAY, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE IN THE COUNTY, THE GROUP NEEDS SOMETHING. IN THE CITY, THE GROUP REALLY DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING. AND THE QUESTION BECOMES IF WE ELIMINATED THE GROUP AND IT IS STILL JUST A POINT OF DISCUSSION. BUT IF WE ELIMINATED THOSE GROUPS, WHAT WOULD THE IMPLICATIONS BE? AND DOES THAT AFFECT RUN-OFFS? YES. PROBABLY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE YOU PULL A PIECE OF STRING AND THE WHOLE THING -- SO WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT'S CONNECTED TO WHAT BEFORE WE DO THAT. BUT I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS LAST TIME WAS TO DO AWAY WITH THE GROUPS. AND THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION

WAS INTERESTED IN PURSUING. >> NOT TO GET TOO INVOLVED IN THIS CONVERSATION, BUT I THINK ONE OF OUR GOALS FOR THE REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO INCREASE VOTER PARTICIPATION AND TO LET PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT NECESSARILY WELL-CONNECTED OR HAVEN'T LIVED HERE 100 YEARS FEEL THAT THEY HAVE JUST AS MUCH OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED AND TO MAKE THE ELECTIONS MORE EXCITING. TO MAKE THEM MORE OPEN, MORE ACCESSIBLE TO MORE PEOPLE.

[00:20:01]

>> RIGHT. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS, TOO, THAT WE CHANGED THE ELECTION FROM MAY, WHICH IT HAD BEEN FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO A MAY ELECTION TO COINCIDE WITH NOVEMBER ELECTIONS OF STATE AND FEDERAL. TO TRY TO GET MORE PEOPLE TURNED OUT. IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS AT THAT TIME, I REMEMBER THIS QUITE VIVIDLY SAID, WELL WE GET A SMALLER TURNOUT IN MAY, BUT IT'S A HIGHER QUALITY.

>> I HAVE HEARD THAT, TOO. >> I'M THINKING HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? SO, IT WAS AN INTERESTING COMMENT TO BE MADE BY A

COMMENTER. >> I REMEMBER THE ARGUMENT WAS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING OUT IN MAY ARE ACTUALLY INFORMED ENOUGH AND INTERESTED ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY GO AND THEY'RE NOT JUST THERE CHECKING A BOX BECAUSE IT'S ON THE LIST.

>> DOES THAT SAY THAT OUR STATE AND FEDERAL ELECTIONS ARE NOT --

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION, TOO. EXACTLY.

>> THOSE ARE GOOD QUESTIONS. >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THE MAYOR IS TOSSING THIS PIECE OF FRUIT BACK AND FORTH, BUT THESE WERE NOT HANDED OUT TO THROW AT ANYBODY. THAT WASN'T THE

PURPOSE. >> NICE CAVEAT THERE.

>> I DID HAVE A SERIOUS QUESTION. I'M SORT OF CURIOUS IF YOU SET ASIDE THE DETAIL OF THE DOCUMENT, THAT YOU RALL ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GOVERNMENT, WORKING IT DAILY, MUCH MORE THAN I DO, FOR SURE. I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU THINK, JUST FOCUSING ON THE ORGANIZATIONAL ASPECTS OF YOUR CITY GOVERNMENT HERE, IS IT PERFECT THE WAY IT'S SET UP RIGHT NOW? OR ARE THERE AREAS THAT YOU KIND OF STRUGGLE WITH FROM TIME TO TIME? JUST GENERALLY, WITHOUT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE SPECIFIC WORDS OF IT. ACTUALLY, THAT'S -- FOR ME, THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION THAT I HAVE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM ALL OF YOU ON THAT ..

>> I'M STRUGGLING WITH IT IN TERMS OF RESPONSBILITIES, YOU KNOW, DIRECTION OF THE CITY. AND YOU HAVE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BEING MORE SPECIFIC OF, YOU KNOW, WHOSE JOB IS WHAT. IT IS OUR JOB BY CHARTER TO SET POLICY AND IT'S THE CITY MANAGER'S JOB TO RUN THE CITY. AND THEY TEND TO BE OVERLAPPING QUITE A BIT LATELY, AND I THINK THAT CREATES PROBLEMS. I DON'T THINK, I KNOW IT CREATES PROBLEMS.

>> SO YOU'RE SAYING THERE SHOULD BE MORE CLARITY?

>> YEAH. AND THEN YOU GET THE ISSUE OF -- THAT'S WHERE THE ETHICAL ISSUE THEORETICALLY COMES IN. NOT THEORETICALLY, BUT WHAT ARE YOUR OPTIONS AT THAT POINT? AND YOU KNOW, IN ALL THE TIME, THAT TEN YEARS WORKING WITH THE CITY, AND I REALLY NEVER HAD AN ISSUE UNTIL RECENTLY WITH THE CHARTER. THE CHARTER IS THERE AND IT'S FINE. IT MAY BE CUMBERSOME, BUT THERE WERE NO REAL ISSUES. BUT NOW YOU'RE GETTING THIS OVERFLOWING OF RESPONSIBILITIES, AND I THINK THAT IS THE PROBLEM. SO, WHETHER YOU DEFINE RESPONSIBILITY BETTER -- AND THEN WHAT ARE YOUR OPTIONS? THAT'S NOT GONNA BE AN ETHICAL STATE PROBLEM IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOUR ETHICAL -- WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE IN THAT TERM. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EVEN ETHICAL IS THE RIGHT WORD. BUT, SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE ISSUE I HAVE WITH THE CHARTER. ONE ISSUE I WANT TO BRING UP BEFORE I FORGET IT IS I HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME TO ME TALKING ABOUT ELECTION BY DISTRICT. YOU KNOW? THAT SOME GROUPS OF PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY SHUT OUT OF THE SYSTEM. AND I HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS BOTH WAY ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE. YOU KNOW? BUT IT'S INTERESTING. YOU KNOW? I THINK

YOU HAVE LOOKED AT THAT. >> UH-HUH.

>> SO LOOK SOME MORE. ALL RIGHT? BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH THE CHARTER. I DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS WITH -- I THINK TAMMY MENTIONED IF YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT IN THERE, THERE'S A GOOD REASON TO KEEP IT IN THERE. AND YOU ARTICULATED THAT. IT WASN'T LONG AGO THAT THE MAYOR ACTUALLY HAD RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE POLICE

DEPARTMENT BY THE CHARTER. >> WE FIXED THAT.

>> YEAH. THAT WAS SCARY. >> THAT WAS DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY. DURING MATTHEW, WE HAD TO SIGN IT OVER AND I GOT A PHONE CALL FROM BOTH CHIEFS SAYING THEY WERE LEAVING TOWN AND THEN THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE JUST KIDDING.

>> SO THAT FITS INTO RESPONSIBILITIES AND WHERE

THEY'RE AT. >> RIGHT.

>> AND YOU ARE LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

>> UH-HUH. >> YEAH.

