MINUTES OF

POLK COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION

MARCH 19, 2002

 

Chairman Dan Costello, called the meeting of the Polk County Charter Review Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Lakeland City Hall.  Commissioner Nunnallee led the prayer and Commissioner Moore Bailey led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ms. Swearengin called the roll.  All commissioners were present.

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

The Chairman said the first order of business was the approval of the minutes of February 19, 2002.  He asked if there were any changes to the minutes?  There were none. 

Commissioner Lindsey made a motion to approve the minutes of February 19, 2002, and Commissioner Nunnallee seconded the motion.  The Chairman asked if there was further discussion?  There was none.   The motion carried.

The Chairman began the meeting by introducing himself to the audience, and he welcomed them to the third of the Commission’s three public hearings, which they conducted prior to their final report on April 3, 2002. 

He told the audience the Charter Review Commission was appointed under the authority of Article 8 of the Charter.  There were thirteen commissioners appointed by the County commission and the County Constitutional Officers.  They were all unpaid volunteers.  He asked the commissioners to introduce themselves to the audience. 

He told the audience that was the Commission’s twenty-third meeting since they began their first meeting April 8th of the last year, and they would be making their report to the County Commission on April 3rd, and their recommendations would be submitted to the voters for their approval or disapproval at the November general election. 

He introduced Mr. Watts and Mr. Spitzer to the audience.

The Chairman asked Mr. Spitzer to brief the audience on charter government and its significance.

Mr. Spitzer briefed the audience on the history and significance of county charter government in Florida.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Spitzer for his presentation.

He said the purpose of the public hearing was to find out what the public thought, not only about the amendments that the Charter Review Commission had come up with thus far for referral to the voters, but also on any other issue concerning the Charter including, and he said he didn’t think anyone in the audience seriously wanted to recommend it, but including the abolishment of the Charter. 

He told them there was a list of the eight amendments the Charter was proposing on the table in the back of the room, and there was a sign-up sheet for those who wished to address the Commission.  He said the Commission’s rules permitted each person to speak for five minutes, and he would call them in the order in which their names appeared on the sign-up sheet.

He reminded the audience no decisions would be made at that evening’s public hearing, just as they did in their meetings in Winter Haven and in Haines City.  The information that was presented to the Commission was recorded and the commissioners had that in writing, and they would have their comments in writing before their next meeting, which was on March 26th at Board of County Commissioners Administration Building, Room 407, at 6:00 p.m.

He said a total of eight amendments had been proposed.  Five of the amendments could be classified as substantial in nature and those were one, two, three, seven, and eight, and three were technical in nature.  He reviewed those eight amendments and briefly summarized them.  (Copy attached to the file copy of these minutes).

The Chairman asked if the commissioners had any comments to make before opening the public hearing?  There were no comments.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

The Chairman said there were twenty-four speakers who had signed up, and he invited Mr. Eugene Roberts to speak to the Commission.

Citizen’s Comments

Mr. Eugene L. Roberts, 524 Pablo Street, Lakeland, 33803

Mr. Roberts began his comments by saying he was a Lakeland businessman and educator.

Earlier he gave each of the commissioners a copy of the comments he wanted to make that evening.  (Copy attached to file copy of these minutes).

 In the early days of the work of the Commission, he said he made several recommendations for the Commission’s consideration.  One of those recommendations was the creation of single-member districts for the Polk County Commissioner elections.

He was disappointed that recommendation failed by one vote to be placed on the ballot.  It was his feeling there were many benefits that could be derived from single-member districts, which were: more candidates would consider running because the campaign area would be greatly reduced; the cost of campaigning would be more affordable; the elected candidate would have an easier time maintaining close contact with the district as the geographic area, and the number of direct constituents would be much smaller, and this would likely generate more public interest in the Commission as voters would feel they had closer ties to the person living in their area who they had elected. 

It was his feeling that single-member districts would not lead to fragmentation of the County Commission any more than personalities and personal convictions then did.  The Commission would still be dealing with issues that affected the entire county and could certainly have town hall meetings as a group throughout the county.

He said a number of years ago, the Florida legislature moved to single-member districts.  Prior to that, candidates for the Florida house of Representatives had first to campaign in Polk and Sumter Counties, and later, when districts were redrawn, in all of Polk County. That move to single-member districts had caused no damage to the Legislature or to the legislative process.

The only way to get that issue on the ballot then was by petition with signatures of seven percent of the registered voters.  He intends to form a committee to do that, and he believes there won’t be a problem obtaining the required number of signatures.

He commended the Commission for its hard work.  He said a number of good things had been accomplished, and Dan Costello had been an outstanding chairman.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Roberts for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Victor Mansfield to speak.

Mr. Victor Mansfield, 602 Julius T. Horney Drive, Lakeland, FL

Mr. Mansfield said he believed they all could agree that there were some problems in Polk County government.  Most of the problems could be reduced to two or three parts.  Two basic problems, which concerned power and money, first who had the right or the power to make political decisions?  Secondly, how much taxes shall be?

The Florida Constitution said, “All political power was inherent in the people”.  Article 1-Section 1.  It plainly said “all”, and he asked what does that mean? He replied, all meant every bit – period.  He asked what part of that three-letter word didn’t they understand?  He said even a six year-old child knew what all meant.  That was basic Florida Law.  In law the words meant what they said, no more or no less.  So KISS, which meant, “Keep it simple stupid”.  Those were constitutional issues.  Right and wrong moral issues, because God gave one’s rights. 

The Declaration of Independence said, “That all men were created equal, they were empowered by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among those were life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.  He said those rights had to do with one’s political freedom.  There was a greater ultimate freedom offered by God.  Freedom from the bondage of sin, and he asked them to read John 8:31-36.  He said he personally had experienced that. 

The issues that were facing them and the voters affected all three of the four political freedoms, which were: their lives, their liberties, and their happiness. 

He said they all looked nice and polite in public, but the majority of them had been offensive, antagonistic, and abusive to the majority of the Polk County citizens.  They had opposed them.  He told them they should agree with them and not the “fact cat”, bossy career politicians etc.  He said he had a question for them all, and that was why were the people generally unhappy and distrusted government and politicians?  He replied, the people were unhappy with the high taxes.  They were unhappy with the “fat cat” professional politicians who made decisions against them.  He said those were wrong. They were unhappy about the five-cent gas tax placed on them after they voted for no new taxes, and those were some of the reasons for distrust. 

