MINUTES

POLK COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION

AUGUST 28, 2001

Chairman, Dan Costello, called the meeting of the Polk County Charter Review Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. on the 3^rd floor conference room of the Citrus & Chemical Bank, Bartow. Commissioner Dukes led the prayer and Commissioner Masters led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ms. Swearengin called the roll. All Commissioners were present, with the exception of Commissioners Hunt and Strang who gave advance notification of their absence in accordance with the Commission’s Rules.  

 The Chairman said he would like the record to show the Commission had a quorum. 

He advised the members of the audience that there was a sign-up sheet for those wishing to address the Commission later in the agenda, and he would call their names in the order in which they appeared on the sheet.  

The first order of business was for the approval of the Minutes for August 14, 2001. 

The minutes of August 14, 2001 as mailed to the commissioners, and as supplemented in the handout provided to them at this meeting, were approved after a motion by Commissioner Nunnallee and seconded by Commissioner Stoer. 

The Chairman asked if there was discussion?  There was none.  The motion carried. 

The Chairman said the Commission had eight Invited Guest Presentations that evening, and the first presentation would be from Richard Weiss, Clerk of Courts.   He invited Mr. Weiss to speak.

Richard Weiss, Clerk of Courts

Chairman Costello welcomed Richard Weiss, Clerk of the Circuit and County Court for his presentation to the Commission.

He thanked the Commission and said that his remarks would focus primarily on his responsibilities as Auditor and Accountant to the Board of County Commissioners, and were presented from his perspective of 35 years of experience.  He does not believe that the crusade to change the way constitutional officers are organized stems from a failure by any of them in carrying out their responsibilities.  He urged the commissioners to compare hard data with the personal and subjective perceptions being given to them.

The 1868 Florida Constitution organized the Clerk’s office to ensure separation of powers.  The autonomy of the Clerk as auditor protects the integrity of the financial resources of the county.  His independence and direct accountability to the citizens help guarantee his freedom from improper influence.  The Clerk has the fiduciary duty to act as public trustee, which imposes on him a high standard.  In order to exercise that responsibility, he must maintain an independent relationship with respect to the BOCC, in much the same way as the State comptroller does with respect to the State executive branch.  The public looks to the Clerk for accountability in county government, and the public looks to the Comptroller for accountability in State government.  Under Florida law the Clerk is legally responsible should any expenditure be made inconsistent with legal requirements.

Removing the Clerk as an independent elected official would compromise the fiduciary relationship between the public and county government.

Referring to past statements to the Commission that there was no such thing as a “constitutional officer,” Mr. Weiss said that the term is used in Florida Statutes and in hundreds of Florida court cases.

He commented on Commissioner Wilkinson’s August 14, 2001 presentation to the Charter Review Commission.  He noted that his statement that the Clerk’s budget increased over 400 percent over the past 20 years should have been placed in proper context.  The increases for the period are not comparable because during the period the Clerk’s office changed significantly:  an internal audit department was established in 1983; a collection department was established in 1983 in response to a request of the BOCC; BOCC transferred its accounts payable department, property control department, and Historical Museum and Library to the Clerk on various dates during the same period.  Additionally, population increases, an increase in the number of judges, inflation, and salary increases in response caused the large percentage increases.  Mr. Weiss felt it was imprudent of Commissioner to present only one side of a multi-faceted situation, and had not discussed the issue with him.

He said that the information being given to the commissioners that the BOCC has no control over the constitutional officers’ budgets is not true.  All are required to submit their budgets to the BOCC for BOCC review and any changes they care to make.  And they do make changes as illustrated by the budget for the upcoming year: The BOCC reduced the  $107 million requested by the constitutional officers, by $3,584,000.

He described the procedure applicable to the Sheriff’s budget, which can be appealed by the Sheriff to the Florida Cabinet. The reason for this is to make sure that the Sheriff has adequate funding to protect the citizens of the county.  Disagreements over the budget could be motivated by partisan political considerations, so the appeals process provides a safety valve.  He regretted that in difficult budget years there is a tendency to use the constitutional officers as scapegoats for the BOCC’s financial problems.

He said that comments to the effect that constitutional officers get an automatic $3,000 increase each year, receive paid sick and vacation leave, have cars, and get liberal expense accounts are untrue.

Salaries are set by State statute; cars are provided only if duties warrant them; official travel is paid in the same way as it is for other State employees; and there is no additional compensation for sick and vacation time.

He commented on the “sanctity” of the constitutional process in the United States.  Noting that the U.S. Constitution has been changed only 17 times since the Bill of Rights was approved, he urged the Commission to be slow to make sweeping changes.  More time is needed before making significant changes to the Charter.

He said that customer satisfaction responses received by his office show overwhelming satisfaction with the services offered.  He said that those results speak of an intentional government in control of its resources, authority and responsibilities.

He ended his presentation by calling the commissioners’ attention to his memorandum to the original Charter commission, a copy of which was distributed to commissioners.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Weiss for his presentation, and invited the commissioners to ask questions. 

Commissioner Gernert, referring to Mr. Weiss’ comment that 85% of the people they serve rate their department as excellent, asked how they collected that data?

Mr. Weiss said through customer service survey cards located at each of their counters, and in the last number of years they had in excess of 4,000 returned, and he asked that the Commission keep in mind who their customers were.

Commissioner Gernert asked if it was a blind survey, and they didn’t have to sign it?

Mr. Weiss said that was correct, and the return survey cards were placed in locked boxes that only one person had access to.

Commissioner Lindsey said earlier in the Commission’s process they heard from someone who expressed displeasure with Mr. Weiss’ department about the length of time it took to get public documents, tapes, or other exhibits that were part of the public record, and he asked what was a typical response and reply time for tapes of BOCC meetings and/or any other public document?

Mr. Weiss said Commission meeting tapes were available immediately after the Board meeting. The draft minutes are made available immediately, but are not finalized until the next meeting, which takes two weeks, and the day of the meeting the finalized minutes are placed on the Internet. 

He said they did have some problems getting information to the public in a timely manner a few years ago, due to an employee with a serious illness, but that was no longer the case, and he assured the Commission the minutes were readily available to the public the day they were finalized.  

Commissioner Masters said Mr. Weiss mentioned his office had done several different things for the people of Polk County, but he didn’t want to elaborate on them at that time, and he asked him if he would just mention one of the things his office had done, and secondly how had the budget process gotten to the point that it had?