>> I THINK, FOR ME, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT IS THE GROUP ELECTION THING. I HAVE HAD MORE PEOPLE COME UP AND SAY CAN I ONLY VOTE FOR THAT GROUP? OR WHERE IS MY GROUP LINE? PEOPLE REALLY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S AN OPEN

[00:25:04]

ELECTION. WE JUST GROUP THOSE. AND SO, I THINK, TOO, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE IDEA OF THE RUN-OFFS, BECAUSE I THINK IT PROLONGS THE PROCESS, IT CERTAINLY ADDS AN EXPENSE TO THE PROCESS. AND I THINK HISTORY HAS PROVEN THAT THEY'RE NOT BANGING DOWN THE DOORS IN A RUN-OFF ELECTION. YOU DON'T HAVE LONG LINES. I THINK THAT ESTABLISHING CLEAR LINES OF RESPONSIBILITY BETWEEN COMMISSIONERS AND CITY MANAGERS, THE OTHER CHARTER OFFICES IS ALSO IMPORTANT. SO, THAT WITH THAT, A MECHANISM TO DEAL WITH, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF EXPLAINING IT, OVERSTEPPING BOUNDS. SO, THAT I THINK SOMETIMES THINGS HAPPEN AND IT'S LIKE, WELL, WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT? AND SADLY, THE ANSWER REALLY COMES DOWN TO NOT M

MUCH. >>

>> DO I THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE DOCUMENT? NO. I THINK IT'S A WONDERFULLY FUNCTIONAL DOCUMENT. I THINK THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THERE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSIONERS THAT TALK ABOUT THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES AS SOMEONE WHO HAS DEALT WITH THESE FIVE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL AS COMMISSIONERS BEFORE. YEAH, THAT'S A GRAY LINE, BUT YOU WILL GET THAT IN A SMALL TOWN. WE ALL KNOW EACH OTHER. THEY KNOW CITY AND STAFF. THERE'S A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS -- HOWEVER WITH THE EXPRESS PERMISSION, THE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS MAY COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH AN EMPLOYEE. AND I THINK THAT IS BEING ADHERED TO. I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY DIRECTION BEING PROVIDED THAT OVERSTEPS THE BOUNDARY. I THINK THIS COMMISSION IS MORE ACTIVE IN THEIR ENGAGEMENT WITH CITY STAFF. BUT I WOULD CONTEND THAT I DO NOT THINK THERE IS ANY INTERFERENCE. WITH REGARD TO THE CODE OF ETHICS, MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THE LOCAL CODE OF ETHICS AND A LOCAL CODE OF ETHICS BOARD IS GIVEN THE HYPERSENSITIVITY AND POLARIZATION, I WOULD CAUTION WATCH WHAT YOU ASK FOR BECAUSE YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT. LITTLE DECISIONS MIGHT BE -- BECOME CONTENTIOUS ON A LOCAL POLITICAL BASIS, AND SUDDENLY THAT CONSUMES THE TIME AND DIRECTION OF A LOCAL BOARD OF ETHICS. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE -- YOU CAN JUST I DON'T LIKE THE WAY YOU TIE YOUR SHOES OR I THINK YOU VIOLATED THIS AND ALL OF THE SUDDEN YOU HAVE A FULL BLOWN BOARD OF ETHICS, AND IT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR DISTRACTING FROM CITY COMMISSION BUSINESS, WHERE I THINK -- AGAIN, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY ETHICAL ISSUES THAT HAVE ARISEN FROM CITY COMMISSIONERS IN THE FOUR YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, SO I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A HIGH STANDARD THAT YOU KNOW WHAT? IF YOU'RE GOING TO ACCUSE SOMEBODY OF A CODE OF ETHICS VIOLATION, THERE NEEDS TO BE A HIGHER AUTHORITY OTHER THAN THOSE FOUR OR FIVE SITTING IN JUDGMENT, BECAUSE IT CAN BE ABUSED. I THINK IN THIS POLITICAL CLIMATE THAT WE HAVE TODAY, LOCALLY, STATE, FEDERALLY, THAT YOU RUN THE RISK THAT A SLIGHTEST TRANSGRESSION IS SUDDENLY GOING TO GIVE RISE TO THE CODE OF ETHICS AND I WILL BE LOOKING AT YOU FOR THE SLIGHTEST MISSTEP AND IT WILL BE REVENGE MOTIVATION. I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN A HISTORY OF CODE OF ETHICS IN MY SHORT TENURE HERE. SO, THERE'S A PART OF ME THAT SAYS DON'T GO LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM. I THINK IF THE STATE HAS THINGS THAT ARE SET UP, WE'LL KNOW WHEN THERE'S AN ETHICS VIOLATION. AND I THINK IT CAN BE HANDLED APPROPRIATELY. SO, I JUST URGE YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

>> DID ANY OF THE CITIES YOU WORKED FOR PREVIOUSLY HAVE A CODE OF ETHICS IN THEIR CHARTERS?

[00:30:02]

>> UM, I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK. BELIEVE ME, I HAD CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS IN SOME OF THE CITIES I WORKED IN BEFORE. HOW DO YOU HANDLE THE MAYOR'S ABILITY TO VOTE? IS THAT -- SHOULD THAT BE HANDLED LOCALLY? WHO YOU HAVE SITTING IN JUDGMENT OF THAT IS BEERS? TYPICALLY THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD, DO THE MAYOR FILE AN ETHICAL VIOLATION AGAINST SOMEONE ELSE? AND IT BECOMES A POLITICAL CIRCUS. TO FILE A VIOLATION IN THE STATE, AND THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW FILED SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE THAT HAVE BEEN RESOLVED. BUT IT'S THAT EXTRA STEP. THAT EXTRA SHORT THAT'S REQUIRED. YOU HAVE GOT TO TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY INSTEAD OF ROLLING OUT I THINK THAT'S A CODE VIOLATION OR AN ETHICAL

VIOLATION. >>

>> NOT TO MAKE A LIGHT-HEARTED COMMENT ON IT, IT WOULD TAKE US UNTIL JUNE 2022 TO COME UP WITH. WE WOULD BASICALLY BE REINVENTING THE WHEEL TO DO THAT. I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE IT DONE IN TIME, TO BE HONEST. THERE WOULD BE SO MUCH DEBATE ABOUT IT, THAT IT WOULD TAKE ANOTHER CHARTER REVIEW

COMMITTEE TO DO THAT. >> WELL, I DON'T THINK -- I'M NOT -- FIRST OF ALL, YOU CAN'T OVERRIDE IT. THE STATE IS GOING TO BE THERE ANY WAY. IT WOULD BE A DIFFICULT TASK TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ENFORCE THAT. I THINK YOU CAN HAVE STANDARDS THAT YOU CAN INCORPORATE IN THERE. BUT WHAT DO YOU DO? I DON'T LIKE JOHNNY? WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS? WHAT CAN WE DO? WHAT DO WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO? YOU HAVE TO CREATE IT.

>> RIGHT. >> I WOULD RATHER LOOK AT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND, YOU KNOW, JUST SET A STANDARD.