He said they could and should put every issue the voters wanted on the ballot whether it was one or a dozen.  That was the right of the voters.  It was not their right to decide what went on the ballot.  The Charter Review Commission had made it difficult for the seventy-three percent majority of Polk County.  They had despised the citizens’ rights, and they had failed.  It was his feeling the Charter Commission had wasted a lot of time and money in those many months of hearings and discussions. 

In Job 38:2 God asked Elihu, “who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? And Proverbs 10:19 said, “In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin”.

He said it was not too late for them to correct their wrong decisions.  He said he could only think of two or three possible reasons why they had done what they had.  The first being ignorance, and he said he believed they knew what they were doing.  Secondly, they did it deliberately.  Maybe because of fear of people in prominent positions, and lastly they were seeking honor and power for themselves-greed.  He said each of those were wrong motives.  It was a heart matter.  He said they could still do right by the citizens, and they would be happy about that, but if not, they must and would bear the blame for doing wrong. 

It was his feeling that people like Dewey Smith, Russell Hancock, Jerry Hughes, etc, were on the right road, and they should be able to see that.  He asked if they were blind, deaf and dumb? He said the majority spoke loud and clear in the 2000 elections. 

He asked them to become friends of the majority in Polk County instead of the professional politicians, and that was what they were asking of them, and if that was too big of a job for them, then they were too small for the job they had on the Commission, and they should either repent or resign and say why they did so.  The majority would respect them for that.  “Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin was a reproach to any nation”, Proverbs 14:34. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Mansfield for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Russell Hancock to speak. 

  Mr. Russell Hancock, 321 Imperial Blvd., Lakeland

Mr. Hancock began by saying in the absence of a survey that Commission perhaps should have taken, Citizens for Truth in Government conducted one.  They hired a national marketing firm to take a poll, and Ms. Barbara J. Talbott had planned to speak that evening, but a family emergency prevented her from being there.  He said Mrs. Talbott was the General Manager of Suburban Associates.  He said Suburban and Associates was a second research firm, and on March 11th Citizens for Truth and Government contracted her firm to conduct a survey relative to several issues that had been and were currently being consider by that Commission.  The survey was a brief three-question poll.  The questions were as follows: First, were they a registered voter of Polk County; Secondly, would they be in support of a ballot measure to increase politician’s salaries by fifty percent, and Lastly, would they be in support of a ballot measure to cut politicians salaries by fifty percent?

He asked the Commission to bear in mind that was an ongoing survey that would be going through the end of there meetings.  He said that Mrs. Talbott would at the Charter Review Commission’s meeting to present her final findings. 

Out of curiosity they asked Suburban and Associates to conduct a separate one question poll, and that one question was simply what was the first word they thought of when they heard the word politician? 

He said Commissioner Gifford and other company present excluded, practically everyone had something negative to say on that score. 

He said Suburban and Associates polled five hundred and eight-five people in the Lakeland Mall in a personal survey, and more than fifty percent said they were registered votes, and more than ninety-five percent said they would not be in favor of a ballot measure to increase any politician’s salary by fifty percent.   More than sixty-six percent said they would be in favor of a ballot measure to cut constitutional officers salaries by fifty percent or any politician’s salary by fifty percent. 

He asked them to bear in mind that was not just a local initiative that was going on.  It was going on the west and east coast by the same firm. 

Regarding the question, “What is the first word you think of when you hear the word politician”?  The most often response was: crook, crooks, and crooked followed by liar, liars, and lies.  Similar negative thoughts were expressed by more than seventy-two of the respondents. 

He said one could draw their own conclusions from that information based upon in person interviews with five hundred seventy-five people, two hundred eighty-six females, and two hundred eight-nine males who ranged from the ages of eighteen to eighty-seven, and it appeared that the overwhelming majority did not hold politicians in high esteem.  They did not believe politicians’ should be given fifty percent raises, but instead should have their salaries cut by fifty percent.    

He said the Citizens for Truth in Government had taken an interest in the Commission’s public record files.   He said he asked Ms. Swearengin to bring the file of public records generated or received from them by politicians, and others who might be referred to as “rent seeks”, which were people who had vested interests in the system at the expense of others.  He said that file was very small, and he wouldn’t ask her to produce it. 

He said Mr. Steinard would be showing them a poster board shortly, with the people versus the politicians.   

He said at any rate there were 2,700 names of petitioners who were on the side of the so called people, and there were telephone logs of people who had called the Charter Commission’s office the last week saying that they were opposed to the current way that they were headed.  (Commission has copy in files).

He said surely the items that the people, and they knew who he was talking about, he wasn’t talking about all of the people of Polk County, but just the signatures they had on file, and surely Mr. Bark’s oversight committee to stop abuse in the jails and police brutalities was something that Commission could have taken up.  He said surely the single-member district as appealed by the NAACP and the politicians and the people there was something that they could have done, and surely would have great priority in giving undeserving politicians raises. 

He said it had been an interesting eleven months and he hoped in spite of everything that they could part as friends. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Hancock for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Frank Koch to speak.

Mr. Frank Koch, 2123 E. Gachet Blvd., Lakeland

Mr. Koch began by saying that he had read and heard their side of the story about why the people’s proposals were not being advanced by the Commission.

He said the Commission claimed those proposals were illegal and undoable under the charter.

With respect to freezing taxes and recalling politicians, Mr. Hancock told them the Commission was correct. Mr. Koch reminded them the proponents of the charter government in 1997 to sell the idea of forming the original Charter Commission used those claims. 

After more than two years they now knew the truth.  Not only was the Charter a sham from the standpoint that citizens had no practical way to petition for ballot amendments, but they could not do the very things that they wanted the most, and that was stopping the politicians from further taxing them, recalling politicians whenever they become so corrupt and powerful that the courts and an electoral process favoring incumbent politicians failed them all.

 He felt they were mistaken about all the other citizen proposals such as: 1) Bringing the county constitutional officers under the charter for reducing the size of government and greater accountability.  Term limiting those officers and reducing their salaries by fifty percent. 2) Reduce the amendment petition requirement to three percent. 3) The ombudsman issue. 4) Mr. Bark’s citizens law enforcement oversight proposal.

According to attorney Phillip Kuhn they were legal.  All of them were doable.  All of them would meet the so-called “muster” of any fair-minded group of citizens. 

But even if that were not true, Mr. Smith and Mr. Kuhn both asked the Commission to change the wording so that it would meet any ballot layout requirement.

That was the reason why they were asking the Charter Review Commission to ask the county commission for a deadline extension for the purpose of reconsidering those and other important issues.  (Copy attached to the file copy of these minutes).

The Chairman thanked Mr. Koch for his comments. 