Mr. Weiss said he would like to address his first question.  In 1987 Barton Marlow submitted a little over $200,000 in extra work orders to the County Commission for payment for work that had been done in relation to the construction of the Court House.  His office reviewed those work orders, and determined according to the contract they were not legal expenditures, which the County needed to pay.  The Board of County Commissioners and the County Manager took issue with that decision, and initiated a public meeting and received approval to pay those work orders, but since the Clerk had the responsibility of signing every check we refused to sign the check, and to prove their point, they hired an engineer from Tampa to review the contract and the work orders, and when the process was finished instead of the County owing Barton Marlow over $200,000, Barton Marlow owed the County over $100,000.  This illustrates how important it is for the Clerk’s office to be independent of the BOCC.

Commissioner Masters said that the second part of his question was how did the budget process become adversarial? 

Mr. Weiss said years ago, prior to the actual formal budget process the Constitutional Officers, County Manager, and some board members got together, and talked about the financial condition of the County, their needs, and things they wanted to see accomplished, and what raises should be according to the economy at that time, and when they finished with the meeting they had some direction of what was going to be submitted for their budgets, and they were all very cooperative.  He said over the last number of years, that communication link dropped, and he felt this was a shame.  He said the Commission was hearing that the Board had no control, but it did.  He said they have complete control over the budget he submits to them for some of his operation, and the only appeal he has is to go to the Circuit Court and file a legal suit against them.  He said it had never happened, but that was the only appeal he had. 

Chairman Costello asked if there were further questions?

Commissioner Price said she had a couple of questions for him.  She asked if his department still had Accounts Payable?

Mr. Weiss said, yes, the Clerk had always had the responsibility of pre-audit expenditures.  The Board had a department that monitored purchase orders and invoices coming in, and forwarded them to his department, and he felt there was a lot of duplication.  He said his office finally convinced the BOCC it was a waste of county assets, and part of that responsibility was turned over to them, and the rest was eliminated. 

Commissioner Price asked if the only way for a bill to be paid from the County was to go through that Accounts Payable Department? 

Mr. Weiss said yes.

Commissioner Price asked if there were any petty cashes or any other revenues?

Mr. Weiss said some of the departments have petty cash funds, and they audit those.  The Internal Audit Department he referenced earlier, which started in 1983 goes out periodically.  He said they monitored what was being paid, and some bills could get through, but funds would not be reimbursed if they weren’t legal.

Commissioner Price asked if they zero-base budgeted for his department?

Mr. Weiss said they start with zero-based budgeting, review mandates received by the Legislature, review services that may need to be added, and review the office’s growth. 

Chairman Costello asked Mr. Weiss to comment further on the problem of budget comparability from one year to the next, when the intervening period of time was steeped in changes such as, inflation, CPI index, changes in mission, and changes in salaries, etc., and if he would particularly touch on transfers from one fund to another, where both were counted in the budget, making it appear that there were significant increases in the budget, but in reality it was simply a transfer from one fund to another?

Mr. Weiss said he felt the Chairman clarified a large part of that question with his summarization of fund transfers.  He felt there was some duplication of numbers, for example the selling of bonds wherein money may go into one fund, then some of that same money goes into a debt service fund, so the money could be counted twice.  He said there were also transfers, as the Chairman pointed out that were counted twice.  

He said he thought what he pointed out earlier was important, and that anytime numbers were reviewed, the person reviewing those numbers needed to go beyond those numbers and find out the causes for the numbers.

To solidify his point, he asked the Commission to consider the County’s budget for this year. He said the Board of County Commissioners commissioned a company to do a salary survey, and the survey revealed the Property Appraiser and the Sheriff were behind the market.  He said if they didn’t want to pay for those things within their budget, why did they hire a company to do a study to show why the BOCC had trouble hiring and maintaining staff, and now they say the budget increases are too high.  He felt the BOCC did not want to take the responsibility that they should. 

Commissioner McLaughlin said one of the topics that had been discussed at the Commission had been the issue of cash flows and the auditing of those cash flows.  He said what he was referring to was a concern because of the way budgeting occurred in Polk County, and that a particular department head might unwisely spend funds near the budget year’s end due to fear that if those funds weren’t spent they wouldn’t receive them the next year.  He asked if there was a way monthly cash flow coming from a particular department could be reviewed?

Mr. Weiss said he would give him two answers to that question.  First there is a misconception that the Clerk has anything to do with the Board of County Commissioners’ Budget.  He said Florida law provides that the Clerk serve as the Budget Officer only if the Board did not designate a Budget Officer, and years ago the Board designated the County Manager as their Budget Officer, and the Clerk had no control over the County’s budget, and the only control they had was by law they had to ensure funds were not being overspent, and if an actual expenditure exceeded the fund it would not be approved.

He said to answer his question regarding the monitoring of funds, they tried to implement with the Board, as their Finance Officer, on a monthly basis the monitoring of funds just as he had said, and there was a Finance Committee that met monthly with some of the board members, the County Manager, the O & B Director and some of the Clerk staff, but they could not require them to provide that information.  The Board had total control over their budget, and they basically had total control over their expenditures unless they were illegal. 

Commissioner McLaughlin asked Mr. Weiss in his opinion, with his many years of experience in Polk County politics, if the given salary cuts of the County Commission and some of the commissioners that felt they had to be part-time was the reason for some of the budget wrangling because they didn’t have the time to devote to the give and take in the budgeting process, and because they didn’t feel they had final authority and Tallahassee did, and if that was the case, should the Commission do something to make them full-time?    

Mr. Weiss said they were using the salary cut as the reason they were not full-time any longer, and any of the problems that were being encountered in Polk County now were because those commissioners were not able or willing to spend adequate time dealing with them.  He said he would like to use as an example the Finance Committee, and once each month they would meet with the key people.  He said in the last six months they had only had one or two Finance Committee meetings, and the reason given was that they did not have time.

Commissioner Moore Bailey thanked Mr. Weiss for the package that was sent to them in advance, and  she asked that he disregard the comment she made before the meeting.  Referring to one of the components he had in formulating a system to receive feedback from taxpayers regarding their satisfaction with  governing bodies, she asked if that was something that he could or would consider as it related to county commissioners, and not necessarily their pay, but perhaps their part-time status?

Mr. Weiss said he did not have control over that.  He said if he did he would like to poll the citizens.  He thought it would be beneficial to do that, but he had no control and his area of responsibility and authority didn’t cover this, and this would be something they would have to take on their own initiative.    

The Chairman asked if the Commission had further questions?

Commissioner McLaughlin asked if Mr. Weiss had an opinion on whether or not the County Manager should be given more or less authority, and should we have a strong County Manager form of government given the part-time status of the commissioners?