>> RIGHT. AND I AM ONE TO JUST STATE MY OPINION. WE HAVEN'T HAD THIS CONVERSATION AS A COMMITTEE. BUT I THINK THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE TERMINOLOGY IS NOT FITTING WHAT WE MIGHT BE TALKING ABOUT. IN FLORIDA, WE HAVE THE SUNSHINE LAW, AND WE KNOW THAT IN THE PAST, PEOPLE HAVE VIOLATED SUNSHINE. RIGHT AND LEFT, THEY HAVE VIOLATED SUNSHINE. AND TODAY I'M NOT SURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY KNOWS WHAT RESOURCE -- MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY KNOW WHAT RECOURSE THEY HAVE IF ELECTED OFFICIALS OR ANYONE ELSE IN THEIR GOVERNMENT HAS VIOLATED SUNSHINE. SO, MAYBE WHAT WE NEED TO RECOMMEND, NOT AS PART OF THE CHARTER IS SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THEN THE OTHER THING IS IN ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITY IDENTIFICATION, WE NEED SOME WAY OF SAYING IF THESE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ARE NOT ADHERED TO, WHAT HAPPENS? WE HAVE HAD CITY COMMISSIONS ADOPT -- IT WASN'T A CODE OF CIVILITY, BUT IT WAS -- WAS IT?

>> NO. >> IT WAS SOME SORT OF PROMISE TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY TO YOU THAT THERE WOULD BE CIVILITY IN THESE DISCUSSIONS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE

[00:35:07]

FERNANDINA GO A STEP BEYOND WHAT THE REST OF THE COUNTRY IS DOING AND SAY WE CAN HAVE THESE DISAGREEMENTS BUT HAVE THEM IN A WAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO SCREAM AND YELL AT EVERYBODY AND CALL OUR CHILDREN NAMES. OKAY? SO I THINK ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE AT PLAY, AND SOME OF THEM MIGHT BE PART OF THE CHARTER AND SOME OF THEM MAY NOT BE PART OF THE CHARTER. BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH OUR HAVING TIME TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THOSE THINGS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. THEY ARE GOOD AND VALID AND THERE ARE TRULY SOME PITFALLS OF DOING A CODE OF ETHICS FOR ALL OF THOSE REASONS. JUST TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE A LITTLE BIT AND STEP BACK A SECOND. BECAUSE THE REAL ISSUE IS HOW DO YOU PROJECT A CITY GOVERNMENT THAT HAS THE CONFIDENCE OF THE COMMUNITY. WHEN YOU SAY CODE OF ETHICS, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS CONVEY TO THE PUBLIC THAT NOBODY IS TAKING MONEY UNDER THE TABLE OR DOING SOMETHING UNETHICAL. IF THE PUBLIC THINKS THAT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO, IT WILL BE HARD TO GET IT P PASSED. THERE MIGHT BE A WAY TO ARTICULATE THE GUIDING PRINCIPLE. MAYBE IT'S ENOUGH TO SIMPLY SAY THAT OUR GOAL AS A CITY IS TO OPERATE IN AN ETHICAL WAY. MAYBE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ENFORCED, BUT SOME EXPRESSION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF IT. I DO THINK THERE'S SOMETHING VALID ABOUT THAT. MAYBE IT'S SIMPLY ENOUGH TO SAY THAT'S THE WAY WE INTEND TO CONDUCT OURSELVES. WE'RE NOT GOING TO SET UP A WHOLE ENFORCEMENT APPARATUS, BUT I WILL SAY I THINK IF YOU LOOK AROUND AT OTHER CITIES, WHAT SUNK A LOT OF THEM IS WHERE YOU SEE THE ISSUES AND WHERE THEY BUBBLE UP AND THE PUBLIC LOSES CONFIDENCE, AND THAT IS REALLY HARD TO DIG OUT OF. IT SEEMS TO ME THERE'S SOME VIRTUE IN

ARTICULATING IT. >> THAT'S VERY MUCH A CITIZEN'S BILL OF RIGHTS. THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY ENFORCEMENT TEETH IN IT, BUT IT PUTS OUT RIGHTS FOR THE CITIZENS OF WHAT'S OUT

THERE. >> TO GO BACK LOOKING AT THE SURVEY, AS PART OF OUR MATERIAL. THE LACK OF TRUST IS A

HUGE ISSUE. >> ACTUALLY, IT'S VERY INTERESTING. WHAT REALLY CAME UP IS WE WERE BELOW THE NATIONAL STA STANDARD, THIS 50,000 THING. AND WE DROPPED PROBABLY 10 TO 15 POINTS FROM 2017 TO 2019 IN GOVERNANCE. PEOPLE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING A TERRIBLE JOB, A THIRD THOUGHT WE WERE DOING AN OKAY JOB. AND THE MIDDLE DIDN'T REALLY SAY MUCH AT ALL. ONLY 6% THOUGHT THAT WE WERE HONEST. THIS WAS A SAMPLE OF 881 PEOPLE. THAT'S A GOOD SAMPLE.

AND 389, 34% THOUGHT WE WEREN'T HONEST. BUT IF YOU PUT IN THE EXCELLENT GOOD AND FAIR, WE WERE KIND OF HONEST. SO, YOU LOOK AT

ALL OF THOSE. >> KIND OF HONEST IS LIKE KIND

OF PREGNANT. >> THE NUMBERS ARE INTERESTING, BECAUSE THEY ACTUALLY SHOW YOU, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE THING. YOU CAN'T JUST PICK OUT ONE THING HERE OR THERE. AND EVEN SOME OF THE DATA THEY USED AS POSITIVE, YOU HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT. AND THE NUMBERS REFLECT REALITY. THEY'RE NOT SO GREAT ABOUT OUR ROADS. GUESS WHAT GETS THE LOWEST THING? AFFORDABLE HOUSING. NO KIDDING. SO, YOU GET REAL GOOD DATA. I'M SURE YOU WILL SEE. YOU WILL LOOK AT THE TWO AND YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT CAME OUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE WAS GOVERNANCE. AND WE DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY. I THINK I KNOW WHY THAT WAS, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT.

>> WHY NOT? >> WELL, WE HAD TWO NEW

COMMISSIONERS. >> WITH THE THREE THAT ARE

[00:40:05]

ALREADY HERE? I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE DATA AND LOOK AT ALL THE NUMBERS, NOT JUST THE NEGATIVE NUMBERS, YOU WILL FIND THEY ARE PRETTY SURPRISING.

>> SO THAT WAS TO YOUR POINT, ALL I KNOW.

>> I HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. IN MY OTHER JOB, I HAVE SEEN THE EMERGENCY ROOM. I HAVE SEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS. MANY OF THEM LIVE ON THE ISLAND. AND OFTEN, I ASKED DO YOU LIKE LIVING HERE? HOW'S IT GOING? THINK WE CAN CHANGE? AND THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY -- NOT MAJORITY, BUT I'M TALKING 95% SAY THE SAME THING. GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. WHAT WOULD YOU CHANGE? I ASKED ONE GUY THAT I WAS SUTURING UP, THE GUY COULD NOT COME UP WITH ONE THING WRONG. SO, SURVEYS -- THESE ARE JUST RANDOM PEOPLE. AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHO I AM. SOME OF THEM DO.

