Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:10]

CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. PLEASE CALL ROLL CALL.

>> MEMBER KOSACK. >> HERE. >> MEMBER LASSERE?

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : HE IS HERE. >> CAN WE DO A MIC CHECK FOR MEMBER LASSERE.

>> HERE. >> THANK YOU. MEMBER MORRISON.

MEMBER DAVIS? >> HERE. >> MEMBER BRYAN.

>> HERE. VICE CHAIR BEAN. >> HERE.

IN MY VICE CHAIR NOW? >> I THINK THAT HAPPENED WHEN WE WERE GONE.

AND SHARE FILKOFF. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : HERE. PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY, I DID THAT BACKWARDS. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING? >> I SO MOVE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE HAVE A MOTION. >> SECOND.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MOTION TO SECOND-PERIOD ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> AYE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OPPOSITION? VERY GOOD. OLD BUSINESS.

[5. OLD BUSINESS ]

WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH A COPY OF THE SLAIN VERSION OF THE CHARTER AND A COPY OF THE CHARTER CHANGES THAT WE RECOMMENDED TODAY. DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION?

OKAY. MS. DAVIS? >> I HAVE A FEW SECTIONS I HAD SOME COMMENTS ON. SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO ãI HAVE THEM IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY SHOW IN THE CHARTER. I CAN GO THROUGH THEM OR OTHER PEOPLE MAY HAVE OTHER SECTIONS IN BETWEEN. AND DIDN'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAD ANY COMMENTS. TWO OF MY CHANGES SHOW UP IN THE VERSION THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED IN THE PACKET IS HIGHLIGHTED. ONE IS IN SECTION 8. I WOULD LIKE THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER CHANGING THE WORD, AND IT HAS BEEN HIGHLIGHTED FOR ONE REGULATIONS TO "RESOLUTIONS." BECAUSE RESOLUTIONS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 166.041 WITH WHAT MUNICIPAL ADOPT. AND TALKS ABOUT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTION. AND THAT IS ALSO WHAT OUR OWN SECTION 21 TALKED ABOUT.

SO REGULATIONS IS ANOTHER TERM USED ELSEWHERE. SO I THINK RESOLUTIONS MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? SO ARE WE ALL RIGHT WITH MAKING THAT CHANGE? ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.

REQUEST THAT CHANGE, PLEASE. IN THE NEXT ONE? >> THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE TO THE SECTION 121. AND I DON'T KNOW SINCE WE HAD ASKED, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST MEETING AND ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DO AN INITIAL DRAFT FOR US .

I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS HAD ANY ISSUES OR COMMENTS TO DOMINATE, BUT I THOUGHT AT A MINIMUM WHEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE, WHICH WE ALL TALKED ABOUT THAT WE HAD LIKED, ONE THING THAT OUGHT TO BE MENTIONED WOULD BE IN ADDITION ON TO TALK ABOUT INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATIONS. IN ADDITION TO TALKING ABOUT THE STANDARDS OF CONDUCT OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES, WHICH I THINK IS GREAT TO MENTION, I PROPOSED ADDING THIS LANGUAGE ABOUT THE CITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. GIVEN THAT IS ANOTHER ITEM THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A LOT OF INPUT

[00:05:04]

INTO AN IS KIND OF THE OVERARCHING DOCUMENT. I THINK EMPLOYEES ARE PRETTY WELL AWARE THE ORDINANCES. BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT ALSO HELP WITH THE ãWE ARE TRYING TO HELP BUILD TRUST WITH THE PUBLIC HERE. A REFERENCE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.ON THE OTHER THING IS ãAND THIS IS NOT IN THERE, BUT IT STARTS OUT SAYING I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. AND THEN IT SAYS I WILL SUPPORT THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. SOMETHING I WILL SUPPORT THE LAWS OF FLORIDA TWICE.

AND THOUGHT MAYBE THE SECOND TIME SUPPORT MIGHT SHOW UP IT MIGHT SAY I WILL IN ALL RESPECTS OBSERVED THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE LAWS AND POLICY OF THE CITY FOR FERNANDINA BEACH THE CONDUCT ON THE CODE OF ETHICS. SO THOSE WERE SOME MINOR CHANGES I HAD. I DIDN'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE WANTED TO GO MORE ASPIRATIONAL

AS FOR THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE WE HAD RECEIVED. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : DO WE HAVE

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? MS. KOSACK? >>TAMMI KOSACK: WHEN I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED THE MEETING, I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE GOING TO WORK ON THAT WE RECEIVED AND HAVE IT INCLUDED. I DO CONCUR WITH MARGARET ON THAT AND I LIKE THE WORD CHANGE THAT YOU JUST PROPOSED AS WELL. IS THAT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH? I THOUGHT THE OTHER TAMMY WAS GOING TO DO SOMETHING WITH

THAT. >> THIS IS HER FIRST SHOT AND SO NOW WE ARE TWEAKING IT AND I HAD IN REAL QUICK AT A MINIMUM IN MY COMMENTS AFTER WE GOT THAT ONE, THE PACKAGE A WEEK

AGO. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : CAN I JUST CALL FOR A REACTION FROM THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO THE CHANGES MARGARET HAS SUGGESTED? IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH ANY OF IT? AND DOES IT ADDRESS WHAT WE SAID WE WANTED IT TO ADDRESS? WHICH IS A REPLACEMENT, IF YOU REMEMBER, FOR A CODE OF ETHICS. OKAY.

IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? MS. KOSACK, DID YOU WANT TO GO FURTHER?>> I'M LOOKING AT IT RIGHT THIS MOMENT ARE IN I KNOW WE HAD THE ISSUE OF ENFORCEABILITY ETC. IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE WAS MORE ASPIRATIONAL. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PREPARED SO I DON'T FEEL LIKE I CAN PUT ANYTHING INTO THIS AT THIS POINT.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO AT THIS POINT IS TO AGAIN, MARGARET, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO REPEAT YOUR ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE AND LET US ALL DO A CHECK ON WHAT THAT

ACCOMPLISHES WHAT WE HOPE TO. >> AFTER THE FIRST PART OF THE SENTENCE, IT SAYS I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, I AM SUGGESTING WE AMENDED TO READ "AND I WILL IN ALL RESPECTS OBSERVED AND IMPLEMENT THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE LAWS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATIONS OF THE CITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND" AND IT CONTINUES ON TO WHAT IS

EXISTING THERE PRESCRIBED BY THE FLORIDA CODE OF ETHICS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

ANY REASON TO TRY TO GO FURTHER OR ARE WE OKAY WITH THIS? >> I HAVE A MINOR ADDITION.

I WOULD SAY WHERE IT SAYS "I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION" I WOULD SAY "THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES." IN MY BE MORE CLEAR THERE ARE TWO CONSTITUTIONS AND NOT JUST ONE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYTHING ELSE? GOING TO CALL FOR A VOTE.

[00:10:03]

ARE WE ALL IN FAVOR THIS? PLEASE SAY AYE IF YOU ARE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : SO THAT'S IT.

WHAT IS NEXT, MARGARET? >>MARGARET DAVIS : NEXT IS THE LANGUAGE THAT I HAD PROPOSED TO TWEAK SECTION 142 AND INSTEAD OF CALLING IT CHARTER REVIEW: CHARTER AMENDMENT AND REVIEW.

AND THIS WAS IN THE PACKET. THE MIDDLE OF THE PETITION MATERIAL RATHER THAN IN THE OLD BUSINESS CHARTER SECTION. ALTHOUGH IT WAS RECIRCULATED TODAY SEPARATELY SO NOBODY MISSED IT. AND SO WOULD LIKE TO ADD CLAUSE A, WHICH SAYS THE CHARTER MAY BE AMENDED BY EITHER ONE ORDINANCE PROPOSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OR TO ADDITION PROPOSED AND SIGNED BY AT LEAST 10 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF QUALIFIED VOTERS REGISTERED TO VOTE IN THE LAST REGULAR CITY ELECTION. IN EACH CASE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTE 166.031. AND FOR MY MEMBERS INFORMATION, I HAD INCLUDED A HIGHLIGHTED COPY OF THAT STATUTE, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THOSE TWO WAYS TO AMEND YOUR CHARTER AND ALSO SAYS A MUNICIPALITY CANNOT CHANGE THAT RIGHT TO AMENDMENT .

AND THE OTHER IS A MINOR TWEAK IN MAKING THE EXISTING LANGUAGE CLAUSE.

AFTER IT TALKS ABOUT REVIEWING THE CITY CHARTER, TO CHANGE IT TO READ "AND PROPOSED TO THE CITY COMMISSION ANY AMENDMENT OR REVISION." SO THESE ARE SIMPLY CLARIFYING.

I WAS THINKING IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO ADD A CLAUSE A SO CITIZENS DIDN'T THINK THE ONLY WAY THE CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED WAS IN THIS EIGHT YEAR PROCESS. AND WHILE TRUE THE STATUTE SAYS THE CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED THE OTHER TWO WAYS, I JUST DID NOT WANT THERE TO BE ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICT OR CONFUSION TO THE CITIZENS. AND ALSO THE REASON TO ADD THE WORDS ABOUT THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE LANGUAGE WE ALREADY HAVE THERE IT WAS JUST WHAT DO WE DO AFTER THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETS. IT IS CLARIFYING I DID NOTE HERE FOR YOU ALL THAT FIVE OF OUR SEVEN PEER CITIES ACTUALLY DO CONTAIN LANGUAGE ADDRESSING THIS CONCEPT THAT THE CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED EITHER BY ORDINANCE OR CITIZEN PETITION.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : SO DOES ANYBODY. >> THAT WAS MY SUGGESTION AND I HAVE THE LANGUAGE TO HELP MAKE IT EASY TO FOLLOW WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : DOES ANY OF THAT LANGUAGE APPEAR ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CHARTER THAT YOU

ARE AWARE OF? >> IN OUR CHARTER, NO. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

IS IT THE CONSENSUS THAT IT NEEDS TO? MS. KOSACK?

>>TAMMI KOSACK: I DO REMEMBER WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ONCE OR TWICE SEVERAL MEETINGS IN AND WE DID SAY THE CHARTER COULD BE AMENDED ACCORDING TO FLORIDA STATUTE.

SO I THINK IT IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE TO HAVE IN THERE FOR ANY CITIZEN ãTHE ONES WHO ARE ANNUAL ENOUGH TO GO LOOK AT OUR CHARGES IF THEY ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING, I THINK IT'S NICE TO HAVE THAT SPELLED OUT. WE ARE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING, WE'RE JUST TELLING THEM

SOMEPLACE TO REFERENCE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. WHERE IN THE CHARTER OR ANYWHERE ELSE DOES IT INDICATE ãAND I KNOW I AM SUPPOSED TO KNOW THIS BUT I DON'T.

DOES IT INDICATE THE CITY COMMISSION HAS TO APPROVE WHAT GOES OUT ON A PETITION FOR

CHARTER AMENDMENTS?>> IT'S SILENT AS FAR AS THIS IDEA REALLY IS IN LINE WITH CITIZEN INITIATIVE.THIS IS ONE TYPE OF CITIZEN INITIATIVE. I'M JUST GOING TO SUGGEST, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DISCUSS CITIZEN INITIATIVE TODAY. WE SHOULD PROBABLY DISCUSS THIS AND HAVE IT GO ALONG WITH ã BECAUSE IF WE PIECEMEAL IT, CHARTER AMENDMENTS ARE ONE TYPE

[00:15:08]

OF CITIZEN INITIATIVE, BUT I KNOW WHEN WE HAD OUR PAST DISCUSSIONS, I'M SURE TODAY WE

WILL TALK ABOUT OTHER TYPES ORDINANCES. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS COMMIT JUST ONE SECOND MS. DAVIS, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IF THE CHARTER IS SILENT ON SENDING THIS TO THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL BEFORE IT CAN GO TO REFERENDUM, WHY

DOES IT HAPPENED? >> IT'S IN CHAPTER 166 THAT AN ORDINANCE HAS TO BE ADOPTED TO PROPOSE CHARTER AMENDMENTS FOR REFERENDUM. OUR CHARTER AND ORDINANCES.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. DAVIS? >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE ABOUT IT BEING PART OF THE CITIZEN INITIATIVE PROVISION THAT WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT LATER BECAUSE THAT IS FOR CITIZENS TO INITIATE THE CHANGEORDINANCES AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT POSSIBLY GIVING CITIZENS ON THE RIGHT . THIS IS A RIGHT HERE THAT THE CITIZENS ALREADY HAVE. THEY HAVE UNDER FLORIDA LAW AND IT CANNOT BE TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM. THAT'S WHY IF YOU READ 166.031, THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

THE CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED EITHER BY ORDINANCE WITH THE COMMISSION OR BY THE 10 PERCENT OF THE CITIZENS MOVING FORWARD. AND IN BOTH CASES THEY NEED A PUBLIC REFERENDUMAFTERWARDS .