Mr. Weiss said the way he understood the Charter, and the Constitution of Polk County, the County Manager has the authority.  The County Commissioners are Legislative, and the County Manager is administrative.  All of the County employees work for the County Manager except for the County Attorney.  He said he didn’t know what more authority he would need to do his job.  He said the BOCC was the legislative body and the County Manager was the one to carry it out.  He said in looking at the State of Florida we have a Governor and Cabinet and others to carry things out, and Polk County was the same now under the Charter. 

Commissioner McLaughlin said perhaps he wasn’t clear.   He asked what about a County Chairperson that would be elected that would have more authority, with line item veto that would actually serve as an extra vote on the County Commission?

Mr. Weiss said he didn’t know if there would be a benefit to that because the County had five elected commissioners, and he knew there was some consideration that it may need to go to seven, and he felt if they did their job, they would have line item vetoes.  He said he didn’t feel that the County needed an elected County Manager.  He said he wasn’t sure the School Board benefited from having an elected Superintendent, and the School Board decided on the budget and passed it, and the Superintendent only carried it out, and he was elected, unless the County Manager was given a large amount of power. 

Commissioner Masters asked if Article 5 of the Florida Constitution affected the Clerk’s Office?

Mr. Weiss said he would like to give the Commission a quick history lesson. Back in 1973 the Constitution changed the court system, and up until that time we had Justice of the Peace, City Courts, City Judges, Criminal Court of Records, Circuit Judges and the citizens of Florida decided to have two tiers on the local level, the County Court and the Circuit Court, and they changed.  The counties felt when that was passed there was a mandate for the State to pay for the court system and they fought that for years and the Legislature said they didn’t see a mandate and they would never fully fund the State Attorney, the Public Defender, and the Clerk or the Judges. Some were funded by the State, some by fees, and some by the Board of County Commissioners, and finally there was a movement by the County Commissioners Association statewide to amend the Constitution, he said he believed it was Revision 7 to change Article 5 that mandated the Legislature pay for the court system, and the way the Clerk fits into that, the implementing Legislation provides that the Clerk will be funded from fees, and it has to be implemented by July 1, 2004. 

He served on a statewide committee, and they are trying to determine the adequate fees statewide for every Clerk’s Office that it is uniform, to fund the offices. 

He said by the year 2004 the only budget the Clerk will have with the Board of County Commissioners is the budget for the Clerk, Accountant, and Auditor.  He said fees of the office would pay all other expenses, and now it was about even and after that on the court side it would be one hundred percent. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey said to follow up on Commissioner McLaughlin’s statement in terms of a strong County Manager, if for example Commissioner Neil Combee, who was the Chair presently, were elected by the people as the County chair, would he support that?

Mr. Weiss said he would have to see the benefits.  He said he had not seen anyone articulate what the benefits would be to the citizens of Polk County by having that. 

Chairman Costello said he was not sure he understood the question. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey said for instance, as it stood now, the people do not elect the County Chair, and the commissioners do, and asked if Mr. Weiss would support that?

Mr. Weiss said he did not know because he had never seen a study or the benefits that would be given to the County. 

Chairman Costello thanked Mr. Weiss for his presentation. 

Scott Girouard, Commissioner, City of Winter Haven

Chairman Costello welcomed Scott Girouard, Commissioner and former Mayor of the City of Winter Haven.

Commissioner Girouard addressed the subject of Community Redevelopment Areas (CRAs).  He noted that before the Charter existed, the BOCC had no control over the cities and their establishment of CRAs, but now they do.  He believes that city governments are the best positioned to determine the need for a CRA, and they must justify the slum and blight finding based on State statute.  While it is true that county ad valorem tax increments on property within the CRA are not available as general revenue to the BOCC, the same is true with the cities.  They lose money in their general fund and must commit it to the CRA funds.  He also noted that the CRA has a limited life span, and eventually the tax dollars will return for general fund uses.

Based on his observations, be concluded that the decision to establish and determine the area of a CRA district should be granted in the Charter solely to cities, as long as they comply fully with the spirit and specifics of the State statute that authorizes CRAs.

Chairman Costello thanked Commissioner Scott Girouard for his presentation and asked if the Commission had questions?

Commissioner Masters said in Commissioner Girouard’s presentation he spoke about incremental funds flowing into the CRA fund from the general fund.  He asked what limits were set on the CRA fund?

Commissioner Girouard said the funds must be spent within the CRA district, and they must be spent on infrastructure.  He said the salary of a CRA Director could be paid by those funds as well as for development assistance, but basically all of the funds in the district must be spent on redevelopment, for example, drainage projects and streetscaping.  He said the objective was to spend the money on items that would cause property values to increase, for example in Winter Haven the funds they will be using in their downtown CRA will be used for the renovation of the city’s Central Park, streetscaping on Central Avenue, putting in underground utilities and redoing drainage.  He said in Florence Villa the CRA funds would go toward doing streetscaping on Avenue T and redoing a drainage problem.  He said as the property values went up they would be able to collect more tax increments, but he thought if they looked at some of the figures through the Florida Redevelopment Association for every public dollar that was spent, there was usually about $6 in private investment to follow that.

Commissioner Masters asked if as that money increased, would he have to go back to the County Commission to approve what the funds were spent on?

Commissioner Girouard said no.  Once the funds were in the CRA the City  had control over how the funds were spent. 

Commissioner Masters asked if the County was able to choose if it was a CRA or not?

Commissioner Girouard said yes.  He said they would go to them with the plan, specify why some areas were blighted areas and some were not, and they would have to approve that plan.   

He said CRAs were being penalized for being a success, and it seemed that none of those problems occurred when there was no money involved. 

He said there were strict rules by which the money must be spent by State statute. He said as an example, where a city approached the county and asked them to redo their downtown area, and in the past the county would have told the city that was their responsibility, even though city and county taxpayers are contributing to the funds.  The county taxpayers that live in the city are receiving a partial rebate to bring the funds back into the community to spend it.

He said they were concerned for all of the cities that were working hard on redevelopment efforts, and the county could come to a point where they would not grant any more CRAs because they didn’t want the loss of revenue, but the problem was until some success was achieved one would not know how much that would be. 

Chairman Costello said the Commission’s consultants had educated them on the point that the Charter could speak to almost any subject as long as it was consistent with the U.S. Constitution, the State Constitution, and the general laws, and with that frame of reference he asked if the consultants would like to comment on the issue of the CRA and the language in the Charter?