>> THEY DO KNOW YOU'RE A DOCTOR. >> THEY KNOW I'M A DOCTOR. I WOULD SAY BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH IF. I HAVE READ A LOT OF BOOKS, AND WE HAVE A HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL CITY. WE REALLY DO. I JUST READ ON NEPTUNE BEACH THAT GOT THE URBAN LEAGUE TO COME IN AND STEVE COOK WROTE AN ARTICLE, AND I READ IT. THEY HAVE ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS AND WE FIXED THAT AND FIXED THAT AND DON'T HAVE THAT AND BLAH BLAH BLAH. SO, WE'RE A HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL CITY. SO, I WOULD BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING -- THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE CHANGED. ONE IS THAT IF WE COULD CHANGE OUR ELECTION LAWS, SO WHEN THE STATE LAW CHANGES, IT'S -- OUR ELECTION LAWS CHANGE TO MODIFY THAT. SO, IT REFLECTS WHATEVER IS IN FLORIDA LAW. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS IN THERE AND ARE NOW NO LONGER TRUE BECAUSE FLORIDA ELECTION LAWS CHANGE. AND WE STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW FLORIDA ELECTION LAW. SO, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE SHOULD SAY FLORIDA ELECTION LAW AND CALL IT A DAY. THE SECOND WAS BROUGHT UP TO ME. AND IT IS BACK BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ASKED ME TO BRING THIS UP, SO I WILL. BUT IT GOES TO RECALL ELECTION. AND A NUMBER OF PEOPLE BROUGHT THIS UP TO ME. WHEN YOU LOOK AT FLORIDA LAW, IT'S HIGHLY RESTRICTIVE ON THE ISSUES OF WHAT SOMEBODY YOU CAN -- BUT THERE IS A LITTLE A-HA IN THERE THAT IT CAN BE EXPANDED SO THAT PERHAPS THE CITY COULD MAKE IT MORE EXPANSIVE OF WHO CAN BE RECALLED. IF YOU'RE UNHAPPY WITH SOMEBODY'S WHATEVER. YOU'RE HERE FOR FOUR YEARS NOW, AND SOMEBODY ON YEAR TWO, YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY STUCK WITH THEM FOR ANOTHER TWO AND A HALF YEARS. AND MAYBE ONE OF THE WAYS TO MAKE IT MORE TRANSPARENT IS TO DO THE BALLOT BOX, WHICH GIVES EVERYBODY A VOICE. UNDER FLORIDA LAW, IT'S EASY FOR FEES.

>> MALFEASANCE. WHAT IS PUBLIC DRUNKENNESS. COMMITTING A FELONY. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE. BUT IT DOES ALLOW IN THERE

THAT YOU CAN EXPAND THAT. >> I THINK THE OTHER ONE IS

INCOMPETENCE. >> WHATEVER THAT MEANS.

>> WHO WOULD IT APPLY TO? >> TALKING ABOUT BOARD MEMBERS? OR LIKE ONLY COMMISSIONERS.

>> JUST COMMISSIONERS. >> I'M TALKING ABOUT CITY COMMISSIONERS. IF YOU HAVE AN UNHAPPY POPULATION, THEN TAKE IT TO THE BALLOT BOX. AND I THINK YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT DEMOCRACY, THAT'S DEMOCRACY. AND HAVING BOARDS AND ALL OF THE OTHER PEOPLE, THE BOARD IS CORRUPT, THIS IS CORRUPT, THAT'S CORRUPT. THEY DON'T BELIEVE IT. THAT MIGHT BE OF SOMETHING

TO CONSIDER. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS, FOLLOW-UP TO THAT, SEVERAL OF THE CITIES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED THAT WE

[00:45:04]

LOOK AT BY THE LEAGUE OF CITIES, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE, AS YOU INDICATE, HAVE EXPANDED RECALL PROVISIONS IN IF. AND YOU CAN'T GO BELOW THE STATE STANDARD, BUT YOU CAN BE MORE RESTRICTIVE. IN ADDITION, THEY HAVE PETITION AND REFERENDUM INITIATIVE LANGUAGE, AND THAT'S ALSO FAIRLY COMMON AND SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE, SO THAT FOR EXAMPLE, THE PEOPLE THROUGH AN INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM CAN ACTUALLY SEEK TO GET ON THE BALLOT BOX FOR THE COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER AND ACTUALLY FORCE -- OVERTURN A VOTE OF THE COMMISSION. AND THAT'S AGAIN SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE, BUT SEVERAL OF THE PEER CITIES --

>> I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK INTO THOSE THINGS, BECAUSE I THINK THEY ARE FAR MORE DEMOCRATIC AND FAR MORE INCLUSIVE OF THE POPULATION SO IT'S NOT JUST ONE PERSON HAVING

AN AX TO GRIND. >> RIGHT. BUT IT CAN GET EXPENSIVE TO KEEP HAVING THESE REFERENDUMS ON BALLOTS.

>> BUT YOU HAVE TO GET A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PETITIONS. IF 10% OF THE POPULATION THINKS THERE'S SOMETHING DRAMATICALLY WRONG -- I WAS INTERESTED. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT HOW TO GET MORE PEOPLE TO VOTE. I REALLY DRILL DOWN ON WHO VOTES AND WHO DOESN'T. IT'S BASICALLY ELDERLY WHITE CITIZENS, THAT'S WHO VOTES IN THIS COMMUNITY. IT'S A HOCKEY STICK. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW -- I MEAN, HOW DO YOU BECOME -- BUT THAT'S ENDEMIC OF THE WHOLE ELECTION PROCESS. IT'S A NATIONAL ELECTION. IF YOU GET MORE PEOPLE TO VOTE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. BUT LESS THAN

30%? THAT TERRIBLE. >> IF WE SCREW UP THE CITY, THEY WILL COME OUT TO VOTE. THAT'S THE FACTS. PEOPLE ARE FACT HAPPY, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO COME OUT AND GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO VOTE. THERE WILL BE MORE PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY VOTING IN NOVEMBER, WHICH IS WHY REMEMBER THE DISCUSSION OF THE COMMISSION? THE CHARTER REVIEW'S RECOMMENDATION TO GO TO EVERY TWO YEARS AND HAVE TERMS. THAT INDEED INCREASED OUR VOTER TURNOUT BY HAVING THE ELECTIONS. I WILL SAY THIS, TOO, IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE STATISTICS FOR OTHER CITIES, SMALL CITIES, BIG CITIES, AND MUNICIPAL ONLY ELECTIONS, LESS THAN 10% VOTER TURNOUT. IF YOU'RE THE ONLY ONES ON THE BALLOT. SO, IT'S A PROBLEM EVERYWHERE.

>> IN MY DAY JOB, I HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE DO WHAT I DO A LOT YOUNGER THAN I AM. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT I DEAL WITH ARE IN THAT AGE GROUP WHERE THEY ARE JUST STARTING FAMILIES OR HAVE VERY YOUNG FAMILIES AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE CITY HALL IS. THEY THOUGHT I HAD AN OFFICE AT THE COURTHOUSE. THEY THOUGHT THAT IS WHERE IT WAS. THEY CAN'T NAME ANY OF US. IT'S NOT JUST ME THAT THEY DON'T NAME. AND THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT, YOU KNOW?