The Chairman invited Mr. Al Whittle to speak.

 Mr. Al Whittle, 1637 Yorkshire Tower, Lakeland

He began by saying he was there that evening representing the Florida Bi-Partisan Civic Affairs Group as well as himself. 

He said he wanted to begin by thanking the commissioners for their obvious effort that had gone into what must be an incredibly difficult and largely thankless task of putting together the set of recommendations that were emerging that evening. 

He said they fully supported their concern about the County Commission organization, and it might not be best organized to represent the electorate and some changes were needed. However, they wanted to suggest a modification to the proposal that was then on the table. 

He said they felt that the reason that the five existing commissioners perhaps didn’t adequately represent their districts had less to do with geography than it did with the manner in which they were elected. Because the truth was to be elected to the county commission one had to carry a large metropolitan area such as Lakeland.  Therefore the attention of any commissioner was going to be divided among where he or she had to have their support as opposed to being focused on specific districts, and therefore they recommended that the Commission reconsider the issue of single district elections, however there was a balance that needed to be maintained.  The balance had to absolutely maintain a countywide strategic focus on the commission, so that they didn’t simply have five or seven representatives of single districts considering only their district issues.  They fully supported the Commission’s proposal to go to seven commissioners, and they recommended that the additional two commissioners be elected at-large. 

He said the County Commission then could be equated to the same situation that was currently had in the U.S. Congress, where congressmen and women represented individual districts, and then there was the U.S. Senate which took a more broad strategic view, and he felt a combination of those would better serve the county than perhaps the current system or going to just seven single-member districts. 

Regarding the county commissioner’s salaries, Polk County’s future was being written then by policy decisions that county commissioners were making and had made over the last several years.  He said they had some serious opportunities and challenges ahead of them in the next few years that would largely determine where Polk County was going to go for the next generation or more.

What he was referring to was whether Polk County became an integral part of the high tech area along I-4 and was able to benefit from the food industry, and other jobs and higher education, and all of the good things that would go with that sort or business or whether they would continue down the road they had already started down in becoming simply the low rent neighbor for an ever expanding Tampa and Orlando, and he felt that was the way the County was headed then. 

He thought what was needed on the County Commission were men and women of serious vision, with leadership ability at the level of senior management of major corporations, or senior retired government officials or military officers who had proven track records of vision leadership and accountability. 

He said he would submit to them that Polk County was simply not going to be able to attract those types of people at the salary levels that were set then, and he fully supported the Charter Commission’s initiative to go forward raising the commissioners’ salaries to whatever level was required to attract the best candidates for those positions.    

 The Chairman thanked Mr. Whittle for his comments.

 The Chairman invited Jean Harden to speak.

  Ms. Jean Harden, 179 Imperial Southgate Villas, Lakeland

Ms. Harden said she had been a resident of Polk County for more than forty years.  She said the previous speaker said many of the things that she intended to say, so based upon that she would make her comments brief. 

She supported increasing the County Commission to seven members, and she too would like to see single-member districts, and she thought that the voters should have the opportunity to vote on that.  She felt with the population as large as the geographic area of Polk County was, that it was impossible for five commissioners to give the attention needed to be given to the serious business of running Polk County. 

She supported increasing the salaries of the County Commissioners so that Polk County could attract professional, qualified, persons to be candidates.  Currently, it was her feeling that many people who wished to serve would not because of the salary. She was a strong believer that one got what they paid for. 

Regarding changing some of the constitutional officers to non-partisan, she was a strong believer in the two party system and she didn’t think that there was any political race that was non-partisan, and if they thought that it was she would direct their attention to the list of people who held campaign events for candidates, and to look at the guest list and at the contributors, and then tell her that the race was non-partisan, because it just wasn’t so. 

The Chairman asked Ms. Harden what her position was regarding the mixed system where there were some single-member and some at large?

Ms. Harden said if she understood it there were many counties in Florida that did have single-member districts, but that they did have one or two that were at-large, and she said if she was not mistaken that was what Hillsborough County had.  She said she thought Leon County had something similar to that, and she thought that system worked quite well. 

The Chairman thanked Ms. Harden for her comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Robert Sowick to speak.

 Mr. Robert Sowick, 127 Elm Square South, Lakeland

Mr. Sowick began by asking what made the County Commissioners feel that they were worth that kind of an increase in salary when they couldn’t do what they were supposed to do then?  He said the County Commissioners that were had previous to them made top salary, and he asked what did they do to the people?  He answered they turned around and placed a five cent gas tax when the people told them not to.  He asked what happen to those people who were County Commissioners when the people spoke and said do not put a five-cent gas tax on them?  He answered they were out.

It was his feeling if they could not operate on the amount of money they were making then they certainly would not do any more making $49,000 per year than they were doing then.  It was obvious to him that all they were doing was sitting around and pointing fingers at one another and getting nothing done.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Sowick for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. D.G. Micklewright to speak.

Mr. D. G. Micklewright, 2015 Charms Ct., Lakeland

Mr. Mickelwright said he was there that evening to plead the benefits of having a Citizen’s Review Board, and to urge them to put the formation of such a board on the ballot for consideration by the public.  A need for such a board was glaring.

It would handle cases of questionable police matters, which then were being handled by a police internal review.  Such internal review was inherently flawed subject to perceived or actual built in bias, lack of expertise on varied issues, and a narrow view of what was best in the long run for the community. 

He said in his engineering work project designs were reviewed not by their associates across the aisle, but rather by a completely outside group or neutral consultant.  He said the community had been buffeted in the last few years by a list of excessive police action resulting in death during attempted arrests, and there was no need to rehash those cases.  In addition, he said he had a list of thirteen persons who had died under questionable circumstances after being booked into the Polk County Jail since 1992.  Also, there was an article from Monday’s Ledger telling of fourteen Miami police officers being exonerated by an internal review board of two hundred ninety-three allegations, which included eyewitness accounts.  Those cases all provided good reason for a Citizen’s Review Board.  

He felt law enforcement basic policies needed periodic review for their affects on law enforcement costs, on the local workforce, outsiders perception of the community and on the individuals caught in the system, and it was his feeling that the Citizens Review Board could best accomplish that.

Regarding the pro-arrest policy, which was put into effect by Polk County Law Enforcement under the theory that major crimes were reduced if minor crimes were pursued assiduously, and that if thousands of citizens were arrested they were bound to catch a few real criminals.  The policy was put into effect largely without input from the Polk County business and economic leaders, and without input from persons directly affected financially within the Polk County government.  There were no public hearings.  He asked what were some of the ramifications of that policy?