Mr. Watts said the Legislature specified in a charter county CRAs could not be created by municipalities without the approval of the county.  He said, he thought that was a subject of debate not only there, but in other charter counties as well.   He said the problem was that the limitation was one, which the Legislature imposed, and it was not imposed by that Charter and was a limitation on municipal authority.  He said he did not believe by charter that they could remove what the Legislature put in place. 

Chairman Costello asked if legislators could change what the Legislature put into place, and if that was where lobbying should occur?

Mr. Watts said that was correct.

The Chairman asked if there were further questions?  There were no further questions. 

The Chairman thanked Commissioner Girouard for his presentation. 

Marsha Faux, Polk County Property Appraiser

Chairman Costello welcomed Marsha Faux, Polk County Property Appraiser.

Ms. Faux thanked the Commission for giving her the opportunity to make her presentation.  She provided and explained the contents of packets of information distributed for the file and for each commissioner detailing the operations of the Property Appraiser’s office.

She outlined the mission, vision, values and accomplishments of her office, including a new deputy policy handbook, an automated financial/payroll system, staff restructuring and training, and web site operations.  She reported on the positive feedback she has received from the citizens of Polk County.

She reported that as a result of a new computer system, her office has added approximately $450,000,000 to the tax roll.  That results in $3.5 million added dollars to the county’s tax revenue.  The computer system will also increase future increases in tax revenues, making it more than pay for itself.

She plans on continually improving their web site, and reaching the point where citizens will be able to file for homestead exemption without coming to the Property Appraiser’s office.

She went into detail on the budgeting process within her office, and how it was presented to the BOCC, and then to the Department of Revenue.  Both the BOCC and the Property Appraiser have appeal rights in the event there is disagreement on budget matters.  She regretted that the only opportunity for her to discuss her budget with the BOCC was during its formal presentation.  She felt that informal advance discussions would be useful for both her and the BOCC.

She said that much of the increase in her budget is driven by county growth and the addition of property as people move in to the county.  Some of the increases stem from the recent salary survey initiated by the BOCC, and some from the county health plan which covers her employees.  Some of it was due to the need to upgrade an antiquated phone system so that she could better serve the citizens.  She noted that unused funds are not spent at the end of the year just for the sake of spending them, but are returned to the BOCC.

She proceeded to explain the difference in the Property Appraiser’s budgets over the years, and indicated that the comparisons presented to commissioners between her office and the Hillsborough property appraiser on August 14, 2001 were not properly presented.  She provided a spreadsheet comparing the two offices, and it is attached to the record copy of these minutes, so that the commissioners had the correct set of facts.

Under the present system of governance there is accountability, independence, and separation.  The BOCC, which is the millage rate setter, should not be in control of the Property Appraiser who sets values.  To merge the two would destroy all of the checks and balances required by the Constitution and the statutes.  We should work together as a team but maintain the separation that is essential.

The Chairman thanked Ms. Faux for her presentation, and asked the Commission if they had questions.

Commissioner Masters said he was frustrated because the numbers she quoted were different than Randy Wilkinson’s, and he was to the point that he didn’t know what to believe.  He asked if she and Commissioner Wilkinson met and discussed those numbers?

She said Commissioner Wilkinson had never been to her office to discuss anything about those numbers, and she had a copy of Commissioner Wilkinson’s presentation, and he did not give references of where the data came from, and everything she presented to the Commission had a reference, and Rob Turner would be happy to verify those numbers were correct.  She said that afternoon at 4:50 p.m. the reason they had one sheet that was loose was because he was trying to get his appraisers together so that she could give them apples to apples and oranges to oranges, and she didn’t have enough time at 4:50 p.m. to replace that sheet.  She said on the loose sheet, they would notice two additional lines, which were important because they showed them the difference between the number of appraisers he has and the number she had to do the job, and she was only asking for four positions, and she still had 3,536 parcels to his 2,761 to do the job she needs to do to get their level of assessments to at least the state average. 

Commissioner Lindsey asked if the Board of County Commissioners had ever appealed to the Governor’s office that she mentioned in the handout?

Ms. Faux said yes they did once, and she thought it was in 1997, and they went to the Department of Revenue with an appeal.  She said that was when Mr. Coleman was trying to get the new computer system implemented, and the county didn’t want to lose control over that, and they appealed.  She said that Mr. Coleman, the Department of Revenue and the Board sat down and negotiated.  She said she had a signed copy of that agreement between the Board, Jim Keene and Mr. Coleman as to what was agreed upon to withdraw their petition, so that it did not go to the Governor and the Cabinet. 

Commissioner Lindsey asked what a typical response from Mr. Smith’s office in the Department of Revenue would be when she submitted her budget? 

Ms. Faux said they compared them to other sizable counties, and reviewed their spending, looked at growth and what was remaining in their budget, and asked them what they would be spending the remaining funds on between then and October 1^st.   She said whenever they wanted to do something in their office, if there weren’t sufficient funds, she had to submit a request to the Department of Revenue to transfer funds, giving them a reason for the transfer of the funds, and she felt that was accountability. 

Commissioner Lindsey asked if the phrase “bucket accounting” was applicable?

Ms. Faux said it was not. 

Chairman Costello said the Commission had a proposal from a gentleman early on in their presentations about educational qualifications for Constitutional Officers, and for the Property Appraiser he recommended that the Charter state the Property Appraiser would be licensed as a Property Appraiser, and he asked if she had a comment on that proposal?

Ms. Faux said she thought that the Property Appraiser must have experience.  She said she was a Certified Florida Evaluator with four years experience in all of the courses, classes and studies she had before she became the Certified Florida Appraiser, and that title was only given when one was elected, and she did have an American Society of Appraiser’s designation in ad valorem taxation for mass appraisals. 

Chairman Costello asked if she thought the Charter should address the educational or certification requirements for an elected Property Appraiser or did she think it should stay the way it was in terms of educational qualifications?

Ms. Faux said she thought it should stay the way it was.

Chairman Costello asked if the Commission had further questions?

Commissioner Price said she had an expression that she would like to make to all of the Constitutional Officers, with one concern.  She said she thought Ms. Faux had made some headway in the accomplishments that she listed in the eight months that were reflected in her report, and she asked where she saw consolidation in the future?  Would we in future years see a smaller increase in county budgets?  Growth does not necessarily mean equal dollars.

Ms. Faux said they were all expected to do more with less.  She said when she presented her budget to the Commission in April she gave them a forecast of the next two years, and many of the things she asked for in this year’s budget were catch up things.  She didn’t feel anyone in the room could deny values in the county hadn’t been at market value.  She said the number of appraisers for parcels was proof which showed they needed adequate staff, and if they didn’t do what they were suppose to do within that three-year period, with regard to the return on the investment coming back to the county, the citizen had a right to change that as a voter. 