>> THEY DON'T VOTE. >> AND THAT'S WHY. THEY DON'T

KNOW WHO WE ARE. >> BUT THEY DON'T VOTE IN THE STATE AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS, EITHER. IF YOU LOOK AT THE VOTING STATISTICS HERE. BUT I THINK MY MAIN MESSAGE WOULD BE THAT PEOPLE ARE BASICALLY HAPPY HERE. SO, I DON'T THINK -- IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT. I'M NOT SAYING THERE ARE THINGS THAT CAN'T BE IMPROVED, BUT BASICALLY PEOPLE ARE HAPPY. TO A LARGE

DEGREE. >> I AND I THINK A PROBLEM SOCIETY-WIDE IS PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW GOVERNMENT WORKS. I MEAN, YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE THINK OF THE SUNSHINE LAW HOURS.20 POINT OUT HOW GENERALLY UNINFORMED PEOPLE ARE, THE SPEAKER AT THE LAST MEETING THOUGHT CITY STAFF WERE VIOLATING SUNSHINE LAWS BECAUSE WE WERE E-MAILING EACH OTHER. PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SUNSHINE LAW, AND PEOPLE GET THEIR INFORMATION OFF OF FACEBOOK AND SOCIAL MEDIA. ALL IT TAKES IS THREE PEOPLE TO SAY YOU KNOW WHAT? I THINK COMMISSIONER ROSS IS ON THE TAKE, AND ALL THE SUDDEN, IT'S TRUE. AND YOU JUST CAN'T COUNTER THAT. WE HAVE TO TRY AND EDUCATE PEOPLE OF HOW CITY GOVERNMENT WORKS. AND MOST PEOPLE DON'T CARE. I THINK WHEN THE WHEELS COME OFF OR ARE ABOUT TO COME OFF, THEY WILL CARE. DO THE POLICE COME WHEN THEY ARE CALLED? WE GOT AN ISSUE. ALL RIGHT. BUT. AGAIN, STREET SAFE? YES. ON THANKSGIVING AFTERNOON, I INVITED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT SHIFT TO COME TO MY HOUSE FOR DINNER. THE ENTIRE

[00:50:03]

SHIFT SHOWED UP TO MY HOUSE AT NOON AND THEY SAT THERE FOR AN HOUR AND DIDN'T DO A SINGLE CALL. WHOO DOES THAT SAY?

>> EVERYBODY WAS EATING TURKEY. >> TURKEY WASN'T READY YET. BUT AGAIN! I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ROSS THAT LIFE IS GOOD. THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT I DON'T THINK MATTERS TO 98% OF THE PEOPLE OUT THERE. SO, DON'T OVERTHINK IT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.

>> WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOUT THE YOUNGER PEOPLE THAT AREN'T VOTING TO EXPAND ON THAT WAS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE PROBABLY THE MOST PEOPLE AFFECTED BY A LOT OF OUR DECISIONS. YOUNG FAMILIES AND PEOPLE WITH CHILDREN THAT LIVE HERE ARE NOT BEING REPRESENTED AND PEOPLE THAT COME TO CITY COMMISSION MEETING BECAUSE THEY ASSUME EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE OKAY. BUT A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE ARE AFFECTING YOUNG FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO, YOU KNOW, HAVING AN ACTIVE POLITICAL GROUP LIKE YOU DESCRIBED THAT ARE VOTING NOW MAKING DECISIONS I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY NEED TO BE CAREFUL OF.

>> OH, ONE OTHER THOUGHT. CITY COMMISSION IS -- THIS COMMISSION, WHICH I THINK IS MADE UP OF PEOPLE, IS ONE SHOT AT A TIME. ONE CITY COMMISSION, BUT WHY SHOULD ONE CHARTER

COMMITTEE -- I DON'T KNOW. >> IT GOES ON TO THE NEXT

CHARTER REVIEW. >> IT DOES.

SO WHAT I AM COMMUNITY. IT'S RECOMMENDED HERE. YOU HEAR IT. YOU VIOLENTLY DISAGREE WITH IT, BUT YOU STILL SAY IT'S OKAY TO LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE IS RWHAT WE'RE SAYING.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT SOME OF US ALREADY SAID.

>> YEAH. SOME OF YOU. >> I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH

YOU. >> YOU ALREADY SAID IT

PUBLICLY. >> I THINK THAT WE CAN, OBVIOUSLY I SERVE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, TOO, BUT ULTIMATELY I WORK FOR THE CITY COMMISSION. I PRETTY MUCH HAVE TALKED TO ALL OF THEM ABOUT IT, AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT. I THINK THESE COMMISSIONERS ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE ONES THAT CAME BEFORE THAT WERE CHANGING THE CHARTER. AND REMEMBER THAT CHARTER WAS CHANGED OVER SIX YEARS. SO, THERE WERE THREE DIFFERENT COMMISSIONS OVER THAT TIME. AND THEY SAW THEIR ROLE, I GUESS, AS I COULD HAVE CORRECTED THEM IF BUT I DIDN'T. I KNOW THAT THESE COMMISSIONERS WILL RESERVE THEIR RIGHT IF ANYTHING REALLY WHACKY COMES OUT OF THE COMMITTEE, AND THEY WILL EXPLAIN WHY THEY WOULD GO WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION. BUT MY SENSE IS THAT ALL OF THEM GENUINELY WANT TO HONOR WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE. AND YEAH. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BREAK DOWN THE WORDING OF WHAT THEY CHOOSE, BECAUSE WE DID DO THAT IN WORKSHOPS WITH THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS. WE SAT WITH CITY COMMISSIONERS IN THIS GROUP, INCLUDING PROFESSIONALS, ATTORNEYS, AND WHATNOT HAD PROVIDED WORDING. AND WE STARTED AT GROUP ONE WITH THE CITY COMMISSION AND B WENT THROUGH EACH THING AND NOT ONE THING SUBSTANTIVE WAS CHANGED IN THE

CITY. >> BUT IT'S UP TO THE CHARTER COMMITTEE TO COME UP WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT TO GO TO THE PEOPLE. AND THEY WOULD GO TO THE PEOPLE. IF YOU'RE NOT CAREFUL, THEY WILL REJECT IT, WHICH WON'T BE A PROBLEM, BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS CHARTER PER SAY. IN TEN YEARS IT HAS NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE EXCEPT RECENTLY SOME MINOR ISSUES. SO, YOU KNOW, GO ON, IT'S NOT A BAD DOCUMENT. YOU KNOW? SO IF YOU WANT TO MAKE CHANGES, JUST, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW, YOU KNOW, DON'T WORDSMITH THEM AND DO ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF, AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT BECOME IRRELEVANT WHICH WOULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO PASS. PEOPLE CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT. YOU KNOW?

>> I JUST WANT TO -- IN THE CHAIR'S INITIAL COMMENT, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN IT UP SO IT READS MORE CLEARLY. WE HAVE TWO

[00:55:02]

OUTSTANDING ATTORNEYS WHO VOLUNTEERED THEIR SERVICES ON THAT. SO, WE'RE FORTUNATE IN THAT SENSE. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS -- AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT IT AT THIS POINT AS A GROUP. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU START READING THE DETAIL IS SOME THINGS IN THE CHARTER DON'T REALLY MATCH CURRENT PRA PRACTICE. AND CURRENT PRACTICE IS PROBABLY WHAT EVERYBODY THINKS THE CHARTER SAYS, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY SAY. THAT ONE EXAMPLE IS UNDER OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, IT TALKS ABOUT THE CITY COMMISSION SHALL FIX BY ORDINANCE. AND I TALKED TO DALE ABOUT THIS AND DOES THE COMMISSION SET THE SALARY OF ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS? NO. SO, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE CAN CLEAN IT UP TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PRACTICE ACTUALLY, WHICH IS LOGICAL, IS WHAT'S REFLECTED IN THE CHARTER.

