CHARTER REVIEW BOARD JUNE 22, 2000 **NOTIFICATION: **This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the following **meeting. It should be used for informational purposes only. **This document has not been edited; therefore, there may be **additions, deletions, or words that did not translate. >>JAN SMITH: GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING, JUNE 22nd OF THE YEAR 2000. WE HOPE YOU WILL STAY TUNED AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU WILL CONTACT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. THE NUMBERS AND THE FAX LINES AND THE E-MAILS WILL BE FAXED OVER THE TELEVISION SET DURING THE EVENING. MR. BALLARD, WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >>JAN SMITH: MS. WEST, MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? [ROLL CALL] >>RECORDING SECRETARY: YOU HAVE A QUORUM. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A LETTER FROM MR. BEDKE SAYING THAT HE WILL NOT BE HERE THIS EVENING. HE HAD MADE OTHER PLANS FOR THIS EVENING PRIOR TO BEING APPOINTED TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. MEMBERS, WE HAVE SETS OF MINUTES FROM TWO MEETINGS, I BELIEVE. THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 25th MEETING. DID WE ALREADY DO THAT? NO. THAT WAS THE APRIL ONE THAT WAS MESSED UP. OKAY. WE HAVE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 25th, 2000, MEETING, AND THE JUNE 1st MEETING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. LET'S DO THE MAY 25th FIRST. IS -- ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THIS? >> SO MOVED. >>JAN SMITH: MOTION BY MR. LaBOUR AND SECOND BY MR. WHITE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 25th, 2000. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. [MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY] AND THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 1st, ARE THERE ANY AMENDMENTS, CORRECTIONS, ADDITIONS TO THOSE MINUTES? >> SO MOVED. >>GERALD WHITE: THERE WAS ONE. >>JAN SMITH: OKAY, MR. WHITE, IF YOU WANT TO POINT IT OUT. >>GERALD WHITE: IN OUR DISCUSSION ON THE AUDIT, I TRIED TO MAKE A MOTION. IT SAYS, HE MADE A MOTION. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. THAT MOTION WAS NEVER RECOGNIZED BECAUSE THERE WAS A MOTION ALREADY ON THE FLOOR. >>JAN SMITH: WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO -- >>GERALD WHITE: THE CHAIR DIDN'T RECOGNIZE THAT MOTION. >>JAN SMITH: I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. WE OUGHT TO REVIEW THE TAPE AND MAKE SURE THAT'S CORRECT AND WE'LL CHECK THESE AGAIN. WE'LL CONSIDER THESE MINUTES AT THE NEXT MEETING. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, OTHER THAN THAT, WE CAN APPROVE THE MINUTES, IF WE CAN CORRECT THAT. >>JAN SMITH: I THINK WE OUGHT TO VERIFY -- WE CAN VERIFY IT FROM A VERBATIM TAPE. I'M SURE YOU'RE CORRECT, BUT JUST SO THAT WE HAVE THE MINUTES CORRECT FOR THE MEETING ONCE THEY'RE APPROVED, IF THE BOARD IS IN AGREEMENT, WE'LL JUST HOLD THESE TILL THE NEXT MEETING AND VERIFY THAT. AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE, MS. WEST, I GUESS YOU'LL HAVE SOMEONE CHECK INTO THAT FOR US. THANK YOU, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THEY'LL CONTACT YOU, MR. WHITE. WE'LL BEGIN THE MEETING AS USUAL WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. AND I KNOW ONE OF THE PERSONS HERE THAT WANTED TO COME AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AND SPEAK IS ALSO HERE TO ADD SOME INFORMATION THAT HE HAD REGARDING SOME CONCERNS THAT WE RAISED AT A MEETING WHEN HE SPOKE TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD BEFORE. SO IN ORDER TO ALLOW COUNTY STAFF PERSON AN EARLY OUT, MR. HUNZEKER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS? >>ED HUNZEKER: THANK YOU. ED HUNZEKER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. I VISITED YOU LAST A WHILE BACK, AND I'VE BEEN OWING YOU A REPORT. AND WITHIN THE HOUR, I FINISHED IT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THAT REPORT WITH YOU. I HAVE 14 OF THEM HERE. NEVER ONE TO FORGET. IF YOU NEED MORE, I'LL GET BACK TO A COPY MACHINE BY TOMORROW. THE FOLLOW-UP REPORT IDENTIFIES FIVE ITEMS THAT I DISCUSSED WITH YOU LAST TIME. SOME OF THE ITEMS I COULDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS TO, AND I TOLD YOU I WOULD GET BACK TO YOU. WE'VE BEEN A LITTLE BUSY AROUND HERE WITH THE BUDGET, SO I AM LATE WITH DELIVERING THIS TO YOU. BUT IT'S ALL HERE. IT DISCUSSES THE ISSUES OF THE BUDGET AND TRANSFERS AND RESERVES. IT DISCUSSES THE COMBINING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT FUNCTIONS. IT TALKS ABOUT THE DEBT ISSUES. THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS. CITIZEN INPUT ON THE BUDGET PROCESS, AND LAST, SOME INFORMATION ABOUT TAX RATES AND SOME ATTACHMENTS RELATIVE TO THE TAX RATES. AND THEN WHEN I WAS FINISHING THIS UP, I THOUGHT I COULD HELP BY PROVIDING YOU A REPORT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS COUNTY AUDITOR DISCUSSION. AND SO I PROVIDED A SEPARATE REPORT ON THE COUNTY AUDITOR PROPOSAL. BUT LET ME SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT YOU'LL SEE AT THE END OF MY FIRST MEMO THAT MY RECOMMENDATION IS IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, YOU DON'T NEED AN AUDITOR. THAT IS MY RECOMMENDATION. THAT'S MY PERSONAL RECOMMENDATION. I THINK I SAID TO YOU BEFORE, AND I'VE SAID TO OTHERS, IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHERE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION WORKS FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS -- AND IS STAFFED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN OTHER FORMS OF GOVERNMENT WHERE WE HAVE A SEPARATION OF POWERS, WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION OR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS INDEPENDENTLY ELECTED AND IS, THEREFORE, INDEPENDENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I WAS THE COUNTY AUDITOR FOR FOUR YEARS IN THAT FORM OF GOVERNMENT. I WORKED IN THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. WE PROVIDED SERVICE TO THE BOARD TO BE A CHECK AND BALANCE AGAINST AN INDEPENDENT EXECUTIVE BRANCH. IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE, STAFF TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. IT'S AN ADDITIONAL EXPENSE I THINK WE WOULD INCUR WITHOUT MUCH MERIT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT INDEPENDENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SERVE THEM AND THEM ALONE. SO THAT'S MY INITIAL RECOMMENDATION OR THAT WAS MY THOUGHTS AND MY OPINION ON THIS ISSUE. HOWEVER, IF YOU AGREE TO DISAGREE WITH ME, THEN I PROVIDE YOU OPTIONS IN THIS REPORT FOR HOW YOU MIGHT WANT TO ADDRESS THAT AUDIT FUNCTION. AND I GIVE YOU THAT FOR YOUR READING PLEASURE. I PROVIDE YOU THREE OPTIONS. AND IF WHEN YOU GET INTO YOUR DELIBERATIONS AT SOME POINT IN TIME ON THAT ISSUE, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO READ THE REPORT AND INVITE ME BACK, I'LL COME BACK. IF YOU WANT TO READ THE REPORT AND NOT INVITE ME BACK, THAT'S OKAY TOO. BUT I HAD BEEN IN THAT BUSINESS FOR A WHILE AND THOUGHT SOME INSIGHTS MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >>JAN SMITH: ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE ONE QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR. BECAUSE I'M AT THE CROSSROADS ON THIS ISSUE. ON ONE SIDE, WE'VE HAD TESTIMONY FROM THE ELECTED OFFICIALS REQUESTING AN EARLIER ROLE IN THE PROCESS. AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, I'VE HAD SOME CITIZENS SAY, WELL, WE DON'T NEED THIS AUDIT POSITION. THEY FEEL AS THOUGH THE SYSTEM WE HAVE IN PLACE IS WORKING JUST FINE. SITTING HERE ON THIS BOARD AND NOW WE HAVE THIS PROPOSAL OF AN AUDIT POSITION TO DEAL WITH, I NEED SOME HELP TO REACH AN EQUILIBRIUM, IF YOU WILL, IN MY HEART ON THIS ISSUE, A BALANCE TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. ON THE ONE HAND I HAVE CITIZENS; ON THE OTHER HAND I HAVE OFFICIALS ASKING FOR MORE ACCOUNTABILITY. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT? >>ED HUNZEKER: WHEN YOU STARTED ABOUT THE EARLIER INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROCESS, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS, IF THAT'S THE QUESTION, WELL, THE BUDGET PROCESS IS DIFFERENT THAN THE AUDIT FUNCTION. THE AUDIT FUNCTION IS, AS I DESCRIBE IN THE REPORT, THERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUDITS. AND YOU ALL CAN WRESTLE WITH THOSE FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUDITS. THE BUDGET IS SOMETHING WHOLLY DIFFERENT. AND AS I DESCRIBED TO YOU IN MY LAST VISIT, WE PROVIDE THE BOARD THE BUDGET 45 DAYS EARLIER THAN WE'RE REQUIRED TO BY LAW. AND IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT PROCESS AND HAVE US START THE BUDGET A HUNDRED DAYS EARLIER OR 200 DAYS EARLIER, WE CAN DO THAT TOO. SO IT'S NOT REQUIRED FOR ANY CHARTER CHANGE TO DO THAT. IF THE BUDGET PROCESS IS OF CONCERN TO THE BOARD, WE JUST START EARLIER, AND WE CAN DO THAT WITHOUT A CHARTER CHANGE. WE CAN DO THAT WITHOUT AN AUDITOR. THE AUDIT FUNCTION IS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT, AT LEAST IN MY MIND FROM THE BUDGET FUNCTION. >>GERALD WHITE: MY LAST THOUGHT, MADAM CHAIR. OTHER COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WITH THIS AUDIT POSITION HAVE COME BACK AND BROUGHT SAVINGS, FINANCIAL SAVINGS TO THE COUNTY, THEIR PARTICULAR COUNTY. THAT'S THE ARGUMENT SOME ARE MAKING WHY WE SHOULD HAVE SUCH A POSITION. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT? >>ED HUNZEKER: WELL, WE ALREADY HAVE THE FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUDITS GOING ON IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND IF THOSE AUDITS ARE DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING WE ARE ALSO GETTING SAVINGS. THE QUESTION IS, I GUESS, PERHAPS, WOULD WE GET MORE SAVINGS WITH A DIFFERENT KIND OF AUDIT FUNCTION BECAUSE WE CURRENTLY DO THE FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUDITS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. >>JAN SMITH: MS. TUTTLE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: HI, THERE. WHEN YOU WERE AN AUDITOR IN A GOVERNMENT BEFORE AND REPORTED TO THE BOARD, WHAT SIZE GOVERNMENT WAS IT? MID-SIZE, LARGE LIKE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OR SMALL? >>ED HUNZEKER: OH, IT WAS A LARGE COUNTY. IT HAD A POPULATION A LITTLE OVER A MILLION. THIS IS BACK IN THE EARLY '70s. I SUSPECT THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER BY NOW. THERE WAS FULL RANGE OF SERVICES, BUT IT WAS TRULY A MUCH MORE CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT. ONLY NINE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE COUNTY. SEVEN MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL, THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, AND THE ELECTED COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. AND THAT'S THE WAY THE COUNTY WAS RUN. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: WHAT SIZE STAFF DID YOU HAVE TO RUN THIS? >>ED HUNZEKER: FOUR PEOPLE -- FOUR IN ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT, FIVE PEOPLE IN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: FIVE PEOPLE. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: FIRST OF ALL, YOU SAID PERFORMANCE AUDITS ARE DONE TODAY. >>ED HUNZEKER: YES. >>STEVE LaBOUR: WHO DOES THOSE AND HOW ARE THEY GENERATED? >>ED HUNZEKER: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AWARDS THE CONTRACTS. THEY HAVE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE. AND THE AUDIT COMMITTEE ARE THE ONES THAT REVIEW AND EVALUATE THE SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT THE AUDITOR WILL PERFORM. THEN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES GOES TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND THEY OKAY THEM. AND THEN THE RFP, IS PUT OUT FOR THE AUDIT FIRMS TO RESPOND. WHEN THE RESPONSES COME BACK IN, THE BOARD AWARDS THE ULTIMATE CONTRACT. AND THEN THE BOARD RECEIVES THE ULTIMATE REPORT BACK FROM THE EXTERNAL AUDITORS. THAT'S FOR AUDITS DONE UNDER THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' DEPARTMENTS UNDER THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. NOW BACK TO -- TIME FLIES -- FOUR, FIVE YEARS AGO, THE LEGISLATURE DICTATED EIGHT OTHER PERFORMANCE AUDITS TO BE DONE. FOUR OF ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND FOUR OF INDEPENDENT AUTHORITIES. I REFERENCE THEM IN THE REPORT ALSO. I THINK -- AND I GET IN TROUBLE WHEN I DO THIS OCCASIONALLY -- IS THAT THE LEGISLATURE IN THIS LAST SESSION HAS ELIMINATED THAT REQUIREMENT. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THAT'S CORRECT. >>ED HUNZEKER: BUT ORIGINALLY, THEY WERE -- THE ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE EPC, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, AND A NEW -- LET ME CHEAT -- AND CIVIL SERVICE. AND THE FOUR INDEPENDENT -- THAT MEANS THEY HAVE THEIR OWN FUNDING AND INDEPENDENT OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -- WAS THE PORT AUTHORITY, THE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY, THE SPORTS AUTHORITY, AND THE AVIATION AUTHORITY. I THINK THEY ALL WENT THROUGH ONE CYCLE, AND EACH HAD ONE AUDIT DONE. AND THEN -- IF THE LEGISLATURE ELIMINATED THAT REQUIREMENT. BUT AS I REFERENCE IN HERE, PERFORMANCE AUDITS I THINK PEOPLE PERCEIVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE ONEROUS THAN MANAGEMENT REVIEWS. GENERALLY, IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, A CEO WILL HAVE A PERFORMANCE REVIEW OR MANAGEMENT REVIEW, OR PERFORMANCE AUDITS, BUT THEY ARE UNDER THE DIRECTION MORE OFTEN OF THE CEO TO HELP IMPROVE THE OPERATIONS OF THE ORGANIZATION. THEY ARE NOT PERCEIVED AS THREATENING; THEY ARE PERCEIVED AS ALLOWING MANAGEMENT TO BRING SOMEBODY IN WITH A CLEAN SET OF EYES TO LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING TO SEE IF WE NEED TO TINKER WITH OUR POLICIES OR PROCEDURES TO STREAMLINE THE PLACE AND BE MORE EFFICIENT AND HOPEFULLY MORE EFFECTIVE AT THE SAME TIME. YOU NEVER WANT ONE OF THOSE AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER. YOU CAN ALWAYS FIGURE OUT HOW TO BE MORE EFFICIENT. BUT IF YOU'RE NOT EFFECTIVELY SERVING YOUR CUSTOMERS, YOU MIGHT SUFFER. YOU LOOK AT BOTH OF THOSE EQUATIONS BUT IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR HAVE THOSE UNDER THE CEO. PERFORMANCE AUDITS OR MANAGEMENT REVIEWS ARE A HELPFUL WAY OF IMPROVING THE OPERATION, BUT THEY ARE BEING DONE TODAY. SO YOU CAN TAKE THAT WHEREVER YOU WANT TO GO WITH IT. BUT WE HAVE THEM. I THINK WE'VE BEEN THROUGH ABOUT 80% OF THE DEPARTMENTS UNDER THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. AND I KNOW, AS I SAID, THOSE EIGHT ORGANIZATIONS HAVE EACH HAD ONE ALSO. >>DENISE LASHER: THIS LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WAS THERE NOT SOME CHANGE IN OUR LOCAL RULES REGARDING AUDITS OF THESE OUTSIDE AGENCIES? PERFORMANCE AUDITS? >>ED HUNZEKER: I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST DISCUSSING. THOSE EIGHT ORGANIZATIONS, I THINK THE LEGISLATURE ELIMINATED THE REQUIREMENT FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE AUDITS. THEY CAN STILL HAVE THEM, BUT IT ELIMINATED THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT. >>DENISE LASHER: WOULD THIS PROPOSED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AUDITOR, WOULD YOU THINK THERE WOULD BE ANY ROLE FOR THIS PERSON THEN? COULD WE WORD IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THOSE AUDITS? >>ED HUNZEKER: I HAVE IN MY RECOMMENDATION SECTION UNDER TWO OF THE THREE OPTIONS THAT YOU VEST IN THE AUDITOR THE ABILITY TO AUDIT ANYONE AND EVERYONE FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND IT DEPENDS ON WHICH OF THE OPTIONS YOU TAKE, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE KEY THINGS IS YOU WOULD WANT EVERYBODY FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME AUDITING STANDARDS AND THE SAME FREQUENCY FOR AUDITS. >>DENISE LASHER: I BELIEVE IN BROWARD COUNTY THEY DO HAVE SUCH A POSITION. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT? >>ED HUNZEKER: NOPE. >>DENISE LASHER: OKAY. >>ED HUNZEKER: I CAN FIND OUT ABOUT IT. >>DENISE LASHER: THEY DO HAVE AN AUDITOR THAT WORKS UNDER THE COMMISSION. IN ADDITION TO COUNTY STAFF THAT DO -- THAT ARE IN THEIR BUDGET OFFICE. >>ED HUNZEKER: YES. >>DENISE LASHER: THAT MAY BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT THE ROLE IS FOR THAT PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL IN BROWARD COUNTY. RIGHT NOW, THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER URBAN COUNTY THAT I'M AWARE OF IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT HAS SUCH A POSITION. >>ED HUNZEKER: YOU MIGHT WANT TO INVITE THAT AUDITOR UP HERE AND TALK TO YOU. >>DENISE LASHER: I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT IN OUR BUDGET. BUT WE COULD CERTAINLY FIND OUT THROUGH THEIR CHARTER IF IT SPECIFIES WHAT THEIR EXACT RESPONSIBILITIES ARE. >>ED HUNZEKER: YEAH. I CAN LOOK THAT UP OR BARBARA AND I COULD LOOK THAT UP. BECAUSE YOU CAN LOOK IN THE CHARTER. I ARTICULATE IN MY PAPERS SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS -- >>STEVE LaBOUR: WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, MADAM CHAIRMAN. >>JAN SMITH: I ASKED MS. MERRITT TO PROVIDE THAT AND IT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKETS. SHE WAS GOING TO PROVIDE WHICH COUNTIES HAVE IT. WHAT THE STAFF IS, WHAT THE BUDGET IS, ET CETERA, AND SO THAT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKET. >>DENISE LASHER: OKAY. >>JAN SMITH: SHE RESPONDS VERY QUICKLY TO REQUESTS, LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY. I ASK FOR SOMETHING, I GET IT. >>DENISE LASHER: I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS THAT FINANCIAL AUDITS ARE DONE ON AN ANNUALLY BASIS, RIGHT? >>ED HUNZEKER: CORRECT. >>DENISE LASHER: BUT PERFORMANCE AUDITS, THAT'S UP TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE PERFORMANCE AUDITS DONE OF THE -- LIKE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, THINGS LIKE THAT? >>ED HUNZEKER: THERE'S NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT FOR A PERFORMANCE AUDIT TO BE DONE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS BY ANYBODY INDEPENDENT OF THEM. THEY CAN DO THEIR OWN. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION A FEW YEARS BACK ABOUT ONE FOR THE SHERIFF, BUT I DON'T THINK ONE WAS EVER CONDUCTED. >>DENISE LASHER: DO YOU KNOW HAS, LIKE, THE CLERK'S OFFICE OR SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS HAD PERFORMANCE AUDITS RECENTLY? >>ED HUNZEKER: I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY. >>DENISE LASHER: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> THEY ARE CALLED ELECTIONS. [LAUGHTER] >>JAN SMITH: YEAH. MR. HUNZEKER, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION, THE WAY THE WORDING OF THE FIRST PROPOSAL WE HAD IS A COUNTY AUDITOR THAT ADVISES THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ASSIST THE BOARD IN CONDUCTING CONTINUING STUDIES IN THE OPERATION OF COUNTY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES. FROM EXPERIENCE I HAVE HAD WITH AUDITING, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO TRY TO EXPLAIN TO ME AND TO THIS BOARD HOW A BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IF THE AUDITOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO THEM, OTHER THAN THE BOARD TURNING IT BACK TO STAFF AND ASKING STAFF TO MANAGE IT, HOW THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONSTRUED AS IT IS TODAY, COULD HAVE -- WOULD IT BE THE CHAIRMAN AND WOULD THE CHAIRMAN BE THE PERSON THAT MET WITH THE AUDITOR AS THE AUDITOR -- THERE'S AN AUDIT PROCESS OF A PROGRAM LAID OUT, SOMEBODY WORKING WITH THE PERSON THAT HAS REQUESTED THE AUDIT. THERE'S MIDRANGE REVIEWS, THERE'S A TIME FOR FACILITY. THIS WOULD NOT BE THE CASE HERE. BUT THERE'S TIME TO REVIEW A PROPOSED AUDIT, A DRAFT TO SAY THAT, IN FACT, THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE SOMETHING WAS CORRECT OR MAYBE IT IS CORRECT OR MAYBE THERE NEEDS TO BE CHANGES OR MAYBE THEY HAVE OUTDATED INFORMATION OR WHATEVER. AND THEN AFTER THAT DRAFT IS WRITTEN, THEN IT'S RE-PRESENTED TO WHOEVER IS VIEWING IT AND THEN THERE'S A FINAL DRAFT THAT IS APPROVED. AND I'M WONDERING HOW, IF THIS WERE UNDER THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IN YOUR OPINION, THIS WOULD BE STRUCTURED AND WHO ON THE BOARD WOULD HAVE THAT ROLE. >>ED HUNZEKER: IN THIS STATE WITH A SUNSHINE REQUIREMENT, YOU COULDN'T HAVE TWO COMMISSIONERS MEET WITH THEIR AUDITOR WITHOUT SOME PUBLIC NOTICE AND THEN A PUBLIC MEETING. WELL, I REFERENCE IN HERE AT ONE POINT IN TIME, THAT THERE OUGHT TO BE, PERHAPS, AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MADE UP OF COMMISSIONERS AND CITIZENS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS WORKING ACCORDING TO HOYLE AND THAT NO POLITICS GETS INVOLVED IN THE AUDIT PROCESS. THAT'S ONE THING I DON'T THINK PEOPLE LOOK AT TOO OFTEN, BUT THIS IS A POLITICAL ARENA, AND YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POLITICS STAYS OUT OF THE AUDITS AND THAT WE DON'T GET CAUGHT UP IN THAT BUSINESS DOWN THE ROAD. AND I BRING THAT THROUGH IN THE REPORT. YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS OF HOW IT MIGHT WORK IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, I'M NOT SO SURE HOW IT WOULD WORK. I'D HAVE TO THINK THAT ONE THROUGH WITH AN OPEN MEETING AND REVIEWING DRAFT REPORTS. AND IF THE DRAFT REPORT HAS SOMETHING IN ERROR IN IT BUT IT IS NOW SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND THEN THE MEDIA PICK IT UP AND REPRESENTING TO THE CITIZENS THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG OR AFOUL AND THEN FIND OUT LATER THAT IT WAS AN ERROR IN ASSUMPTIONS ON THE AUDIT SIDE, IT JUST GETS DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH IT IN THAT ARENA. >>JAN SMITH: WHICH YOU'RE SPEAKING TO IT IN THAT CASE, IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKELY ASK THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION TO MANAGE IT OR THE AUDIT SHOULD COME FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS THE CEO IN THE FORM OF MANAGEMENT. >>ED HUNZEKER: WELL, THAT'S KIND OF THE WAY WE DO THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS NOW. >>JAN SMITH: EXCEPT THAT THEY'RE HIRED THROUGH A BID PROCESS AS OPPOSED TO BEING A STAFF. >>ED HUNZEKER: BUT THERE IS A PROCESS WE GO THROUGH. WHEN I WAS AN AUDITOR, YOU NEVER WANT TO GET AN AUDIT REPORT OUT THERE THAT IS -- MIGHT HAVE AN ERROR IN IT. I MEAN, I ALWAYS THOUGHT WHEN I PICKED UP THE NEWSPAPER IN THE MORNING AND IT STARTED OFF WITH THE AUDITOR IS UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNETHICAL AND ILL-TRAINED THAT I HAD A GOOD AUDIT BECAUSE THAT MEANT THEY COULDN'T PICK ON THE FINDINGS, THEY HAD TO PICK ON THE FINDER. IF THEY START OUT WITH THE AUDITOR MISSED THIS AND THIS AND THIS, I WAS A LITTLE MORE TROUBLED BY THAT. SO AUDITORS NEVER WANT TO GET OUGHT CAUGHT UP WITH A REPORT GOING PUBLIC THAT THEY MAY HAVE AN ERROR IN. THEY ALWAYS WANT TO VISIT WITH THE AUDITEE TO SEE IF THEY HAVE THE FACTS LAID OUT CORRECTLY AND THAT THE FINDINGS ARE CORRECT AND THAT THEIR RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS ARE LEGAL, VALID, AND BINDING. THAT'S JUST THE NORMAL PROCESS OF AN AUDIT, EVEN THOSE CONDUCTED BY THE INDEPENDENT AUDITORS THAT WE RETAIN, THEY ALWAYS WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T GET CAUGHT IN AN ERROR IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HURLEY. >>DAVID HURLEY: THE DRAFT REPORTS THAT THE HIRED AUDITORS DO BECOME PUBLIC RECORD BECAUSE I'M ON THE CAC AND WE GET THOSE ALL THE TIME. I KNOW IF THEY'RE MAILED TO ME BY EDITH STEWART, THAT'S PUBLIC RECORD. THAT DRAFT REPORT THING, I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW THAT BECAUSE THEY -- THE DRAFT REPORTS HAPPEN ALL THE TIME AND THEY ARE ALL PUBLIC RECORD. >>ED HUNZEKER: YEP. WE HAVE IN THE AUDITS CONDUCTED BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THEY ARE NOT A PUBLIC RECORD, WHERE WE REVIEW THOSE, WE GO OVER THE FINDINGS WITH THE AUDITORS. WE RESPOND WE THEM AND THEN THEY GO PUBLIC. AND IT'S IN THE RULES