She said her office projected the budget would be less, unless additional responsibilities were given to them, and the Auditor General’s Report was increasingly putting pressure on them to tighten their numbers. 

She said many of the things in the budget were things that were required to get her office caught up, and would not exist again, and as a conservative and cost conscientious person, she would do everything she could to maintain and decrease her budget to get her office where it needed to be, so the county could get a return investment, and as the tax base continued to grow the millage rates should come down.

Chairman Costello thanked Ms. Faux for her presentation. 

The Chairman said if there were no objections, the Commission would take a ten-minute recess.  There were no objections. 

The meeting reconvened at 7:45 p.m.

Mr. Mawhinney  of the City of Lakeland

Chairman Costello welcomed Mr. Mawhinney for his presentation on behalf of the City of Lakeland.  Mr. Mawhinney is the City Attorney for the City of Lakeland.

He complemented the Commission on their work on behalf of the citizens of the County.

On behalf of the City of Lakeland commissioners, he made the following recommendations. 

Approve a revision to the Charter, which would change the membership of the county commission from five to seven members.  Five would serve at large but live in each of five geographic districts based on population, and two would be at-large and could live anywhere in the county.

The position of county commissioner to be a full-time position with the salary restored to what is set forth in the statute or a reasonable percentage thereof.  By full-time is meant that the job of county commissioner should be the first priority in the professional life of a commissioner, and they should be compensated accordingly.

He suggested the Commission consider strengthening the language in the Charter, which governs the relationship between county employees and the county commissioners.  He thought the commissioners might want to look at the language in the City of Lakeland’s Charter, and use it as an example of how the wording could be strengthened.

Constitutional officers should be elected on a non-partisan basis.  The City of Lakeland does not advocate any other change in their status, duties or salary.

The City of Lakeland advocates that the School Board be addressed in the Charter.  School Board members should be elected on a non-partisan basis.  Also the Charter should address the issue of an appointed Superintendent of Schools.  If it is to remain an elected position it should also be non-partisan.

The Chairman asked the Commission if they had questions. 

Commissioner McLaughlin asked if the City of Lakeland addressed the constitutional officers regarding their budgeting process? 

Mr. Mawhinney said they did not specially address that.  He said the focus was on the partisan versus non-partisan status of those positions.  He said their commissioners were aware of the debate that existed concerning budgeting between the Board of County Commissioners and the Constitutionals, but the Commission did not make a recommendation for changes. 

Commissioner Lindsey asked if their CRA were not in place prior to the existing charter, would they support the position of the Winter Haven representative?

Mr. Mawhinney said yes he would, but he would admit that he would probably be biased in stating that position, but he agreed with the Winter Haven commissioner’s position.  He said he didn’t think anyone could better appreciate the problems within a community particularly within a municipality, and better address them than the municipality.  He said a CRA had been used that year to create two new areas, Midtown and Dixieland.  He said they had a downtown CRA for a number of years. The William’s Development, which was a huge annexation, was not designated as a CRA, but it was in the agreement that they will have a CRA in a very limited area for purposes of constructing an interchange in the area of Interstate 4 and Mt. Olive Road.  He said in that instance there were meetings between the developer’s representative and the County Commission and they came up with an inter-local that was brought to the city to enter into a CRA between the county and the city.  He said the way the original agreement was drafted it stated the law required the city to come to the county to get their permission to create CRAs, and he objected to that language, and what they ultimately ended up with in their agreement was that their was some debate or confusion as to what might be necessary to avoid that, so they were entering into an inter-local so that there would be no legal challenge to the future operation or the creation of the CRA. 

He said he believed municipalities were better able to judge within their corporate limits what the needs were.  The standards as were indicated, were slum and blight, and they were very specific in the statute as to what you must find and must have in a detailed redevelopment plan that has to be adopted after public hearing, and then a trust fund has to be established, and those funds can only be used in the trust fund to fund aspects and elements of the redevelopment plan. 

Chairman Costello said on the issue of non-interference by Board of County Commissioners in administrative affairs, the Charter article 3.4 was very brief and he would read it.

The Chairman read the article, and asked Mr. Mawhinney how he would strengthen it?

Mr. Mawhinney said they had two lengthy paragraphs that were extremely detailed and specific, and they prohibit the Commission or any of its members from attempting to dictate who gets appointed or who gets removed from any office that was either directly or indirectly under the organizational chart of the City Manager. Except for general inquiries concerning administrative procedures and policies they are not to deal with officers and employees of the city that are subject to the direction and control of the City Manager.

Chairman Costello asked if there were sanctions for violations?

Mr. Mawhinney said yes, in the last paragraph it stated, “Any violation of a provision of this section by a member of the Commission shall constitute grounds for removal from office”.  He thought this same thing could probably be accomplished by the constitutional reference in the County Charter. 

Chairman Costello asked regarding the five geographic districts, would the districting be the same as currently in the Charter, roughly equal districts in terms of population conforming more or less to municipal boundaries? 

Mr. Mawhinney said he thought the assumption was that the districts as they existed would remain for the five seats, but with the understanding that those districts were supposed to be population driven, and subject to redistricting after each census. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey asked in regards to the CRAs did he say Lakeland had three or possibly four on the way, and if so, was there any restriction from the State or the County regarding how many a municipality could have?

Mr. Mawhinney said there was a lot of debate regarding the language of the statute, and he felt the interpretations were correct in stating that there could be only one community redevelopment authority or agency, and the statute says that shall be the City Commission, however, they could delegate that.  He said there could be multiple areas underneath that agency.  He said the way the City of Lakeland did it when they only had one redevelopment authority, and that was the downtown area, the City Commission delegated its authority as a CRA to the Lakeland Downtown Development Authority.  He said that created a problem when they started developing additional redevelopment areas, because the feeling of the Commission was that the LDDA being specific to the downtown area shouldn’t be serving as redevelopment authority for the additional community redevelopment areas, so the Commission took back from the LDDA the role of the CRA, or the Community Redevelopment Authority, or agency and now served as the overall authority.  The blueprint was for each one of those community redevelopment areas that they created to appoint an Advisory Panel in each one of the areas that was made up of people who work, live, or own property within that area, and they would in turn make recommendations to the City Commission as to what should be in the Redevelopment Plan, what changes should be made in the Redevelopment Plan, how the budget should work as to when those different elements would be addressed, and which ones would be given priorities over others. 

Chairman Costello asked if there were further questions?

