MINUTES
POLK COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 18, 2001
Chairman, Dan
Costello, called the meeting of the Polk County Charter Review Commission to
order at 6:00 p.m. on the 3rd floor conference room of the Citrus
& Chemical Bank, Bartow. He
asked that everyone stand and pause for one minute in silent prayer in
memory of those, who through no fault of their own, lost their lives in the
tragic incidents last Tuesday, and then he led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Ms.
Swearengin called the roll. All Commissioners were present, with the exception
of Commissioners Gernert 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 28, 2001.
The minutes of
August 28, 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 Lindsey and seconded by Commissioner Moore Bailey.
The Chairman
asked if there was discussion? There
was none. The motion carried.
The Chairman
said the Commission had three Invited Guest Presentations that evening, and the
agenda showed five, but Mayor Crisman of Bartow was not able to make the meeting
and she would be appearing at the September 25, 2001 meeting.
He said that Mr. Grizzard of the Democratic Party could not be present at
the meeting and he indicated that he would be submitting some comments in
writing to the Commission.
The Chairman
said the first guest speaker would be Sheriff Lawrence Crow, and he invited him
to speak.
Sheriff
Crow
Sheriff Crow
began his presentation by expressing appreciation to commissioners for their
invitation to appear before him. He
had three purposes in his presentation: first to provide some information about
the Sheriff’s office; second, to discuss the important role of constitutional
officers; and finally to urge that the Commission maintain the independence and
effectiveness of the constitutional officers.
Using a slide
presentation he presented information on the operations of his department, which
has the responsibility of protecting lives, protecting property and operating
the Polk County jail. He explained
the Sheriff’s role in judicial matters, including process serving and arrest
warrants. His office also operates
the boot camp, the largest in the State of Florida.
He emphasized
that the Board of County Commissioners has complete authority over the
Sheriff’s budget as per State statute. Approval
by BOCC is required for any transfer between accounts.
BOCC must approve the expenditure of seized drug monies.
The Sheriff does not have independent authority to do that.
He also explained that there are many internal controls over the budget
over and above the control that resides with the BOCC.
It was his view that there is more scrutiny now over the Sheriff’s
budget than there would be if he were a department head.
He explained the
factors which led to the growth in his budget over the years, including
increases in population, increases in case load and demand for services, an
increase in deputies patrolling the county, growth in jail population, health
care cost increases for employees and for inmates, the rise in unfounded
mandates such as additional bailiffs for newly added judges, the addition of
child abuse investigating functions, the addition of new programs such as
community policing.
He showed that
his budget growth has averaged about 6.3% per year, and he thought that
represented good performance. The
daily inmate cost at the jail was $28 in 1987.
Now, even in view of all the increased costs for health care, it is $39
or an increase of a little more than two percent per year.
He commented on
the subject of consolidation of services and suggested that bigger is not
necessarily better. He said that if
that was the case, then why was HRS divided up.
It was to make it more responsive. There are some instances of successful
consolidations such as fuel management, health services, building maintenance,
radio, and telephone services. They
are hoping to combine the 911 systems, but need to wait until a properly sized
facility is available. He supports
consolidation where it makes sense and if it will improve services and/or save
taxpayer dollars.
He believes in
independence and accountability for constitutional officers. They answer to the people or they don’t stay in office.
Some say the Sheriff’s office has too much power, but the power is in the
people. They empower his office to
get the job done. If he has a
strong constituency it is because his people spend a lot of time in the
community. They know us and we know
them.
The Sheriff
provided the Commission with the following recommendations with respect to the
Charter:
1.
Do no harm. Don’t fix
something if it isn’t broken. Don’t
be fooled by people who are not credible.
2.
If you tinker with the statutes governing constitutional officers you
will be opening the door
to
ineffective government.
3.
Find ways to increase direct accountability.
4.
Keep political party affiliations on the ballot.
Party affiliation helps the voters make their decisions.
5.
Expand BOCC to seven county commissioners.
6.
Chairman should be an elected position.
7.
Preserve Article V that is in the Constitution.
The
Sheriff completed his presentation and the Chairman invited the commissioners to
ask question.
Commissioner
McLaughlin thanked the Sheriff for coming to the meeting. He felt Sheriff Crow
had obviously been a student of Polk County politics for sometime, and he wanted
to get his thoughts on whether the county commissioners were able to devote
their full time and best efforts to understanding his budget, and the issues of
the county, and whether or not he thought they were basically part-time
commissioners and were unable to do that. What he was alluding to was the county
commissioners salary cut, and he wanted his opinion on whether the commissioners
salaries should be restored or not, and should their position be a full-time?
The Sheriff said
he was of the opinion that it was a full time job to operate the county, and he
felt there should be seven commissioners, and those people should be adequately
paid to do the job, and in his opinion the salary reductions of the
commissioners had hurt the county.
