MINUTES

OF POLK COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION

AUGUST 13, 2002 

Chairman Dan Costello called the meeting of the Polk County Charter Review Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. in Room 407 of the Administration Building of the Polk County Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Strang led the prayer and Commissioner Stoer led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ms. Frega called the roll.  All commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioners Artis Dukes, Alice Hunt, and Cindy Price, who gave advance notification of their absences in accordance with the Commission’s Rules. 

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

The Chairman reported briefly on the new secretary, that this job is completely new to her, and that she is demonstrating that she will serve us well.

The Chairman said the first order of business was the approval of the minutes of July 9, 2002.  The Chairman asked if there were any changes to the minutes?  There were no changes to the minutes.

Commissioner Strang made a motion to approve the minutes of July 9, 2002 and Commissioner ­­­­­ Stoer seconded the motion.  The motion carried. 

The Chairman had a brief report on the correction to the report to the Board of County Commissioners.  A copy of the relevant e-mail and other documents are in the commissioners’ folders.  The correction would be to Amendment 7, paragraph 8.6 where January 31 of 2004 should be January 31 of 2005.  With commissioners concurrence and approval the chairman will send a letter to the County Commissioners and also to the Supervisor of Elections noting the correction and also enclosing a copy of C. Allen Watts letter, copies of which have been distributed to commissioners. 

It was moved and seconded to approve the correction to Amendment 7 language, paragraph 8.6 by changing  “January 31 of 2004” to “January 31 of 2005” and to notify the County Commissioners and Supervisor of Elections.  The letter will be hand delivered and Chairman reported that he has already talked to the Supervisor of Elections.  The Chairman invited discussion on the motion but there was none.  The motion carried unanimously.

The Chairman also opened discussion on the September meeting which is currently scheduled for Tuesday, September 10th.  Commissioner McLaughlin indicated that he thought we ought to change that meeting because that is Election Day. The Chairman asked if the Commissioners wanted to keep it on the 10th or to shift to another day?  Commissioner Strang asked if it would be better to have the meeting before the election or after?  Does it make any difference?  Chairman Costello responded that the issue is not going to come until November for us.  Commissioner Strang asked if there were any other issues that might come up during the elections that we ought to take cognizance of.  Chairman Costello responded that he did not know.  The discussion followed as to what would be on the Agenda.  Chairman Costello stated that it would probably be a report from Commissioner Gernert and whatever else comes up between now and then.  He added that he is sure it will be a very brief meeting.  Discussion centered on Monday, September 9th.  The Chairman ruled that without objection the meeting for September will take place on September 9th at 6:00 p.m. in the County Commission Administration building. 

The Chairman said the next item on the agenda was Commissioner Gernert’s report.  

Commissioner Gernert stated that he approached the County Attorney to determine what bid procedures would apply to our public education effort, and what kind of time frame did we have to give the vendors.  He referred me to Buddy Storey of Polk County Purchasing Department.  Mr. Storey  told me that if we went to their existing contracts for the placement or printing materials and things of that nature, that we can issue an AVS (alternate vendor sheet) through the County system.  None of our campaign expenditures exceed $25,000, and that’s the threshold for that.  Also, the County claims they do have quick turn-around procedures because they deal with printers all the time, and they would be willing to bid that out and give us a rundown and recommendation on which printer was the lowest, and we could do our printing through them so there would be economies of scale there.  What this means is I could not come back to you today with a recommendation on who to choose, or how to go through the County system because they just did not recommend us going that way.  Mr. Storey said he would base his recommendation on the lack of time available to do it.  Secondly, he said that with the Commission’s permission on the expenditures that we approved several months ago, that we could move forward and proceed to produce those materials.  If a quote came back that exceeded the approved budget, we would need to come back to the CRC for approval.  That is pretty much where it stands, and my recommendation to you would be for us to avail ourselves of Mr. Storey and the Polk County Purchasing Department, and place our campaign through their network.  Commissioner Strang added that we would still have the benefit of competitive bidding.  Commissioner Gernert responded yes.  He continued that certain elements may not be such as cable television, where there is no bidding. Chairman Costello asked how many campaign elements will we have?  Commissioner Gernert said that there is an element which will be the print – direct mail piece which would be printing and the cost of mailing.  I believe we estimated that in the neighborhood of $24,000.  Then we have newspaper or print placement, radio placement and television placement.    Chairman Costello asked if we would write up the specifications and place them with Mr. Storey.  Commissioner Gernert said yes, and if we need placement in newspapers in the various communities which he did not have daily contact with, we can go through the County system and they can release the contract for the placement of the newspaper print.  We can design the print, and he showed the Commission one draft.  That is what we would do in September.  He further stated that our goal would be to have the radio commercials cut and ready for you to hear next month, just to get your informed consent that this is what we are going to proceed with later in September.  Most of our campaign falls in the October time frame just prior to the election.  We purposely stayed below the radar so we didn’t confuse the issue on the September election.  Chairman Costello asked what is needed from the Commission?  Do we need any approval of this?  Commissioner Gernert said unless you want it on the record as a formality tonight, he thinks that one is not necessary.  The Charter Review Commission has approved the budget and Mr. Storey says that we can accomplish it through their network. 