SO THIS PARTICULAR CLAUSE A IS NOT CHANGING EXISTING LAW. IT IS SIMPLY CLARIFYING WHAT EXISTING LAW IS, THE RIGHTS OF OUR CITIZENS OF FERNANDINA BEACH ALREADY HAVE.

IT IS JUST CLARIFYING AND NOT CONFUSING THEM THAT THE ONLY WAY THE CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED

IS AFTER AN EIGHT YEAR REVIEW. >> SO THIS WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN HOW WE HAVE APPROACHED STATE LAW REFERENCES IN THE CHARTER. WE'VE BEEN TAKING OUT A BUNCH OF STATE LAW REFERENCES IN THE CHARTER ALL ALONG IN THIS ONE, I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU MIGHT WANT THIS, BUT IT IS REMINDING CITIZENS THAT DON'T FORGET THERE'S A STATE LAW OUT THERE THAT SAYS YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR OWN CHARTER WITH THE PETITION OF 10 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS.

I MISUNDERSTOOD EARLIER FROM YOU AND BUT IT IS DIFFERENT THAN HOW WE ADDRESSED IT.

>> IT IS ALSO THAT THE COMMISSION ITSELF CAN ORIGINATE IN AMENDMENT PROCESS OF THE

CHARTER. IT ADDRESSES BOTH WAYS. >> IS THAT TRUE?

>> YES. WHAT MS. DAVIS IS SAYING IS SHE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND HEAR THE SECTION 160 60 31 TELLING PEOPLE HOW THE CHARTER GETS AMENDED.

>> I THINK MS. POTTS POINT IS IN OTHER INSTANCES WE HAVE REMOVED LANGUAGE WE DEFINED TO BE REDUNDANT IF IT ALREADY EXISTED IN STATE LAW. SO THIS WOULD BE A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO THAT. THIS TIME WE WOULD BE PUTTING IN LANGUAGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IN

STATE LAW. HOW DO WE FEEL ABOUT THAT? >> I THINK IT IS A LITTLE MAYBE APPLES TO ORANGES. I FEEL LIKE WHEN WE REMOVED REFERENCES PREVIOUSLY IT WAS KIND OF MINUTIA TYPE REFERENCES THAT WERE VERY REDUNDANT. AND I FEEL LIKE SOME OF THE LETTERS WE GOT IN OUR CITIZENS SURVEYS WHEN IT FELT LIKE THERE WAS NO TRANSPARENCY.

I GUESS WHAT I WOULD ASK THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE IS WHAT'S THE DOWNSIDE TO HAVING THIS IN

THERE? >> JOHN? >>JON LASSERE: I REALLY DON'T SEE ONE, TO BE HONEST. IT IS STATE IS SOMETHING THAT ALREADY EXISTS AND AS LONG AS IT IS NOT MAKING ANY OTHER CHANGES. I THINK THAT WAY IF SOMEONE IS READING THROUGH THEY SAY WHAT CAN WE DO. IS PROBLEM WITH THE WAY THIS IS SET UP. I GUESS WE WILL JUST ADDRESS IT IN FIVE OR SIX OR EIGHT YEARS

WE CAN DO SOMETHING MORE IN SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND WHAT WAS JUST SAID. I THINK THIS IS RELEVANT INFORMATION. I THINK THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE TOOK OUT BEFORE.

THIS IS HOW YOU EDIT THE DOCUMENTST IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE IT IN THERE AND IT IS

[00:20:02]

ALREADY LOST. NO REASON TO NOT DENOTE HOW WE EDIT THE DOCUMENT .O I AM IN

FOR IT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES WITH THE CODE OF ETHICS WE TALKED ABOUT DOING, BUT ONE OF THE REASONS WE TALKED ABOUT DROPPING THE CODE OF ETHICS AND USING THE OATH INSTEAD WAS A CODE OF ETHICS ALREADY EXIST AT THE STATE LEVEL. IS A LITTLE BIT OF INCONSISTENCY.

THAT'S THE ONLY PUSHBACK I AM GIVING AND IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH TO GO FORWARD.

ANOTHER SLIGHT QUESTION IS COULD YOU PLEASE STATE WHAT YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE TITLE TO?

>> IN THE HANDOUT I INCLUDED THAT WAS IN THE PACKET, I INCLUDED HOW I WANTED TO REVISE THE TITLE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. IT WOULD READ CHARTER AMENDMENT

AND REVIEW. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. I MISS HER THAT.

ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO MAKING THESE CHANGES?

>> NOT AT ALL. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. >> AYE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. WHAT IS NEXT?

>> THAT IS IT FOR ME.

VARIOUS SECTIONS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE WITH CHANGES TO BE MADE.S.

KOSACK? >>TAMMI KOSACK: THIS IS WORKING OFF THE CLEAN VERSION OR WHATEVER. THE WAY IT IS PRINTED AND PUT OUT.

WE HAVE GONE OVER THIS BEFORE. IT REFERS TO SECTION 25, 31 AND 46.

SO THOSE OF THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY CLERK.AND AM JUST TRYING TO GET THE FORMATTING AND DESCRIPTIONS UNDER EACH OF THE CHARTER OFFICERS TO BE IN SYNC.

THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK ARE DONE ONE WAY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY IS DONE ANOTHER WAY. IN SECTION 25 OR CITY MANAGER AND ALSO 46 FOR CITY CLERK.

THE FIRST SECTION IS ONE BIG RAMBLING CITY MANAGER APPOINTMENT TENURE OF OFFICE AND QUALIFICATIONS. AND THEN WHEN WE GO TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE SECTION IS ENTITLED THE SAME WAY BUT THEN THEY ARE NOT ENUMERATED BUT WITH SMALL LETTERS. AND THEN THERE IS A WHOLE SECOND SECTION FOR PRO TEM THAT A WHOLE SEPARATE SECTIONFOR QUALIFICATIONS . DOES THIS MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M TRYING TO EXPLAIN WITH THESE? NOT BEING LITERALLY FORMATTED THE SAME WAY?

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MISS BRIAN? >>AMY BRYAN : I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I AGREE WITH YOU, FOR SURE. IT IS VERY INCONSISTENT AND LOOKS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

IT NEEDS TO READ THE SAME, I THINK. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE?

TAMMY, WHAT IS YOUR REACTION? >>TAMMI KOSACK: THIS TAMMY? >> OKAY.

YES, THEY LOOK DIFFERENT. BUT THEY SAY THE SAME THING. I'M ASSUMING YOU ARE ALL SHAKING YOUR HEAD AND NOBODY IS OBJECTING THAT WE JUST GO AHEAD AND MAKE THEM FORMAT THE SAME.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE WILL ASK MS. VAUGHT TO REFORMAT AND SHARE WITH THE COMMITTEE.

I THINK WE ARE IN A PLACE WHERE OUR ONE MEMBER ABSENCE WHERE WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO GO AHEAD WITH A SHORT SECOND MEETING ANYWAY. WE CAN COME BACK AND DISCUSS THAT IS THAT AN OKAY APPROACH? NOT YOUR HEADS. OKAY.

VERY GOOD. ANYTHING ELSE, MS. KOSACK? >>TAMMI KOSACK: THAT'S ALL.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE WITH CHANGES? MR. LASSERE? P2 I WAS GOING TO SAY THE CLEAN VERSION READ SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE VERSION I DOWNLOADED ONLINE. WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS, IT IS A MUCH CLEANER ãIT JUST READS WAY BETTER. SO THANK YOU TAMMY AND KATIE FOR MAKING IT.

IT IS A MUCH BETTER DOCUMENT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

[6.1 DISCUSSION: ELECTION RUNOFFS: This item is placed on the agenda at the request of Members Bean and Lasserre. ]

ALL RIGHT. WE WILL GO ON TO NEW BUSINESS. THE FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM IS ELECTION RUNOFFS. WE HAVE IN OUR PACKET THE LANGUAGE FROM SECTION 9

[00:25:02]

DESCRIBING WHAT WE LANDED ON AS WE LAST DISCUSSED THIS. AND THEN AN ARTICLE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US IN A REPORT OF VOTER TURNOUT IN NASSAU FOR VARIOUS SELECTIONS.

WHO WANTS TO START?DON'T ALL GO AT ONCE. I'M OLD, I CAN'T KEEP UP.

>>JON LASSERE: I CAN START TO READ TWO THINGS, NUMBER ONE, I THINK THE DATA PROVIDED FROM SUPERVISOR ELECTION SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION.

I THINK ALSO WITH US HAVING JUST FINISHED UP WHAT WAS ONE CASE THE UNIVERSAL PRIMARY, I THINK THAT ALSO ADDS A LOT TO THIS DISCUSSION AND WHY HAVING IT ALL DONE AND FINISHED IN ONE ELECTION AND IDEALLY IN NOVEMBER BASED ON THE DATA THAT WE HAVE JUST MAKES THE MOST SINCE. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE DATA FOR THE FOLLOWINGDECEMBER RUNOFFS AND YOU CAN SEE IT IS A VERY POOR TURNOUT . PRIOR TO THE CHANGE, EVEN THE PRIMARIES IS AVERAGE OR BETTER-THAN-AVERAGE TURNOUT. BUT ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE IN THE TEENS AND 20S. DON'T THINK THAT IS REALLY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY. SO MY FEELING IS WILL THOSE THINGS TAKEN TOGETHER VALIDATES WHY WE ARE BACK HERE AGAIN OR MAYBE THE FOURTH TIME TALKING

ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY REACTION?

MS. DAVIS? >>MARGARET DAVIS : I HAVE ACTUALLY A DIFFERENT READ ON THE CHART THAT WAS PROVIDED TODAY FROM THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS.

BECAUSE MOST OF THE FERNANDINA BEACH ELECTIONS WHERE THERE WERE RUNOFFS PRESENTED WERE IN ON NUMBERS SO THEY WEREN'T CONCURRENT WITH OUR NEW SYSTEM, WHICH IS OWNED EVEN-NUMBERED YEARS. AND IN FACT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ONE THAT WAS AN EVEN NUMBER 2014 THAT HAD A RUN OF 2014, HE SAW YOU HAD THE FERNANDINA BEACH RUN OFF WITH 28 PERCENT, WHICH IS RIGHT OUT THERE WITH WHAT THE PRIMARY NUMBERS ARE. AND I THINK EVEN MORE, I HAVEN'T HEARD A SPECIFIC PROPOSAL, BUT I BELIEVE WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED HERE IS MOVING THE RUNOFF RECURRING IN AUGUST INSTEAD OF THE CURRENT GENERAL ELECTION DAY.

IF YOU EITHER HAVE ONLY TWO CANDIDATES OR YOU HAVE, IF YOU HAVE ONLY TWO CANDIDATES IT IS SAYING NOW OR EVEN IF YOU HAVE THREE WHO GOES INTO THE RUNOFF AGAIN CAN BE AS LOW AS 20 PERCENT. ELECTION ON THE OTHER YOU HAVE BELOW 1/3 OF THE POPULATION PARTICIPATING. AND IF YOU HAVE TWO CANDIDATES RUNNING, YOU WILL SAY IN AUGUST BECAUSE HE WOULD NEED TO RUN OFF YOU ARE HAVING THAT DECISION MADE WITH POSSIBLY ONLY 20 PERCENT AS WELL. ONE WAY OR THE OTHER TO GET DISADVANTAGED, ONE OF THE ELECTIONS WOULD HAVE A LOW TURNOUT NUMBER. I THINK BECAUSE 2007 STARTED SHIFTING EVERYTHING SO THAT ELECTIONS WILL BE IN THE EVEN-NUMBERED YEARS CONSISTENT WITH ON YEAR, WHAT THEYCALL ON YOUR ELECTIONS, WE WILL HAVE MUCH BETTER DATA OVER TIME .

