MINUTES

 OF POLK COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION

 JULY 9, 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 Hunt led the prayer and Commissioner Strang led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ms. Swearengin called the roll.  All commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioners Allen, Moore Bailey, Masters, Nunnallee and 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 said the first order of business was the approval of the minutes of May 14, 2002.  The Chairman asked if there were any changes to the minutes?  There were no changes to the minutes.

Commissioner Lindsey made a motion to approve the minutes of May 14, 2002 and Commissioner Strang seconded the motion.  The motion carried. 

The Chairman said the next item on the agenda was his report.   He indicated to the Commission that a laptop computer had been placed in the back of the room with the Charter’s new website displayed for their review.  He indicated that the name of the website was the same, which was “Polkcharter.com”.  He said the logo on the website integrated with the logo Commissioner Gernert used on the brochures.   It was his feeling that the website was extremely important in terms of the educational campaign, and he suggested when the commissioners were at home that they log on and review that website.

The Chairman said that concluded his report.  He asked Commissioner Gernert if he would like to make his report to the Commission. 

Commissioner Gernert said he brought copies of the brochure for the Commission’s review, and he also brought additional brochures for the commissioners to use during speaking presentations.  (Copy attached to file copy of these minutes).

He said they ordered the initial three thousand copies, and he noticed that the statement, “Please Vote on Election Day, and the date” had not been included when setting up the brochure for printing, but he would have that statement and the date added to the brochure before it was distributed to the general public. 

He said since the Commission’s last meeting he had vacillated between bidding the brochure out to an agency.  He said he talked to several different media representatives about the placement for newspaper ads and potential, and it appeared to him that the Commission could set up a relatively simple placement schedule and perhaps use a college intern to help do the details and be able to save some money in terms of the investment that the Commission makes in the program.  He said he would suggest that the Commission consider doing something of that nature.  

He said he would like to add that he reviewed the Commission’s new website that afternoon, and he asked the Chairman how long it had been on line?

The Chairman answered it had been done that day. 

Commissioner Gernert said in his opinion, there was sort of a mixed blessing there because he was a huge advocate of a consistent look, and it was his feeling if one was going to do something everything should be the same.  He said the graphics that were on the website were stunning, and it was a great rendition of the County with the quill and the inkwell, and it was his feeling that whatever the Commission chose to use it should be consistent on the ultimate printing of the brochure. 

He said he also visited the portion of the website where the proposals and rational were listed, and the rational on the website differed significantly from what was used in the brochure.  It was his feeling that the Commission should present to the public a consistent message.  It was his suggestion that the Commission bid out a campaign for the elements, which they outlined.   He said with Chairman Costello working on the website and he working on the brochure, and with one working within the “Sunshine Law”, one couldn’t pick up the phone and discuss those things, and because of this one ended up with two different products. 

He said he would like to propose that the Commission bid the producing of those brochures out to an agency, and determine which agency the Commission was most comfortable using at the Commission’s August meeting.  He said he would suggest the Chairman interface with that agency for the product that they produce so there was a consistent message. 

The Chairman said he would like to respond to Commissioner Gernert’s comments regarding the website.  He said it was impossible to include all of the information that was on the website in the brochure in terms of the rational. 

He said for example, one item that was included in the rational for the salaries was the average salary of the Charter County Commission, and it was approximately $58,000, which was not included in the brochure, and it added some insight to that rational. 

He said he agreed with Commissioner Gernert in that the information provided on the website and the brochure should be coordinated, but he was not sure that the depth of information which was provided on the website would fit into a brochure.

Commissioner Lindsey said it was his feeling that the brochure should be complimentary and not contradictory. 

Commissioner Gernert said he agreed, and he was not arguing that point, but it was his feeling that the Commission needed to take a hard look at the information, which was in the brochure because if it was going to be placed in the hands of electors that voted in the two, three, or four most recent elections, and the Commission had information regarding what the average salaries in charter counties were he thought that information needed to be in the brochure that was going out to the public. 

The Chairman asked Commissioner Gernert if there was anything that was in the rational that was inconsistent with what was in the brochure?

Commissioner Gernert said he didn’t think the information was inconsistent, but what he thought, was the rational provided in the brochure was sterile, and it didn’t offer any kind of in depth analysis, like that which was provided on the website. 

The Chairman asked what Commissioner Gernert was asking the Commission to approve? 