Commissioner Masters asked if we have any other options besides using the County for possible bidding out.  Commissioner Gernert responded that he did not see how we could and get the job done in time.  He added that because the only reason it is going to work now is because he is designing advertisements on a computer to bring for you to look at, and if it is acceptable to the Commission, we are going to proceed that way.  It will save us some money in the long term but it is really a kind of volunteer effort coupled with the system.  Commissioner Masters said that his only point is that when they came to us one time and said an oil change was $75.00 or something.  He did not remember the exact number, then we are well within budget, I know, but I know some of us here use different firms in town that these print media and if you were to come up with a product, would it hurt to get a bid from them as well, or do you think we should just stick with the County vendors?  Commissioner Gertner responded that we could do it both ways.  In printing and things of that nature, he got some estimates when we were putting the budget together so if it varies very much from what we’ve got in the budget, it’s going to be a red flag.  Commissioner Masters indicated that he understood.  Commissioner Strang said that there may be some typos in the one piece he was viewing from Commissioner Gernert who responded that it was possible.  He further added that this is just an example for you to look at.  Commissioner Strang pointed to Nos. 5 and 8.  Commissioner Gernert agreed.  In referring to the draft advertisement. Commissioner Gernert pointed out the options for color.  It will cost more to add red, but it will draw attention to the advertisement.  He said that our ad is going to be one of many in the newspapers  so he was looking for something that would give it eye appeal.  What he would like is the commissioners impression as to whether or not this will be adequate. 

Commissioner Gernert invited comment from commissioners on the draft format for the newspaper advertisements.  Several of the commissioners responded with their comments.  The overall opinion was favorable.  Commissioner Gernert said that the layout was done by Kingham Software.

Commissioner Gernert explained that what he did was take each of our amendments and says should we amend this section to the Polk County Charter, and that all again takes up space in a newspaper, and I just put the line in at the top “Shall the Polk County Charter be amended to”, and these are general statements about what is on the ballot.  Some of them are not necessarily clear, especially when you get in to conform the Charter to the Constitution and Laws of Florida.  You are almost going to have to go to the web site to see what that says.

Commissioner Lindsey commented that to the uninformed, it  could read  as being an all or nothing vote.  It doesn’t make a distinction that each of these are free standing.  I don’t know if anybody else would come to that conclusion by just reading it.

Commissioner Gernert said we could add wording to that effect that each of them is a separate issue-.

Commissioner Lindsey commented that the proposed ad looked great.  Chairman Costello said that he wanted to make sure that the numbering system we used conformed to that used by the Supervisor of Elections,  Lori Edwards.

Commissioner Gernert said that is an excellent point because when he went to the website and copied the rationale off, those have been rearranged and they are numbered one (1) through eight (8) but they don’t match the way they are in our brochure and he would suggest that we have that restructured.