>> BUT EVEN AT THAT, IT'S ARRANGED SO IN THEORY, WE START

BY APPROVING A RANGE. >> ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT I CAN COME UP WITH IS DEDICATION OF STREETS, WHICH WE HAVE HAD INDIVIDUAL STREETS, BUT REALLY, MORE LIKE THROUGH PLATS OF SUBDIVISIONS, WHICH ARE ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION OR GROUPED BY RESOLUTION, AND THE CHARTER SAYS THAT STREETS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED OR SHALL BE ACCEPTED BY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION. SO, THAT'S JUST ANOTHER --

>> COULDN'T YOU DRAFT TWO REFERENDUMS? YOU KNOW, ONE WHICH BECOMES A HOUSEKEEPING REFERENDUM, WHICH IS THOSE ISSUES? SO, YOU KNOW, YOU KEEP IT, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S LIKE A

NO-BRAINER? >> THAT'S WHAT I WILL END UP RECOMMENDING US TO DO.

THAT IS A SEPARATE QUESTION ALL TOGETHER. AND SO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE THINKS ARE WHAT WE WOULD DO.

>> HOW MANY WORDS? >> 75 OR LESS.

>> I THINK ONE OF THE COMMON THINGS THAT WE BROUGHT UP BY A FEW PEOPLE TODAY IS THAT THERE IS NOT ALWAYS CLEAR UNDERSTANDING IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE WAY THINGS WORK. WHICH IS A VALID STATEMENT. ONE OF OUR OBJECTIVES IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOCUMENT DOESN'T MAKE ME MORE MYSTMYSTERIOUS. AND WE HAV CONSISTENCY. THAT IT'S AN ENGLISH LANGUAGE DOCUMENT THAT EVERYBODY CAN RELATE TO. AND THAT THE PRACTICES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT L HERE MAKE SOME KIND OF SENSE. MOST PEOPLE WHO HAVE A DEFINITION OF GROUP AS THEY COME TO THE TABLE IN THEIR HEADS THINK THAT THAT MEANS SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS A DISTRICT. AND THAT YOU MUST LIVE IN THAT DISTRICT, WHICH IS NOT TRUE AT ALL WITH OUR GROUPS. SO, THAT, IN MY MIND, IS SOMETHING THAT ADDS TO CONFUSION. IF WE CHANGE IT EITHER WAY, WE EITHER ELIMINATE THE GROUP ALL TOGETHER AND THEN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYBODY IS AT LARGE. IF WE LEAVE THE GROUP, WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER REQUIRE THAT YOU LIVE IN IT. OR THAT IT BE A DISTRICT THAT YOU REPRESENT. SO, WITH AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE THINGS MORE CLEAR TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE WAY THINGS ACTUALLY OPERATE, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY SAYING THAT ANYTHING IS BROKEN. AND IT'S ONE THING TO SAY THAT PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT BUT IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND IN MY MIND, A BAD THING TO SAY THAT'S OKAY THAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. SO, WHATEVER WE CAN DO WITH THIS LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR FOR PEOPLE SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING, I THINK THE BETTER

OFF WE ARE. >> YEAH. WHEN THEY WENT TO THE FOUR-YEAR TERMS, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, FORGET THE GROUP NUMBERS. THEY NEVER MADE ANY SENSE. BUT THEY DID AT THE TIME WHEN THEY WENT TO THE FOUR YEAR, ONE OF THE REASONS WAS THE

CONTINUITY. >> YES.

>> OKAY. SO, THE CONTINUE F DER CONTIN CONTINUITY. AND NOW THERE IS THE ARGUMENT IN THE NEXT ELECTION IS THREE COMMISSIONERS. SO THAT'S GONNA CHANGE THINGS. BUT YOU'RE GONNA -- YOU'RE GONNA GET CONSEQUENCES ONE WAY OR

ANOTHER. >> THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP IS THE FACT THAT IN ONE ELECTION, YOU COULD COMPLETELY FLIP. AND SOME CONCERNS THAT VOTERS HAD IS IN ONE DAY YOU

[01:00:01]

COULD CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY.

>> YEAH. >> BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS LETTING THE PEOPLE SPEAK.

>> CORRECT. >> IF WE'RE GONNA TURN OVER A COMMISSION, THAT'S THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE TO DO IT.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> IF WE'RE NOT, THEN THAT'S THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. SO, I THINK THAT THE MORE WE CAN PUT IT INTO THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE, THE BETTER OFF WE ARE.

>> MY PERSONAL THING, I WOULD LIKE TO DO AWAY WITH THE GROUPS AND I WOULD LIKE TO ELECT PEOPLE ON IF YOU HAVE GOT THREE SEATS, THE TOP THREE VOTE GETTERS. I WOULD LIKE TO DO AWAY WITH RUN OFFS. WE ACTUALLY HAD MORE PEOPLE RESPOND TO THIS SURVEY THAN VOTED IN SOME OF THE RUN OFFS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> SO I LIKE TO SEE THAT. AND ALTHOUGH, IN A WAY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE REPRESENTING AREAS AND AWARDS. THAT BECOMES REALLY PROBLEMATIC.

>> YOU ALSO LIMIT YOUR POOL OF CANDIDATES. YOU CAN LIMIT THE

POOL OF CANDIDATES. >> THEY DID THAT.

>> SO THE TIMES CURRENTLY ARE SHOWING MORE PEOPLE WITH BETTER

RATES. >> IT WAS NOT TANNED DATES AT THE TIME. THE CITY IS GROWING BORDER-WISE.

>> THE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE CHANGING, TOO.

>> ARE WE HELPING OR HURTING? >> HELPING.

>> THESE ARE THINGS YOU ALREADY HAVE DISCUSSED.

>> THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. WE ARE EXCITED TO HEAR THE WISDOM.

>> WHEN I SERVED IN CONNECTICUT, WE HAD A SEVEN MEMBER BOARD AND ALL SEATS WERE UP EVERY TWO YEARS. AND WE DID FLIP AND THEY WERE PARTISAN ELECTIONS. THERE IS MORE STABILITY THAN YOU REALIZE. WE'RE KIND OF A MIDDLE OF THE ROAD -- CITIES ARE A MIDDLE OF THE ROAD IN OKAY. WHEN THEY COME UP, THEY CAN'T CHANGE THE COURSE OF THE CITY THAT QUICKLY. SO, CAN YOU CHANGE THREE? AND ARE YOU GETTING IT THREE? THREE LIKE-MINDED, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE THREE THAT ARE LEAVING? ANOTHER KEY POINT TO REMEMBER IS WE SEE KNIT SOME OF OUR E-MAILS. THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. THIS IS A REP REPUBLIC. YOU ARE NOT ELECTED TO REPRESENT EVERY SINGLE ONE. SAYING YOU REPRESENT ME. A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. SO, YOU CANNOT REPRESENT EVERYONE. AND I THINK SOMETIMES THAT NEEDS TO BE REMEMBERED. WE TALK ABOUT THE DEMOCRACY. SO, LET'S PUT EVERY ISSUE ON FACEBOOK AND YOU GET AN HOUR TO LIKE OR DON'T LIKE, AND THAT'S NOT THE WAY I THINK WE WANT TO CONDUCT BUSINESS. YOU FIVE ARE ELECTIONED TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTEREST IN THE COMMUNITY.