Chairman
Costello said Mr. Bark appeared before the Commission and then wrote them a
letter on the subject of citizen oversight of law enforcement in the jail, and
he asked if he would comment on his proposals and what his reaction was to them?
Sheriff Crow
said Mr. Bark was very concerned about the inmates and their welfare in the
county jail, and he would welcome a visit from him. He felt civilian oversight
had never worked, and it had become another bureaucracy. It had been tried in
New York City, and he had studied it in the FBI Academy. He said he would be glad to let Mr. Bark see the jail system.
He felt Mr. Bark thought everyone in jail was somehow tortured or
something, and in reality the average person that went into the county jail
system saw a great improvement in the life they had been living, first by
receiving three square meals. He
said this was being found more and more in the boot camps, and although they
were tough, they were noticing just prior to graduation kids started having
problems, and one would ask why? He felt the reason was because they didn’t
want to go home. They understood
what needed to be done to survive, and they received three square meals. He said
he was not quite as liberal as Mr. Bark was, but he was opposed to civilians
that didn’t understand law enforcement issues trying to give oversight in a
very complicated world, which was even difficult for him at times, and he had
forty years of experience.
Chairman
Costello said he thought he knew the answer to his next question, but it had
been posed and he wanted to ask him.
He said there
was a proposal made that the constitutional officers’ salaries be
significantly reduced, and he asked what would happen in the Sheriff’s case,
being a certified law enforcement officer, and what his comments were on the
reduction of the salaries of the constitutional officers?
The Sheriff said
he could tell him exactly what would happen.
Sheriff’s salaries were set based upon the population of the county and
the inflation factor for that year. He
said some counties that had a population of 20,000 didn’t pay their Sheriffs
very much money, and there was Sheriff in one particular county who was elected
and ran a gas station, and when that Sheriff was called, his calls were
transferred to the gas station or the person would have to catch him in between
visits to the Sheriff’s office. He
thought the idea was ridiculous, because first of all it took a very good senior
staff, and many of them had college degrees, and he thought it was preposterous
that the Sheriff should make less than his staff. He said obviously people would
be placed in that job who were not the best qualified, because he didn’t think
any of the staff would apply for the job, and take a cut in salary.
He felt the bottom line was, one got what one paid for, and if they
didn’t pay for a Sheriff they wouldn’t get a Sheriff.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked if the Sheriff would expand further on budget oversight.
He said they had heard earlier the Sheriff’s budget was like “bucket
accounting”, where all monies went into one large pot and the Sheriff had the
discretion of moving the money as he saw fit, and from his slide presentation,
he gathered this was not the case?
The Sheriff said
he wished it were like that, but it was actually cumbersome and difficult to
spend money for a purpose other than what the Board of County Commissioners
appropriated the money for, and in fact, it was almost impossible.
He said to appropriate money some place other than originally agreed
upon, they had to go back before the Commission and get them to agree to it, and
it simply did not happen. He said
there was some latitude in deciding what type of vehicles he wanted, but as far
as being able to take a bucket of money and spend it any way he wanted, it did
not happen.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked how many sworn and civilian employees he had on his staff?
The Sheriff said
including the school crossing guards they had somewhere between 1,600 and 1,700
employees countywide.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked how he would distinguish between running a Sheriff’s office as
an elected official and running a municipality police force as the Chief of
Police?
Sheriff Crow
said as a Chief of Police one had twice as many officers per capita.
He said he currently had approximately 550 deputies, and if he were Chief
of Police running a district of similar size, he would have at least 1,100
officers working for him instead of 550, so in essence he operated with about
half the personnel that police departments did.
Commissioner
Nunnallee said that the Sheriff’s office had been compared to Hillsborough
County.
The Sheriff said
his office was actually set up similarly to the way Hillsborough County was. The
Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office and the Polk County Sheriff’s Office
had the same ratio of supervisors. He
said they had less than Orange County. Some
people felt they could get by with fewer supervisors, but
Polk County was bigger than the State of Rhode Island, and he felt they
had too many young deputies with three years or less experience, and one would
want to ensure adequate supervision over those people.
Commissioner
Nunnallee said that based on the information that was given to them, the crime
rate in Polk County was below the Florida average, and she asked how did Polk
County’s crime rate compare to Hillsborough County’s?
Sheriff Crow
said Polk County was in much better shape than Hillsborough County as far as the
crime rate, and in fact the only area that Polk County was near them on at one
point, was auto thefts, and the county had dropped down in that area.
He said another area he was very proud of, which was much better than
Hillsborough County, was pornography. He
said one of the things he did as the Sheriff, was to set a goal with his staff
to go after the pornography outlets in Polk County, and it took them ten years.
They went after 110 or 112 pornography outlets, and the last
establishment was in the process of closing.
When that happened Polk County then would be free of any pornography.