Commissioner Gernert said he didn’t think the Commission needed additional approval to bid it out to an agency, but what he was asking was if the Chairman was willing to coordinate the information which was provided on the website and on the brochure?

The Chairman asked Commissioner Gernert to explain what that meant?

Commissioner Gernert said once the product was assembled and whatever was going to be placed in the newspaper or the script for what was going to be presented on television that it would go through the Chairman’s eyes before going out.

The Chairman asked if that information could go through Commissioner Gernert’s eyes as well, because it was his feeling that Commissioner Gernert’s eyes were better educated in terms of those things. 

Commissioner Stoer asked in the ads couldn’t they add the sentence, “For more detailed information and rational to go to the Charter’s website”? 

Commissioner Gernert said they could certainly add that, but the problem would be that many frequent voters wouldn’t have access to the Internet.

Commissioner Hunt said in the last election a large percentage of the super voters did not have computer access.

Commissioner Gernert said that was what concerned him.  He said it was great to put the more in depth rational on the website, but it was his feeling that the people that the brochure was being mailed to would miss out on that information.  He said there were ways that a four-paneled brochure could be designed or a larger one, which folded open if necessary. 

He said he wanted the logos to be consistent down to the smallest detail, and didn’t want a hodgepodge affair that didn’t present the information consistently, and in his opinion, it was not professional and wasn’t something he thought that Commission deserved after its many months of hard work. 

Commissioner Hunt said she agreed it needed to be consistent because there would be a lot of information for the voters to take in, and it should be as clear as possible to avoid confusion. 

Commissioner Dukes said he agreed if the correct verbiage wasn’t used it could be confusing. 

The Chairman asked if there were further comments or questions? 

The Chairman said, as he understood the County’s rules regarding the bidding out of jobs, if the cost was less than $1,000 there was no need for estimates. 

Commissioner Gernert said he thought that was correct, but what they would be bidding out would be the package for the agency to coordinate all of the things they hadn’t and some of those items didn’t have costs, for example, meetings with editorial boards, but the package that they were going to invest in could perhaps be in the neighborhood of $50,000, and that would have to be bid out, and they would also have to advertise at the same time to existing agencies if they were going to place a news release in the newspaper because there were people that had small shops that may not be known to them that should at least have the opportunity to respond. 

Commissioner McLaughlin asked if a list of individuals to whom that would be bid out to was available?

Commissioner Gernert answered that he did not have a list with him that evening, but what he had intended to do was use the list from the telephone directory under advertising agencies, because items of that nature required someone with experience in that area.

He said he would estimate that there were maybe five companies in Polk County. 

The Chairman asked Commissioner Gernert if he needed the County Attorney’s help on that matter?

Commissioner Gernert said he would make sure that the County Attorney’s office saw whatever was going to be sent out, so that it met the letter of the law, and that would probably be done during the latter part of that week. 

The Chairman said that he would like to go back to his report.  He said regarding the meeting in August, he took it that there was not a lot of fervor to meet in August. 

Commissioner Stoer asked what item needed the Commission’s approval in August, and couldn’t wait until September?

Commissioner Gernert said the only thing that might be needed was the retention of an agency.  He said perhaps since thirty days notice more than likely would need to be given for a response time that date would come very close to the Commission’s next scheduled meeting, and his suggestion was once the bids were in, Cynthia could distribute them to everyone with the Commission’s recommendations and instructions to get back in touch with the Commission, and perhaps that decision could be made without holding a meeting. 

The Chairman said that was against the Commission’s rules. 

Commissioner Gernert said in that event, the next best thing would be to have a meeting the first week of September, and the development time then would be impacted. 

The Chairman asked if Commissioner Gernert could be ready for a meeting the second Tuesday in August?

Commissioner Gernert said he needed to check with the County Attorney to see what the time requirement was, and if they could do it in less than thirty days they could be ready.

Commissioner McLaughlin asked if the Commission was going to ask the committee to bring the Commission three recommendations, and have those three appear similarly to what was done with the law firm selection or would that committee come up with a recommendation and present it to the Commission?

Commissioner Gernert said that a legitimate agency would not bring concepts for them to look at, and literally what they would be telling them was to use a certain look and apply it to the materials, and he didn’t think there would be any need for a presentation.

The Chairman said he didn’t think that the Commission could delegate to Commissioner Gernert to make the final approval, because the Commission had to do that even though they made the recommendation. 

Commissioner Lindsey asked why the committee couldn’t make that recommendation?

The Chairman said he didn’t think that the committee could make the decision because of the amount of the expenditure. 