>> WE PROBABLY HAD MORE 5-0 VOTES THAN PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF. AND SIGNIFICANT ISSUES, YOU KNOW?

>> SO I HAVE A QUESTION WITH SO WE HAVE THE THREE SEATS THAT ARE COMING UP NOW. AND THIS REALLY GOES BACK MORE TOWARDS OPERATION

[01:05:02]

VERSUS FLIPPING THE COMMISSION. WHEN YOU HAVE A NEW COMMISSIONER UP THERE AND THERE'S A LEARNING CURVE AND YOU HAVE TWO NEW COMMISSIONERS AND THREE NEW COMMISSIONERS, WHAT, FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE, ESPECIALLY THE NEWER PEOPLE, IS THE LEARNING CURVE LIKE? AND DO WE LOSE INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY BY HAVING MORE PEOPLE CHANGING AT THE SAME TIME? DO YOU RELY ON -- WHERE DO YOU GO FOR YOUR ANSWERS? YOU CAN'T TALK TO EACH OTHER OR SOMEBODY ELSE LIKE HOW DO YOU HANDLE THIS. HOW DO YOU

COME UP TO SPEED? >> THAT'S AN EXCELLENT

QUESTION. >> WHEN I FIRST GOT I ELECTED, THE CITY MANAGER AT THE TIME HAD SCHEDULED AN APPOINTMENT. SO, YOU UNDERSTOOD HOW IT ALL WORKS. THAT WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL. WHEN YOU'RE DOING THAT, YOU'RE FORMING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT DEPARTMENT HEAD. YOU SPENT THE WHOLE DAY WITH THEM. BUT I LEARNED EARLY ON THAT THE BEST THING TO DO IS YOU DON'T HAVE TO KNOW EVERYTHING. BUT YOU DO NEED TO KNOW WHO TO CALL TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT STAFF DOES. IT DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG TO GET TO KNOW STAFF. INDUSTRIAL KNOWLEDGE. IF I CALL WITH A LEGAL ISSUE, SHE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO LOOK IT UP. MOST THINGS HAVE COME UP ALREADY. IT DIDN'T TAKE THAT LONG. YOU LEARN FROM MAKING MISTAKES. YOU PROBABLY DON'T DO IT TWICE. YOU LEARN REALLY FAST WHEN YOU DO SOMETHING THAT, OOPS, YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS. STAFF DOES A GOOD JOB OF TEACHING.

THEY GO THROUGH A DIFFERENT COMMISSION ALL THE TIME. THEY KNOW HOW TO EDUCATE AND GET US ON THE RIGHT ROAD. SO, I DON'T THINK IT IS HUGELY IMPORTANT. BUT I'M SPEAKING FOR

MYSELF. >> THAT'S WHAT YOU GOT A STAFF FOR, IS TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS. I WAS ON THE PAV SIX YEARS. WHEN I CAME IN I THOUGHT I KNEW A LOT. BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THAT MUCH. I THINK THE KEY IS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS, WHAT THE PLAN SAYS. NOT UNDERSTAND IT, BUT KNOW ITS RELATIONSHIP. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE ORDINANCES. THEN YOU READ YOU MAKE THE EFFORT AND ACTUALLY READ AND ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE AGENDA IS. WE'RE NOT RUNNING THE CITY. THAT'S HIS JOB IS TO RUN THE CITY. WE ARE POLICYMAKERS. AND IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE. IT MAY BE OVERWHELMING, BUT ANYBODY CAN DO IT. I SHOULDN'T SAY ANYBODY.

>> FOR ME, TO PIGGY BACK ON SOMETHING THAT DALE SAID, THE BIGGEST LEARNING ISSUE FOR ME IS WHEN I TOOK THAT SEAT UP THERE, I NOW REPRESENT 12,000 PEOPLE. AND MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE DON'T VOICE PUBLICLY AN OPINION. SO, FOR ME, THE HARDEST THING WAS TO COME DOWN AND SAY ALL RIGHT, IN MY OPINION, WHAT IS THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY? TO GET INDIVIDUAL ISSUES OF PEOPLE, IT'S WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CITY. I HAVE APOLOGIZED TO TIM POINTER BECAUSE I SAID TIM, I HAD NO IDEA WHAT IT WAS LIKE WHEN YOU SIT IN THAT SEAT. AND YOU DON'T HAVE AN IDEA UNTIL YOU SIT IN THAT SEAT. AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THINGS DIFFERENTLY. I HAD NO IDEA. AND IN THE BEGINNING, I ASKED COULD I GET MY AGENDA PACKET ON PAPER? AND SOMEONE TOLD ME SOMETIMES THAT PACKET RUNS OVER 300 PAGES. SO CAROL GAVE ME THE IPAD SO I COULD READ IT UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL. I DON'T THINK A LOT OF CITIZENS REALIZE THAT WHEN WE GO TO A TUESDAY NIGHT MEETING, THERE IS POSSIBLY 300 PAGES OF BACK-UP INFORMATION AND TO BE ABLE TO FIT IN A LIFE OUTSIDE THESE CHAMBERS AS WELL AS TRY TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THAT MATERIAL I THINK, TOO, FOR ME, I GUESS I

[01:10:09]

SAY THIS TO ANYBODY WHO IS THINKING ABOUT RUNNING. MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A BIG SIT DOWN. THEY TAKE A HIT WORSE THAN YOU DO. AND IT'S THE REASON, HONESTLY, WHY I'M NOT RUNNING AGAIN. I COULDN'T DO THAT TO MY WIFE. I THINK AND I SAT IN MANY MEETINGS. I SAT FOR MANY YEARS IN THE AUDIENCE. BUT IT DOES BECOME DIFFERENT THE MINUTE YOU RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY I

DO. YOU KNOW? I SWEAR. >> THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT WE PAY, WE HIRED. IF I ASK A STAFF OPINION, AT LEAST THEY EXPLAIN IT TO ME IN WAYS THAT I UNDERSTAND IT. SO, YES. I THINK WHY PAY STAFF IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS? WE MIGHT AS WELL ELIMINATE THEM AND SAY FIVE PEOPLE SITTING UP HERE, WE'RE GONNA MAKE ALL THE DECISIONS. I SEE IT WITH, AGAIN, I CAN'T TELL YOU THE AMOUNT OF HELP I HAVE HAD FROM TAMMY, BILL, CARE LINE. YOU CAN PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL THEM. THEY WILL GIVE YOU AN ANSWER. THEY ALL HAVE THE COURAGE TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT TO YOU. AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. IS STAFF GOING TO BE ALWAYS RIGHT? OF COURSE NOT. THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS. JUST GOING TO TELL THE KIDS WHAT I TAUGHT. IF STAFF IS HUMAN, THEY WILL MAKE A MISTAKE NOW AND THEN. AND IF YOU NEED -- THE PACKAGE OF WHAT THEY DO, IT'S A DAMN GOOD STAFF. AND I DO SUPPORT THEM.