Chairman
Costello said one of the members of the County Commission came before them and
said the Sheriff was comparing his department with the eight largest policing
jurisdictions; Polk, Pinellas, Miami PD, Palm Beach, Orange, Hillsborough,
Jacksonville Metro, and Dade, and that commissioner asserted that was not an
appropriate comparison, and they should really be comparing themselves with
Pasco and other counties, and would he comment on that?
Sheriff Crow
said they were the eighth largest policing jurisdiction in the State of Florida,
and that included the cities and the counties, and they were one of the ten
largest. He said that didn’t mean
they were the largest agency, but they had more people to police, and it was
true that they had seen some growth in Pasco County, but Pasco County was so
different than they were, and it was hard to compare them with Pasco County.
He said they were two cities, Dade City and New Port Richie.
He said there were many differences and few similarities. He said one needed to be careful when one was comparing to
make sure they were comparing apples to apples instead of apples to oranges.
Chairman
Costello asked the Sheriff when he said eighth largest, from what standpoint was
he referring to?
The Sheriff said
largest from the standpoint of population.
Chairman
Costello asked the Sheriff under Florida Statutes if the Sheriff of Polk County
had to be a certified or sworn law enforcement officer?
Sheriff Crow
said no, but he felt to run an agency that size; it is preposterous to hire
someone that had no law enforcement experience.
Chairman
Costello said that the issue had been raised and some suggestions were made
regarding educational qualifications or certification qualifications for some of
the constitutional officers, for example Tax Collector, which would require some
accounting background or a CPA.
Chairman
Costello asked if he would recommend that the Charter have some requirements as
to the Sheriff’s educational or certification background?
Sheriff Crow
said yes that needed to be done, but it needed to be done at the State level,
and not at the local level, because if the door was opened and his position was
made a charter officer instead of a constitutional officer, that door could
probably never be closed again. He
said, however, the Sheriff of Orange County was able to close that door.
He was a charter officer and at the last election he raised enough money
to place that issue on the ballot and 72% of the people voted to make him a
constitutional officer again.
Chairman
Costello asked the attorney whether or not there would be an inconsistency,
because he thought that he was arguing that if he did put any qualifications in
there that would automatically put them in a “charter officer status”, and
he would like to ask his advice on that.
Mr. Watts said
off the cuff, and with that warning, the Constitution said in the case of the
constitutional officers two things: one they may be chosen in another manner
when provided by the charter, and two the constitutional officer can be
abolished of all of its duties. He
felt that qualifications could be specified without jeopardizing the Sheriff’s
status as a constitutional officer, but he said he would research the issue
further.
Commissioner
Moore Bailey asked Sheriff Crow if there were plans in the future to have the
bailiffs removed from the courts?
Sheriff Crow
said the bailiffs were not going to be removed from the courts and would remain
under his control.
Chairman
Costello said that completed Sheriff Crow’s presentation and the questions
from the Commission, and he thanked him for his presentation.
Chairman
Costello said the next presentation would be from Wayne Ezell, of the Winter
Haven Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Ezell
said he was the Vice-President for Governmental Affairs for the Greater Winter
Haven Chamber of Commerce. He said
he would also like to introduce Judy Cleaves who was the President of the Winter
Haven Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Ezell
thanked the Commission for allowing them to speak on behalf of the Chamber,
which represented a large segment of the business community in Winter Haven and
in east Polk County.
He said they
wanted to highlight four issues that were important to the business community in
east Polk County, and to others as well.
First, they
urged the Commission to make the necessary changes to allow Polk County to have
an appointed and professional Superintendent of schools. He said his Chamber as well as others had endorsed efforts
towards making that change. Members
of the business community were already working towards what was going to be a
broad based campaign to make that change. He said placing that opportunity on
the ballot would help facilitate reform, which they believed would be endorsed
by the voters. He didn’t think anyone of them if asked to design a model of
governance for the school systems in our large county would devise or accept a
plan that fixed political power and responsibility in both a seven member board
and in an elected executive at the same time.
He said the
County’s system was a quaint system developed many decades ago, and it was
useful at the time in agrarian American, but now they believed there was both
the need and an opportunity to provide more effective leadership for the school
system. Under the current system
many people were elected to oversee education, but none had sufficient authority
to lead effectively, and they believe an appointed Superintendent would be a
strong step towards bringing an effective administration and accountability to
the school system.
Their second
recommendation was to increase the county commission districts from five to
seven, and provide for those commissioners to be elected within their districts.
He said as the county grew in size and complexity they felt more
commissioners, more voices, more views, and the moderating effect was needed,
which they believe would come with a larger number.
They felt these commissioners should be elected by the voters in their
district in order to ensure geographic interests were represented, provide
direct representation and lower campaign costs. The system has worked well in
many other areas and jurisdictions.
Their third
recommendation related to the County Commission. He urged the Commission remove the current restriction on
compensation, which placed an unnecessary and unwise restriction on the number
of people who might be willing to serve in that office.