He said the Sheriff’s budget consumed essentially all of Polk County’s real property tax income, which amounted to approximately $90 million dollars.  Last year over 28,000 citizens were booked into the Polk County Jail, and between twenty to twenty-five percent of those were males between the ages of eighteen and forty-five.  Since the Polk County labor force was about two hundred thousand with males representing one hundred seven thousand of that total, they could see that the Sheriff’s Department jailed about twenty to twenty-five percent of the total male workers in one year, and of course some of them were jailed more than once, but no available numbers were provided on that. 

He said only about half of those individuals were ultimately convicted of a crime, and of those who were convicted only twelve percent were convicted of a serious crime or felony.  Moreover, such arrests cost the taxpayer $1,640 just for the processing and the first appearance in court, and thus the direct out-of-pocket to the taxpayer were substantial due to Polk’s pro-arrest policy.  The out-of-pocket costs to a citizen who was arrested was also substantial, and the long-term costs of carrying a criminal record for the rest of their life heavily affected future income.  Thus they must consider what affect all of that had on the Polk County labor poll and on an outsider’s view of the county as a desirable living area. 

It seemed to be the homeless, poor, and the mentally handicapped who seemed to be most enmeshed in the penal system, and often could not get free of the system due to inability to pay court costs or getting rearrested for a parole violation on a minor infraction, which was another $1,640 taxpayer cost. 

In 1999 parole violations were the leading cause for arrest in Polk County totaling six thousand four hundred eighty-three, thus the law enforcement establishment spent $10.6 million on that one item. 

He said it seemed to those of them who were connected to Citizen Law Enforcement Watch that policies affecting the economy, quality of life, and social justice future of Polk County should not to be left of persons of strong but limited one sided view points.  There was an opportunity for improvement by adopting a Citizens Review Board comprised of citizens bringing multi-varied talents and viewpoints that could solve the problems of the present system.  He asked that they consider proposing such a board to the electorate.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Micklewright for his comments.

The Chairman invited Joe Tedder to speak.

Joe Tedder, 2415 Nevada Road, Lakeland, Tax Collector for Polk County

Mr. Tedder said he provided to the Commission an amendment to the Efficiency Committee that he wanted them to consider in their deliberations over the next few weeks.  He felt that amendment would accomplish the ultimate goal of the Efficiency Committee, which was to provide more accountability to the elected officials as well as focus on making sure the elected officials and government bodies actually had a focus, mission, and could define what they believed was successful and success for them. 

He said for many of them in the business world it was very easy for them to define success, but in government it was at times very difficult to define success.  He said if they were to ask the City Commission of Lakeland or the School Board how they would define success for their operation they would have a difficult time doing that, as he was sure they would if they were discussing it. 

It was his feeling that the Efficiency Committee with those changes would allow the citizen to be involved in that process, which in the long run would provide more accountability and a better future for Polk County.

The Chairman asked Mr. Tedder if he could summarize for the Commission what changes on the current proposal he was recommending?

Mr. Tedder said he felt that page three was the most substitutive change, which started on line eight.  Basically what the change did was it set part of the focus of the Efficiency Committee to actually study the mission, objectives, and the goals of the government body.  Each elected official and government body should be able to define exactly what they believed their mission and their objectives were, but in turn they should also be able to demonstrate adequately in unbiased measurements how they were or were not achieving those goals and objectives, and then they needed to make sure that they expressed what they believed the goals and objectives were of those government agencies.  They should be able to inform the citizens of what those objectives were so they would be held accountable for the results that had been generated. 

Those objectives and those goals of that mission needed to be in line with what the citizens perceived that government body to do.  He said that completed the circle of making sure a government agency goes through the planning process. They make sure that they adequately measure that so that they could demonstrate to the public if they were meeting it or if they were not meeting it.  They make sure that the citizens agreed that was exactly what they wanted that agency to do. 

He said if one asked the School Board what their objective was – Was it to graduate more people or to get more people into college to help higher teachers’ salaries, and what exactly was the overall objective for the School Board, and he felt they could debate that issue for a while, and once they decided what they believed the overall objective was or how they defined the School Board then they asked themselves how they would measure that objectively and adequately so that they could tell the citizens of Polk County that was what they had determined was their objective, and that was how they were going to measure it, and one year from then they were going to show them what kind of results they came up with.  He said he felt that should be the focus of the Efficiency Commission Committee as opposed to maybe going to the School Board and trying to find out what kind of computers they buy or what kind of cars they buy, and was the Efficiency Committee looking into the minute decisions being made.  The Efficiency Committee should look at the broad picture as a way of setting a goal and a guide for public policy in the county. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Tedder for his comments. 

The Chairman said it was then 8:00 p.m., and without objection, the Commission would recess for fifteen minutes.  There were no objections.

The Commission reconvened at 8:15 p.m.

The Chairman invited Rhonda Thurner to speak.

Ms. Rhonda Thurner, 5101-2 Old Hwy 37 in Lakeland

Ms. Thurner said she wanted to speak to them on three items that related to the elected constitutional officers. 

The first being term limits, which she was not in favor of.  Term limits were not conducive for developing a long-term commitment for the organization.  It would take a long time for a new incumbent to become acclimated to the position.  Their most productive times could possibly be in their last term.  This could seriously minimize the ability to build a strong agency.

Secondly, regarding salary reductions for the constitutional officers, she felt reducing their salaries would devalue the importance of the office in which they held, and they would more than likely need to seek additional employment to supplement their incomes if there was reduction in the salary. 

She said they had already seen what had happened to the County Commissioners in that respect.  She felt the constitutional officers held positions of much responsibility, and knowledgeable capable leaders needed to be sufficiently paid for the highly administrative jobs, which they held.   She said she was in total agreement with Amendment 2. 

Lastly, she was glad to see that there were no proposals to change the structure that was then had.  She asked that they leave the constitutional officers the way they were.  Operating in their environments with a qualified leader at the top.  She asked them not to take the citizens rights away by not letting them have the opportunity to vote on the constitutional officers of their own choice. 

She thanked the Commission for allowing her to speak.

The Chairman thanked Ms. Thurner for her comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Allan Arbuthnot to speak.

Mr. Allan Arbuthnot, Lake Lowry Road, Lake Alfred

Mr. Arbuthnot said that he wanted to say that Commission had not done what they should do,  and yet there were some initiatives that some of the citizens would like to have on the ballot, and he felt it would be very good if they would put those on the ballot, and if the voters wanted to approve them then they could, and if they didn’t want to approve them then they could vote against them. 