Chairman Costello said he  would ensure that the order was changed on the web site.

Commissioner Masters said the brochure was excellent, that everything looks great.  Commissioner Gernert said the logo is wonderful and so we tried to replace it in everything and that is what you are going to see in the television campaign.  About the best we can do with radio is to encourage them to call for the brochure or go to the website.

Chairman Costello asked what should be done with the old brochures.  Commissioner Gernert said that they can be used for the time being, that they have the essence in there.  Chairman Costello drew attention to everyone that the brochure presented at the meeting was the second version.  Commissioner Gernert commented that he encouraged everyone to read it over and call him if you find errors.

Commissioner Strang said he commended Commissioner Gernert for keeping the educational level and avoiding  strong advocacy.  Commissioner Gernert said he has been trying to do that, and it is very difficult but we have to give them some rationale for why that question is being asked but he thinks it will work.  It is simple and it is straightforward.

Commissioner Masters asked if there is anyway to emphasize the website more.    Commissioners Nunnallee and Stoer suggested changing the font.  Commissioner Gernert said that we could abbreviate that whole block of copy and say, “Further information:” and then put the website or the telephone number and make it very bold.

Commissioner Stoer suggested Arial because people would be able to read it better.  Commissioner Gernert said that it would be strengthened. 

Chairman Costello stated that we have several points, that Commissioner Lindsey’s point is to make sure the people don’t think that they have to vote all for or all against, that they are individual decisions.  And then any commissioner can make suggestions with respect to language, and pass it on to Commissioner Gernert.  He asked Commissioner Gernert what deadline he wanted for the receipt of suggestions?

Commissioner Gernert said that he would need comments by August 21st on the proposed ad and brochure. Final approval would be in the hands of the Chairman and Commissioner Gernert 

Chairman Costello asked if there were any more questions of Commissioner Gernert.  Unanimous comments were “Great Job!”

Chairman Costello asked if there were any other reports.

Commissioner Strang said he was going to quote a communication from Mr. Russell Hancock but Mr. Hancock was in attendance at the meeting and commented that Mr. Hancock could speak for himself.

Chairman Costello said that it would be a minute or two that we would be down to that point in the Agenda. 

Chairman Costello asked for any unfinished business.  There was no unfinished business.

Chairman Costello then asked for Citizen’s Comments.  Mr. Russell Hancock addressed the Commissioners with these comments:

“First of all, those of you who have been reviewing your e-mail, the exchanges that have been occurring between myself and people at Columbia County, you know that you-all weren’t quite as bad as we thought you were.  I am speaking in reference to the Amendment Petition Requirement, and I’m not going to go so far as to apologize, but I am going to say that Charter Commissioners and Review Commissioners in Polk County certainly stand  tall above those north of us.  I wanted to say that, and I also wanted to say that with all the bad and negative things that I have passed along to you, there is no question that what you have done in terms of the single member district and also the four percent ordinance petition requirement, hopefully those things will pass, and those certainly are outstanding and I commend you personally for it.  The other reason that I’m here is because of the e-mail traffic between myself and Commissioner Gifford of the last month or so. 

“Mr. Gifford in May of 2001 was reported as saying that the Amendment Petition for the pay decrease for the Commissioners was illegal, supposedly there was a conversation from Mr. Carpanini to the County Commissioners, and Mr. Gifford was quoted as saying that it was illegal.  The reason I would, the paper went on to say that six months down the road, these fellows could sue and get back pay, and I mean I started to try to find out to get to the bottom of those things but neither Mark nor Gifford at the time would answer me, or answer Dewey because Dewey put it to him.  But the bottom line is now Gifford is saying that both that petition to Carl and others being in motion, that not only that one was illegal but also the one that you-all had proposed is illegal.  The reason I’m here is that I would like to end this once and for all by hearing from somebody in authority that you-all are perfectly satisfied that it is legal, this pay raise, quite frankly it is not going to bother me if goes one way or the other.  But the big deal is I would like to know if there is any question from your attorney, I hope that you would put it in your brochure, that there is a question about the legality of it.  I think that would be in order.  I would feel rightly served.  That’s all I had and thank you for the time.”