The Chairman said the Commission gave him the authority to hire Kingham to do the website, and the cost of that was less than $800.

The Chairman asked should the Commission keep their scheduled meeting for August 13^th? 

The Commission agreed that they should keep their scheduled meeting in August. 

The Chairman asked if there was any unfinished business?

Commissioner Strang said he had a question with regards to the advertisement campaign.  He said he understood the referendum regarding the School Superintendent was scheduled to be on the September 10^th ballot, and he asked was that correct?

Commissioner Hunt answered that was correct. 

Commissioner Strang asked should they differentiate between the November election and the one in September?  He said the brochure said 2002 ballot, but it didn’t say anything about November versus September.   He asked should they observe that distinction to avoid confusing the electorate?

The Chairman said the date of the election was noted on the website. 

Commissioner Gernert said one option might be to get a stamp that said November ballot issue and place it across the top or something if they wanted to use it. 

Commissioner Strang said he was only raising the question, because things were going to be very crowded and confused.

The Chairman said there was a group that was considering instead of attacking each one of the proposed amendments that they didn’t like to simply do a campaign urging voters to vote “no” on everything. 

Commissioner Strang asked did the Chairman agree that if the ballot was busy and cluttered up that people tended to do that?

The Chairman answered that was right. 

Commissioner Gernert said one other thing he wanted to mention to the Commission was on July 30^th in Winter Haven the Winter Haven Chamber was going to have a political rally at the Dome, and all of the candidates had been invited, and they were inviting the School Superintendent folks and the Charter Commission to have a booth there.  He said there was a cost, which was $75, and he felt someone needed to represent the Charter Commission at that function. 

He said there was also a pig roast in Haines City on August 18^th, and Lakeland would have Politics in the Park on October 3^rd.  He said all three of those events were big community events, and he felt someone from the Commission should be there to represent them.

The Chairman said having been at all of those events in the past he worried about the Commission “dirtying their hands”.  He said they might look on the Commission as just another group of politicians.

Commissioner McLaughlin said one thing that might be helpful was he knew the chambers would have the electronic booths at those events, and he said he thought they could put their issues on there and on the straw ballot. 

Commissioner Strang asked could they?

Commissioner McLaughlin said he was assuming they could as they were written on the ballot. 

Commissioner Gernert answered, “yes” they could.   He said the ballot was quite lengthy and from what he was told the candidates and then the participant would be given the option to answer other issue questions, and things like Elected Superintendent and then each of the ballot issues could be on there, and that just depended upon how lengthy the ballot became. 

The Chairman asked if Commissioner Gernert would give him the dates of those events again?

Commissioner Gernert complied with the Chairman’s request. 

The Chairman said he would participate only if he had support from some of the other members of the Commission.  He said for instance in Lakeland perhaps the members who were from Lakeland would man the booth and distribute literature. 

He said he thought that they should do things slightly different than the candidates, perhaps more modestly. 

Commissioner Hunt made the suggestion that they shouldn’t wear buttons, shirts, or hats associated with campaigning, but that they simply hand out brochures or place them on a table and stand there for questions. 

Commissioner Gernert said the Winter Haven Chamber would not put the Charter Commission in the mix of the candidates they would have an area where the issues were. 

Commissioner Stoer said she would be glad to hand out brochures.

The Chairman thanked Commissioner Stoer for her willingness to help. 

Commissioner Hunt said she would come for the Chamber and Haines City events.

The Chairman asked if there were any other events besides those three?

Commissioner Gernert answered he didn’t think so. 

The Chairman asked if the Chamber was going to charge the Commission for the event even though it was a non-profit organization? 

Commissioner Gernert answered they had to. 

The Chairman said he understood the cost of the July 30^th event was $75, and he asked what the cost was of the other events?

Commissioner Gernert answered the Lakeland event was $60, and one had to bring their own table and chairs, and that there were requirements.  He said he thought he had those requirements at his office. 

The Chairman said he would check with him later regarding those requirements. 

The Chairman asked Commissioner Strang which event he wanted to attend? 

Commissioner Strang said he would consider going wherever the Chairman sent him. 

The Chairman thanked Commissioner Strang for his willingness to help.

The Chairman asked if there was further unfinished business?  There was none.

The Chairman asked if there were any remarks from interested citizens?  There were none.

The Chairman said without further objection, the Commission would stand adjourned until the second Tuesday in August.  There were no objections.  The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cynthia Swearengin