>> I HAVE A LITTLE DIFFERENT VIEW. I WAS NOT ELECTED TO REPRESENT 12,000 PEOPLE. I WAS ELECTED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE PRINCIPLES AND IDEAS THAT I RAN ON, AND I THINK I CONTINUE TO DO THAT. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SATISFY 12,000 PEOPLE. SO, THERE'S A GROUP OUT THERE THAT SUPPORTS ME. AND I'M WILLING TO LISTEN TO ALL GROUPS. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, THERE ARE MANY, MANY WAY TOSS VERIFY THAT. AND I MAKE A LOT OF PHONE CALLS. THE CONGRESSIONAL STAFF RUNS THE COUNTRY IN A LOT OF WAYS. SO, I THINK A HEALTHY SKEPTICISM OF STAFF, OF ANYBODY'S RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT'S JUST A WAY OF LOOKING AT LIFE.

>> YOU'RE REVIEWING -- STAFF IS GOING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON WHETHER IT'S THE COMP CLIENT AND READ THE CHATTER. WHEN THEY SAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH 61301, YOU LOOK

AND SEE IF THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU LOOK TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WASN'T CORRECT.

>> RIGHT. BUT I'M CURRENT WITH, WE HAVE SAHH ST A STAFF AND IT' THEIR JOB. IT'S YOUR OBLIGATION TO LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE

[01:15:07]

ORDINANCES. SOME OF THEM ARE VERY SIMPLE. BUT YOU DO LOOK AT

IT AND SAY WE'RE DONE. >> THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY, THERE'S NO PAUSE. THERE'S NO SPRING TRAINING. WHAT I TRY TO FACILITATE IS I SEND OUT WHAT I REFER TO IS MY FRIDAY. A FEW BULLET POINTS. I START SENDING THOSE TO CANDIDATES AS WELL. PROBABLY STARTING IN JANUARY. SO, THEY GOT A WHOLE YEAR. GO TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE PRESS. I TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THEY GET ELECTED, THEY DON'T NEED SPRING TRAINING. PAYING BILLS, AWARDING CONTRACTS, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT IT DOES TAKE SOME TIME TO GET UP TO SPEED. AND IT WAS INTERESTING TO WATCH THE TWO RECENT ONES. YOU CAN SEE THEY COME IN WITH AN IDEA, AND IT'S SO MUCH DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY

EXPECTED. >> ONE TASK THAT WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN IS PULL PEOPLE TOGETHER. RIGHT NOW THERE IS A BIG ONE. WHAT THEY'RE CALLING THE FRUIT BASKET TURNOVER WITH THE THREE COMMISSIONERS COMING UP. IT'S AN UNDERCURRENT THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THAT THERE'S A LARGE LEARNING CURVE AND WHAT HAPPENS AND WHERE DO THOSE PEOPLE GET THEIR

INFORMATION FROM? >> BUT FROM A CHARTER PERSPECTIVE, THE ONLY CHANGE THAT WE COULD MAKE TO PREVENT THAT TYPE OF THING IS TO CHANGE THE TERMS.

>> YEAH. >> I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO RELAY ON IS THE FACT THAT ANYONE COULD RUN FOR ANY OFFICE WITHOUT ANY EXPERIENCE, SKILLS, TRAINING,

AND POSSIBLY WIN. >> AND I'M 100% POSITIVE THAT IT'S HAPPENED HERE IN FERNANDINA AS WELL. SO, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE CANNOT LEGISLATE. THE AMOUNT OF TRAINING AND EDUCATION THAT CANDIDATE OR THE PERSON SITTING IN THE SEAT, MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THEIR RELIANCE ON EXPERTISE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE INITIALS BEHIND THEIR NAMES IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LET THEM DO OR NOT DO, WHATEVER THEIR CHOICE IS. SO, FROM A CHARTER PERSPECTIVE, WE CAN'T REALLY CHANGE THE WAY A COMMISSIONER COMES TO THE TABLE. I WOULD SAY, THOUGH, THAT GOING BACK TO THE STATEMENT AGAIN OF PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S HAPPENING. I THINK THE MORE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OPERATES THE WAY THEY DID WHEN THEY WERE CANDIDATES, TRYING TO GET THE FEEL OF THE PEOPLE, TRYING TO HELP THE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU KNOW? MAYBE WE DESCRIBE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. BECAUSE WHO ELSE'S JOB IS IT OTHER THAN CITY GOVERNMENT TO HELP THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND THE WAY CITY

GOVERNMENT WORKS? >> I JUST WANTED -- SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT BE ENDING SOON, AND I WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT. I SAY IT PARTLY BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO ARGUE WITH ME IF I DON'T SAY IT RIGHT. I THINK MOST OF YOU, TALKING ABOUT THE COMMISSION, HAVE SORT OF IMPARTED THIS NOTION IS IT'S WORKING PRETTY WELL THE WAY IT IS. AND DON'T CHANGE IT. THAT IS A WORTHWHILE AND HELPFUL COMMENT TO SAY THAT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU

[01:20:02]

HAVE TALKED ABOUT SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. A RECALL PROVISION, GETTING RID OF THE GROUPS, THOSE ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN TERMS OF HOW WE DO IT. CLARITY IN THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. THOSE MAY NOT IS SOUND LIKE A LOT, BUT THEY COULD HAVE AN IMPORTANT IMPACT. I DO SAY THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE, AS WE GO ALONG THE ROAD HERE, AND MY COLLEAGUES CAN DISAGREE WITH ME. I THINK THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT ARE LIKELY TO BE IN OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOU. I THINK WE HAVE TOUCHED ON A LOT OF THEM. I THINK THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT YOU ALL HAVE IDENTIFIED HERE THAT ARE WORTH LOOKING AT.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE ADVOCATED FOR IS MAYBE HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM. THAT'S MORE SPEAKING TOWARDS PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. THEY'RE THERE AT YOUR MEETING. THERE'S A GROUP OF ENGAGED CITIZENS. HERE'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE. WHAT CAN BE DONE?

>>

>> I THINK, THE NEXT ELECTION THE CITY IS GOING TO MOVE ON. IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE DOING WHAT IT'S DOING. PRETTY CONSISTENTLY THE SAME WAY. MUCH OF WHAT WE DO IS ROUTINE. IF YOU EVER ANALYZED IT, YOU WOULD BE KIND OF AMAZED. IN THE TERM OF FLIPPING, IT'S KIND OF TRANSITIONING TO THREE NEW COMMISSIONERS. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TOLOOK LIKE.

>> SPEND A LOT OF TIME WE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE WAY OF DESCRIBING WHAT OUR HOT TOPICS ARE, AND THEY ARE EXTREMELY JEALOUS. THAT'S KIND OF A GOOD THING ON IT. HAVE YOU GUYS GOT WHAT YOU NEED? I LOOK FORWARD TO DOING IT AGAIN. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. SOUNDS LIKE YOU GOT A LOT ACCOMPLISHED. I THINK WE PICKED THE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.