He said the Commission was trying to keep things as status quo according to the people who put them on that Commission, and he said he didn’t believe that was right, and that was not what charter government was about. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Arbuthnot for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Tom King to speak.

Mr. Tom King, 1100 Oakridge Parkway, Lakeland

Mr. King began by saying that he would like to thank the Charter Review Commission for what they did on behalf of the Polk County citizens.  He said he thought they all desired a county whose government was representatives of and responsive and accountable to the citizens. 

He said he supported the existing structure of the constitutional officers whereby the elected official may devote one hundred percent of their time to their visions and goals of the office.  Further, he supported Florida’s Constitution in the laws of the state including the checks and balances system as provided for the independent constitutional officer, therefore, it was his belief that it was extremely important that the constitutional officer not be limited to what might be termed a half-time position receiving half-time compensation. 

Although he could not claim each and every duty of each constitutional officer, he did know that his or her duty and accountability was great, and therefore, felt that the management including the decision making process should remain with each unique constitutional office.

The idea of term limits for constitutional officers asked the question were career politicians bad for the county?  He answered in his opinion, no.  He said he believed that if voters desired to re-elect long-term or career politicians it was entirely their right to do so, rather than their not having the opportunity, which was stripped by having term limits.  Well-regarded politicians who had formed strong ties with their constituents should not be forced out merely because of term limits.  Careerists were not the greater threat, and careerists who were elected to office were not more likely to betray their constituents, and they were as likely to uphold ethics as a new coming politician. 

He said as long as a person qualified for political office that person had the same opportunity for election or re-election as the next qualified person.  Therefore, the political field was not narrowed simply because an elected official decided that he or she would like to be re-elected in order to continue in their work.  On the other hand, term limits did narrow the political field since the result of term limits was that after a couple of terms the field was open only to new comers.  The veteran politician should not be punished simply because he or she had served for a stated period of time.  Instead a veteran politician should have the opportunity to be rewarded for their experience, their good work, and their high ethics, and that reward was achieved by the choice that voters exercised.  In his opinion, the voters should not be limited to voting for new comers only because of term limits.  The voters should have the opportunity to vote for any qualified candidate whether they had or had not previously served at the same office. 

He said he appreciated having that opportunity to voice his views regarding the structure, compensation and term limits as related to Polk County constitutional officers.  He said he was a registered voter and a Polk County resident of nineteen years, and he had resided in Lakeland for ten years. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. King for his comments. 

The Chairman invited Jim Doll to speak.

Mr. Jim Doll, 1028 Bentmore Drive, Winter Haven

Mr. Doll said he thought for someone to come before the Charter Review Commission and say that the salaries of the politicians needed to be raised before they could get good people was a slap in the face to the Commission because they did what they were doing for nothing, and they were doing a good job. 

He said he didn’t know their worth, but he didn’t think they could afford to pay them what they were paying them, and if they were worth those wages, he would suggest that they get them a job that paid those wages. 

He said he agreed with Mr. Smith regarding cutting the constitutional officers’ salaries.  He said he thought the Commission would be doing the people a disservice by not putting it on the ballot, and if they didn’t place it on the ballot they could get out and get those petitions signed and in the process educate the people as to what those salaries were, and what the Commission was trying to do to raise the County Commission salary. 

Last year he said he thought they got a raise of $3 or $4 thousand dollars, and he felt they would get another raise that year for $3 or $4 thousand, which was not bad, and he said if he was wrong he apologized.  He said he wasn’t sure how much they received, but he was sure they got a raise. 

The Chairman said he thought Mr. Doll was a little on the high side. 

Mr. Doll said he was with Mr. Smith and he thought they should have their salaries cut because people in Polk County made an average of $27,000 per year, and couldn’t afford to pay those wages. 

He said two weeks ago at the meeting in Haines City there was a man who spoke who was obsessed with where Mr. Smith got his money to do what he was doing.  He said he didn’t think it was any of that man’s business where Mr. Smith got his money. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Doll for his comments.

The Chairman invited Hugh Johnson to speak.

Mr. Hugh W. Johnson, Jr., 1615 Skinner Road, Lakeland

Mr. Johnson said tax, spend, and regulate sounded like insanity to him.  He said as of then they were being taxed at fifty-five percent total of what they made on all taxes.  More than half of one’s income was taxes.  If one loved their children and their grandchildren then they must cut spending, and they must cut the pay in half and have term limits to start with.  He said to, “Remember the power to tax was the power to destroy”, Thomas Jefferson. 

He said if they didn’t stop spending then one could look for eighty-five percent of their income to go to taxes in five to seven years.  He asked them to remember what George Frederick Hegel said, “Man never learns anything from misery, he goes to his own destruction”.  He said he was behind Dewey Smith for what he was trying to accomplish, and he was the best thing to happen to Polk County, the State of Florida, and the United States of American, and God bless Dewey Smith. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Johnson for his comments.

The Chairman invited Ms. Kristi Joyner to speak.

Kristi Joyner, 1285 E. Hibiscus, Bartow

Ms. Joyner said she had a letter with her which was signed by nineteen individuals that lived in Polk County that were unable to attend the meeting that evening for one reason or another. 

She said she would like to for the sake of time, read the first and last paragraph of that letter.  (Handout attached to file copy of these minutes).

The letter read, "It was of the utmost importance that the Charter Review Commission maintain its policy regarding the constitutional officers."  As a resident of Polk County, I value the quality of the individuals holding these positions, and to cut their salaries and impose term limits would serve only to demean those offices, and in return, decrease the caliber of individuals seeking those positions. 

Polk residents deserve highly qualified, experienced individuals overseeing the country’s five constitutional offices.  The individuals who have signed this letter send a message of support to the Charter Review Commission and urge the Commissioners to continue with their support of maintaining the current polices that govern the constitutional officers.

The Chairman thanked Ms. Joyner for her comments. 

The Chairman invited Mr. Wayne Steinard to speak.

Mr. Wayne Steinard, 2931 Country Place SW, Winter Haven

Mr. Steinard began by saying according to the Charter Review Commission’s records since April 10th of last year more than 2,750 individuals had participated directly or indirectly in the Charter Review process.  Some of their wishes had not been expressed in person, and some by letters, e-mails, petitions and telephone calls.  Approximately fifty of those politicians, their personal friends, surrogates, want-to-be’s lobbyist, county employees, financial contributors, some businesses, and special interest groups, bankers and lawyers. 