Chairman Costello responded to Mr. Hancock. That he did not think it necessary to ask our attorney for another opinion.  He has already given us his opinion, and that is in effect this proposed change to the Charter is legal, otherwise he would not have passed on it.  We did find one mistake in the work but it was a scrivener’s error.  The original Charter allowed the people to set the salary.  The first Charter did set the salary of the County Commissioners and if they had the authority to do that, it seems to me they would have the authority to change it.  Now we all have copies of the opinion from the Supreme Court on the two cases, and I didn’t see anything in those opinions, of course I’m not a lawyer either, but I didn’t see anything that would cast any doubt on any of the provisions that we propose for the voters deliberation.

Commissioner Strang asked if those opinions apply strictly to Constitutional Officers? 

Chairman Costello responded that yes, that’s correct, they did.  He further commented that no Commissioner has made a case to any court to indicate that the decision should go beyond just the Constitutional Officers and extend to County Commissioners as well.

Commissioner Strang commented that he understood that with regard to the Palm Beach County Commission there is a movement afoot there  to impose term limits  and the County Commission was trying to claim the same deal they did in Pinellas County and on the advice of counsel, they let the term limit issue  go on the ballot.

Commissioner Masters asked whether  the argument that the County Commissioner is saying that he is supposedly recognized as a Constitutional Officer in some way and that is why they believe it is not legal.  Is that the basic issue?

Commissioner McLaughlin said he believed that specifically in the Charter it states that you cannot lower the salary, he believed said something to the effect does it say of a government official; specifically it says that in our Charter.  And I think their argument is that it would apply to an elected officer whereas I think the intention was when it was drafted, that it would be so that you couldn’t basically, the public cannot set Jim Keene’s salary, that what he said, by the County Commission, or the public couldn’t reduce the salaries of various officials in the County.  I think that’s the argument that they have been making and now, of course, I just skim read these e-mails because literally Gifford and Hancock are going back and forth so much that you can’t even keep track of it all.  That seems to be the issue from what I’ve gathered.

Chairman Costello commented that Allen Watts’s conclusion in a recent decision of the Supreme Court has no effect on the existing provision of the Polk Charter for term [limit] in the Office of County Commissioner. 

Commissioner McLaughlin queried if Mr. Watts is retained right now on an hourly basis.  Chairman Costello responded that no, and further stated that he did want to get concurrence that if he bills us for this study of this letter that we received reporting on the scrivener’s error, that I talk to him, and tell him that I don’t think we should pay that because it was really his error or the error of his staff that prompted it.  He added that he believed that we should not pay twice for his advice.  He asked the Commissioners if there is there any disagreement with that.  The Commissioners agreed.  Chairman Costello further commented that we are not paying him anything unless he comes down here.  We did have to pay him for the opinion on the Supreme Court decision but we are not paying Kurt Spitzer either although Kurt did agree to reread in detail all our proposals and he didn’t find any other problem.  I asked Allen to do it too.  I haven’t heard from him. 

Commissioner Masters asked if anybody was in contact with Kurt just to kind of let him know what is happening in Polk and where we are in our advertising and our campaign.

Chairman Costello responded that he had spoken with Kurt last week.  I think he is very much up to date.  He has been busy in Bay County.  That is where his latest consultancy is.

Commissioner McLaughlin stated that his thought if we had Allen on retainer where we had to pay him a certain fee, then I would say let’s ask him this question but if not, I think he really has already answered the question because he has already sent us a letter saying everything is fine with the Constitution, and I think Mr. Gifford has something that he wants to bring, that he would have a standing to bring it into court.

Chairman Costello added “or to us”.  He asked if there was any other business.  There was none.  He then said the Commission would stand adjourned until Monday, September 9th.  There were no objections.  The meeting adjourned at 6:43 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Marilyn A. Frega