BUT ACCORDING TO THIS CHART, THE ONLY FERNANDINA BEACH EVEN-NUMBERED YEARS DID NOT HAVE RUNOFFS. I THOUGHT AND 2018 THERE WAS AN RUNOFF BUT THERE'S NO PERCENTAGE NUMBER SHOWN HERE. I WAS STILL NEW THAN. I THINK IF WE DON'T HAVE GOOD DATA YET WHEN YOU HAVE THE SAME THINGS HAPPENING IN EVEN YEARS. MY OTHER CONCERN IS IF YOU GO TO THE INITIAL SEATS RACE BEGINNING IN AUGUST. FROM AUGUST TO NOVEMBER IS A VERY LONG TIME TO DO A RUNOFF. AND I THINK YOU WILL HAVE A LOT OF ãIT WILL BE A LOT OF NOISE

[00:30:08]

MIXED IN NOW THAT WE ARE HAVING ELECTIONS CONSISTENT WITH SO MANY OTHER ELECTIONS IN THE LOCAL CANDIDATES ARE LIABLE TO GET LOST. AND SO THIS WAY ONCE YOU ARE DOWN TO ONLY TWO CANDIDATES FOR THE RUNOFF THEY GET MORE FOCUSED.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OF MY THOUGHTS IN ADDITION TO THE ONES I'VE EXPRESSED BEFORE ABOUT CONFUSION NONPARTISANSHIP AND OTHERS WE DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. KOSACK. >>TAMMI KOSACK: I FEEL LIKE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TWO DISTINCT ISSUES WHEN WE BRING UP THIS TOPIC IT WOULD WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INCREASE IN VOTER TURNOUT AND WE ARE ALSO TALKING ABOUT ELIMINATING A RUNOFF. THOSE TWO THINGS ARE ACHIEVED THROUGH DIFFERENT MEANS. I MY MIND, I LOVE THE WAY JOHN THE LAST MEETING HE SAID WE BASICALLY FOUR CHOICES . NOT ENTER INTO PARKED THROUGH ALL OF THIS, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT VOTER TURNOUT THAT WAS THE LAST YEAR SEEING THEIR INTENT WI-FI PUTTING THE, OUR ELECTIONS CONCURRENT WITH THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS BUT I THINK THIS DATA SUPPORTS EVEN THOUGH IT IS A LOWER VOTER TURNOUT THAN ANY OF US WOULD LIKE BECAUSE WE ARE INVOLVED, IT IS STILL DRASTICALLY HIGHER THAN IT WAS IN APRIL. I THINK THE LAST THINGS HAD A GOOD INTENT THERE AND IS EVIDENCE THAT IT WORKED. IF LISA SWITCH TO OFF CYCLE, NASSAU COUNTY SEEMS TO RUN PRETTY CONSISTENT AND ABOUT THAT 27 PERCENT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT'S GOING TO GIVE US A KICK UP TO INCREASE VOTER PARTICIPATION.

IF YOU LIKE IN THAT REGARD THERE ARE INVOLVED IN THAT BOAT AND CAREGIVER THE BOTH OF US THAT ONLY GET INVOLVED IN BOTH WHETHER IT'S IN OUR BACKYARD AND IS SOMETHING THAT BOTHERS US. IF YOU LIKE IN THE MUNICIPALITY AND ALL THE ONES THAT EVER LIVED THAT, IN THAT 20 PERCENT IT IS HARD TO BOOST THAT GET BETTER VOTER TURNOUT.

IN A SMALL TOWN. . MY CONCERN IS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ELECTION CYCLES YOU'D IF WE DO PULL IT BACK TO AUGUST, THAT'S A VERY LONG WAY.

IF SOMEONE IS CHOSEN AND SELECTED AND NO NEED FOR RUNOFF, THAT'S A LONG TIME AS THEY MAY BE IN A COMPANY IS NO LONGER IN THEIR. ARE THE DATA A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY TOO THINKING THAT I WAS PRETTY POIGNANT WITH THE PERCENTAGES OF THE RUNOFF, THINKING IT WOULD BE WAY LOWER THAN AVERAGE AT 22 PERCENT. I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK LAST YEARS WAS GOOD AND I WOULD VOTE TO KEEP IT JUST THE WAY IT IS ALSO BECAUSE OF VOTER FATIGUE. ANOTHER CASE WE JUST DID THIS JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, IF YOU

LIKE IT IS NOT ROUGH LET'S NOT FIX IT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : REACTIONS?

MR. BEAN? >>BRADLEY BEAN : THANK YOU. I THINK I HAVE ONE MORE WAY WE COULD BOTH WIN IF WE DO IT THIS WAY. IF WE CHANGE THE DEADLINE TO REGISTER SUCH AS YOU HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO PUT EVERYONE ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT IF NEED BE.

SO WHAT WE WOULD DO ON THIS YEAR WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COVID MESSING IT UP, ALL CANDIDATES DID ANNOUNCE PRIOR TO WHAT WOULD'VE BEEN A DEADLINE.

IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN LIKE THAT ANYWAY. WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS IF THERE ARE THREE CANDIDATES WE COULD HAVE ESSENTIALLY IN THE PRIMARY IN THE TOP TO AND GO TO THE GENERAL. EITHER WAY WILL ALWAYS HAVE TWO CANDIDATES IN THE GENERAL ELECTION WITH THE MAXIMUM TURNOUT. IF A PRIMARY IS NEEDED, WE WILL HAVE A PRIMARY WHETHER SLIGHTLY HIGHER TURNOUT. I NEED TO HEAR IF WE DID THAT

PLANE. >> WOULD YOU SAY THE THREE CANDIDATES WOULD BE IN THE

[00:35:04]

PRIMARY? AND WOULDN'T THEY BE RUNNING AT THE SAME TIME AS THE OTHER TWO WERE THE TWO DON'T RUN UNTIL NOVEMBER.SPOKE WE HAVE A PRIMARY IN AUGUST AND THE GENERAL IN NOVEMBER. SO WHAT WE WILL DO IN THE CASE WHERE THERE ARE THREE OR MORE PARIS FOR INSTANCE, LET'S TAKE THIS ELECTION CYCLE AS AN EXAMPLE.

THERE IS ONE GROUP WITH THREE OR MORE RIGHT NOW. WHAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE IS ALL DEADLINES TO FILE WOULD'VE BEEN BEFORE ãTHEY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME DAY OF THE DEADLINE TO GET ON THE BALLOT FOR THE PRIMARY. IT WOULD'VE BEEN SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WOULD'VE DONE FOR JUDGES. IT WOULD'VE BEEN THE SAME TIME.

SO THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO WOULD GO ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT IS GROUP TO.

WE WOULD HOLD A PRIMARY AND WE WOULD TAKE THE TOP TO AND SEND THEM STRAIGHT TO THE GENERAL.

IN THE CASE OF THE GROUP 1 AND GROUP 3, WE WOULD NOT EVEN SEE THEM.

WE WOULD ONLY SEE THEM ON YOUR GENERAL BALLOT. MAXIMIZE THE TURNOUT FOR ALL THREE GROUPS. AND ANY GROUP THAT WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE 70 PERCENT,

80 PERCENT TURNOUT WE ARE LOOKING FOR.>> IS PROBLEM HERE IS CITIZENS NEED TO SEE A WHOLESALE ARRAY ãI DON'T THINK YOU CAN VOTE IN ISOLATION ONE SEPARATE GROUP.BECAUSE WHO I VOTE FOR IN GROUP 2 MIGHT BE COUNTERACTED OR HELP DETERMINE WHO I VOTE FOR IN GROUP 1 OR A DIFFERENT GROUP. AND I THINK ALSO LIKE THE FORM YOU DID, IT WAS SO HELPFUL TO SEE EVERYBODY AT ONCE TOGETHER SO YOU CAN WAY WHERE IS THE DAYLIGHT BETWEEN CANDIDATES.

I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THAT.GOOD IDEA BUT IN REALITY, IT'S NOT GREAT.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MARGARET? >>MARGARET DAVIS : I APPRECIATE MEMBER BEAN FOR WORKING TO TRY TO THINK OUT-OF-THE-BOX, ALTHOUGH I THINK YOU ARE GETTING IN A COMPLICATED WAY TO APPROACH IT, BUT SOMETIMES THAT IS WHAT IS NEEDED. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I'M NOT SURE WITH WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS SETTING THE DATES OF THE PRIMARY AND WHEN THE RUNOFF IS HELD. IT'S REALLY SOMETHING WE OUR CHARTER NEED TO DO.

BECAUSE I THINK SECTION 9, THE FIRST SENTENCE ALREADY SAYS THEY SET THE DATES AND MANNER OF HOLDING THE ELECTION. I THINK THE COMMISSION BY ORDINANCE COULD MOVE TO EITHER ONE OF THESE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. AS FAR AS THE TIMING OF WHEN, AS LONG AS IT IS HELD THE SAME YEAR AS THE STATE AND COUNTY ELECTIONS, THAT'S THE ONLY REQUIREMENT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE. I THINK THEY COULD MOVE TO THIS AND MAYBE THE BEST THING WE SHOULD DO WE HAVE ALREADY SAID, WHICH IS IDEALLY WE WOULD LIKE A. IT'S NOT AVAILABLE AND OTHER IDEAS THE MEMBERS DISCUSS WITH THE COMMISSION MAY WANT TO CONSIDER DOING ARE THESE THINGS. I STILL DON'T WE NEED TO CHANGE. I LIKE HAVING MYSELF WHERE THE EXTRA TIME SO THE DECEMBER RUNOFF DOESN'T HAVE ALL THE OTHER NOISE INVOLVED. LIKE MEMBER KOSACK, I WAS PLEASANTLY SURPRISED BY HOW HIGH THE RUNOFF WAS 28 PERCENT. I THINK THAT IS REALLY

IMPRESSIVE, ACTUALLY. >> A COUPLE THINGS, THERE REALLY IS A PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE FOR IN AN THINK IT DOES HELP ACCOMPLISH BOTH THOSE GOALS IN REALLY WHAT IS A REASONABLE WAY. MY IDEA WAS WINNER TAKE ALL THE GENERAL.

OF THE THAT SEEMS LIKE A WAY TO DO IT. AND THEN THERE IS NO RUNOFF AND YOU HAVE A LARGE TURN OUT. WE HAVE A LONG TIME RIGHT NOW BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER TO LEARN THE CANDIDATES, WHICH YOU HAVE ALL DONE. AND ANYONE ELSE TO DO SO.

ALMOST ANYONE ELSE IS ON THE BALLOT. IS ABLE TO BE DONE, THERE IS NO VOTER FATIGUE FOR ME. I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE.

ESPECIALLY FOR LOCAL ELECTIONS. I HAD AGREED THAT HAVING ON THE PRIMARY UNTIL NOVEMBER IS WAY TOO LONG. WE ARE SEEING THAT WITH THE COUNTY NOW.

[00:40:02]

I THINK IT IS PROBLEMATIC WE COULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC IN THE CITY I AGREE WITH AVOIDING THAT. MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE THAT WE HAVE SOME FINALITY IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION WITH NO RATE RUNOFF BUT ON THAT. I THINK MADELEINES SUGGESTION IS SPOT ON FOR THAT. THE FOLKS OFFICE NEED TO TAKE RESPONSE ABILITY AND UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. BRADLEY IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED IN OUR JUDGE RUNOFF. HE HAD FOUR CANDIDATES AND TWO ADVANCED AND THEY WILL BE CITED IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, WHERE IS ALL THE OTHERS I THINK FOLKS THOUGHT MAYBE IT WOULD BE ADVANCED TO A FINAL TO THE GENERAL ELECTION. BUT WAS UNIVERSAL PRIMARY.

WHEN OR TAKE ALL. IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A SURPRISE. I STILL ADVOCATE THAT HAVING A FINAL ELECTION OF THE ORDINARY GENERAL ELECTION. TO ONE OF YOUR POINTS, THE PREVIOUS COMMITTEE WAS SUCCESSFUL. THEY DID EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT TO DUPLICATE THEY INCREASE THE VOTER TURNOUT AND THAT WAS PERFECT.

BUT WHAT DIDN'T HAPPEN IS THE RUNOFFS. THAT DOES NOT SEEM THE SAME AMOUNT OF VOTER TURNOUT. IN FACT, IT'S 1/3 IN SOME CASES.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THEIR INTENT. I THINK THEY WANTED TO INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT, THEY DON'T HAVE IT IN THE RUNOFF AND THAT IS WHERE IT WAS.

SO I WOULD JUST LEAVE THAT THERE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. BRYAN , COULD YOU REMEMBER FIRST IF YOU CAN, SHARE WITH US WHAT THE COMMITTEES RECOMMENDATION WAS

ON RUNOFFS FOR ANYTHING? >>AMY BRYAN : REMEMBER HAVING THIS EXACT SAME CONVERSATION AND I THINK THE ONLY WAY WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IS BECAUSE THERE WAS A SPLIT IN RUNOFFS IT WOULD AND SO THE ONLY WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IS MAKING THE ELECTION TO GO WITH GENERAL TO GET BETTER TURNOVER THAT IS ALL WE WANTED AT THAT TIME POTENT THAT WHAT WE DIFFERENT IN 2007 AND THE WORD NOW, OF COURSE, BUT THAT WAS THE ULTIMATE GOAL AND WE COULD NOT COME TO A CONSISTENT ON THE RUNOFF, WHICH WAS DIFFICULT. SO THAT'S WHERE WE WERE

SUCCESSFUL AND THAT'S WHERE WE ENDED. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

WE ARE MISSING A MEMBER IF WE TRY TO VOTE ON THIS TODAY. I KNOWINGLY VOTED ON ISSUES IN THE PAST IT DIDN'T SIT WELL. AND THIS ONE WAS ENOUGH FOR US TO COME BACK FOR THE FIRST TIME WE VOTED MR. BEAN WAS MISSING WHICH IS WHY WE ARE BRINGING IT BACK NOW.

GOING TO ASK YOU ALL FOR YOUR THOUGHTS BEFORE WE ARE DONE DISCUSSING.