He said Polk County needed capable candidates and the best possible
commissioners. He said logic suggested that they must be paid at a level
commensurate with their responsibility, and while some people might disagree,
and they felt that it was a minority, it was important that elected leadership
in Polk County not be defined by some arbitrary, short sighted, and perhaps
punitive cap on compensation.
Their fourth
recommendation was to urge the Commission not to allow any arbitrary reduction
in the compensation for constitutional offices. They felt that the levels now were adequate, but their view
was that compensation should be established based upon available data from other
counties and other jurisdictions of similar size or in some other manner
commensurate with responsibility. He
said to do less than that was clearly a false economy.
He said in
closing they recognized the extraordinary importance that the charter review
process held for Polk County, and it had great potential to continue the change
in local government structure and process models in keeping with the evolving
community that was had in both size and complexity.
He urged that they be realistic with what was obtainable with the voters
when they got to their work product, and while they understood that the
Commission must consider all views, including political opposition and some had
a vested interest either in the past or with their own self interest, or in an
interest in the status quo, they applauded their efforts and encouraged them to
take bold steps.
Mr. Ezell said
he appreciated the Commission giving them the opportunity to speak to them, and
they applauded their efforts.
Chairman
Costello thanked Mr. Ezell for his presentation.
Chairman
Costello asked if the Commission had questions for Mr. Ezell?
Chairman
Costello said he had a question regarding single member districts. He asked if all seven districts would be single member
districts, and if that was the case, how would they feel about some of them
being at large and some of them being single member districts?
Mr. Ezell said
in their discussions their preference was to have all of them single member
districts.
Chairman
Costello asked with respect to the status of the constitutional officers, he
indicated no arbitrary reduction in compensation for them, but did he have any
position on any other changes that should be made to the constitutional
officers’ status?
Mr. Ezell said
none had formerly been discussed.
Commissioner
Stoer said she thought that the last time the appointed Superintendent was on
the ballot it lost by a very high margin of votes, and she asked why he felt
that would change?
Mr. Ezell said
there were a number of reasons, and how education was perceived in the community
might be different than it was then, and he felt if the voters were properly
educated they would see the need for the change.
Commissioner
Lindsey said his recollection was that it was defeated narrowly by two or three
hundred votes.
Commissioner
Stoer said she thought it lost by 70%, and she asked if anyone else had
knowledge on that issue?
Commissioner
Lindsey said no, he didn’t think that was the case, but it could easily be
determined.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked Mr. Watts if the Charter Review Commission had the discretion to
put the School Board issue on the ballot?
Mr. Watts said
he had a written opinion on that which he was going to distribute.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked what the bottom line said?
Mr. Watts said
the bottom line under a conservative view was no, it would be a Constitutional
experiment, and the reason being was that Article 9 which dealt with the
appointment of the selection of the Superintendent of Schools, provided two
methods by which the Superintendent could be employed rather than by being
elected, and one was by special act of the Legislature that was approved by the
voters, and the other was by resolution of the School Board approved by the
voters. He said there was a
provision in Article 8 that stated any of the county offices could be chosen by
another manner when provided by a charter.
He said that was
a general provision and there was a specific provision to respect to the
Superintendent in Article 9, and the usual rule of construction of statutes was
where there was a specific exception to a general provision the specific
provision controlled in that narrow area. He
said that was the conservative view; however, charter amendments addressing the
schools have been upheld in the courts, and he did think it was possible for the
Charter to reach into the school system for the reasons he outlined in the
written report.
Chairman
Costello thanked Mr. Watts for his remarks.
Chairman
Costello asked if the commissioners had further questions?
Commissioner
Moore Bailey said in regards to the County Commissioners, Mr. Ezell talked about
expanding the members from five to seven, and having all seven single member
districts, and she asked if there had been any discussion with the Winter Haven
Chamber as it related to a strong county manager or a mayor type position?
Mr. Ezell said
no, not in depth, and he did not particularly care to address that issue.
The Chairman
thanked Mr. Ezell and Ms. Cleaves for coming to the Commission’s meeting.
The Chairman
said he would need to check with Haines City and determine what happened to
their presentation, but it appeared that they were not there, and the Commission
would have to give them an opportunity in the future to speak if there was some
misunderstanding.
The Chairman
said that concluded the Invited Guest Presentations, and they were now down to
Item VI on the agenda, reports and he would like to start with his report.
He said the
subject of his report was the tape recordings for their meetings, and he further
explained the difficulties concerning the use of the duplicating machine at the
Clerk’s Office. He asked that the
Commission approve an expenditure of $423 for the cost of a new tape recorder,
which would record at normal speed, and would be used as a backup in the event
the duplicator in the county office was not working. He said what he recommended was that the Commission
authorize the purchase of a back up tape recorder, which was recommended by the
MIS Department.
Commissioner
Masters moved for authorization of the Commission to purchase a back up tape
recorder, and Commissioner Moore Bailey seconded the motion.
The Chairman
asked if there was further discussion?