He said for purposes of that short discussion he would call the group of politicians the fifty.  More than 2,700 participants were ordinary blue and white-collar taxpaying citizens, and he was one of those citizens. 

He said he realized that they were not all of the people of Polk County, but 2,700 were the minimum number of ordinary citizens who participated in that process, and whose names were also found in the Charter Review Commission’s public record files. 

He said what politicians wanted most was bigger more expensive government, and the people on the other hand, wanted just the opposite, less government and more accountability.

The collection that had beset that Commission throughout those proceedings was what the members would do when it came time for them to choose between the politicians and the people.  He said the 2,700 people versus the fifty.

 He said that question came to a head several months ago when the commissioners voted to place an issue on the ballot to raise the County Commissioners’ salaries by approximately fifty percent.  That Charter Commission did that knowing that the County Commissioners could place such an amendment on the ballot themselves, and in the minds of the people that equated to be an eight-month April to November political campaign in support of County Commission salary increases, with the people being forced to bear the promotional cost. 

He asked did that not speak in the same kind of arrogance when the County Commission spent thousands of tax dollars to advertise a penny sales tax, which was the same tax that the voters overwhelmingly turned down. 

 Increasing any politician’s salary was not what the overwhelming majority of the participants in that Charter Review process wanted, which were 2,700 and as indicated by the Suburban and Associates Survey it was also not what the overwhelming majority of people of Polk County wanted.

One of the most important measures that the people of Polk County wanted was an opportunity to decrease county constitutional officers’ salaries by fifty percent.  That ballot proposal was not in conflict with any other ballot measure, and it was legal, and it was fair and it was doable. 

On point, the Commission could have easily embraced the salary decrease proposal the people wanted for the county constitutional officers, but instead of doing so, that Commission did what the politicians wanted only, the fifty.  Granted the Charter Commission did not do everything the politicians wanted.  The Charter Review Commission however did what the politicians collectively wanted the most, and maybe not what the people wanted the most. 

Based on the input the Commission had received from the people as well as the Suburban and Associates Survey presented to them that evening, they urged them to reconsider those matters.  A pile of 2,700 petitioners, and nineteen where placed on the record from the other side of the argument.  He said there was nothing coming out of there for the 2,700 only for the fifty that they knew of.  He said he wanted to remind them that the issues as well as that Commission would be judged in accord of public opinion, and based on what he expected them to do he was going to be working on the side of the prosecution.  He said 2,700 people said they wanted something, and they got nothing, and fifty got everything.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Steinard for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Jack Fouts to speak.

Mr. Jack Fouts, 1917 Shawnee Trail, Lakeland

Mr. Fouts began by thanking the Commission for allowing him to come before them that evening to express his support of the current structure of the constitutional officers concerning salary reductions and term limits. 

He said he was Tax Collector from January 1995 until January 1997, and he decided not to run because of his dislike for politics.  He said if there was anyone in Polk County who would want a different form of deciding the Tax Collector it would be him.  He said he would probably still be Tax Collector if was not an elected position, and he had almost thirty years of experience in the Polk County Tax Collector’s office, and waiting to retire in slightly more than five years, and therefore he had nothing to gain by taking his position.  He said even though it would have been better if the position were appointed as opposed to elected, he felt the voters deserved to have a voice as to who ran their local government. 

The constitutional officers should have to run for office every four years and be held accountable.  Checks and balances were needed.  He asked if the Tax Collector were to serve under the Board of County Commissioners or become a department head under the Board of County Commissioners who would be there independently on behalf of the taxpayers?  He answered control should not be under one body of government. 

Regarding term limits, there already were term limits for the constitutional officers.  The people voted for them every four years.  If someone wasn’t doing a satisfactory job they should have opposition and be voted out of office.  He said he could assure them that if a new person came into office every eight years whether they were doing a good or not, the learning curve for the Tax Collector was tremendous, for it worked for many agencies such as local, and state and in independent districts the tasks would vary. 

Regarding cutting the salaries of the constitutional officers he would not serve as Tax Collector for a half-time salary.  The responsibility and stress was too great, and he asked them to think of it in this light, they collected and distributed over $300 million dollars and processed over $1 million transactions annually, and it that were a private business with responsibilities of that volume what would the CEO’s salary be?

The Chairman thanked Mr. Fouts for his comments.

The Chairman invited Keyno Hicks to speak.

Mr. Keyno Hicks 2917 Borington Ave., Lakeland

Mr. Hicks began by saying that he wanted to ask the Commission to please reconsider the idea of the Citizen’s Review Board especially for the Sheriff’s Department of the county.  He said there was empire building going on in the Sheriff’s Department, and he said he would give them an example of what happened to his brother, and they could multiply that by thousands of cases that happened there in the county. 

He said his brother who was an easy going law abiding religious kind of fellow happen to be passing through a neighborhood one night, and the lawyer explained later probably because of the kind of county car that he was driving, and at the hour he was driving through that certain neighborhood it was decided by a Sheriff’s officer that he had to be stopped.  The Sheriff’s officer was straight in front of him at a stop sign.  He pulled up to a stop sign and he made a full stop, because he saw the Sheriff’s deputy in the parking lot in front of him.  As he pulled away from the stop sign the deputy followed him and pulled him over and told him he ran the stop sign.  His brother responded, “officer, I saw you in front of me, and I would have been foolish.  The officer said to his brother that he was trying to resist him.  He placed handcuffs on him, made a big deal out of it, and took him down to the jail and booked him.  His father who was eighty years old who was an easy going religious man and another brother who had worked as a reserve officer for the Sheriff’s Department went down to help his brother and they were treated rudely and discourteously and made to wait. 

He said what was happening in the county was a lot of people were being arrested on knit picking charges, and he discovered that when he went to court with his brother, and ran into other people that were having to deal with the court system because they had been hauled in on knit picking charges of driving without their glasses.  He said he ran into a third cousin, and he and his wife were going through a divorce, and she made charges against him, and the Sheriff’s Department made a mountain out of a mole hill. 

His brother paid $1,000 to an attorney to help him, and he went to court and his attorney subpoenaed the Sheriff’s Deputy to be in court and explain the situation, and the Sheriff’s Department ignored the subpoena, and he asked how was it the citizens had to abide by subpoenas to show up in court and explain things, but the Sheriff’s Department could arrest people and haul them to jail and harass people, but then they could disregard subpoenas to show up in court and explain what they were doing.  He asked how could they do that?