I'M NOT CALLING IN AND TO THIS DISCUSSION YET. WE DO HAVE TO BE OUT OF HERE BY 5:30 P.M. IS THAT TRUE? 5:15 PM? OUT OF CHAMBERS BY 5:15 PM TODAY. SO THAT GIVES US AN HOUR AND 1/2 NOW TO TALK THROUGH WHAT WE NEED TO TALK TO. BUT WHAT I WANT TO DO IS ASK YOU ALL YOUR THOUGHTS ON VOTING ON THIS ISSUE IN THE NEXT ONE WITH A MISSING MEMBER. MS. DAVIS?

>> WE HAD A VOTE ON THE PLURALITY AS MEMBER LIST RECENTLY REFERENCED.

I THINK THAT IS WHEN WE HAD ALL SEVEN PRESENT AND THAT WAS NOT A 3/3 VOTE.

THE 3/3 BOAT WAS ON THE TIMING ISSUE. NOT A PLURALITY.I DID NOT REALIZE THAT DISCUSSING PLURALITY AS OPPOSED TO HAVING A RUNOFF WAS ON THE TABLE HERE.

I HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, AS WELL AS WE OUGHT TO MAKE THAT MORE CLEAR TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. BECAUSE THAT IS ALSO WHO WE HEARD A LOT THAT SHE.

WE GO BACK TO ELIMINATING RUNOFFS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : I'M NOT SURE WE ARE DISCUSSING THAT NOW, ALTHOUGH I WILL SAY I AM STILL NOT CONVINCED PUT ON HEARING CONFLICTING FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY. CONFLICTING WITH WHAT WE RECEIVED HERE ON PAPER IF HE WENT TO A PLURALITY VOTE, WOULD ELIMINATE RUNOFFS.

RIGHT? ARE RATIONALE WAS TOO MUCH CHANGE TOO FAST.

WE START IMPLEMENTING THE FOUR-YEAR ELECTION CYCLE IN 2014.

[00:45:06]

AND JUST FINISHED IT. SO THAT WAS A SIX YEAR PROCESS. I'M JUST SUGGESTING IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION ON ILLUMINATING RUNOFFS OR MOVING THE DATE OF A RUNOFF OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, MY QUESTION FOR THIS GROUP IS DO WE WANT TO DO THAT WITHOUT ONE HOUR

MEMBERS PRESENT? >> I THINK IN ORDER TO AVOID CONFLICT, YOU SHOULD HAVE ALL OF US HERE. PLUS, I JUST THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ALL OF US HERE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OTHER OPINION ON THAT? >> WE ARE ONLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT THE NEXT MEETING AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE A CHANCE ãIF WE DID DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO COME BACK TOGETHER.

WOULD WE HAVE TIME? WE ARE ALREADY IN THE MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER.

WE ARE ONLY AROUND TWO MORE WEEKS UNDER THE CORN ORDINANCE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : DO WE HAVE

TIME TO WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING? >> WE ARE ASSUMING EVERYONE IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE. RIGHT NOW THEY ARE.>ARLENE FILKOFF : TODAY THEY ARE BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT NEXT WEEK WILL HAVE EVERYBODY EITHER. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T END UP WITH A STATEMENT COMING OUT OF OUR COMMITTEE THAT WE VOTED ON A MAJOR ISSUE WITHOUT ONE HOUR MEMBERS AND THEY VOTED A DIFFERENT WAY. I DON'T WANT TO END UP WITH THIS BEING A 3/3 TIE AND I DON'T WANT TO END UP WITH IT BEING WE DECIDED SOMETHING WITHOUT A MEMBER WITHIN LATER EXPRESS AN OPINION THAT MIGHT BE NEGATIVE.

I AM SO WALKING ON EGGSHELLS AROUND THIS COMMUNITY THESE DAYS.

AND THEIR REACTIONS TO THINGS THAT ARE NOT ACCURATE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE DOING WHAT WE KNOW WE ARE DOING AND STANDING BEHIND IT. SO THAT'S WHY I AM ASKING THIS QUESTION. OKAY, IF WE THINK WE CAN CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION AND COME TO A RESOLUTION, I WILL TIME BOX US ON IT. CAN WE DO THAT? I'M GOING TO SAY THAT 4:05:00, IT IS 10 OF NOW. CAN WE REACH A CONCLUSION THAT WE CAN TAKE A VOTE ON ABOUT THE PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE. AND AM GOING TO ASK MR. LASSERE AS SOON AS I GET AN ANSWER, GOING TO ASK MR. LASSERE WHETHER HE CAN RESTATE THE PROPOSAL AS HE SEES IT FOR RIGHT NOW. SO DO WE THINK IN THE NEXT 15

MINUTES WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON A STATEMENT? >> HOW DO WE KNOW UNTIL WE GO BACKAND FORTH . WE CAN CERTAINLY GO FOR 15 MINUTES AND VOTE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : IS THAT OKAY? >> YES.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. >>JON LASSERE: I THINK WE WENT FROM WANTING TO INCLUDE ALL

SEVEN OF US TO MAKING US VOTE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : AM ASKING YOU WHAT YOU THINK.>>JON LASSERE: THINK WE SHOULD ASK THE COMMISSION TO EXTEND OUR DATE TO OCTOBER 31 AND ME AT A TIME WHEN ALL OF US CAN BE AND WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION AT THAT TIME.

I DON'T THINK IT IS TOO MUCH TO ASK, IT IS AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH ISSUE.

IS THERE ANOTHER OUTSIDE DEADLINE WE NEED TO MEET CAN WE MAKE IT OCTOBER 15 AND ASK FOR A TWO WEEK EXTENSION? I DON'T THINK IT IS TOO MUCH TO ASK THAT.

INCLUDING THE CITIZEN INITIATIVE ISSUES AS WELL. >> THE CANDIDACY ISSUE, OR

THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT MEMBER BEANS CANDIDACY? >> AND WE CAN'T KEEP GOING PAST NOVEMBER 3. BUT I WILL MAKE IT, I WILL MAKE ANY TIME NECESSARY FOR THIS.

>> I THINK THE LAST TIME WAS ON SHUT DOWN. >> THE TIME I MISSED IT WAS

WORK. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : NO ONE IS CRITICIZING YOUR MISSING IT.

CITY STAFF, IS THERE AN ISSUE ABOUT ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION TO MID-OCTOBER?

SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RUSH THESE DISCUSSIONS? >> NO.

OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. ANYTHING CAN BE DONE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : I HAVE OFFICIALLY ASKED TO EXTEND UNTIL OCTOBER 15. SO TODAY WE CAN DISCUSS AS LONG

[00:50:05]

AS YOU WANT AS LONG AS WE ARE DONE BY 5:30 P.M. >> 15.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : SORRY. 5:15 PM WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING COMING IN THAT NEEDS TO BE SET UP. SO LET ME TRY TO RESTATE WHERE WE ARE HEAR THE SITUATION THAT EXISTS RIGHT THIS MINUTE IN TIME IS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO ELIMINATE A RUNOFF.

WE HAVE NOT APPROVED LOOKING AT A PLURALITY AGAIN. WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A SEPARATE ELECTION CALLED A RUNOFF.

IN THE PROPOSAL THAT HAS BEEN PUT IN FRONT OF US TO DO THAT IS TO MOVE THE GENERAL ELECTION TO COINCIDE WITH THE COUNTIES PRIMARY DATE AND RUNOFF DATE TO COINCIDE WITH THE GENERAL ELECTION DATE. THAT MEANS WE DON'T HAVE A SEPARATE RUNOFF THE CITY HAS TO PAY FOR. AND WE HOPE BY DOING THAT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THATWE HOPE WE

WILL GET HIGHER VOTER TURNOUT . DID I STATE THAT ACCURATELY? >> I WILL RESTATE WHAT I AM THINKING.AND IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT MEMBER BEAN HAS PRESENTED.

SO IT WOULD BE ãFEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME IF ANY OF THIS IS INCORRECT, BUT WE WOULD SET THE DEADLINE TO QUALIFY FOR A CITY COMMISSION SEAT AS THE PRIMARY DEADLINE.

WE WOULD THEN HOLD ELECTIONS FOR GREATER THAN TWO CANDIDATES AT THE PRIMARY WITH THOSE TWO HIGHEST VOTE GETTERS MOVING TO THE GENERAL IN NOVEMBER IN WHICH THE SEATS WOULD BE DECIDED UPON AND ARE GOING TO BE TWO CANDIDATES FOR EACH GROUP.

IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. THAT IS NOT WRITTEN AS PART OF THE CHARTER, BUT THAT IS IN GENERAL THE THEORY. A MAN, AS FAR AS THE CITY COMMISSION DICTATING HOW THE MANNER ãI KNOW IT SAYS THAT BUT I DON'T THINK IT IS INTENDED FOR THEM TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THEMSELVES REELECTED. I THINK BY PUTTING THIS IN THE CHARTER IT'S TELLING THEM YOU CAN DECIDE WHEN AND WHERE ELECTIONS ARE HELD IN GENERAL, BUT THIS IS HOW ãNOT HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT. SO I THINK ãI FORGOT TO RESPOND TO THAT EARLIER. BUT THAT IS THE PROPOSAL I WOULD PUT FORTH.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD HOPEFULLY VOTE ON A NUMBER NEXT MEETING.

SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. BUT AGAIN, IT IS UP FOR A DISCUSSION FROM NORMAL YEARS.

I THINK WHAT WE HAVE IS PROBLEMATIC. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FIX IT.

>>TAMMI KOSACK: I'M JUST GOING TO REITERATE WHAT I SAID BEFORE ABOUT WHAT WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF THAT WITH NOT HAVING ALL THE CANDIDATES OUT THERE AND COMPARING AND CONTRASTING AND DOING EVERYTHING AT ONCE. AND THEN I'M JUST GOING TO BACK UP TO WHAT IS THE REASON OF US WANTING TO ELIMINATE THE RUNOFF? IS IT THE COST?

IS IT WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS LOW TURNOUT? >> I CAN SPEAK FOR WHAT I THINK IS A SERIOUS POINT. THINK THE POINT IS THE LOW TURNOUT. THERE IS NO HIGHER WILL THEN 70 TO 80 PERCENT OF THE TURNOUT. AND SO THEREFORE ãTHAT'S WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OR TWO PEOPLE GO HEAD-TO-HEAD IN THE GENERAL. THEREBY THE GREATEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE GET TO DECIDE WHO WILL BE THE NEXT CITY COMMISSIONER. WHICH I BELIEVE MIGHT BE THE INTENT AND THE COUNTY CAN DO WITH DOING THE SAME THING SIMILAR TO WHAT I DON'T SPEAK FOR THE COUNTY THOUGH. THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD JUMP INTO.

AND OUT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. DAVIS? P6 I'M NOT SURE WHO PROVIDED THE TURNOUT DATA, BUT I WAS WONDERING ON THESE NUMBERS. LIKE THE 63 PERCENT IN 2018, IS THAT THE TURNOUT, THE PERCENTAGE OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHO VOTED FOR COMMISSIONERS OR IS THAT WHO VOTED FOR EVERYTHING ON THE BALLOT AT THAT TIME? BECAUSE I HAVE READ IN MY RESEARCH ON THIS THAT YOU MAY HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE TO GO TO

[00:55:04]

POLLS THAT DAY BUT THEY AREN'T VOTING IN THE LOCAL ELECTIONS WHO THEY ARE ONLY VOTING ON HIGHER UP PART OF THE TICKET. I'M NOT SURE YOU WILL GET 63 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE ARE 77.

ARE ACTUALLY VOTING AT ONE TIME. BUT IF YOU ARE STILL HAVING THESE, WHETHER YOU ARE HAVING ONE OF THE PRIMARY AND ONE IN NOVEMBER, ALWAYS ONE OF THE TWO ELECTIONS IS GOING TO BE DOWN IN THE 20 TO 30 PERCENT RANGE. BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE NUMBERS ARE FOR THE PRIMARY. SO EVEN IF YOU MOVE THINGS TO AUGUST BUT AS I SAID BEFORE, I HOPE IT'S ONLY ABOUT TURNOUT BECAUSE I NEVER THINK MONEY SHOULD BE AN ISSUE WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT CITIZENS EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE. AND IF WE ARE MOVING BACK TO EVERETT DISCUSSING PLURALITY, AS I SAID, VERY MUCH THE VOICE OF THE MINORITY REGIONS THEN I WILL STAY THOSE COMMENTS IF WE ARE GOING TO EVER DISCUSS THAT. BUT I DO ALSO WANT TO THINK SECOND MEMBER KOSACK COMMENTS ABOUT HAVING THIS GROUP OF CANDIDATES POSSIBLY IN AUGUST BUT THE OTHER GROUP IS NOT UNTIL NOVEMBER BECAUSE ONE HAD TWO PEOPLE RUNNING FOR THAT AND THE OTHER HAD THREE. AND I THINK THAT GETS VERY CONFUSING.