Commissioner Stoer said she wanted to discuss another area.  She thought it had already been decided that the School Board would be non-partisan, and she asked how they arrived at the reasoning on the appointed Superintendent, and what was the interest of the City Commissioners of Lakeland in the Superintendent being appointed?

Mr. Mawhinney said he could speculate on what their interest was based upon general comments he had heard.  He said he thought their interest was in seeing what was best for public education, and they felt as many people felt, and it was the feeling of their Commission, without exception, that the Superintendent should be an appointed position, just like at the County Commission or at any City level, the Commission adopts and sets policy and the Administration has the job of implementing and fulfilling that policy.  He said their Commission did not see the need for an elected person to be the one who implemented the policy that was adopted by the elected body that created the policy. 

Mr. Mawhinney asked if she asked about nonpartisanship? 

Commissioner Stoer said she thought the School Board was already going nonpartisan?

Chairman Costello said that was a Constitutional Amendment, and was applicable in all counties. 

Mr. Watts said that was a very recent amendment. 

Chairman Costello asked if there were further questions?  There were no further questions. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Mawhinney for his presentation. 

Larry Hardaway, Voter’s League

Chairman Costello welcomed Mr. Hardaway. 

Mr. Hardaway thanked the commissioners for giving him the opportunity to address the Commission.

He said that the Voter’s League is well organized with about 100 paid members.  The members come from all of the cities in the county.  They meet once each month.  The organization is a registered political action committee with the State of Florida.  During the last election they had 26,000 mail-outs to African-American minority voters.  The organization has been credited with influencing the direction of the minority vote within the county.  He said that he is President of the Voter’s League and Chairman of the Political Action Committee.

The League authorized him to comment on the following issues regarding proposed Charter amendments and/or revisions.

 He said that minority members do not feel that they have full opportunity to be elected in countywide races.

He said that a Florida Court decision had ruled that the at-large voting system that we presently have was motivated by a discriminatory intent.  In the 1860s, many of the counties in Florida had African-American majorities, and they had the opportunity to elect many of their county commissioners.  The State Legislature then took the authority to elect county commissioners away from localities and gave the power to the governor to appoint them instead.  When the power to elect was returned to localities it was returned on the at-large basis.

He urged single member districts within, which only voters within the district can elect the commissioner.  He also recommends enlarging the BOCC from five to seven members.

Commissioner McLaughlin said that it had been argued that some of the recent salary cuts for the Board of County Commissioners would discourage minorities or other disenfranchised individuals or less economically fortunate individuals for running for that office, and did he have any opinions on that?

Mr. Hardaway said they had not viewed the need for increased participation by African-Americans in the political process as candidates in that light.  They believed if there were single member districts there would be a greater incidence of African-Americans and other people running for office because it would be cheaper, and if one only had to run within their own district not as much money would be needed.

He said he thought common people would find it more acceptable to run if there were smaller districts to run in. 

Commissioner Lindsey said they had heard suggestions earlier in their deliberations that in nonpartisan races the candidate would be prohibited from identifying his or her party, and the alternative, if we had nonpartisan, would allow them to at least identify themselves as Independent, Democrat, or Republican or nothing, and would that be acceptable labeling to at least allow the person to identify themselves, but not run as a representative of a specific party if they choose to use the label?

Mr. Hardaway said he was not certain.  He said his membership had not had a discussion regarding that specific question, and he felt by answering he would be speculating, but personally he was not certain if it would work.  He said generally with those that ran from a particular party if they registered as Democrat or Republican they committed to a certain platform.  They pledged to follow a certain program or policies or ideas, and a lot of times the common person looked to that when voting for a candidate, and they were not confident that they were going to make a well informed judgment about individuals who are running, and sometimes one turned to party affiliation.  The League was uncertain in that area. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey said she had two questions.  The first being, Chairman Costello, in an earlier presentation with the Property Appraiser, addressed educational qualifications for that position and she wondered if he or the Voters League had a view on that, and the second question was regarding the Constitutional Officers, she said she understood the Voter’s League wanted to maintain the status quo as far as the Constitutional Officers were concerned.  Was that correct?

Mr. Hardaway responded yes, they wanted to maintain the status quo for the Constitutional Officers.

Mr. Hardaway said regarding her question concerning the educational qualifications for the Constitutional Officers, they had forums and their forum asked very direct and piercing questions, and one of the issues they had during the Property Appraiser’s race was education, and they felt education produced compassion and understanding and it was a quality that they wanted in their elected official.  He said whether or not the Charter should impose some regulation of education, he was not certain. 

Chairman Costello asked Mr. Hardaway to explain his group’s position on the School Board and the County Commission.  He said in the case of the School Board there were a couple of African-Americans, very qualified individuals, who were leaders in their own right, J.C. Corbett and Brenda Reddout and they were elected in large districts, but yet on the County Commission that had never happened.  He asked what the difference was?

Mr. Hardaway said he believed there were certain elected positions in the county that people were very concerned about and focused on a lot.  He felt overall Polk County wanted a cross section of individuals on the School Board to the degree that they would allow an African-American on the School Board, but when it came to certain positions like the Sheriff or like the Superintendent and like members of the County Commission it got more limited, and that was what they had observed over the years.  He said it would be much more difficult for an African-American to be elected to the County Commission than the School Board.

Chairman Costello said he thought that was evident from history. 

The Chairman said he noticed Mr. Hardaway seemed to hedge some on Joe Mawhinney’s proposal for a mixed system, which was to say, five districted and two at large, and he asked if the Voters League was adamantly opposed to that, and did they want all single member districts or would they agree to some sort of combination as he proposed?

Mr. Hardaway said they would possibly agree to some type of combination, and he would like to sit down with Mr. Mawhinney and talk about it looking at it from a different prospective.  He said one of the fears he personally had with single member districts was that they couldn’t come up with a district to give a sufficient percentage of minorities in the district, and that would be extremely difficult to do.  He said he recalled four or five years ago or longer the Florida Rule Legal Services brought in an expert to look at the numbers in the county and it was difficult to come up with a district that was a majority of African American.  He said he knew that there were some concerns and drawbacks to single member districts and that concerned them, but they balanced that with the need to have someone at the table to have concerns heard.  

Chairman Costello asked if the case he cited was the Johnson vs. Desoto case?

Mr. Hardaway said yes it was.

The Chairman said perhaps Mr. Watts could get a copy of that for the commissioners. 

Commissioner Price said that she would like to get clarification from Mr. Mawhinney that his representation was for five single districts, two at large, but all elected at large? 

Mr. Mawhinney said that was correct. 

Chairman Costello thanked Commissioner Price for clarification on that point.