Mr. Watts said
just as a legal point, the assets of the Commission would become assets of the
County upon completion of its processes.
The Chairman
said that was understood, and asked all of those in favor of the motion to say
aye. The motion carried
unanimously.
The Chairman
asked Mr. Watts if he had a report for the Commission?
Mr. Watts said
he had previously given part of his report to them.
He said he had three memoranda covering four issues the Chairman referred
to him for research. (Copies are
attached to the file copy of these minutes).
The Chairman
said following the attorney’s report the Commission would be taking a
five-minute break before resuming with the remainder of the agenda.
Mr. Watts
distributed the three memorandums to the Commission stating that the first memo
related to the school system, the second related to participation of elected
county officers in the State Retirement System, and the third memo referred to
proposals to submit millage rates to electors.
Mr. Watts said
he had previously delivered an oral report with respect to the millage cap
question, and the memorandum simply documented that report, and a similar report
was submitted to them that evening with respect to the Superintendent, and the
retirement system. He said the school report addressed two questions that the
Commission asked that he research. One
was the general extent the Commission could become involved in matters that
related to the school district, and the other was the specific question as to
whether the Commission could go as far as proposing through the Charter that the
Superintendent become an employee rather than an elected officer.
He said when the Superintendent became employed that position was no
longer considered a county officer it was considered an employee of the School
Board.
He said he would
like to dwell for a moment on the school issue.
He said they were dealing with the interplay of two different articles of
the Constitution. He said their
work came under Article 8, entitled Local Government. He said the school system was addressed entirely under
Article 9, and many people thought county was county, and school board was
school board, and never the twain shall meet.
He said that was not apparently entirely the case.
He said there had been a couple of decisions by the courts in which
charters had addressed the school system and had been upheld after legal
challenge, and the most recent one was in Volusia County, in which the County
Council proposed a charter amendment that would make the school board a
non-partisan seat, which was before the Constitution allowed all school boards
to be non-partisan, and that was challenged by the Republican Executive
Committee and upheld by the Court on the theory that school board members were
county officers as surely as the constitutional officers were, and as surely as
the members of the board of county commissioners were, and also the
superintendent of schools, so for purposes of the Governor’s power to suspend
the county officer who committed a felony, school board members and the
superintendent were included within that authority. For purposes of the Legislature’s ability to pass special
laws addressing county officers, school boards and superintendents were included
within that authority of the Legislature. Although
in non-chartered counties the Legislature had no such authority.
He felt it would
be a Constitutional experiment to go as far as proposing by charter amendment
the conversion of the school superintendent to an employed position rather than
an elected position. He said he
could not say that it would be unlawful, but he could say that there were
arguments against it and those were setout in the memorandum. He said they would never know the answer unless they tried
it, because no one would ever challenge something that they didn’t propose.
Chairman
Costello asked him what if there was a school board resolution to the Charter
Review Commission asking that it be put on the ballot, would that change his
opinion in any way?
Mr. Watts said
yes.
Chairman
Costello asked in what way?
Mr. Watts said
it would be a resolution of the school board.
Chairman
Costello asked if it would then be acceptable?
Mr. Watts said
he thought so, and in fact the school board in the case that he mentioned
regarding non-partisan elections came by request through resolution of the
school board through county council, and the council had the authority under the
charter to propose amendments, and the school board did not, so the county
council proposed the amendment at the request of the school board and it passed
by a substantial margin.
Chairman
Costello reminded the Commission that the School Board Chairman would be a guest
at their next meeting.
Commissioner
Price asked Mr. Watts if most of the change in the State occurred from the
elected to appointed position before numerous counties moved to charter
governments? She said she knew that
this had been a controversial issue in Polk County for several years and she
thought most of the superintendents were appointed in the State of Florida.
Mr. Watts said
most of the larger counties were appointed.
He said there were a number of elected superintendents in some of the
smaller counties and he wasn’t sure whether it was a majority in number of
counties, but certainly a majority of the population of the State existed under
employed or appointed superintendents.
Commissioner
Price said did she therefore make the assumption that those were not chartered
counties, and since it had not been tested it would be new ground for them?
Mr. Watts said
that all of the jurisdictions that had gone to appointed superintendents have
done so under the two methods in Article 9 as far as he had been able to tell.
He said that he mentioned in his memo one example of just how far one
charter did go in addressing the interplay between the school district and the
country government, and he reminded them that the City of Jacksonville was
consolidated with Duval County in 1967 by vote of the people there.
He said what most people did not realize was that the charter took the
Duval County School Board and expanded it to 14 unpaid non-partisan members, put
the budget under the control of the City Council, put the Personnel Department
under the control of the City Personnel Department except for the professional
teachers, they were still employed by the School Board itself, put its Legal
Affairs Department under the jurisdiction of the City Attorney, put purchasing
under the City Purchasing Department, and required all school employees to
subscribe to the City Code of Ethics. He reminded the Commission when he
referred to a Constitutional experiment this was one that had stood for
thirty-five years and no one had ever challenged it.