>> IF I CAN JUMP BACK INTO A TRUST THAT ONE POINT. THIS SYSTEM WOULD HAVE IN OCTOBER, IF THERE WERE THREE GROUPS GOING YOU WOULD HAVE SIX CANDIDATES REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS, HE WOULD HAVE THE GROUPS ãSHE WOULD GET TO SEE THAT WHERE EVERYONE CAME IN AT ONCE EXCEPT THERE WOULD BE TO EXACTLY. WOULD BE NO MORE OR NO LESS.

AND AGAIN, WE ARE APPLYING TODAY'S SET UP IN THE AUGUST ELECTION, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONLY THREE CANDIDATES IN GROUP 2 AND DECIDE WHICH TYPE II WOULD GO TO JOIN THE OTHER TWO GROUPS IN THE PRIMARY. IT'S A SYSTEM WHERE THERE IS STILL THE OPTION TO LOOK AT PEOPLE WHO ONLY VOTE IN THE GENERAL TO GET TO SEE A CHOICE FOR EVERY SINGLE GROUP AND THEY WOULD GET TO DECIDE WHO WOULD BEST REPRESENT THEM. WHICH IS WHAT I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR. THIS IS ONLY ABOUT THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VOTES.

>> I WONDER IF ON THAT NOTE WE ARE SETTING UP AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE PERHAPS VIA NAME RECOGNITION ON DOLLARS ON THE CAMPAIGN. IF IT IS EARLY ON WE DO HAVE THREE PEOPLE OR SOMEBODY HAS EITHER THE NEWCOMER, WHICH WE GET LOTS OF NEWCOMERS BECAUSE THEY GET INVOLVED. OR IS SOMEBODY WHO JUST DECIDES TO JUMP IN AND THROW THEIR HAT IN THE RING EARLY ON, THEY MIGHT BE DISADVANTAGED BY THAT. JUST A THOUGHT.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE? IS DAVIS? >> AGAIN, IT GOES BACK FROM AUGUST TO NOVEMBER, IT'S VERY LONG CAMPAIGN FOR LOCAL PEOPLE FOR IN AND IT DOES CONTINUE TO FAVOR, START FAVORING LOCALLY OR IF YOU ONLY HAD ONE MONTH TO PREPARE YOUR RUNOFF IS A MUCH MORE LEVEL FEEL. TALK IN A SMALL COMMUNITY. AND OPTIC I HAD EARLIER.

>> AND THINK WE ALREADY HAMMERED THIS TO DEATH AND TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF POINTS HERE, BUT WE BROUGHT THIS THE FIRST TIME. CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG.

IN 2018, WE DON'T HAVE THE PERCENTAGE, BUT I CAN'T CONFIRM THERE WAS IN FACT THE RUNOFF IN 2018 AS WELL AS THEOTHER ONES . LOOKED AT THE SUPERVISOR AND COULDN'T FIND IT.

BUT IT WAS THERE. THE HIGHEST VOTE-GETTER IN THE GENERAL GROUP FOR LAST ELECTION CYCLE. THOSE WHO HAD THE MOST VOTES GOT MORE VOTES IN THE GENERAL DEVOTED IN TOTAL IN THE RUNOFF. TO PHRASE THAT A DIFFERENT WAY, THE PERSON WHO CAME IN FIRST PLACE AT THE GENERAL ELECTION CAME BACK AND GOT SECOND PLACE IN THE RUNOFF.

[01:00:09]

WOULD HAVE A HIGHER NUMBER OF BOATS IN TOTAL. INPUT ALL THE PEOPLE VOTE THE FIRST TIME AND THEN HAD SOME ã THEY WOULD OUTVOTE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE FOR THE RUNOFF.

SO MY GOAL IS TO TRY TO AVOID THAT SITUATION FOR THE FUTURE. LET'S MAKE SURE THAT GIANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE WOULD GET TO SEE TWO CANDIDATES AND THEY WOULD GET TO DECIDE THE WINNER AS OPPOSED TO SENDING THE TWO CANDIDATES TO IRAQ FOR THERE IS MUCH LESS PEOPLE.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. DAVIS? P6 BOTTOM LINE, THIS IS AMERICA AND CITIZENS HAVE A RIGHT NOT TO VOTE AS WELL AS THE RIGHT TO VOTE. AND SO THEY AREN'T SHOWING UP FOR THE RUNOFF, THE CANDIDATES HAVEN'T DONE A GREAT JOB OF GOING OUT THERE AND CAMPAIGNING AND GETTING THEIR. OR THE CITY IT'S SELF. THERE IS SOME RESPONSIBILITY THERE. AND I THINK CITIZENS HAVE THE RIGHT NOT TO VOTE.

THAT IS JUST THE REALITY. AND IT HAPPENS EVERYWHERE. BUT AS FAR AS THOSE TYPES OF RESULTS BECAUSE I DO THINK ãI DON'T LIKE WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF CANDIDATES, BUT I DO THINK ã I'M STARTING TO LOSE MY VOICE. YOU PROBABLY WOULD BE HAPPY FOR THAT.

BUT THAT THE MINORITY DID COME TOGETHER AND THAT THE OTHER PEOPLE THEN DECIDED NOT TO VOTE. AND THE CANDIDATES NEED TO TAKE THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP GET THE VOTE OUT AS WELL AS MAYBE THE CITY AND MAKING SURE PEOPLE ARE AWARE THAT ELECTION IS

COMING. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MR. LASSERE. >>JON LASSERE: I'M GOING TO POINT OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO MAY END UP BEING ON THE WRONG END OF THE RUNOFF ELECTION COULD BE THE CANDIDATE THAT IS NOT AS WELL-FUNDED OR MAYBE NOT AS GOOD NAME RECOGNITION OR MAYBE WOULD BE THE MINORITY CANDIDATE.I DON'T UNDERSTAND IN ANY SENSE HOW THIS NARRATIVE MR. BEING JUST EXPLAINED WOULD BE THE RIGHT OUTCOME IN ANY ELECTION THAT IF YOU GOT SOMEONE ãTHIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR FOR THE I'M NOT GOING TO PUT MY CANDIDATE WHO IS GOING TO BE IN A. BUT IT IS CLEARLY UNFAIR.

PARTICULARLY COMING OFF A GENERAL ELECTION FOR PRESIDENTIAL YEAR AND PEOPLE TRULY DO HAVE AT THAT POINT APATHY AND EVERYTHING ELSE. THEY ARE KINDA TIRED AND READY TO MOVE ON BUT NONETHELESS, EVEN IF THAT DOESN'T EXIST, IT IS STILL NOT RIGHT. JUST CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW WHEN YOU HAVE 70 PERCENT CHUMMING UP, EVEN IF ONLY HALF OF THEM VOTE THAT IS 35 PERCENT AND YOU WOULD HAVE 25 PERCENT SHOW UP A MONTH LATER.

I WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO GET MY MIND AROUND THAT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE?

MS. DAVIS? >>MARGARET DAVIS : TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, YOU ARE FINE WITH THE CANDIDATES SHOWING UP ON THE PRIMARY AND IF THERE ARE ONLY TWO OF THEM OR THREE, YOU ARE STILL ONLY HAVING THAT BASED ON ONLY 30 PERCENT. SO I MEAN, ONE OF THE TWO

ELECTIONS WILL HAVE A LOW TURNOUT.>> THE PRIMARY IS JUST TO GET TO THE FINAL.

I CAN LIVE WITH THAT THERE IN THAT WOULD BE BETTER THAN THE FINAL BEING THE 20 PERCENT RUNOFF. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH IT.

THE PRIMARY WILL NOT BE A FINAL ELECTION. IS GOING TO GET THEM TO THE

NEXT SET. >> I THINK THE PROBLEM WITH THE PRIMARY IS A LOT OF THE CONFUSION. WHETHER IT'S A UNIVERSAL PRIMARY, OPEN PRIMARY OR CLOSED PRIMARY. MANY PEOPLE THAT WOULD VOTE ON A GENERAL DON'T VOTE IN THE PRIMARY. THERE IS APATHY, EVEN IF IT IS FOR A THREE PARTY COMMISSION RUNOFF. I THINK THEY ARE NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR IT.

MY VOTE IS BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE WE ARE PUTTING FORTH, WE CAN STILL DISCUSS.

BUT KEEP IT WHERE IT IS BECAUSE WE ARE ON SUCH A NEW CYCLE OF SEEING WHAT IS TAKING EFFECT

TODAY VOTE TO KEEP EVERYTHING AS IT IS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. BRYAN?

>>AMY BRYAN : I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY BUT I AGREE WITH MR. LASSERE AND I ALSO AGREE WITH MS. DAVIS AS FAR AS VOTER TURNOUT AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SHOWUP TO VOTE .

SO AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF VOTER TURNOUT AND I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF GOING TO THE GENERAL ELECTION AND HAVING THE TO AND MAKING THE CHOICE WE HAVE THE

MOST TURNOUT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MR. BEAN? >>BRADLEY BEAN : I WILL SAY ONE

[01:05:06]

MORE THING BEFORE I DROP IT. I DON'T WANT TO SOUND LIKE ANY KIND OF RECORD THAT IS BROKEN, BUT MEMBER KOSACK, EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID COULD BE APPLIED.

PERFECT WORLD WHERE WE HAVE 80 PERCENT TURNOUT AT BOTH THE PRIMARY AND THE ELECTION.

THAT WOULD BE MY IDEAL. WHAT WE ARE OVERSEEING THIS ONE ELECTION WITH A SUPERHIGH TURN OUT AND IN HE ELECTION AFTER AND BEFORE THAT BOTH HAVE 20 TO 30 PERCENT.

SO MY IDEAL WOULD BE A WAIVER THE FINAL DECISION IS MADE WITH THE MOST PEOPLE.

I BELIEVE THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISION OUT OF ALL THE DECISIONS TO BE MADE.

THE COURTESY OF PEOPLE IN THE PRIMARY ELECTION A LOSING CANDIDATE IN THIRD PLACE WON'T HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE GENERAL ELECTION JUST TO GET THIRD PLACE.

THEY WILL BE PULLED OUT OF THE ELECTION EARLY ON AND BE MADE IN THAT ONE ELECTION WITH THE MOST POSSIBLE PEOPLE. AND IT SHOULD ELIMINATE ãI SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE DOING THIS.

I CAN SEE THE OPPOSING SIDE. THAT IS ALL I HAVE GOT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE? I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, PLEASE. THE FIRST ONE IS IF WE WERE TO GO TO THE PRIMARY AS OUR GENERAL ELECTIONS, THAT END UP BEING JUST LIKE THE RECENT SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS IN NASSAU COUNTY? WERE THE WINNER ONE AND 35

PERCENT OR 36 PERCENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >> IT WOULD BE LIKE THE JUDGES

RACE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. NOW, IN THAT SITUATION THE JUDGES ARE BEING ELECTED AS AN INDIVIDUAL OFFICE. NOT AS A MEMBER OF A GROUP OF JUDGES? SO IN HOURS IT WOULD BE ELECTED AS A MEMBER OF A COMMISSION.

AND WHAT WE JUST SAID WAS AUGUST TO NOVEMBER IS DIFFICULT FOR THE COUNTY.

WOULD YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? THAT AUGUST TO NOVEMBER. >>JON LASSERE: I JUST POINTED OUT YOU HAVE THREE AS A RESULT OF SUPERVISOR OF ELECTION. WE HAVE THREE LANE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RIGHT NOW. I'M NOT SAYING NOT A PROBLEM. I HAVEN'T HAD ANY PERSONAL ISSUES WITH IT, BUT I WOULD THINK SITTING ON A COMMISSION FROM AUGUST UNTIL NOVEMBER KNOWING YOU WOULD BE REPLACED BY SOMEBODY IS AN AWFUL LONG TIME TO SIT ON THAT OFFICE.

IS THERE A PROBLEM, I DON'T KNOW. MY ASSUMPTION IS THE COMMISSIONERS ARE DOING THE BEST JOB THEY CAN, BUT NONETHELESS, THAT IS A LITTLE BIT AWKWARD. I MEAN, THIS WOULD AVOID THAT. WE WOULD NOT BE IN THAT SAME POSITION.S FAR AS THE CITY ELECTIONS THIS CYCLE, THEY REALLY DIDN'T START IN EARNEST UNTIL AFTER THEPRIMARY WAS OVER . THEY STARTED, YOU ALL KNOW THAT, BUT THEY REALLY STARTED NOW. AND SO IT IS A PRETTY TYPICAL

ELECTION PERIOD AND SEEMS TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

MY OTHER QUESTION IS, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN ONE OF MY PRIMARY CONCERNS WITH THIS KIND OF MOVE FROM THE DAY WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT IT. IN NASSAU, THE PRIMARY THAT HAPPENS IS ACTUALLY CALLED BY MANY PEOPLE THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY.BECAUSE THERE IS RARELY ANYONE FROM ANY OTHER PARTY THAT GOES UP AGAINST THOSE CANDIDATES.