Commissioner Dukes said the Commission had just heard Mr. Mawhinney’s organization suggest seven commissioners, and he asked what their organization would recommend?

Mr. Hardaway said in looking at the dynamics of group action they felt that seven would be the best number, and they felt if it went beyond seven it would become difficult to get a plural vote and ruled action from the Commission, so they felt seven would be the right number at that time.  He said they were urging single member districts, with seven similarly sized districts around the county that should be based upon population. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey said there had been some discussion regarding the Chair for the County Commission being elected by the voters, and she asked if the Voters League had discussed this and if not, could he give his personal opinion?

Commissioner Moore Bailey commented that Mr. Hardaway was very modest concerning his comments about the School Board versus the County Commissioners being elected, and she appreciated his answer. There are pockets of African-American in certain areas of the county.  That’s why it is difficult to draw district(s) made up of African-America, and she was involved in some redistricting meetings.

 Mr. Hardaway asked her to repeat the question.

Commissioner Moore Bailey said the question was regarding the elected County Chair.

 Mr. Hardaway said yes his group had discussed that issue at length.  He said they felt comfortable in the executive officer of the county being appointed as opposed to being elected.  He said in their discussions on how they would decide an issue they looked at what happens with the School Board, and originally the African-American community supported the elected Superintendent for the School Board, but it now appeared that it was not working best for the children who sometimes have specific needs, and they believe as the School Board as presently configured had the abilities and the confidence to choose an appointed official who would do a good job for everybody.  

 Chairman Costello thanked Mr. Hardaway for his presentation.

  Chairman Costello said the next presentation would be from Donnie Allen who represented the NAACP.

 Donnie Allen, NAACP

Chairman Costello welcomed Donnie M. Allen, Vice Chairman, Polk County Conference of Branches, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Mr. Allen said that the mission of his organization is to vocally advocate and educate the residents and voters of Polk County that before there can be fair and equal government, there must be fair and equal representation.  He presented three issues for the consideration of the Charter Review Commission.

 First, in order to enhance the possibility of Black representation on the BOCC, his organization recommends adding two additional seats to the BOCC.

Second, his organization recommends that the seven seats be either all single member districts or five single member districts and two at-large districts.  Only voters in the single member districts would vote for the single member commissioners.  All voters in the county would elect the at-large commissioners.

Third, his organization recommends that the Sheriff and Superintendent of Schools be made non-partisan.  Political affiliations are not relevant to either law enforcement or education of children.

Finally, he stated that his organization believes there should be a redefinition of the relationship of Polk County government, its 17 municipalities and the numerous unincorporated areas that make up the county, so that equal distribution of services occurs between unincorporated areas and incorporated areas.

Mr. Allen also expressed the need for the NAACP to be involved in the process of redrawing district boundaries within Polk County.

Chairman Costello said he would like to clarify that Mr. Allen’s organization represented the umbrella organization of the NAACPs, and said it was a relatively new organization, and it represented all of the NAACP’s in the county.

Mr. Allen said that was correct.  He said there were five branches of the NAACP within Polk County and those branches incorporated the Lakeland, Winter Haven, Bartow, Lake Wales, and the Haines City branches, and he was speaking on behalf of all five of those branches. 

Chairman Costello asked Mr. Allen to clarify his third point that had to do with unequal provisions of services, and he asked to hear more about specific situations that he had in mind that illustrated his point.  

Mr. Allen said he could tell them about an area where he lived.  He said the citizens in the Gordonville area were still on septic systems and the people in that community were still using well water, and as they knew, that was an unsanitary condition, so what they were talking about was the county and/or the cities that annexed around those properties stepping up to the plate and providing those services to those recipients.  He said those people were taxpayers as well as the other county residents, and they simply didn’t receive the services that counties provided in other areas. 

Chairman Costello asked if the Commission had questions?

Commissioner Masters said his question was for counsel.  He asked if all of the areas that had been discussed were within their bailiwick for discussion or were there some things under Florida law that they should not be addressing?

Mr. Watts said there was a general law of annexation provided by state law that was a uniform process, but there was also a provision in Chapter 163 dealing with comprehensive planning that provides the division of responsibility between cities and counties as to future planning and provision of services shall be as the Charter provides, in other words, they could set up, either directly through Charter or probably a little more flexibility through a charter created process, the eventual areas of responsibility for the particular cities so that they can plan the extension of their utilities, their future zoning maps and so forth on an orderly basis.  He said not many jurisdictions have taken advantage of that.  He said there was a couple that had provided some joint mechanisms for planning the expansion of the cities, but it was not widely used. 

Commissioner Gernert said the Commission had just heard the representative from the Voters League express the fact that they were very much in favor of an appointed School Superintendent, and he asked if the NAACP’s group had any discussions regarding that topic?

Mr. Allen said they had not discussed that topic specifically, but in general they supported the election process that was in place then, but they would like to see the School Superintendent be a non-partisan position, but they had not discussed it with respect to appointment.

Commissioner Nunnallee asked if they did bring that issue up at their next meeting if he would please let them know?

Commissioner Nunnallee asked how many people his organization represented?

Mr. Allen said within the five branches he estimated between 500-750 paid members. 

Chairman Costello asked if there were further questions?

Commissioner McLaughlin asked Mr. Allen if he had any thoughts on the salary issue for the Board of County Commissioners.  He said the City Commission for Lakeland recommended that the salaries of the commissioners be increased. 

Mr. Allen said their thought process was that the salary should be commensurate with the responsibility, and on a personal note he thought that was a great responsibility. 

Commissioner Moore Bailey said as the County Commissioners’ positions related to being part-time versus full-time did he have any thought on that?

Mr. Allen said he had obviously listened to some of the comments made that evening, and he had read some of the comments about it suddenly being a part-time position, and he said he had to answer that question on a personal note because they had not discussed that issue.  He felt the commissioners’ positions were not part-time jobs and the job was to serve all of the constituents of Polk County, and he believed that the time that was necessary to do that was what the job should be, and he didn’t consider that to be part-time.

Chairman Costello thanked Mr. Allen for his presentation. 

Chairman Costello said he would pass out copies of Mr. Allen’s presentation to the Commission. 

The Chairman said the next presentation would be from Karen Kaplan of the Sierra Club. 

Karen Kaplan, Sierra Club

Chairman Costello welcomed Karen Kaplan of the Sierra Club for her presentation to the Commission.