He said there was no one that could oversee the Sheriff’s Department, and he knew the County Commission was supposed to do that, but they were burdened with a lot of other things, but the watch dog group called the Citizens Law Enforcement Watch sent a list of questions to Sheriff Crow last summer to please meet publicly and explain some things, and he totally ignored that, with the exception to say that he would meet privately behind close doors, in the dark, and the Citizens Law Enforcement Watch wanted to meet publicly and have him explain some of those questionable deaths in the jails and increased money each year in their budget, and the increased arrest records, but he refused to meet publicly, so he submitted to them that there was empire building going on there.  He said there were a lot of arrests being made to only run up the statistics, and when it was analyzed there were not many convictions. 

He said Solomon in Proverbs said in a multitude of counselors was their safety?  He said that he would like to say that a Citizens Review Board, which would be counselors to the Sheriff from the public would bring safety for citizens rights and for taxpayers money, because there was a lot of money going into the empire building that was going on in the Sheriff’s Department.  He said Teddy Roosevelt began his career by being on a Citizens Police Review Board in New York City, and he learned a lot and went on to become an outstanding president of the nation by starting out walking around at night going on beats with policemen and finding out what was going on.   

He asked that they place that issue on the ballot to expand public discussion and awareness of what was going on in the county, and to let Polk County set an example for the whole nation. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Hicks for his comments.

The Chairman invited Mr. Tom Macy to speak.

Mr. Tom Macy, 925 Lake Elbert Drive, Winter Haven

Mr. Macy said he left some material for them to read at their leisure.  He said he had some questions that he wanted to ask. 

He said regarding the survey that was run out of the shopping center, and he didn’t know what mall that would be, but he would suggest the question that should have been asked, was were they in favor of Polk County being tax-free?  He said he thought one hundred percent of the people would have said yes.  He said the problem in the county was that nobody wanted to pay anything.  They wanted to ride on the roads, but nobody wanted to pay to fix them.  They wanted to have good schools, but if one tried to pass a school bond issue, they better watch it. 

He said he was in favor of single-member districts, so that rich folks can’t be the only ones to run and represent the people. 

Polk County was one of the lowest taxed areas in the nation.  One of the people in Haines City testified that taxes were so abusive with the federal, state and local government that it took $46,000 for a family of four to pay their taxes.  He said with Polk’s County Commissioners getting only $33,000, he totally suggested that they increase their pay so that they could pay their taxes.  

He thanked the Commission for its service and he said they had done a fabulous job, and the people couldn’t thank them enough. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Macy for his comments. 

The Chairman invited Mr. Tim Dooley to speak.

Mr. Tim Dooley, 1425 Baker Drive, Lakeland

Mr. Dooley said he worked in Lakeland at a wood printing company for the last twenty years, and he was a third generation Polk Countian.  

 He said he wasn’t going to bother wasting any more time because he had no faith in anybody listening to him, and he would hand out what he wanted to say.  (Handout attached to file copy of these minutes).

 The Chairman said he would make sure the handouts were distributed. 

 The Chairman invited Commissioner Don Gifford to speak.

 Commissioner Don Gifford, 1006 W Bonnie Dr., Lakeland

Commissioner Gifford said he didn’t know when the Commission finished its work whether or not that information would come to them by the Chairman or by a select group or all of them would have the opportunity, but that being the last public hearing they held, he didn’t want to miss the opportunity to express to them how much he appreciated the work they had done, and they had done it freely and generously and thoughtfully, and so many important issues they had discussed, and while he may or may not agree with all of the things they had or had not included he believed they had studied and worked and had done a great job for the citizens. 

He said he was impressed with people on all sides of the issues, and it was forums such as that, that made him proud to be an American.  Because as they knew, all across the world there were places where people couldn’t walk into a room and stare their elected official down in the eye and tell him that they don’t like him or don’t approve of him or her, and in America we had the opportunity to do that.  He said God bless them, and God bless America, and he thanked them again for all of the work that they had done. 

The Chairman thanked Commissioner Gifford for his comments, and he told him he would see them at the County Commission meeting because they were going to present their report to them on April 3rd, and he believed they were first on the agenda. 

The Chairman invited Scott Wilder to speak.

Mr. Scott Wilder, 1953 Suzanne Lane, Lakeland

Mr. Wilder said he was the Executive Aide to Sheriff Crow.  He said he served on the first Charter Review Commission and he remembered a lot of long meetings, so he felt their pain, and he enthusiastically complemented them on the hard work they were doing and the patience and preparation that they put into that Commission. 

He said he was there to provide them some information regarding the proposed Polk County Efficiency Commission.  He said in short he believed the proposal merited more thoughtful consideration and debate.  He said he did agree it was a good idea worth exploring, but he thought it would be prudent to make a more in depth discovery of the proposal to make sure that those who would be voting on it generally understood it. 

He said the stated purpose of the Efficiency Commission was to study the organization structure and effectiveness or efficiency of any and all governmental units in Polk County.  He said that was quite a responsibility, and it was a very broad mandate and he was of the opinion that it was an overly broad mandate. 

He felt the scope and the authority of that proposed Commission he believed was expansive.  There were virtually no limits as it was written.  He said under Section 8.6.3 the Efficiency Commission shall adopt and amend its own rules of procedure by majority vote, meaning that once that Commission was appointed it could literally stake out whatever it would like to do or not like to do, and how it would like to do it, and it was all within the scope of its own mission, which was to study and propose anything and everything about any government body in Polk County.  He said he thought the question that needed to be debated more was where was the limit to that Commission’s authority? 

The language further provided that governmental units “were directed to provide information and cooperation to the Efficiency Commission”.  He asked what did that mean, and what would that cost the taxpayers?  He said the language was unprecedented, and there was no other government or private agency that he knew of that had that kind of authority.  He said there were some extreme examples like a State Attorney or a Grand Jury and those kind of things, but the Board of County Commissioners didn’t have that authority, constitutional officers didn’t have it, or cities, and none of those elected bodies or officials had unlimited authority to direct other bodies or officials to “provide information and cooperation”.  He said under that language the Commission could require government agencies to create extensive reports and expensive reports for whatever reasons it chose.

He said he would be in favor of more focused language in that document.

He said he thought one of the concerns that he had with that proposal was the assumption that there was not now any independent arms length analysis and scrutiny being given to government.  He said in their case that certainly wasn’t true, and by way of example, the Polk County Sheriff’s office was independently accredited by five different accrediting agencies that objectively evaluated the organization structure and effectiveness of the Polk County Sheriff’s Office.  The Sheriff’s Office recently earned the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing Outstanding Agency Accreditation Achievement Award, and in so doing the Sheriff’s Office was the only governmental agency to win that recognition in the county, and it was the only law enforcement agency in the country to have that recognition. 