OUR ELECTION IS SUPPOSED TO BE ãI HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE TO KEEP IT AS NONPARTISAN.

AND THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT IT REMAINS NONPARTISAN.

THE COMMUNITY ITSELF DEMOGRAPHICALLY IS GROWING IS DIVERSITY OF PARTY AFFILIATION.

IN OTHER WORDS, THERE ARE MORE NON-REPUBLICANS NOW THAN THERE WERE 10 YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS ON THE COMMISSION. HOW WOULD WE MANAGE THE CONFUSION THAT EXISTS OUT THERE

[01:10:05]

WITH WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE CAN VOTE IN THE PRIMARY? BECAUSE UNLESS THERE IS NO

CHALLENGER, IT IS THE GENERAL. MR. LASSERE? >>JON LASSERE: WHEN THAT SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS GOES OUT AS A BALLOT, YOU WOULD HAVE THE CITY COMMISSIONER ON THE RUNNING THE NEWSPAPER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS UP TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO MAKE SURE EVERY VOTER KNOWS WHO THEY CAN VOTE FOR THEM WHERE THEY NEED TO VOTE.

THAT IS UP TO THEM. THEY HAVE SOME RESPONSIBILITY AS WELL.

AS MEMBER DAVIS SAID, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND THE RIGHT TO NOT VOTE.

IF THE RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OR NOT INFORMED. BUT THEY HAVE THE OPTION ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM. I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY DIDN'T VOTE IN HIS RECENT PRIMARY

BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IT WAS A REPUBLICAN PRIMARY.>>ARLENE FILKOFF : I DID.

>>JON LASSERE: THAN THAT IS NOT UP TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REMIND THOSE FOLKS BE WHEN IT'S NOT. MY POINT IS THIS, IF IT IS UP TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO PUT SOMETHING IN FRONT OF THE VOTERS AS AN OPTION TO CHANGE OUR CHARTER.IGHT? IF WE PUT THOSE IN FRONT OF CONFUSED VOTERS AND THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, DO YOU THINK THEY WILL PASS? DO YOU THINK IT WILL LOSE BECAUSE OF A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING? I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

>> IN THIS CASE THIS WOULD BE OUT IN MARCH OF NEXT YEAR. IS GOING TO BE A MALE IN BALLOT AND PEOPLE HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT AND UNDERSTAND IT AND TAKE A POSITION.

AND WILL NOT BE AN IN PERSON VOTE AT ALL. I THINK THERE WILL BE ENOUGH TIME FOR PEOPLE TO BECOME INFORMED. THERE IS NO OFFPUTTING RESIDENTIAL ELECTION GOING ON OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WILL BE A LIGHT QUIETER TIME AND PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE THEIR TIME.ND IF THEY WANT TO TAKE A POSITION ON IT, THEY WILL DECIDE NOT TO. I WOULD LEAVE IT UP TO THEM. NOT GOING TO MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER SOMEONE WILL BE CONFUSED. I THINK WE MAKE OUR BEST

SUGGESTION AND MOVE ON. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MR. BEAN? >>BRADLEY BEAN : YOUR QUESTION, WHICH WAS HOW DO WE PROMOTE, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THIS ELECTION AND HOW DO WE KNOW TO GO VOTE? I THINK THE ANSWER IS PEOPLE GO VOTE.

PROBLEM WITH THE EXACT SAME THING THAT THEY DO FOR THE PRIMARY AND WE SHOULD SEE A BETTER TURNOUT IF ANYTHING. BECAUSE IF WE ARE DOING THE ADDITIONAL PROMOTING AT THE CITY, THEY SAY GOVOTE ON THIS DATE , WHICH THERE IS A LOT OF SYNERGY THERE AND WE CAN PUT ALL THE RESOURCES TO GO VOTE ON THIS AUGUST DAY WE SHOULD HAVE A LARGER TURNOUT DAYS IS WHAT I

AM GETTING AT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. KOSACK? >>TAMMI KOSACK: ON THE NASSAU KENNETT SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS WILL SITE, THE WAY THEY HAVE ACCUMULATED THEIR DATA OVER THE YEARS, THEIR METRIC HAS CHANGED IT IS NOT CONSISTENT YEAR TO YEAR.

SOMETIMES FOR THE VOTER TURNOUT PERCENTAGES, THEY DO BREAK OUT FERNANDINA BEACH AND OTHER TIMES THE SHOW SPECIFIC COMMISSION. WE ARE LOOKING AT IN THE PRESIDENTIAL YEARS IS A MUCH LARGER TURNOUT. ANYWAY, THE WAY THE DATA IS MARSHA TO SHOW FERNANDINA BEAC . THE MOST EXCLUSIVE GETTING RID OF PRESIDENTIAL AT FERNANDINA BEACH SEPARATELY EXCLUDING MENTORS IN NOVEMBER, WHICH IS 22 PERCENT. NASSAU COUNTY PRIMARIES WITH 27 PERCENT.

AND IN THE RUNOFFS ALONE IS 22 PERCENT. THAT IS A SMALL VARIATION OF PERCENTAGES THAT ARE NOT SURE IS REALLY WORTH BEATING THIS TO DEATH AND TRYING TO EXPLAIN IT TO THE CITIZENS. WE WANT TO MOVE IT TO AUGUST, THERE IS STILL ONLY 12 AND 27 PERCENT OF THE ELECTRIC SHOWING UP. THAT IS A SMALL DIFFERENT.

AND I THINK THERE IS TOO MUCH MORE CONFUSION THAT IT OPENS UP A BIGGER WINDOW FOR PROBLEMS.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE? >> THE SHORT ANSWER IS IN THE WAY, A MATTER WHICH STATE WE ARE LOOKING AT, WE HAVE A SMALLER PERCENTAGE WE WOULD

LIKE MAKING THE FINAL DETERMINATION. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

THIS DAVIS? >>MARGARET DAVIS : GOING BACK EARLIER, MR. LASSERE SAID HE

[01:15:08]

DOESN'T BELIEVE THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN SECTION 9 AREN'T SAYS THE COMMISSIONER SAYS WHEN ELECTIONS ARE HELD WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

I WAS JUST WONDERING IF MS. BOCK AGREES WITH THAT. IF SO, WHY DO WE TALK ABOUT ã WHY DO WE SAY WHAT IS THE CHARTER SAY WHEN ELECTIONS ARE HELD.

>>JON LASSERE: JUST TO CLARIFY, I HAVEN'T READ IT FOR THAT PARTICULAR DETAIL.

THEM IN A DIFFERENT SET UP WHERE I COULD NORMALLY HAVE IT UP AT THE SAME TIME.

I WOULD SAY I DON'T THINK THE INTENT WAS ALLOW THEM HOW THEY ARE ELECTING THEMSELVES.

AND FIND THAT ODD. >> THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE THAT SAYS THEY DON'T WITH RESPECT.I THINK THEY DO HAVE THE ELECTION TIMES FOR THEIR SEAT.

I THOUGHT THAT. WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TO SAY.

>>JON LASSERE: MY SUGGESTION IS MAYBE THEY CAN SET ELECTIONS OTHER THAN FOR THEIR OWN SEAT.

IT BE WITH STATING THAT. IF THAT IS WHAT IT SAYS, I DON'T WANT THEM TO TELL US HOW AND WHEN THEY WILL GET ELECTED BECAUSE THEY WILL DO THAT WHATEVER IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST WOULD I DON'T THINK THEY KNOW THAT ARE RELATED THEY HAVETHAT ABILITY .

MAYBE THEY DO. BUT THEY'VE NEVER TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF IT IN THE PAST.

IF THEY PUT IN A CHARTER THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT, THEN THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY IT IS RELEVANT. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. BOCK STEPPED OUT OF THE ROOM FOR JUST A MOMENT SO I WILL GIVE HER AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR YOUR

QUESTION AGAINAND RESPOND . >>MARGARET DAVIS : MY EARLIER COMMENT INDICATING THE LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER IN SECTION 9 SAYS THE COMMISSION SAYS WHEN ELECTIONS ARE HELD SO THAT IF THEY WANTED TO MOVE OUR CURRENT GENERAL ELECTION FOR COMMISSIONERS TO BE HELD EARLIER, SAY AND AUGUST, COULDN'T THEY DO THAT UNDER THE CURRENT LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER

RATHER THAN US NEEDING TO MAKE THAT EXPLICIT LANGUAGE CHANGE? >> THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND BECAUSE IT IS IN THE CHARTER THAT WAY MEANS IT NEEDS TO BE A CHARTER AMENDMENT.

SO I'M SORRY TO BE CONFUSING, SORRY. I'M LOOKING AT 166.031 RIGHT NOW. IT SAYS THAT IS JUST MIRRORING STATE LAW.

THE CHARTER PROVISION THAT THE CITY COMMISSION COMES SET THE DATES IN THE CITY ELECTION, RUN OFF GENERAL IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY DISTINCTION. IN OUR CHARTER AND SAYS GENERAL OR SPECIAL ELECTION BUT THE STATUTE SAID THEY CAN SAID THAT BY ORDINANCE .IGHT NOW CHAPTER 34, YOU ARE CORRECT. WAS IT MS. DAVIS OR MR. LASSERE

THAT SAID THE CITY COMMISSION CAN CHANGE IT AT ANY TIME. >> THE ONLY RESTRICTION WE HAVE ON THEM IS IT HAS TO BE CONSISTENT YEARS AS THE STATE AND COUNTY ELECTIONS, WHICH IS THE 2007 RECOMMENDATION WAS. UT WITHIN THAT, IF THEY WANTED TO MOVE IT TO AUGUST

2022, THEY COULD DO THAT. >> THEY COULD. >> IT IS NOT ¦

>> WITHOUT US ADJUSTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER? >> CORRECT.

>> MAY BE ALL WE NEED TO DO IS RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION LOOK AT THIS?

IF THIS IS A CONCERN THERE. >> THAT WOULD BE A GOOD FOLLOW-UP FOR IN IF THEIR HANDS ARE TIED, THEY HAVE TO DO IT THIS WAY. IT IS MEANT TO THEM AND IT HAS BEEN TO THE ELECTRIC AND THEY VOTED ON AND IF THEY APPROVED IT THAT IS THE WAY THE CHARTER READS. IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, IF THEY SO DECIDED TO FOLLOW THAT RECOMMENDATION OR A LATER COMMISSION DO SO, THAT IS UP TO THE LATER COMMISSION TO DO SO.

RIGHT NOW WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IT OUT TO THE VOTERS IF IT IS A CHANCE HE WOULD WANT TO MAKE TO THE COMMISSION AND TIED HER HANDS WERE THEY CAN'T CHANGE THE DATE

OF THE ELECTION. >> YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS PURSUIT MAKING THIS A CHARTER

AMENDMENT? >> I THINK WE WASTED AN AWFUL LOT OF TIME IF WE DON'T GO IN AS I LAID OUT EARLIER, THOSE THREE PROVISIONS. AGAIN, AT THE LATER MEETING

[01:20:05]

WHEN WE HAVE ALL SEVEN OF US. BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO HAVE A VOTE ON IT AND IF WE COULD ADVANCE IT AND LET THE CITY COMMISSION REVIEWED AND IF THEY LIKE IT BUT SEND IT OUT TO THE VOTERS AND LET THEM DETERMINE. WE JUST MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK MS. NEWTON TO DO IS TALK WITH MR. MORRISON AND SUMMARIZED THIS CONVERSATION FOR HIM IN PREPARATION FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMITTEE? DO YOU WANT US TO VOTE AT THE NEXT MEETING ON THIS ISSUE? THAT'S NEXT WEEK. MONDAY.

A WEEK FROM TODAY. >> WE HAVE SOME LANGUAGE WE ARE LOOKING AT TO REACT AND VOTE

ON? >> I WAS GOING TO SAY, I CAN PREPARE SOMETHING.

WE ARE MEETING AGAIN IN AWEEK? >>ARLENE FILKOFF : YES . >> I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO

OCTOBER. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE ARE, BUT THE CURRENT SCHEDULE SAYS WE ARE MEETING A WEEK FROM TODAY AND THAT EXTENSION TO THE MIDDLE OF OCTOBER WOULD GIVE US THE POSSIBILITY OF ANOTHER COUPLE OF MEETINGS. BUT THE ONLY ITEMS WE HAVE TO DISCUSS OUR THI ONCE AND THE CITIZENS INITIATIVES. I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO A VOTE

ON ONE OR BOTH OF THEM AS SOON AS WE CAN. >> I WILL WORK ON LANGUAGE FOR

THIS ONE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MS. DAVIS? >>MARGARET DAVIS : I APPRECIATE NUMBERLESS AIR GETTING READY TO PREPARE LANGUAGE, BUT MY ONLY CONCERN IS SINCE IT WILL TAKE HIM, I KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES ME TO DRAFT LANGUAGE 4 AT LEAST A DAY OF NOTHING ELSE TO DO.