Ms. Kaplan said that the Sierra Club had three recommendations.  The first was the establishment of a Growth Management Commission in the County.  It would determine, manage and coordinate the technical issues of growth management and inter-governmental coordination.  It would arbitrate disputes between governmental bodies, assist in the implementation of extra-governmental programs (busing, solid waste, emergency response, etc.), develop Master Plans for infrastructure, set minimum standards for natural resource protection, set standards for infrastructure capacity, and set uniform standards for review of comprehensive plans.

The second recommendation was to establish a Polk County Environmental Protection Council.  It would be more responsive than the State agencies.  The Sierra Club has consistently advocated such a body because it believes that a majority of the persistent environmental problems in Polk County are due to absentee agencies regulating Polk’s environmental quality.  A local agency will be more responsive and more effective.

The third recommendation was for the adoption of a Citizen Bill of Rights.  She suggested as a model, the Dade County Bill of Rights, a copy of which is attached to these minutes.

Chairman Costello thanked Ms. Kaplan for her presentation and asked if the Commission had questions?

Commissioner Nunnallee asked how many members were in the Sierra Club?

Ms. Kaplan said a total of 500 members. 

Chairman Costello asked if the Sierra Club had a model that currently exists for the Growth Management Commission, and was there one that existed in any other county?

Ms. Kaplan said she didn’t know the answer to that question, but she was sure Marion Ryan did. 

Chairman Costello said perhaps the consultant could assist with that question.

Mr. Spitzer said that Volusia, Broward, and Pinellas all had growth management bodies that attempt the planning and regulatory processes of the different local governments.

Chairman Costello asked if there were further questions?  There were none.

Chairman Costello thanked Ms. Kaplan for her presentation.

Chairman Costello reminded the Commission that the information had been sent to them sometime in late July, and if they needed additional copies Ms. Swearengin would be able to provide those. 

Chairman Costello said the final presenter that evening would be Wayne Steinard, of Citizens for Truth in Government. 

Chairman Costello invited Mr. Steinard to speak.

Wayne Steinard, Citizens for Truth in Government

Mr. Steinard said he was a twenty-six plus years resident of Polk County, and he thanked the Commission for giving him their time to present his positions. 

Mr. Steinard said he made a public statement that he wanted to clear up based upon an appointment he didn’t agree with.  He said he had no reason to believe that Commissioner Hunt would be anything less than forthright in executing her duties under the Charter Review Commission, and it was a disagreement he had with Commissioner Gifford over an appointment, and in no way did he wish to impugn Commissioner Hunt’s ability or reputation. 

He said he was first going to present the issues of the Monday Night Group.  He said they tried to get a referendum started some years back, and what it involved was limiting taxes in Polk County, and getting a handle on the taxes. 

He said he would like to give the Commission some background on the Monday Night Group.  He said it was not an official group. It was a group of people that have met for eight years.  He said they range from 50-150 per week who met in a local area restaurant.  He said they span all of the political spectrum, and they come from different financial backgrounds, and in fact have had people from South Africa attend regularly while they were here.  He said it was a citizens activist group which has been involved in the NAFTA, and GAT efforts to keep the manufacturing here, supporting people for office, radio time and a number of things.  He said their agenda overall was good government.  He said he was a member of the Monday Night Group and there was no membership leader. 

He said they were proposing a two-thirds majority of the voters be required for any tax increases in Polk County.  He said this may seem to some to be an unnecessary obstacle in operating Polk County, but he said he would like to remind them that they adopted a two-thirds position also in the Charter Review Commission rules, so they already agree with him on half of it.  He said the problem was with the two-thirds requirement with the Charter Review Commission is that it may prevent access by some people to the Charter Review initiative, and it might not, but when this country was established we always tried to err in favor of freedom, and favor of the citizen, and in fact there were some sayings that it was better to let one thousand people free than to convict one innocent person, and he felt that stated clearly the position they took regarding government power and authority.  The two-thirds rule would have prevented what happened after the initiative in 1996 where seventy-two or seventy-three percent of the people in Polk County said no to a one percent increase in the sales tax and then immediately the commissioners said the heck with that we are going to go ahead and tax you people, we are going to raise your gas tax, we are going to raise your impact fees and we are going to raise your utility taxes.  He said over two-thirds of the people in Polk County said no to those taxes, and he and the people he represented felt that two-thirds of the voters should have to commit themselves to raise the taxes.  He said they did not want to see at any time in the future where a government such as was had in Polk County overruled the citizens in the manner in which they did in 1996 on the sales tax. 

He said they requested that this issue be placed on the ballot.  A copy of the suggested language was provided to each commissioner.

He said they discovered that a portion of the State statute governing election behavior by elected county officials did not apply to the County, and the letter stated it rather clearly.  He said that the County Attorney found that Section 4 did not apply, and was a moot point at that time.  He said they presented that to the Commission for them to bring the county officials under the same scrutiny and the same standards of conduct as the State, and there was nothing extraordinary about it.  He said at the time it was presented by him that all five commissioners voted unanimously immediately with little discussion to go ahead and do that, but he said he wanted to remind them that was just prior to the elections. 

He said they had evidence of a number of violations that took place in the last election, and while it did not change the outcome of the election it should not have taken place, and if it were a state employee there would have probably been fines and perhaps jail time.  He said when that issue was brought to the County Commission there was something in the air that said this was not going to go anywhere, and there they were two years later, and not a peep out of anyone as far as holding the county to the same standards as the people in state office would be.  He said he didn’t feel that there would be much to question on that, but it was a moral issue as well as a financial issue, and it was unfair for the people who were trying to achieve an office when someone was able to use county or government facilities in any manner whatsoever to enhance their chances of re-election, and that was basically what they wanted to do to prevent that.  He said they believed the ordinance that they had drafted as a proposal, and Attorney Kuhn signed the document, and had given his opinion as a lawful attorney that it would be legal.   A copy of the suggested language was provided to each commissioner.

Chairman Costello asked if the Commission had questions?

Commissioner Lindsey asked if Mr. Steinard’s definition of tax included the whole gambit of fees, fines, and assessments that were within the purview of the Commission per limited to effectively what was typically referred to as the millage rate or the full spectrum.  He said some people believed that every dime or dollar that they gave was a tax, and he asked where that began and ended?

Mr. Steinard said his opinion was it would encompass tax increases that would be normally voted on by the County Commission.  He said regulatory fees were subject to increase due to increased costs or decreased costs occasionally, and they were done from within a bureaucracy as a rule and he wasn’t sure they were established in the law, but the taxes that were assessed in the last round with the County Commission included, the increase in the utility tax, impact fees, and the increase in the gasoline tax.  He said those were the kind of taxes representative of the taxes they would like to see placed before the public before they are passed.