Chairman
Costello asked if the Commission had further questions?
Commissioner
McLaughlin said he was assuming in terms of ripeness and mootness that in order
to challenge that, most likely before it actually went to the ballot, someone
could not prevent it from getting on the ballot because they would not have
suffered a harm at that point, and then after it was actually voted upon then
someone would then challenge it?
Mr. Watts said
if it were alleged and proved that it was clearly unconstitutional, the court
had the power to strike a measure from the ballot prior to the election, but
courts were reluctant to do that, and the preference of the court system was to
allow the voters to have their say, and then if there was a legal problem with
it the voters may take the judge off of the hook, and something that was
constitutionally doubtful may be turned down by the voters and the judge never
had to make that ruling. The
preference was to let the voters have their say, and often once the voters have
had their say no one had the political will to challenge that.
Commissioner
Lindsey asked if there was any merit to soliciting an Attorney General’s
opinion?
Mr. Watts said
the only thing he could say about that was the Attorney General had not been
very supportive of charters doing that, for example, the prior Attorney General
gave an opinion that a charter could not make a Supervisor of Elections a
non-partisan, and their were many charters which had done that, and none of them
had been challenged. He said the
Attorney General told the Brevard Commission when he was serving as its counsel
that they could not make the county officers and the constitutional officers
non-partisan. He said they got an
opinion from the Division of Elections, the Secretary of the State’s office
that contradicted the position of the Attorney General, and it might be a
question that would be better addressed by the Secretary of the State since it
dealt with the subject of elections, but he didn’t feel that the subject came
up often enough that they could expect an expert opinion coming from either the
Secretary of the State or the Attorney General, because it wasn’t something
that came up everyday in the kind of advice
they gave.
Chairman
Costello asked with respect to the School Board itself was the resolution on the
part of the School Board a supermajority or simply a majority?
Mr. Watts said
simple majority.
Chairman
Costello asked if the School Board by simple majority passed a resolution
addressed to the Charter Review Commission asking them to put that item on the
ballot would he have any reservations about its legality?
Mr. Watts said
no.
Chairman
Costello said in other words whatever reservations he currently had would be
overcome?
Mr. Watts said
the reservations would be whether they were pre-empting the authority of the
School Board, and with that reservation in place it would clearly not be a
pre-emption of their authority.
Chairman
Costello asked if Mr. Watts wanted to cover any of the other memos?
Mr. Watts said
he thought that he had covered them all unless there were questions.
The Chairman
requested that the Commission recess for five minutes at 7:17 p.m.
The Chairman
called the meeting to order at 7:22 p.m.
The Chairman
said that Item VII, Unfinished Business was next on the agenda. He said there was none.
He said on Item
VIII, there were three individuals who signed up to speak in the following
order: Mr. Hancock, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Martin, and under the Commission’s
rules they were limited to five minutes.
The Chairman
invited Mr. Hancock to speak.
Mr. Hancock said that one of the issues that Dewey Smith had spoke to them about was the need for amendments to the Charter calling for a reduction in petition requirements found in Article 6.1 and 8.3.2. He said he was there that night to present drafts of those amendments. He said if they thought that the wording, format, or style should be changed without changing the obvious intent please do so and refer them to the County Commission for ballot placement. He presented those amendments and stated that on the back was a Lakeland Ledger editorial explaining why those amendments were so important.
He said if they
would permit he would like to use the balance of his time to share some personal
thoughts as they related to that Commission, and if not he would be glad to
leave what he had to say in writing?
Chairman
Costello said that he had four minutes remaining and he was welcome to continue.
He said first of
all he had come there that evening to compliment all of them. He said he did not
remember any Chairman more qualified and impartial than Dr. Costello.
He said he did not remember any Executive Assistant as dedicated and
professional as Mrs. Swearengin. He
said he did not remember any two facilitators as knowledgeable about the subject
matter as counsel Allen Watts and consultant Kurt Spitzer, deferring to their
experience he said he would venture to say that there had not been a county
charter commission in Florida with so many knowledgeable panelists, and with so
much citizen participation and activism, and while all of them could count on
him to continue sending comments and questions, which may seem like a lot, and
sometimes even annoying, he asked them to consider that those commission
proceedings were discussed by as many as forty private citizens who met weekly
at Ryan’s Steakhouse in north Lakeland, and all of them were invited to attend
those meetings. He said some of
those citizens had been attending the Commission’s meetings regularly.
He asked them to consider that some of the Commission’s meetings were
discussed over radio talk show programs such as Commissioner Moore Bailey’s.
He asked them to consider that the missives that they had received from
him were the comments and the questions of many of those citizens, and most
importantly he asked them, the fellow citizens with the Monday Night Group, the
Home Rule Charter Committee, Citizens for Truth in Government, and he told them
they all had something in common, and that something was, that they all knew the
importance of participating in the democratic process, which in no small way
translated to the preservation of civil liberties and to freedom itself.