IT WOULD BE A WHILE. WITHIN A WEEK OF NEXT MEETING. I JUST WORRY IS THERE ENOUGH TIME TO GET IT OUT IN THE PACKET AND THE PUBLIC TO LOOK AT IT AS WELL AS OURSELVES?

>> NOT AS MUCH AS I PREFER, I CAN SAY THAT. >> IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO RESCHEDULE OUR NEXT MEETING, ESPECIALLY IF WE THINK WE CAN GET IT EXTENDED BEYOND

SEPTEMBER 30? >> DOESN'T THE AGENDA NEED A WEEK PUBLICATION NOTICE?>> THERE IS NO HARD AND FAST RULE THAT SAYS THAT. THAT IS A POLICY WE HAVE BEEN

FOLLOWING. >> I WAS GOING TO PUBLISH NEXT WEEK'S MEETING TOMORROW.

>> WE WERE GOING TO PUBLISH THE MEETING TOMORROW. THE USUAL TIME.

>> I WOULD BE IMPRESSED IF YOU DID. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE A VOTE NEXT MONDAY, BUT WE CAN START TODAY IF YOU'D LIKE.

I'M SAYING THIS BELIEVING THIS DISCUSSION HAS KIND OF SAID IT ALL.

SOMETHING SAID TWO OR THREE TIMES. WE DON'T NEED TO GO FURTHER TODAY WITH THIS DISCUSSION WITH JOHN IS GOING TO DRAFT THE LANGUAGE, KATIE WILL PROVIDE A SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION WITH MR. MORRISON SO HE IS PREPARED TO COME BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING.

HOPEFULLY WHERE WE WILL NOT VOTE. WE CAN'T DO NEXT WEEK'S MEETING AT ALL? WE CAN IF WE DISCUSSED THE OTHER INITIATIVE? SO WHAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST IS WE KEEP MONDAY NEXT WEEK AGENDA OPEN TO DISCUSS THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE. AND THEN A FOLLOW-UP MEETING IS A VOTE FOR BOTH ISSUES.

DOES THAT WORK? ANY ISSUES WITH THAT MARGARET OR TAMMY?

YOU ARE BOTH LOOKING AT ME. NO? >> RATHER THAN BEGIN DISCUSSING THE CITIZEN INITIATIVE ISSUE TODAY, GIVEN WE HAVE DONE A SHORT MEETING, YOU WANT TO MOVE

THAT TO THE MONDAY'S MEETING? >>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE HAVE 45 MINUTES LEFT.

WE COULD START THE DISCUSSION TODAY AND FINISH IT NEXT MONDAY'S MEETING.

OR WE COULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NEXT MONDAY HOPEFULLY WITH ALL OF US HERE.

LET BENJAMIN ASK WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT ASK REGARDING THIS TOPIC AND THEN

AT THE FOLLOW-UP MEETING WE HAVE THEM BOTH. >> DO WE HAVE A TIME CONSTRAINT

[01:25:01]

NEXT WEEK? >> IS THAT ON MONDAY? I MEAN, I WILL SAY THIS.

JUST GENERALLY 15, 5:15 PM IF THAT IS WHAT YOU MEAN, DO WE HAVE A TIME WE NEED TO FINISH AND THE ANSWER IS YES BECAUSE KATIE HAS TO GET HOME TO HER FAMILY.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : TWO HOURS AND 15 MINUTES NEXT MONDAY ON THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE AND ANSWERING WHATEVER QUESTIONS BENJAMIN MIGHT HAVE ON THE RUNOFF.

AND THEN WHATEVER DATE WE SCHEDULE THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE A VOTE ON BOTH INITIATIVES.

DOES THAT WORK? PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES TO ME.

WAVE TO ME OR SOMETHING. OKAY. I WILL ENTERTAIN IF ANYBODY

WANTS TO START THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE ãEXCUSE ME. >> BEFORE WE GO ON TO THAT, I WANTED TO BECAUSE I KNOW AT LEAST SOMETHING YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THE DISCUSSION WERE HAVING ON THE DATES OF THE ELECTION FOR THE SECTION OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES THAT SPEAKS TO MUNICIPAL ELECTION DATES AND HOW THOSE WERE SET IS 101.75. OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE SUBSECTION 2 IT SAYS THE DATE OF THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION SHALL BE SET BY THE MUNICIPALITY BY ORDINANCE, WHICH IS WHY THE NOVEMBER DATE FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION IN THE DECEMBER DATE FOR THE RUNOFF ELECTION OR ALLSTATE OF SPECIFICALLY IN CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES. WHAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN THE CHARTER IS IN SECTION 9 T E YEARS IN CONJUNCTION WITH STATE AND FEDERAL ELECTIONS.

I WOULD SAY THAT LANGUAGE CONSTRAINS US SOMEWHAT IF WE SAY IN CONJUNCTION WITH, WE AT LEAST TALK TO HAVE CURRENT MUNICIPAL ELECTION GENERAL ELECTION AT THE SAME TIME.

I DON'T THINK IT MEANS IS AN EXACT DAY, BUT IT HAS TO BE THE SAME EXACT TIME.

IN OTHER WORDS, WE COULDN'T SET IN APRIL AND A JUNE BASED ON WHAT OUR CHARTER SAYS.

SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO THINK OF TOO IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES.

IT IS TOO RESTRICTIVE RIGHT NOW THAT WE HAVE IT WHERE IT IS, THE LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER

WHERE IT IS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. IS THER ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE

[6.2 DISCUSSION: CITIZEN INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM: This item is placed on the agenda at the request of Members Davis and Kosack. ]

TO START THE DISCUSSION ON THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE? MS. DAVIS?

>>MARGARET DAVIS : I AM HAPPY TO DO SO. I FIRST BROUGHT THIS UP IN FEBRUARY THE IDEA OF FOLLOWING THE MODEL CITY CHARTER FORM OF INCLUDING SOME FORM OF DIRECT DEMOCRACY PROVISION IN OUR CHARTER. AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED IT MANY TIMES. I KNOW MEMBER BRIAN WAS NOT PART OF THE COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME. BUT THE IDEA OF BEING THAT CITIZENS CAN BOTH PETITION NEW INITIATIVE TO BE BROUGHT FORTH IF THEY FEEL THE COMMISSION IS NOT RAISING AN ISSUE THAT THEY FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT. OR IF THE COMMISSION DID SOMETHING THEY FELT VERY MUCH AGAINST, THEY COULD ASK FOR A REFERENDUM TO OVERTURN THAT. SO THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS.

THE INITIATIVE AND THE REFERENDUM PROCESS. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND CONCERNS IN PARTICULAR WITH THE REFERENCE SITE THAT SINCE ORDINANCES IN WHICH THE REFERENDUM IS MOVING FORWARD ON WOULD BE SUSPENDED, PEOPLE FELT THAT WOULD KEEP MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION FELT THAT THAT WOULD LEAD TO PARALYSIS OF THE COMMISSION. EVEN THOUGH EVIDENCE WITH THESE PROVISIONS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE ARE NOT SHOWING THAT. WE AS WE COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE IN ONE THOUGHT WAS JUST TO GO WITH HALF OF THAT, WHICH WAS THE CITIZENS RIGHT TO PETITION FOR NEW ORDINANCES.

[01:30:01]

SO WITH THAT IN MIND BEEN A COMPROMISE POSITION, I PUT IN THE PACKET A PROPOSED LANGUAGE, WHICH EVERYONE I'M SURE HAS HAD A CHANCE TO READ THAT IS BASED ON THE IDEA THAT ONLY GIVES THE CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO PETITION FOR NEW ORDINANCES OR AMEND EXISTING ONE IT IS NOT SUSPENDING. NONE OF THE SUSPENSION IS STOPPING.

IT'S ONLY THE INITIATIVE PART. AND ONE THOUGHT I DID IN WORKING ON THINKING THROUGH SOME OF THE OTHER OBJECTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ELECTION, THE VOTE TO BE HELD ON THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE WOULD HAVE TO BE WITH THE GENERAL ELECTION. SO NO SPECIAL ELECTION NEEDED TO BE CALLED. SO THAT HELPS SOME.EEPS YOU ON THE TIMING ISSUE.

IT WOULDN'T HAVE THINGS POPPING UP CONSTANTLY AND NEEDING LOTS OF ELECTIONS.

ON THE COST ISSUE, I'M DONE THIS BEFORE BUT ONCE AGAIN MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE PETITIONERS COMMITTEE HAS TO PAY THE CITY CLERK FOR THE COST OF THE FORMS AND IN THE COST OF THE CITY CLERK AND CURSE IN GETTING THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO VERIFY SIGNATURES.

I ACTUALLY MADE IT EVEN MORE EXPLICIT THAT ALL SIGNATURES HAVE TO BE DONE IN HAND IN INK.

EVEN THOUGH MY ORIGINAL LANGUAGE ALWAYS SAID, WHICH DIDN'T ALLOW ANY ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, I HAVE MADE THAT MORE EXPLICIT. SO THE TYPE OF COMPROMISE, IT ALLOWS THE CITIZENS TO HAVE A BIT OF A DIRECT DEMOCRACY RULE AT THE ORDINANCE LEVEL.

AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER TODAY, THE LAW ALREADY GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO DO THIS.

TO DO PETITION TO AMEND THE CHARTER. BUT THEY ARE PROVISIONS YOU WOULD NOT NECESSARILY WANT TO BE IN THE CHARTER. FOR EXAMPLE IN LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PIER CITY CHARTERS, THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS IN THERE ABOUT ZONING AND VARIANCES IN BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS ON THOSE ARE THINGS MUCH BETTER PUT IN ORDINANCES THAN IN CHARTERS. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, OR I SAW SOME OF THESE, THEY ALSO DO NOT HAVE THE CITIZENS RIGHT TO PETITION FOR CHARTERS. I MEAN, TO PETITION FOR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AS WELL AS REFERENDUM. AND I LOOKED AT THE DATES.

THOSE PROVISION OF ZONING WERE PASSED IN THE 1980S AND THE RIGHT TO PETITION TO AMEND THE CHARTER OR HAVE A REFERENDUM WAS DONE IN 1998. THEY GOT BETTER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PUTTING SOME OF THE PROVISIONS IN ORDINANCES WHERE THEY BELONG INSTEAD OF THE CHARTERS. OTHERWISE WITHOUT THIS, THERE IS AN ISSUE THE CITIZENS FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT, THEY WILL USE SECTION 166.031 TO MOVE FORWARD TO AMEND THE CHARTER.

RATHER THAN WORKING AND AMENDING THE ORDINANCES. SO THAT IS WHAT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE I HAD. I INCLUDED FOR YOU JUST BY WAY OF INFORMATION AND CHART SHOWING HOW THE POPULARITY OF PETITION REFERENDUM PROVISIONS. AND I WILL NOTE THAT NONE OF THE CHARTERS I LOOKED AT ONLY ALLOW THE RIGHT TO PETITION FOR NEW INITIATIVES AND NOT ALSO THE REFERENDUM RIGHT. AND I HAVE OFFERED HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

HOWEVER, ALL THESE NUMBERS YOU ARE SEEING OVER 75 PERCENT IN ALL CATEGORIES EVEN 80 PERCENT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE 10 LARGEST CITIES HAVE THE RIGHT TO PETITION THE INITIATIVES AS WELL AS TO REFER IN ORDINANCE THE OVERTURNED. THAT IS THE BACKGROUND AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYONE HAD ABOUT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE.

I DID GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU THE LANGUAGE. >> MARGARET, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU PULLED A LOT OF THIS FROM THE MODEL CHARTER. A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE AND MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER CHARTERS, BUT AFTER THE QUALIFIED FOR THE PETITION AND THERE IS A 10

[01:35:07]

PERCENT THRESHOLD FOR SIGNATURES, IS THERE A TIMEFRAME OF WHEN THEY HAVE TO GATHER THE SIGNATURES WERE SET UP TO THEM BASED ON WHERE IT FALLS IN THE ELECTION PROCESS.

>> THE LANGUAGE IS BASICALLY ALL THE CITY CHARTERS ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE MODEL CHARTERS.