He said a quote from the Executive Officer of that board was, “Many government agencies had attempted to achieve that accreditation status only to realize that their practices fall short of the required standards of performance, while the NIDP Membership represents 2,100 governmental agencies throughout the United States and Canada only forty governments had obtained that distinction. Clearly the Polk County Sheriff’s Office had joined the elite group of purchasing organizations that represented the highest standards of quality and efficiency in government”.

He said the Sheriff’s Office had a total of five accreditations.  They were one of the very agencies to be a five star accredited agency in addition to their Purchasing accreditation that they received they had earned an accreditation from the Commission of Florida Law Enforcement, the Commission For Accreditation For Law Enforcement Agencies internationally, the Florida Corrections Accreditation Commission, and Health Care Accreditation from the National Commission for Correctional Health Care, and next week they would receive their sixth accreditation, which was a national accreditation for their 911 Telecommunications Center. 

He said the point that he was trying to make was that there were some very professional organizations out there, and he thought one thing that the Charter Commission could do was to encourage governments to use those accreditations to affectively help those agencies do what was right.  He said he mentioned those to explain that at least in their case, there already existed a wide range of real professional review, and they did that because it made them better, and improved their services to citizens. 

Candidly those professional creditors knew what they were looking for, and they were judging their agency based on professional peer review standards of accomplishment and performance.  He said the average citizen simply did not have at his disposal the same kind of knowledge and experience to provide the same kind of meaningful management review. 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Wilder for his comments. 

The Chairman invited Mr. Dewey Smith to speak.

Mr. Dewey Smith, 224 Doris Drive

Mr. Smith said two years ago he asked the House Representative Lori Edwards to sign their petition for term limits and reduction of commissioners’ salaries by fifty percent, and at the time Mrs. Edwards was a Democrat candidate running for Supervisor of Elections.  Mrs. Edwards told him that she wouldn’t sign their petition because she was not for term limits and fifty percent salary cuts.  He said he told her that they were not asking her to take a position on the issues.  He said he told her that all they were asking her and everyone else to do was sign the petitions so that the citizens could decide the issues themselves at the ballot box, just to sign the petition so they might have a chance to get the amendments on the ballot, and then if it got on the ballot to vote however she liked.  He asked her wasn’t that the American way?  He said Mrs. Edwards looked at the petitions for a second, and then looked at him and replied that he was right, it was the American way, and she signed the petition. 

He said it wasn’t in Mrs. Edwards best political interest to sign those petitions, and not only was she going against both political parties he was also a Republican.  He said Mrs. Edwards could have also lost financial support from important people, but that obviously was a matter of conscience with Ms. Edwards, and instead of going the political way Mrs. Edwards went the American way. 

Her Republican run off opponent refused to sign their petitions.  He said, need he say how glad he was when they voted the American way, and Mrs. Edwards won out. 

He asked that the Commission let the people decide at the ballot box, and that was all they had asked that Commission to do.  He said they had not asked them to vote for term limits and salary issues or for or against any other issue.  All they had asked them to do was give the people the opportunity to vote on the issues that they wanted on the ballot and let them all vote for or against. 

He said unless the Commission changed between then, and their next meeting they were not going to do what Ms. Edwards and a few other candidates did several years ago, and they were not going to do it the American way.  That failing on their part was not all their fault.  It was their fault too. 

He said up to that very meeting they had done everything they knew to do including having a survey conducted that the Charter Review Commission would not have conducted.  He said they heard the very best they had to offer.  Attorney Phillip Kuhn, Doug Bark, Jerry Hughes, Wayne Steinard, Russell Hancock, himself and others, but it appeared that their very best would not be good enough to change the only thing about them that counted, and that was they failed to change their hearts. 

He said they would of course go forward from there to another petition drive, and they would again negotiate the petition obstacles that remained in their path, and that time they would not only petition to reduce the so called county constitutional officers’ salaries and term limits, and they would petition for a reduction in the petition requirements for even as low as one percent, and then they would finally realize the promise of charter government.  In the meanwhile they would prove again that City Hall can be beaten, and they would again do so overwhelmingly.

He said that ongoing movement promised to be even more exciting and fun than the last.  He said they asked that all citizens keep the faith.  Despite what that Commission or one thousand commissions like it had done, and despite all of the politicians who appointed commissioners such as themselves they would realize the dream of charter government, and they would make the charter work for the people, and they would take their government back.

He said in the meantime he hoped the members of that Commission would realize the error of their ways.  He said a few moments ago he talked about the American way.  He asked what was the American way?  He said he wanted to tell them what it was.  He asked them to try to recall the time in that country when ordinary men and women had the courage of their convictions and were willing to sacrifice their lives on the alter of freedom, principle and liberty.  He said Liberty was an easy word to say but it was a hard word to live up to.  He said it was not a weekend pass from a Navy or Marine base and freedom had little to do with financial gain or personal pleasure.  Freedom brought with her the companion called responsibility, and he asked what was the definition of responsibility?  He answered able to fulfill one’s obligation, able to choose for one’s self between right and wrong, neither is she an only child.  Patriotism and morality were also her brothers they were inseparable, destroy one and all would die.

He said he talked with the Supervisor of Elections Lori Edwards and he asked her if petitions were being circulated again to bring all of the county officers under the charter to term limit them, and cut their pay in half if she again would sign the petitions placing them on the ballot whereby the people could vote and decide those issues for themselves, and he asked would she sign the petitions?  Her answer was yes, and she didn’t hesitate at all.  He said if the people wanted those issues on the ballot and Polk County’s Supervisor of Elections was in favor of putting it on the ballot why couldn’t they?    

The Chairman said that completed the Commission’s public hearing, and he appreciated their attendance.  He said they had a couple of housekeeping items to complete. 

He said the Commission’s next meeting was on March 26, 2002, which would be on the fourth floor of the County Commission Building and the meeting would begin at 6:00 p.m. 

The Chairman asked if there was other business to come before the Commission?  There was none. 

The Chairman said he wanted to compliment the Charter Review Commission for their attendance at that evening’s meeting, and the meeting on March 26th would be a very important meeting, and it would be the last time they would have an opportunity to consider their proposals and to modify or add to them before they made their final report, which was due on April 3rd at 9:00 a.m. in the County Commission Chambers, and he hoped as many of them as possible would be able to attend that meeting. 

He said if there was nothing more to come before them, without objection, they would stand adjourned.  There were no objections.  The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cynthia Swearengin