He said that no one needed to remind any of them that the nation’s
finest, young men and women were now being called on once again to possibly give
their lives so that we might pursue those precious things.
He said in the hour by hour sorrow for the unexplainable things that were
experienced last week he was there to share with them and all other Americans
our admiration for thousands of heroes that had been seen on television, the
citizens of New York City, police, fire, and emergency rescue units and all
sorts of other government workers, and the same was of course true with their
fellow citizens and government workers in Washington.
He said last night they saw and heard on television where authorities had
more reason than ever to believe that passengers of the airliner that crashed in
Pennsylvania may have knowingly caused the crash in a heroic effort to keep the
hijackers from carrying out a suicide mission against the nation’s Capitol.
He said other
than repeating his respect for Dr. Costello and his admiration and respect for
Mrs. Swearengin, Attorney Watts, and Mr. Spitzer and the manner in which all of
them had conducted themselves and encouraging them to continue and other than
committing to daily prayer with all of whom were with them for the uncertain
days ahead, that concluded his statement.
Chairman
Costello thanked Mr. Hancock for his comments and said it was wonderful to
finally get to see the man behind all of the e-mail they had been getting, and
he thought he had encouraged them all to get larger hard drives on their next
computer, and he thanked him for calling to his attention some of the omissions
in the Commission’s Summary of Issues that had been proposed, and with only
one or two exceptions those had been included in the latest revision.
Chairman
Costello invited Mr. Dewey Smith to speak.
Mr. Smith began his presentation by saying
that the need for our national leaders to make the right decisions had never
been greater than then. He said
that all of them would have to make sacrifices, and in making those sacrifices
the need to keep watch over local government had never been greater.
He said he thought that each of them as a member of the Commission had
more of an obligation than they did, just two weeks ago, to listen to the will
of the people.
In the absence of the elected officials
voluntarily reducing their salaries the need for the voters to have the
opportunity to reduce them was greater than before, and they all must look upon
the office that they hold as being truly honorable instead of soft cushy jobs
with which to maintain political dynasties, and to retire at yearly incomes
beyond the imagination of the average taxpayer.
They presented to the Commission that
evening amendments relating to county officers as sited in Article 8, Section 1
of the State Constitution, and also sited in Article 1.5.1 of the current Polk
County Charter. He said those
amendments were prepared by himself and former Brevard County Charter Commission
member, Colonel George Draper, who was regarded as an expert in those matters.
He said as they could see, it related to the inclusion of the Sheriff,
Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Clerk of the Court, and Supervisor of
Elections and to the Polk County Charter, and also provided for term limits and
fifty percent pay cuts.
He said if they felt that those amendments
should be separate for each county officer, which would increase the number of
amendments to achieve the same result, his attorney’s draft was immediately
available for their review, and in any case if they knew a better way to present
those important public policy improvements for the voters without changing the
purpose, meaning, or the integrity of those amendments as a whole, to please do
so.
He said of all of the amendments brought
to their attention a method of freezing the ability of the County Commissioners
to increase taxes without direct voter approval, term limits, and fifty percent
salary cuts for the rest of the county officers were clearly what the fellow
citizens wanted most. He said not
just because of the advocates who had been attending the Commission’s meetings
regularly, but because of the desire that was expressed by more than 2,700
citizens who signed the documents that were placed before them.
He said the citizens had appealed to them
in the same petition for an amendment calling for the creation of a Citizen
Review Panel and a Countywide Public Counsel.
He said they naturally hoped that they would consult Mr. Bark and
Attorney Kuhn, but the writing of those particular amendments they would leave
to them. He said those petitions
had been signed during the last eight weeks since the Commission had been
meeting, and they were still coming in. He
said he received 375 petitions the previous Saturday, and 575 the week before in
addition to the 375. He said all of
those people went to the trouble of returning those petitions by mail furnishing
their own envelopes and stamps, and some gave money to keep the process going.
He said those petitions constituted 2,700 letters asking them to do what
the people wanted and not what the politicians wanted.
He said out of respect for those who signed them to please read what they
asked into the record as was done with the others.
He said they were not asking them for term
limits and salary reductions, but just asking that they give the people a chance
to make that decision for themselves, and to please enter that information in
Dr. Costello’s Issues Spreadsheet and act accordingly.
He said he would like to point out that there were 16 to 17 signatures
per page, and those citizens were taking that position.
He said the citizens’ addresses and complete information was there.
Chairman Costello thanked Mr. Smith for
his comments.
Chairman Costello said the next speaker
was Mr. Martin.
Mr. Martin thanked the Commission for the
opportunity to be able to come before them and to speak.
He said his name was William E. Martin and he lived in the Lakeland area,
and he was also the Judge Martin that had been referred to in several missives
and many of his friends refer to him that way, and beyond that he was probably
going to give the shortest speech that they had heard.