AND ESPECIALLY THERE ARE A FEW TWEAKS BETWEEN THE OLDER AND THE CURRENT ONE AND SO YOU CAN KINDA TELL WHICH CITIES PUT THEM IN PLACE WHEN. IN SO YES, IT MIGHT'VE EVEN BEEN OLDSMAR PUT ONE OF THEM. BUT I WENT TO THE CITY CHARTER. THE CITIZENS CAN TAKE AS LONG AS THEY WANT TO GET THERE 10 PERCENT SIGNATURES.THEIR PROBLEM IS IT WON'T GO TO A BOAT OF THE CITIZENS EXCEPT FOR THE GENERAL ELECTIONS OVER THEY MAY HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THAT TIMING AND THEY HAVE TO ADD LEAST GET IT 90 DAYS AHEAD. THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR SIGNATURE CERTIFIED THAT THEY HAVE THE FULL 10 PERCENT. BECAUSE THERE IS ALSO A TIME THE COMMISSION IS ALLOWED TO ACT. THE COMMISSION IS SUPPOSED TO ACT 30 OR 60 DAYS OF THE PETITION BEING VERIFIED AS HAVING THE FULL 10 PERCENT OF SIGNATURES. AND IF THE COMMISSION DOESN'T ACT IT GOES TO THEBOAT PARADE BUT AGAIN THE VOTE WILL BE AT THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION . SO IF THAT FALLS AND THEY ALSO HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 60 DAYS BEFORE THAT GENERAL ELECTION BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE IT ã THAT THEY GET THE SIGNATURES IN THE ELECTION IS IN TWO WEEKS. BECAUSE HONESTLY THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTION NEEDS TIME TO GET ON THE BALLOT. SO THE TIMING IS SUPPOSED TO WORK WITH THAT. CERTAINLY COULD DO THAT. BUT THAT WAS THE THOUGHT TO.

AND THE REASON I WENT WITH 10 PERCENT BUT I KNOW SOMETIMES WE TALKED ABOUT 20 PERCENT, BUT SINCE THE STATE LAW IS IT ONLY TAKES 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTORATE TO MOVE FORWARD AMENDING A CHARTER, IF I WAS A GROUP OF CONCERNED CITIZENS WITH AN ISSUE AND GOT 20 PERCENT TO TRY TO DO A CHANGE TO IN ORDINANCE AND ONLY 10 PERCENT OF SIGNATURES NEEDED TO AMEND THE CHARTER, I'M GOING TO GO AFTER THE CHARTER. AND I THINK A LOT OF ISSUES WOULD BE BETTER SERVED BEING IN THE ORDINANCES THAN IN THE CHARTER.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR FEEDBACK? >> I'M GOING TO JUMP IN AND SAY I DON'T MIND THE FEAR-BASED CONCEPT THAT EVERY CITY COMMISSION ACTION WILL BE OVERTURNED WERE THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER CITIES BUT IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN I CALLED ALL THE OTHER CITIES TO TALK WITH THE CITYMANAGERS , ONE CITY HAD TO INITIATIVES.

SO THE COMPROMISE OFFERED, I THINK IT IS SOFT PEDDLING. BUT I WAS SUPPORTIVE BECAUSE I THINK IT AT LEAST PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE FOR SOME CITIZEN ACTIONS WOULD AND I DO THINK THE HOOPS THEY HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH ARE PRETTY AGGRESSIVE. AND IT IS TOUGH.

WILL NOT BE AFTER YOU WITH OUR ACTIVE CITIZEN BASE. I DON'T THINK WE WILL HAVE PEOPLE PUTTING OUT REFERENDUM EVERY FOUR YEARS. SO I LIKE IT AND I WOULD

SUPPORT THIS.>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYONE ELSE? >> I WOULD JUST SAY I THINK IN THE POSITION OF OUR ACTIVE COMMUNITY REALLY WANTED TO BE DOING THIS, THEY WOULD BE ALREADY TRYING TO USE THE AMENDMENT OF THE CHARTER PROCESS.

AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN REGULARLY DOING THAT. AND YES, THE NICE THING IS THAT THE LANGUAGE DOES START TO SPELL OUT WHAT THE PROCESS IS THAT YOU NEED TO DO TO AMEND AND MAKE THE VERY CLEAR WHERE FOR EXAMPLE THE STATE STATUTE ON AMENDING FOR CITIZENS INITIATIVE TO AMEND ãTO PETITION TO AMEND THE CHARTER, WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXACT RULES OTHER THAN 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTORATE TO PETITION FOR IT. UT THIS MAKES IT VERY CLEAR

[01:40:04]

ON THETIMING AS WELL . >>ARLENE FILKOFF : MR. LASSERE? >>JON LASSERE: IF THE THRESHOLD IS HIGH AND THERE ISN'T NO RELENT TO DOING IT NOW AND NO OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE IT EXCEPT MAYBE.

WHY ARE WE GOING TO THIS IF NO ONE ELSE HAS HARDLY DONE IT AND WE DON'T EVEN THINK IT WILL HAPPEN HERE AND IT HASN'T HAPPENED HERE. IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE SPENDING TIME ON SOMETHING EITHER WE DON'T HAVE ãI BELIEVE YOU BELIEVE IN IT, FOR SURE, BUT I JUST WONDER WHY WOULD WE ADOPT SOMETHING WE DON'T LIKE ANYONE IS EVER GOING TO USE FOR THE THRESHOLD ARE SO HIGH AND DIFFICULT TO DO AND IT MAKES A LOT OF TIME AND MAYBE EVEN AS INVOLVED AS OUR COMMITTEE IS, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH HERE. ARE JUST BE CURIOUS.

>> I WOULD SAY IT IS A STEP TOWARD MODERNIZATION AND GETTING MORE IN STEP WITH SOME OF THE OTHER PEER CITIES. AND THE OTHER THING IS A LOT OF TIMES CITIZENS COMPLAIN AND THEY FEEL LIKE THERE IS NO TRUST IN GOVERNMENT OR TRANSPARENCY AND THEY MIGHT LOOK TO THINGS AND SAY WE DON'T EVEN HAVE AN OPTION. WILL HEAR YOU HAVE AN OPTION.

IT IS NOT EASY BUT IT IS THERE AND WE ARE PUTTING OUT THERE AND MIGHT QUELL SOME OF THE

UNREST IN THE DISTRESSED. THAT IS HOW I SEE IT. >> ALSO IN THE RESEARCH I DID, THERE WAS A SURVEY THAT FOUND STATES OR CITIES AND STATES THAT HAD DIRECT DEMOCRACY PROVISIONS AS WITH THE CONSTITUENTS REGISTERED AS BEING HAPPIER BECAUSE THEY FELT THEY DID HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF THEIR CONCERNS BEING LISTENED TO.

AND THAT IS A PROVISION THAT THEY PETITION FOR TO GET AND THEY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE.

THEY ARE MORE INTERESTED IN COMPLYING WITH IT. AN INTERESTING THING.

BUT I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO HAVE THE REFERENDUM THAT I WORKED IN WASHINGTON D.C. FOR US SENATORS ENOUGH YEARS AND LEARNED HOW TO COUNT VOTES AND ANOTHER WAS SUPPORT FOR INCLUDING THAT AS WELL, WHICH I IS A POWERFUL TOOL.UT I AGREE THAT THE CHART I GIVE YOU, THE HANDOUT SHOWS ITS MODERNIZATION. IT IS WERE CITIES TODAY ARE RUDE ESPECIALLY IN FLORIDA. I MEAN, OVER 70 PERCENT NO MATTER HOW I SLICED IT, I CAME UP 70, 75, 80 PERCENT WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS IN LARGER CITIES.

IS ANOTHER CITIES CLOSEST INSIGHT PRETEND OF THOSE CITIES ARE LARGER THAN US IT IS NOT

JUST LIKE ONLY THE LARGE CITIES. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANY OTHER

COMMENTS?>> REALLY GOOD ANSWERS. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CONTRARY TO SAY ABOUT IT? IS THERE A DOWNSIDE TO THIS?

I SEE JOHN TRYING REALLY HARD TO THINK ABOUT THIS. >> I'M TRYING TO DECIDE IF WANT TO SAY THE SAME THING AS I DID BEFORE BUT I DON'T THINK I DO.

>> I WOULD AGREE EVERYTHING HAS BEEN SAID. I'M NOT GOING TO ãI WON'T

REPEAT WHAT JOHN SAID. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. SO ARE WE DONE WITH THIS DISCUSSION? SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE DONE WITH THIS DISCUSSION AND READY TO

VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. >> AND THOUGHT WE WOULD DO THIS AGAIN WITH THE SEVEN MEMBERS.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : WE WILL VOTE WITH THE SEVEN MEMBERS, YES. I'M JUST TRYING TO DECIDE IF WE

ARE DONE FOR THE DAY. OKAY. >> BEFORE WE GO THERE, I HAVE

[8. NEXT MEETING DATE ]

SUGGESTION . I GOT A MESSAGE FROM KATIE WHILE WE WERE HERE BECAUSE SHE WAS ABLE TO LOOK AT THE CALENDAR. WHAT IF, BECAUSE NEXT WEEK WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO GET EVERYTHING JOHN WAS GOING TO PROPOSE THE LANGUAGE.

BUT IF WE CHANGE THE MEETING DATE TO THE 28TH. THE FOLLOWING MONDAY.

WILL BE HAVE TIME THEN ãTHAT WILL GIVE YOU ABOUT A WEEK TO PREPARE EVERYTHING.

>> THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH TIME. >> HOW IS THAT MEETING DATE READ THAT AGAIN IS A MONDAY.

[01:45:02]

SAME TIME 3:00 TO 5:15 PM. AND YOU'LL MAKE THAT DATE? THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE

A MEETING OFFER NOT NEXT WEEK. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : IS EVERYONE OKAY WITH THAT DAY? ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL CHANGE THAT TO THE 28TH.

WE WILL HAVE ONGOING DISCUSSION IN ORDER TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BENJAMIN MIGHT HAVE.

ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT. MARGARET?

>> WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE IN THE PACKAGE THE LANGUAGE THAT A PROPOSED FOR THE INITIATIVE AS WELL. IF WE ARE GOING TO BE VOTING ON THAT.

AND I JUST WONDERED IF ANYONE HERE HAD ANY CHANGES THEY WOULD LIKE ME TO MAKE TO IT.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO READ IT FIRST. >> IT IS IN THE PACKET.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : AFTER THIS DISCUSSION IWOULD LIKE TO READ IT AGAIN .

SO LET'S PLAN ON THE 28TH FROM 3:00 TO 5:15 PM AND WE WILL PLAN ON VOTING THAT DAY.

AND IF WE ARE ABLE TO VOTE ON BOTH OF THESE ISSUES THAT DAY, I BELIEVE OUR COMMITTEE WORK IS

DONE. >> AND I WILL WORK ABOUT THAT MECHANICS ABOUT GETTING THE EXTENSION PASSED UP SEPTEMBER 30 FOR THE TIME FOR YOU ALL TO WORK.

SO JUST SPECIFICALLY, JOHN, SO I DON'T SEND A SEPARATE EMAIL, IT WOULD BE MOST HELPFUL IF YOU

COULD HAVE THAT LANGUAGE TO KATIE AND I BY THIS FRIDAY. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY.

SINCE THERE ARE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE, I'M ASSUMING WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

UNLESS THE CITY HOLDS GOES. MR. BEAN? PETE AND I ONE ADDITIONAL PIECE

[Additional Item]

OF NEW BUSINESS. THIS ISA GREAT TIME TO ADDRESS THIS YEAR IF I MAY .

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. >>BRADLEY BEAN : I HAVE BEEN APPROACHED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THIS. WE HAD NO MEETING. I SPOKE TO MY OWN ROTARY CLUB.

ABOUT OUR WORK HERE. BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THAT I HAD BEEN APPROACHED WITH. I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR SOMEONE IN OUR CLUB TO GO DO THAT. IF YOU YOURSELF, CHAIRWOMAN, OR DAVIS OR ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS ONE, IT'S THE OTHER ROTARY CLUB FOR THE SUNRISE ROTARY CLUB THAT MEETS ON FRIDAY MORNINGS.F A SLIDESHOW FOR YOU. YOU CAN USE THE ONE WE DID.

THEY WANT TO HEAR WHAT WE DID AND WHAT THEY GOT FROM IT. >> THE OTHER ROTARY CLUB.

>> THEY ARE VERY NICE PEOPLE. I GO THERE OFTEN. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : 7:30 A.M.

>> IS THERE COFFEE? >> OBVIOUSLY. BREAKFAST INCLUDED.>ARLENE FILKOFF : ANYBODY WANT TO VOLUNTEER FOR THAT?HEN IS IT, BRADLEY?

>>BRADLEY BEAN : THEY WILL SET A DATE. THEY WILL WORK WITH YOU TO PICK

A FRIDAY MORNING THAT WORKS WITH YOUR SCHEDULE. >>ARLENE FILKOFF : 7:30 A.M. ON A FRIDAY MORNING WHICH I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW EXISTED IN REALITY UNTIL THIS YEAR.

TALK WITH, BRADLEY? >> BARB WOULD BE THE PERSON OR STEVE MERCY.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : OKAY. >>BRADLEY BEAN : I WILL GET HERE ãAND TEXTING HER RIGHT NOW. I WILL PUT HER IN TOUCH WITH YOU RIGHT AWAY.

>>ARLENE FILKOFF : ALL RIGHT TO ME THANK YOU. I WAS TRYING TO BE SENSITIVE TO YOUR HELP AND LOOK AT THE WAY YOU ARE TREATING ME. I HAVE A LONG MEMORY.

ANY OTHER ISSUES OR NEW BUSINESS? CINQ NONE,

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.