He said he wanted to highly commend each
of them for their public service on that committee, and he trusted that each of
them would make informed decisions based upon the premise that their individual
responsibility was to the sovereign individual, the citizen of Polk County.
He said having been one of the original participants in the Monday Night
Group, his presence before them that evening was prompted by his concern that
special interest groups might be able to prevail in their requests to the
determent of individual rights. He
said he would like to point out a couple of highlights about things that he
thought were very important to them as they went forward: 1) Revisiting the
April 12th meeting when Attorney Philip Kuhn gave a speech regarding
the 14th Amendment, and he felt if they would refer to that it would
stand on its own. 2) Limit the number of petition signatures needed to no more
than three percent to get an amendment on the ballot, and he didn’t see why as
few a 1,000 or something similar to that would not be an acceptable amount to
show enough concern that it could be done. 3) To approve a tax increase should require a two third’s
vote of the citizens.
He said now was the time in our history,
when some of the military personnel needed food stamps to supplement their
incomes, and he heartedly supported cutting the pay of the constitutional
officers, by fifty percent and limiting them to two consecutive terms in office.
He said there appeared to be wide support for the amendment spoken of by
Dewey Smith, and in the past Wayne Steinard who had appeared before them,
Russell Hancock, and many others. He
said those people and their organizations, and their amendments were worthy of
their support in his opinion.
He said he had a tape for each of the
members of the Commission and it was of a radio program that was done on August
13, 2001, and he asked that they listen to that tape. (Copy placed in public
file).
Commissioner Moore Bailey asked Mr. Martin
regarding the Monday Night Group if they had discussed the issue as it related
to an elected Superintendent versus an appointed Superintendent?
Mr. Martin said that had not been an issue
that had come before the group that he was aware of.
Chairman Costello thanked Mr. Martin for
his comments.
Chairman Costello said that completed
their list of the citizens wishing to address the Commission, and next on the
agenda was New Business.
Chairman Costello asked if there was New
Business?
Commissioner McLaughlin said as he
mentioned at the last meeting, he didn’t think the Commission extended an
invitation to the Superintendent to speak, and in light of all of the recent
discussions regarding the appointed Superintendent he felt it was appropriate
that an invitation be sent to him to speak.
Chairman Costello said that was at the
Commission’s pleasure.
Chairman Costello said an invitation would
be extended to the Superintendent of schools to appear next week, and he hoped
that he could make it next week.
Commissioner Lindsey asked if the Chairman
knew who the Invited Guests were who would be appearing on the next week’s
agenda?
Chairman Costello said currently scheduled
was the representative of the Chamber and Mr. Macey of the School Board and
possibly Mayor Tyler and the Superintendent if he accepted and Mayor Crisman of
Bartow, who could not make that evening’s meeting.
He said that would be the Commission’s last meeting where there were
presentations, so they could get into the business of discussing the issues that
had come before them.
The Chairman asked if there was any other
New Business?
Commissioner McLaughlin said on an
administrative matter, regarding the petitions that they had received that
evening, how would the Chairman propose dealing with those in terms of reviewing
comments if there were any?
Chairman Costello said they were public
record and they would be available in the Commission’s office for review by
the commissioners. He said in
leafing through them he saw very few comments on them, but they would be
available in the office.
Commissioner McLaughlin asked if it would
be possible for Mrs. Swearengin to review and highlight the comments for them
for the benefit of the whole committee?
Chairman Costello said he would review the
comments and determine if there were any and highlight them and make copies and
distribute them.
Mr. Smith said there were not any comments
on the petitions themselves. He
said he did have many people who sent in comments written on small pieces of
paper and he had kept them at home, and would be glad to show them to the
Commission.
Chairman Costello asked if there was any
other New Business?
Commissioner Price said she appreciated
the efforts that he and Cindy made last week to advise them of the cancellation
of the meeting, and she knew that was a challenge, and she felt that if they had
proceeded with that meeting they would not have been focused on the meeting.
Chairman Costello thanked Commissioner
Price for her comments, and said he felt they had to ask the Commission what
their pleasure was. Many wanted to
be home with their families, and that was understandable and made a lot of
sense, and he hoped the tragedy, which prompted it would never happen again.
Commissioner Moore Bailey said she had a
question for Mr. Smith before he left, and she felt that his answer was one she
could probably answer herself, but she asked were the petitions presented to the
Commission earlier that evening, signed by registered voters?
Mr. Smith said no they did not ask if they
were registered voters, and the reason was because he felt that people in the
community who were not registered voters still had the right to say what they
wanted on the ballot whether they were registered voters or not, and they were
still citizens of the county, and he felt there opinions should be heard.
Commissioner Moore Bailey said she
appreciated his answer.
Chairman Costello said without objection,
the meeting would stand adjourned. The
meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cynthia Swearengin