FOR THOSE AUDITS THAT THAT THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE IS AT A LATER DATE AFTER THE INITIAL REVIEW. NOT THAT ANYBODY CHANGES THE FINDING, THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE FACTS ARE CORRECT. AND I SUGGEST THAT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE EXTERNAL AUDITORS THAT DO THE FINANCIAL AUDITS, AND THEY DO THEIR MANAGEMENT REVIEW LETTERS THAT THEY GO OVER THEM WITH THE PARTIES INVOLVED TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE IT CORRECT BEFORE THEY PUBLISH IT. >>TERRY BALLARD: YES, SIR. (MIKE NOT ON). >>ED HUNZEKER: I DON'T THINK THE MICROPHONE IS ON. >>TERRY BALLARD: ON THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO IMPLEMENT ALL THE REPORTS OR, I MEAN, THE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND SOMEBODY HAS SET DOWN AND SAY THIS IS A GOOD ONE. THIS WILL COST US MORE THAN WHAT WE'LL SAVE OR HOW DOES THAT WORK NOW? >>ED HUNZEKER: THE WAY IT WORKS NOW ON THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT SIDE, ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS COME TO THE BOARD AND THERE'S A RESPONSE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. THAT ALSO WORKS FOR THE COMPLIANCE AUDITS AND THE CASH AUDITS THAT THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOES. WHEN THEY COME TO THE BOARD, THEY HAVE THE RESPONSES IN THERE. AND IN SOME CASES, WE'VE BEEN KNOWN TO DISAGREE WITH A FINDING. AND I KNOW IN MY BACKGROUND THAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE DISAGREEMENT AT SOME POINT IN TIME AS YOU STATE, THERE ARE GOING TO BE AUDIT FINDINGS THAT ON THE SURFACE SOUND GOOD, AND THEN YOU REALIZE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO COST MORE TO IMPLEMENT THAN THE SAVINGS THAT COULD OCCUR FROM THAT FINDING. AND YOU JUST AGREE TO DISAGREE. AND THAT'S EVENTUALLY LEFT UP TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF THEY DON'T LIKE THE ANSWER, THEY'LL TELL US TO GO DO IT ANYWAY. AND THE AUDITORS ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY WE HEARD THE RESPONSE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION AND WE CONTINUE TO DISAGREE. WE THINK IT OUGHT TO BE DONE. BUT THAT'S GOOD PEOPLE WITH GOOD INTENTIONS WILL HAVE DISAGREEMENTS. BUTT BOARD -- BUT THE BOARD WILL ULTIMATELY DETERMINE WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT SOMETHING OR NOT. >>TERRY BALLARD: OKAY. THAT PRETTY WELL ANSWERS IT. ANOTHER THING, I KNOW THIS IS ON TAXWATCH, THERE ARE SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HADN'T BEEN IMPLEMENTED THE WAY I UNDERSTAND ON THAT, BUT THAT WAS NOT A PERFORMANCE AUDIT. BUT ON THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT WHERE THEY, YOU KNOW, REVIEW IT AND LOOK AT IT AND SOMEBODY HAS TO WORK THAT OUT. THE WAY WE HAVE IT NOW IS THAT THE WAY I READ THIS DRAFT THAT'S BEFORE US RIGHT NOW IS THAT THEY CAN -- THE PERFORMANCE AUDITOR CAN STILL HIRE OUTSIDE RESOURCES RATHER THAN BUILD A DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER HE CAN -- THEY CAN OPERATE WITH A FEW AND THEN THEY MAY WANT TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AT THAT POINT. AND THEY STILL DO THAT. BUT HE WOULD BE THE ONE TO SEE OR LOOK AT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IT. >>ED HUNZEKER: CORRECT. >>TERRY BALLARD: AND WORK WITH THE ADMINISTRATION ON WHAT POINTS THEY CAN -- YOU KNOW, THAT HE COULD RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION. >>ED HUNZEKER: AS I STATE IN MY PAPER, THAT'S ALREADY BEING DONE TODAY. YOU'D JUST BE TRANSFERRING THE RESPONSIBILITY FROM ONE PERSON IN THE ADMINISTRATION THAT MANAGES THE DAY-TO-DAY PAPERWORK TO AN OFFICE UNDER THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT. BUT IT'S BEING DONE TODAY, JUST TRANSFER THE RESPONSIBILITY. >>TERRY BALLARD: OKAY. I HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO READ YOUR REPORT. I JUST GOT IT TONIGHT BUT I WILL. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, IS IT POSSIBLE HE COULD WALK US THROUGH THE PORTION OF THE REPORT THAT DEALS WITH THE AUDIT. >>JAN SMITH: DO YOU HAVE TIME, MR. HUNZEKER, TO DO THAT? WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO THROUGH IT WITH THE BOARD? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION LATER ON IN THE EVENING. >>ED HUNZEKER: I CAN CERTAINLY, IF IT'S YOUR PLEASURE, TAKE YOU THROUGH THE REPORT. >>JAN SMITH: BOARD MEMBER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THAT? THAT SEEMS TO BE A CONSENSUS, MR. HUNZEKER. SHALL WE GIVE YOU ANOTHER THREE MINUTES? >>ED HUNZEKER: UNDER THE HEADING OF ATTACHMENT B IN THE BACK OF THE REPORT IS DOCUMENT TITLED COUNTY AUDITOR CHARTER REVIEW BOARD FY 2000. THE FIRST PART OF THE REPORT I START OFF WITH IS THERE'S REALLY FOUR TYPES OF AUDITS THAT ARE DONE. THE FIRST IS A FINANCIAL AUDIT. A FINANCIAL AUDIT IS THAT OUTSIDE EXTERNAL AUDITORS THAT WILL AUDIT THE BOOKS AND RECORDS OF THE COUNTY. TO DO THAT, THEY AUDIT THE VARIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, AS I INDICATED HERE. AND THEN THEY PROTO SAY WHAT IS REFERRED -- PRODUCE WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS A CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE C.A.F.R. AND THAT USUALLY COMES OUT SIX OR SEVEN MONTHS AFTER THE FISCAL YEAR AFTER THEY AUDITED ALL THE DIFFERENT SETS OF BOOKS. AND THAT'S BEING DONE TODAY. AND THAT COMMITTEE IS MADE UP OF -- THE COMMITTEE THAT SELECTS THAT AUDIT FIRM IS MADE UP OF ALL THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS IN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION AND IS A JOINT RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO AWARD THAT CONTRACT. THAT CONTRACT TODAY IS FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD. AND THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WHEN UP, THE FIRM THAT DID THE AUDITS CANNOT BE REAPPOINTED FOR ANOTHER FIVE YEARS. SO WE HAVE A ROTATION WITH THE BIG ACCOUNTING FIRMS. AND NORMALLY, IT HAS TO BE ONE OF THE LARGE ACCOUNTING FIRMS BECAUSE THE SIZE OF THE COUNTY IS SUCH THAT A SMALL ACCOUNTING FIRM CAN'T DO ALL THESE AUDITS AND GET IT ALL COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME FRAME REQUIRED. SO THAT'S THE FINANCIAL AUDIT. THEN THERE ARE CASH AUDITS AND THOSE ARE DONE BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT. THEY AUDIT THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE CLERK'S OPERATION FOR THOSE DEPARTMENTS RECEIVING CASH TO MAKE SURE IT'S ALL APPROPRIATELY ACCOUNTED FOR AND ALL THE RECORDS ARE KEPT ACCORDING WITH THE GOOD, SOLID PROCEDURES. THE THIRD TYPE OF AUDIT IS A COMPLIANCE AUDIT. THOSE ARE ALSO DONE BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DEPARTMENTS AS WELL AS THE CLERK'S OWN DEPARTMENTS. THOSE REPORTS MAKE SURE THAT THE DEPARTMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY REGULATORY OR STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OUT THERE OR ANY GRANT OR AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. THE FOURTH TYPE OF AUDIT IS THIS PERFORMANCE AUDIT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. AND I DON'T THINK I NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT. THEN I COULD GIVE YOU -- OFFER YOU OPTIONS FOR THE COUNTY AUDITOR. BUT THEN BEFORE I START ON THAT, I GIVE YOU SOME PRINCIPLES THAT I THINK WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO YOU THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER IN ADOPTING A PROPOSAL LIKE THIS. FIRST, THE AUDIT FUNCTION SHOULD REDUCE THE COST OF AUDITING TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. SECOND, ANY SUGGESTION NEEDS TO IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE AUDITS, BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY BEING DONE. SO WHAT YOU WOULD BE PROPOSING IS SOMETHING THAT IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE AUDITS. THIRD, YOU WANT TO IMPROVE THE COORDINATION OF THE VARIOUS AUDITS OR THEIR IMPACT ON ORGANIZATIONS BEING AUDITED. THE FOURTH ITEM IS DECREASE THE DEPENDENCE -- EXCUSE ME, INCREASE THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE AUDIT OFFICE, IF THAT'S ONE OF YOUR GOALS IS TO INCREASE THAT INDEPENDENCE. THE FIFTH ITEM IS ASSURE THAT ALL ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT TO EQUAL AUDITING STANDARDS AND FREQUENCY. AND THE LAST ITEM IS ASSURE THAT THE AUDIT PROCESS IS NOT USED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. THOSE ARE ITEMS THAT I OFFER TO YOU FOR CONSIDERATION IN DEVELOPING THIS AUDIT PROPOSAL. SO THEN THE FIRST OPTION I GIVE YOU IS CREATE THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR REPORTING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PROVIDING THE OFFICE WITH THE ABILITY TO AUDIT ANY AND ALL ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED WHOLLY OR IN PART BY THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE COULD REPORT TO A COMMITTEE REFERRED TO AS THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MADE UP OF COMMISSIONERS AND PERHAPS CITIZENS APPOINTED BY THE COMMISSION AND REPRESENTATIVE OF AGENCIES FUNDED BY THE BOARD. THIS COMMITTEE WOULD REVIEW THE AUDITOR'S ANNUAL WORK PLAN, BUDGET REQUESTS, STAFFING, AS WELL AS THE AUDITS PREPARED BY THE OFFICE. THE COMMITTEE WOULD ALSO ASSURE THAT NO POLITICAL INFLUENCE WAS EXERTED OVER THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR BECAUSE IT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE DYNAMICS IN GOVERNMENT ARE DIFFERENT THAN PRIVATE BUSINESS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE FIRE UNION WANTED TO GET THE FIRE CHIEF DISMISSED AND THE UNION IS SUCCESSFUL IN ELECTING A COUNTY COMMISSIONER WHO IS COMMITTED TO DELIVERING ON A CAMPAIGN PROMISE, THE COMMISSIONER SHOULD FOR THE BE ABLE TO USE THE AUDIT OFFICE TO DISCREDIT THE FIRE CHIEF FOR POLITICAL REASONS. I JUST RECITE THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS AREA TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POLITICS IS KEPT OUT OF THE OFFICE. AND BY MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, I KNOW THAT HAS A TENDENCY TO CREEP IN. THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE WOULD BE CHARGED WITH MANAGING ALL FOUR TYPES OF AUDITS DESCRIBED ABOVE. THE AUDITOR AND HIS OR HER STAFF WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, "A," SELECTING THE EXTERNAL AUDIT FIRM. "B," CONDUCTING CASH AND COMPLIANCE AUDITS OF ALL ORGANIZATIONS FUNDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. INCLUDING THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND AGENCIES. "C," SELECTION OF THE OUTSIDE PROFESSIONALS TO ASSIST THE OFFICE IN CONDUCTING QUALITY PERFORMANCE AUDITS OF THE VARIETY OF PROGRAMS FUNDED UNDER THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN ORDER TO ASSURE QUALITY EXPERTS ARE AVAILABLE IN EACH FIELD. THE AUDITOR WOULD BE CHARGED WITH PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OUTLINED IN THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS AND IN ADDITION, THE OFFICE WOULD BE PROVIDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBPOENA RECORDS WHEN AND IF IT NEEDED THEM. THE CREDENTIALS OF THE INDIVIDUAL SELECTED FOR THE OFFICE SHOULD INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, THE HOLDING OF A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT'S LICENSE, AS WELL AS FIVE OR MORE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN PERFORMING INDEPENDENT AUDITS. THIS WOULD REDUCE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY INDIVIDUALS SEEKING POLITICAL OFFICE FROM USING THIS OFFICE AS A STEPPING-STONE. OPTION 2: NOT QUITE AS BROAD AS OPTION 1, WHICH WOULD BE TRANSFER THE AUDIT RESPONSIBILITIES FOR COMPLIANCE AND CASH AUDITS FROM THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT TO THE NEWLY CREATED POSITION OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE AUDITOR TO REVIEW THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AS WELL AS THE OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, OUTSIDE BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND AGENCIES FUNDED BY THE BOARD. THIS OPTION WOULD THEN LEAD THE SELECTION TO THE EXISTING COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AND CONTINUE TO SELECT PERFORMANCE AUDITORS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS UNDER REVIEW. THIS OPTION SHOULD ALSO PROVIDE FOR THE SAME QUALIFICATIONS OF THE AUDITOR BACK TO THAT QUESTION OF THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS, IT'S MY OPINION, AGAIN, THAT THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS OUGHT TO BE LEFT UP TO THE CEO OF EACH OF THE ORGANIZATIONS. IF DAN KLEMAN WANTS A PERFORMANCE AUDIT ON THE DOG POUND, DAN KLEMAN OUGHT TO WORK WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE DOG POUND OR ANIMAL SERVICES TO GO OUT AND GET SOMEBODY TO COME IN AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO CATCH DOGS BETTER, CATS, WHATEVER. IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTED A PERFORMANCE AUDIT, THE DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OUGHT TO WORK TO GO GET ONE. AND IT'S THE SAME AS THE SHERIFF OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO GO GET A PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. THEY ARE THERE TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE. THEY ARE NOT THERE FOR, IN MY MIND, ANY OTHER REASON THAN TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE IN THEIR BEST MANAGED BY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO GET AUDITED. THAT'S MY OPINION. THE THIRD OPTION, I WOULD OFFER YOU, WHICH IS, IN FACT, A STATUS QUO, CURRENTLY, THE FINANCIAL AUDITS ARE BEING DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE LAW AND GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, CASH AND COMPLIANCE AUDITS ARE PERFORMED ON ORGANIZATION TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CLERK'S FUNCTIONS. PERFORMANCE AUDITS HAVE BEEN PERFORMED ON OVER 75% OF THE COUNTY DEPARTMENTS. AND, THUS, THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL STAFF AND EXPENSE OF AN AUDIT OFFICE SHOULD BE QUESTIONED AS TO THE VALUE ADDED BY THE OFFICE. MY CONCLUSION IS, THERE ARE NO DOUBT VARIATIONS ON THESE OPTIONS; HOWEVER, IF ONE ACCEPTS THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT I GAVE YOU EARLIER, THE DECISIONS REGARDING THE COUNTY AUDITOR, WILL BE WELL-FOUNDED. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HUNZEKER, BASED ON WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, I WOULD SAY LIKE TO ASK YOU JUST A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. THE FIRST ONE IS YOU TALK ABOUT THE AUDITOR SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OUTLINED BY THE AICPA, THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, AND THE QUALIFICATIONS THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED. WHICH I WOULD ASSUME MEANS YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS, NUMBER ONE, FOR AN AUDIT. BUT NUMBER TWO, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT IN THIS PROPOSED AUDITOR THAT -- THIS PROPOSED CHARTER CHANGE THAT WE HAVE SAYS, A CPA WITH THREE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE. BUT A CPA COULD BE A PERSON THAT'S COMPLETED THEIR FIVE YEARS OF SCHOOL, TAKEN THE EXAM AND WORKED THREE YEARS AT ERNST & YOUNG DOING INDIVIDUAL TAX RETURNS AND HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING. AND THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING AND PRIVATE CORPORATION, INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTING. AND WOULD YOU SUGGEST THAT THAT BE PART OF A REQUIREMENT, THAT IT BE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING AS OPPOSED TO -- AND YOU'VE SAID FIVE YEARS, WHEREAS I THINK WE'RE CONSIDERING THREE. >>ED HUNZEKER: YES, BUT I SUGGEST I HAVEN'T READ THE PROPOSAL THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. >>JAN SMITH: BUT I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO BE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING AND NOT JUST A CPA BECAUSE PEOPLE -- >>ED HUNZEKER: IT IS FOR THOSE THAT PRACTICE ON BOTH SIDES, THEY ARE MARKEDLY DIFFERENT. >>JAN SMITH: OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? GO BACK TO THE AUDITS THAT WERE RECENTLY DONE. THERE MUST HAVE BEEN SOME EXPECTATIONS OF THE BOARD WHEN -- YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY DID SOME OF THE AUDITS THAT THEY DID THAT WERE NOT REQUIRED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE OF SOME OF THE OTHER AGENCIES. AND WHAT KIND OF EXPECTATIONS DID THE BOARD HAVE AND THEN WHAT WERE THE RESULTS? BECAUSE THE AUDITS THAT I LOOKED AT, IT APPEARED TO ME THAT IN ALMOST EVERY AUDIT, THERE WAS NEVER -- WELL, NOT FREQUENTLY DID THEY RECOMMEND COST SAVINGS. MOST FREQUENTLY, THEY RECOMMENDED THE GOVERNMENT SPEND MORE MONEY TO MAKE THIS AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT OR SOMETHING MORE EFFECTIVE AND TO DO SOMETHING THAT THEY WEREN'T DOING. SO THAT I DON'T RECALL THAT THEY RECOMMENDED NOT DOING THINGS. >>ED HUNZEKER: ERIC JOHNSON OF THE BUDGET OFFICE DID AN ANALYSIS FOR ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS. AND I GUESS I COULD SEND THAT REPORT TO YOU. I THOUGHT I MIGHT HAVE IT WITH ME, ABOUT THE BENEFITS TO THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS WHERE THERE WAS SOME REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WE HAD SAVED. HIS ANALYSIS CONCLUDED SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF THE FOLLOWING. WE'VE SPENT I THINK 1.5, 1.6 MILLION DOLLARS ON THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS FOR THOSE DEPARTMENTS UNDER THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, ABOUT A MILLION FIVE, MILLION SIX. AS A RESULT OF THOSE AUDITS, WE'VE SPENT ROUGHLY $5 MILLION TO IMPLEMENT THE FINDINGS. AND THE SAVINGS THAT WE'VE DOCUMENTED AS REAL SAVINGS WHERE YOU CAN GO TO A LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET AND SAY THAT NUMBER IS SMALLER THAN IT USED TO BE, IS ROUGHLY 600,000, 700,000. THE AUDITS HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL, BUT THE REPRESENTATION AT THE FRONT END THAT TAXPAYERS WOULD GARNER LARGE SAVINGS FROM THIS JUST HASN'T HAPPENED TO DATE, AND THAT'S OUR OPINION ON THIS BUSINESS. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. THE AUDITORS CAME IN AND THEY AUDITED -- THEY DID A PERFORMANCE AUDIT ON THE LIBRARY. AND THEY WERE VERY COMPLIMENTARY ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE WERE AUTOMATING THE LIBRARY FUNCTION, PUTTING IN COMPUTERS IN ALL OF OUR LIBRARIES. BUT THEY SUGGESTED THAT THOSE COMPUTERS WOULD BE MUCH MORE BENEFICIAL IF WE SENT ALL THE LIBRARIANS TO COMPUTER TRAINING SCHOOL. BECAUSE THEY WOULD HELP THE PUBLIC BETTER IF THEY KNEW HOW TO USE THE THINGS. AND SO WE DID. WE MADE SURE THAT ALL THE LIBRARIANS GOT ADDITIONAL TRAINING. WELL, THAT DIDN'T SAVE US ANY MONEY, BUT THAT MADE THE PROGRAM MUCH MORE MEANINGFUL TO THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND THAT'S -- YOU CAN TAKE IT THROUGH EACH OF THE AUDITS THAT WE DID, AND MOST OF THEM SAID WE OUGHT TO SPEND SOME MONEY IN ORDER TO MAKE IT MORE EFFECTIVE AND MORE EFFICIENT. AND THEN AGAIN, WE DIDN'T AGREE WITH EVERY ONE OF THE FINDINGS. AND THERE'S A LIST OF THOSE. I THINK WE DO A SEMIANNUAL REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON THE STATUS OF EVERY ONE OF THOSE AUDITS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE SINCE 1995 AS TO WHICH ONE -- HOW MANY OF THE FINDINGS IN EACH AUDITS WE'VE IMPLEMENTED, HOW MANY ARE STILL TO BE IMPLEMENTED, AND HOW MANY WE JUST AGREE TO DISAGREE ON. BUT THAT REPORT GOES TO THE BOARD, I THINK, SEMIANNUALLY. >>JAN SMITH: WOULD YOU GET THE REPORT FROM MR. JOHNSON AND GIVE A COPY OF IT TO BARBARA SO SHE CAN PASS IT OUT TO THE BOARD? >>ED HUNZEKER: SURE. >>JAN SMITH: AND WE THANK YOU FOR COMING THIS EVENING AND FOR GIVING US MORE INFORMATION TO HELP US MAKE OUR DECISIONS. >>ED HUNZEKER: TRYING TO HELP. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, BEFORE -- I HAVE ONE LAST THOUGHT. I'M TRYING TO GET IT SETTLED IN HERE. THE OPTIONS THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN US, THE CREATION OF THIS AUDIT POSITION, IF WE MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION VERSUS WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE NOW IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD TO ASK IS THE SYSTEM BROKE? IS SOMETHING BROKE? IS SOMETHING WRONG? CAN SOMETHING BE IMPROVED? AND IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AUDIT POSITION AND I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVEN'T READ THE PROPOSAL THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD HAS PUT OUT, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO REMOVE THE CURIOSITY OF PROBLEMS WITHIN COUNTY GOVERNMENT BASED ON OUR PROPOSAL, BASED ON YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS? DO YOU SEE SOMEWHERE THAT THERE'S AN IMPROVEMENT THAT CAN BE MADE OUTSIDE OF CREATING THIS AUDIT POSITION? >>ED HUNZEKER: LET ME SUGGEST TO YOU THAT THERE'S ALWAYS IMPROVEMENTS TO ANY ORGANIZATION AT ANY POINT IN TIME. THERE ALWAYS CAN HAVE SOME IMPROVEMENTS. I THINK MY POINT WOULD BE, WE HAVE ALL FOUR TYPES OF AUDITS BEING DONE TODAY. I DON'T THINK IT'S BROKEN. I THINK THE CONSTITUTIONALS HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO PERFORMANCE AUDITS ON THEIR OPERATIONS, AND I ENDORSE THE CEOs OF EACH ORGANIZATION HAVING THAT OPPORTUNITY. I THINK THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR WOULD INCREASE THE EXPENSE TO THE TAXPAYERS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO FUND THAT OFFICE WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING BENEFIT OF EQUAL MAGNITUDE COMING BACK TO THE TAXPAYERS. AND I'M SURE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WOULD DISAGREE WITH ME, BUT THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION HAVING BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR 35 YEARS. AGAIN, MY RECOMMENDATION IS, IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION IS THE STAFF TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS NOT INDEPENDENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SERVES THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND, THUS, A NEED FOR AN AUDITOR IS AN UNNECESSARY EXPENSE. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. I OFFER THAT TO YOU. AS I SAID, IF YOU CHOOSE TO DISA -- DISAGREE WITH ME, I JUST GIVE YOU THOSE OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AS TO HOW TO PROCEED WITH HAVING AN AUDITOR'S OFFICE. >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, AGAIN, MR. HUNZEKER. IF YOU WANT TO STICK AROUND FOR THE DISCUSSION AT THE NEXT HALF OF THE MEETING, FEEL FREE. >>ED HUNZEKER: THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: IF YOU WANT TO GO HOME, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD PLAN TOO. WE'RE GOING TO -- SINCE THAT WAS THE CITIZEN COMMENT THAT WE SORT OF GOT CARRIED AWAY WITH, I WOULD LIKE TO GET BACK WITH CITIZEN COMMENTS. AND THE FIRST ONE IS BEN EASON. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS KIND OF FITS IN WITH WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING TONIGHT. WHAT YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO. I'M HERE WITH LOUISE THOMPSON, WHO IS A FRIEND OF MINE AND WE SERVED ON A NUMBER OF BOARDS TOGETHER. AND I JUST WANTED TO RAISE AN ISSUE, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE STRUGGLING WITH SOME STRUCTURAL ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY, THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT. A FEW YEARS AGO -- I WANT TO TELL YOU A LITTLE STORY ABOUT KIND OF OUR EXPERIENCES FROM IT. BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR LUIS AND I WAS TALKING ABOUT IT, WE FELT LIKE IT WAS IMPORTANT TO RAISE THESE ISSUES. JUST BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF CITIZENS GO THROUGH THIS. AND I THINK THE EXPERIENCES THAT WE'VE HAD IN DEALING WITH TWO GOVERNMENTS ARE ENOUGH TO DRIVE ANYBODY UP THE WALL. AND I THINK IF WE WEREN'T PERSISTENT ABOUT DOING THIS, THEN -- BUT LET ME EXPLAIN TO YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE SITUATION THAT WE'VE BEEN AT. WE WERE ASKED A FEW YEARS AGO, ABOUT 3.5 YEARS AGO, THE PUBLIC ACCESS TELEVISION STATION WAS CONTEMPLATING BEING CLOSED BY TIME WARNER, THE CITY, THE COUNTY, AND THEY WERE LOOKING FOR BOTH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY WANTED TO KEEP IT OPEN AND WERE LOOKING FOR A CITIZENS GROUP TO DO THAT. AND SO A BUNCH OF US SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IMPORTANT. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE A FREE-SPEECH OUTLET. AND WE HAVE THE SKILLS, WE THINK, TO DO THIS. AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. SO WE GOT TOGETHER -- BY THE WAY, I'M NOT TALKING -- I'M SPEAKING AS A CITIZEN THAT HAPPENS TO BE ON THIS BOARD, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD. SO WE GOT TOGETHER AND SAID, YEAH, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD THING. AND SO WE PURSUED IT. THE CITY, THE COUNTY, ASKED US TO PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL, WITH I WE DID. AND WENT THROUGH A COUPLE OF PROCESSES, WHICH WE DID. AND EVERYBODY GOT CONFIDENCE. TIME WARNER GOT CONFIDENCE THAT WE COULD DO THAT. WE'VE BEEN HELD UP A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THE CITY HAS BEEN NEGOTIATING WITH TIME WARNER FOR A CABLE CONTRACT FOR ITS SUBSCRIBERS IN GENERAL. AND THE COUNTY'S GETTING READY TO GO THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS. AND WE UNDERSTOOD THAT, BUT -- SO WE -- WE SAT DOWN. THE CITY HAD ONE SET OF DEALS GOING WITH TIME WARNER. THE COUNTY HAD ANOTHER. THE CITY'S CONTRACT WAS BETTER THAN THE COUNTY'S. AND SO THERE WAS -- A LITTLE BIT THERE. TIME WARNER HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE INCENTIVE MAYBE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY THAN THE COUNTY. IN ANY CASE, WE FINALLY, AFTER A LOT OF SORT OF PAIN AND AGONY, GOT OUR CITY CONTRACT TOGETHER. AND WE HAD ASKED EARLY ON WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY AND THE COUNTY STAFFS WOULD AGREE TO SIT DOWN WITH US AND NEGOTIATE TOGETHER TO GET THE TWO STAFFS TOGETHER SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF APPEALING TO THE POLITICIANS AND CITY, THEN APPEALING TO THE PROCESS OF POLITICIANS IN THE COUNTY. THE TWO STAFFS WERE NOT SEEING EYE TO EYE. SO WE COULDN'T -- WE COULDN'T GET THAT DONE. OKAY, FINE. SO WE GO TO -- WE GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS WITH THE CITY. WORK IT OUT. ULTIMATELY, WHENEVER WE HIT SOME LITTLE BUMPS ALONG THE ROAD, MAYOR GRECO WAS ABLE TO SORT OF INTERVENE AND GET IT TOGETHER. THESE ARE ALL, BY THE WAY, VOLUNTEER CITIZENS TAKING TIME OUT OF OUR DAY TO GO IN AND DO THIS AND TO GET THIS GOING, BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN IT. AND SO FINALLY GET IT GOING. LIKE I SAY, THIS TOOK ABOUT THREE YEARS TO GET THIS DONE. AND THAT'S ENOUGH THAT I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HAVE SENT ANY CITIZEN HOME, I THINK. FINALLY GET IT THROUGH BACK IN FEBRUARY. AND WE WERE LED TO BELIEVE ON THE COUNTY SIDE THAT IT WAS A FAIRLY SIMPLE PROCESS OF A COUPLE OF SHEETS OF PAPER FROM TIME WARNER, RELINQUISHING THE STATION TO US IN THE EVENT THAT WE FAIL TO PERFORM, THAT TIME WARNER WOULD STEP UP TO THE PLATE. WELL, OKAY, THAT SEEMS REASONABLE. WE HAD COME BEFORE THE COUNTY COMMISSION BACK IN THE FALL AND ASKED FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE FUNDING. WE ASKED FOR $300,000 WORTH OF FUNDING, AND IT WAS AT ABOUT 120,000. THE COUNTY COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THAT, GAVE US OUR FUNDING. AGAIN, TWO PIECES OF PAPER, WE'RE READY TO GO. WE GET DOWN AFTER THE CITY'S CONTRACT IS DONE, WE'RE READY TO GO. AND NOW THE WHOLE PROCESS STARTS AGAIN WITH THE COUNTY. AND WE REALIZED THAT THE MONEY HAS NOT BEEN SPENT BECAUSE OF THIS DURATION OF CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY. SO THE MONEY IS SITTING AROUND A POT IN THE COUNTY THAT NO DOUBT WAS SITTING THERE RIPE FOR SOMEBODY HE WILL TO COME IN AND TAKE. GO THROUGH A LOT OF INTERNAL STRUGGLES WITH THE COUNTY, WHICH HAS LED US TO COME TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION ON TWO OCCASIONS TO TRY TO GET -- TO TRY TO GET THE PROCESS RESOLVED. THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO, WE WERE FAIRLY POLITICAL NOVICES IN THE SENSE WE THOUGHT YOU JUST SIGN UP YOU SIGN UP AND YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY, YOU COME IN AND MAKE IT HAPPEN. AT THE TIME, THE STAFFERS SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO BE POLITICALLY AWARE. YOU NEED TO GO TALK TO YOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. YOU NEED TO TALK TO YOUR CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE. YOU NEED LET PEOPLE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. SO WE SAID, OKAY, IF WE HAVE TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO DO THAT. WE'RE POLITICAL PROS NOW, I CAN TELL YOU. LIKE I SAY, WE HAD TO GO TO THE COUNTY TWICE. AND EACH TIME WE GO TO THE COUNTY, WE UPSET THE COUNTY STAFF WHO SLOW DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE AND WANT TO -- >>JAN SMITH: MR. EASON, EXCUSE ME A MINUTE, OUR TIMER ISN'T WORKING AND YOU'RE OVER YOUR FIVE MINUTES. BUT IF YOU CAN BRING TO CONCLUSION WHAT IT IS YOU'RE ASKING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. >> WE'RE JUST VERY FRUSTRATED. HAVING TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY. AND WE'RE VERY FRUSTRATED THAT WHEN DEALING WITH THE COUNTY THAT THERE'S NO WAY TO RESOLVE THIS STAFF COUNTY COMMISSION PROBLEM. WHICH IS THAT WHEN YOU GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS, YOU UPSET THE STAFF. WHEN YOU GO TO THE STAFF, THEY DON'T HAVE THE POWER OF THE COMMISSION TO GET IT DONE. IT WAS A LOT EASIER IN THE CITY TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY HAD -- YOU GET SOMEBODY LIKE GRECO THAT COULD GET SOME THINGS DONE. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS. I JUST WANTED YOU GUYS TO BE AWARE THAT THIS IS A MAJOR, MAJOR FRUSTRATION. AND TALK TO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND IF WE WERE NOT AWARE OF WHAT THE PROCESS IS AND WE WERE NOT TENACIOUS IN OUR BELIEF THAT WE CAN DO SOMETHING GOOD WITH THIS PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL, WE WOULD HAVE GONE AWAY. THERE'S NO WAY ANYBODY WOULD PUT UP WITH THIS STUFF. I MEAN, IT IS JUST NONSENSE. AND I KNOW THIS IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE STRUGGLING WITH. AND I WANTED TO GAVE YOU A STORY AND A FACE TO SOME OF THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH. SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. EASON. I SUSPECT MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY STAFF ARE, IN FACT, WATCHING THIS PROGRAM. SOME OF THEM ARE EVEN HERE, AND PERHAPS IT WILL INFLUENCE THEM TO GIVE YOU A CALL AND HELP RESOLVE THIS. >> WE'RE ON OUR WAY. I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. THANKS. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. THE NEXT PERSON WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS LOUISE THOMPSON. >> LOUISE THOMPSON. I'M REALLY HERE AS JUST A CITIZEN, ALTHOUGH I ALSO AM ON THIS SPEAKUP BOARD THAT'S HAD THIS EXPERIENCE WITH DEALING WITH THE COUNTY STAFF. I WANTED TO BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT OUR EXPERIENCE, BUT I'LL JUST TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE SEEN WHERE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE HEARD US LISTEN TO US, AND MADE DECISIONS. AND THE COUNTY STAFF DOESN'T FOLLOW WHAT INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN TO THEM BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE SEEN. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SAY, HERE, YOU CAN HAVE THIS MONEY. AND THE STAFF SAYS, WELL, JUMP THROUGH THIS HOOP. JUMP THROUGH THIS HOOP. JUMP THROUGH THAT HOOP, JUMP THROUGH ANOTHER. SO THERE'S SOME KIND OF LACK OF CONTROL THAT THE BOCC HAS OVER THE STAFF. AND AS WE ALL KNOW, THE PERSON WHO'S IN CONTROL OF THE MONEY IS IN CONTROL. AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER PLACED, IF THERE WAS SOME OVERSIGHT, GIVEN TO THE BOCC, WHETHER THAT'S AN INDEPENDENT PANEL OR AUDITOR OR SOMETHING, SO THAT THEY CAN SEE THAT SOME OF THE WISHES OF THE ELECTORATE WILL TAKE PLACE. SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT WHY I FEEL THIS WAY, BUT I CERTAINLY HAVE SEEN THE CONTROL NOT WHERE I EXPECTED IT TO BE IN MY ELECTED OFFICIALS. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THANK YOU, MS. THOMPSON, AND ALSO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TENACIOUSNESS, AND MR. EASON'S TENACIOUS, AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. I THINK YOU'LL DO A FINE JOB MANAGING THE STATION. LET ME JUST ASK A QUICK QUESTION. DOES YOUR FRUSTRATION COME WHEN YOU'RE SITTING DOWN ONE ON ONE WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, OR IS IT ACTUALLY THAT IT'S A VOTE TAKEN BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ACT UPON SOMETHING THAT YOU FIND THEN THAT BECOMES A BREAKDOWN AFTER THEY'VE EVEN VOTED ON IT? >> I'M NOT HAVING -- I DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH -- LET ME BE CLEAR. IT'S NOT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT SEEMED TO ME TO BE THE PROBLEM. I QUITE ENJOY THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SEVEN OF THEM. THEY HAVE ALL DIFFERENT OPINIONS. SOME OF THEM ARE NOT MINE, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THERE BE ARGUMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY -- I THINK ARGUMENT IS VERY GOOD FOR THE SOUL AND ALSO BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT IT REPRESENTS ALL THE DIFFERENT BODIES OF PEOPLE THAT THERE ARE IN THIS COMMUNITY. SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. WE MET WITH THEM INDIVIDUALLY. I DIDN'T MEET WITH EVERY ONE OF THEM. BUT SOME OF THE OTHER MEMBERS DID. SOME OF THE PEOPLE ON THE CABLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MET WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE PRESENTED A PLAN. THEY HEARD US. THEY ACTUALLY WERE VERY ATTENTIVE. THEY RESPONDED. THEY GAVE US WHAT WE WANTED. THEY SAID, OKAY, YOU MAY HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR YOU TO GO AND IMPROVE PUBLIC ACCESS OFFERINGS. WHAT I'M TELLING YOU IS THAT THE STAFF, COUNTY STAFF IS TRYING EVERYTHING IT CAN TO NOT MAKE IT HAPPEN, EVEN THOUGH THE COMMISSION CONTINUES TO THEY WILL THEM. AND I WENT AGAIN THE ANOTHER NIGHT AND SAID, THE STAFF IS STILL NOT GIVING US THE MONEY AND WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING PUBLIC ACCESS FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS FOR 79 DAYS RIGHT NOW. AND WE HAVE YET TO RECEIVE ANY OF THE MONEY PUT IN THE BUDGET FOR US. WHY IS THAT? SO THE COMMISSIONER -- COMMISSION ASKED THE COUNTY STAFF, WHY IS THAT? WELL, WE UNDERSTAND THIS AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT AND WE UNDERSTAND THE OTHER THING. AND I'VE KEPT SWITCHING WHAT WE NEED. THE FEELING THAT WE'VE HAD IS, TO GET THE MONEY THAT WE NEEDED TO TRY TO MAKE THESE IMPROVEMENTS WE HOPE AND DREAM THAT WE CAN MAKE -- I MEAN, WE NEED THE MONEY IN ORDER TO DO THAT. IT WAS GIVEN TO US. BUT WHAT WE HAD TO DO WAS GO OVER THE HEAD OF THE STAFF, THEY'RE IN CONTROL OF THE MONEY REALLY. SO WE HAD TO GO OVER THEIR HEAD AND GO TO OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS. THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S DEMOCRACY. WE WENT TO THEM. THEY LISTENED. THEY GAVE IT TO US. THE STAFF WON'T LET GO OF IT. SO I KNOW THAT YOU'RE ENTERTAINING SOME IDEAS ABOUT HAVING AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR OR SOME OTHER FUNCTION THAT WOULD REPORT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. AND I THINK THAT OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SHOULD LOVE THAT IDEA IF, INDEED, THEY ARE DOING THE BEST JOB THEY CAN. I LOVE TO BE REVIEWED WHEN I'M DOING A GOOD JOB. I WANT PEOPLE TO SEE THAT I WROTE THE BEST ARTICLE YOU'VE EVER SEEN. AND I WANT EVERY EDITOR IN TOWN TO COME AND LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, BOY, THAT'S A FINE PIECE OF WRITING, LOUISE, THAT'S A FINE BROCHURE. THAT'S A FINE PRESS RELEASE. SO I DON'T MIND WHEN I'M DOING MY JOB IN ANYBODY COMES AND CHECKS UP ON ME. >>JAN SMITH: MS. THOMPSON, YOUR FIVE MINUTES ARE UP. >> IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >>JAN SMITH: YES, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS? I THINK YOU ALL MADE YOUR POINTS WELL THIS EVENING AND I SUSPECT YOU'LL GET SOME REPERCUSSIONS FROM THIS EVENING. >> WE HOPE SO. >>JAN SMITH: WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE SCHEDULED TO TALK TO US ABOUT THIS -- THIS EVENING WAS TO BE THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY'S EVENING TO ADDRESS THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WITH ISSUES THAT THEY WANTED TO RAISE. SO THOSE PEOPLE THAT I HAVE ON MY LIST ARE STEVEN MIRES WITH THE CHAMBER, PARKER KEEN WITH THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY FARM BUREAU AND RALPH HUGHES WITH FECP. BUT WE -- SO IF YOU ARE NOT ANY OF THOSE THREE PEOPLE AND YOU ARE A CITIZEN THAT WANTS TO SPEAK NOW AND DON'T WANT TO SPEAK LATER, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND MAKE THE COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE THIS EVENING. AND, AGAIN, OUR TIMER IS NOT WORKING, SO MS. WEST AND I ARE WATCHING THE CLOCK. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? MARILYN, ARE YOU GOING TO COME AND TALK OR ARE YOU GOING TO RUN AROUND? >> GOOD EVENING, MARILYN SMITH, GRANDMOTHER AT LARGE. SEE THE NUMBERS DWINDLING. THIS USUALLY HAPPENS. FEWER AND FEWER TURN UP. ANYWAY, THOSE OF US THAT ENJOY GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE AND DEMOCRACY ARE HERE. AND YOU KNOW, YOU HAVEN'T HEARD THE LAST OF THE THING WITH THE PUBLIC ACCESS. LET ME GIVE YOU A THUMBNAIL SKETCH REAL QUICK. 1995, I HAD TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO MOVE MR. KLEMAN OFF THE DIME, TO GET PUBLIC ACCESS BACK ON THE AIR. HE TOOK IT OFF. AND IT'S BEEN A BATTLE SINCE, AND HE DOESN'T WANT IT, AND HE'LL FIND A WAY TO KEEP IT OFF BY STRANGLING THE MONEY AND NOT FOLLOWING THE RESOLUTIONS THAT THIS BOARD, THE ELECTED BOARD OF THIS COUNTY CLEARLY MADE TO HIM TWICE. ONCE ALMOST 13 MONTHS AGO AND THEN ON TUESDAY. ISN'T THAT FOLLOWING ORDERS? YOU DON'T THINK WE NEED SOMEBODY TO LOOK AT HIS PERFORMANCE? I SURELY DO. I'VE EXPERIENCED PLENTY OF HIS FAUX PAS, LET ME TELL YOU. MORE THAN ONCE. YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO LISTEN TO ALL OF THEM THAT HAVE HAPPENED. PERFORMANCE, HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. LET ME TELL YOU WHY, HE KEEPS GIVING PEOPLE RAISES WHO ARE POOR PERFORMANCE, VERY POOR PERFORMERS, WHO I WOULDN'T EVEN HIRE. IF I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY. NOW, WE DO NEED AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR. AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR. AND IT NEEDS TO BE PICKED ON QUALIFICATIONS. AND NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND IS GOING TO PICK SOMEBODY WITH NO QUALIFICATIONS OTHER THAN A CPA. THEY'LL LOOK AT THE BACKGROUND. ANYBODY THAT WANTS A JOB IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH A GOOD RESUME. AND IF THEY DON'T, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE APPLY FOR THINGS. YOU KNOW, JAN. JUST BECAUSE A KID WORKS FOR ERNST & YOUNG DOESN'T MEAN HE'S QUALIFIED, AND YEAH, HE DID PASS HIS CPA, DIDDLY-SQUAT. HE'S NOT EVEN QUALIFIED TO APPLY. WE ALL KNOW THAT. WE'RE GROWNUPS. DON'T ESCAPE THE ISSUE, PLEASE. I WANT TO ADDRESS MY FIRST QUESTION BACK FIRST OR SECOND MEETING REGARDING RESOLUTION 99-2. I ASKED WHY WE HAVE A PERFORMANCE BOND FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. IT WAS NOTHING MORE THAN AN EMPTY SHIRT. IT WAS PUT IN OUR CHARTER, NEVER INTENDED TO GO ANYWHERE. I WANT A LITTLE MORE ELUCIDATION ON THAT SUBJECT. THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM FOR PEOPLE TO DO A BETTER JOB. WE HAVE SOME -- BEAR IN MIND WE HAVE SOME WONDERFUL EMPLOYEES, AND I'M THE FIRST PERSON TO TELL YOU THAT. THE GOOD ONES ALWAYS COME UP TO ME AND SAY, HOW YOU DOING? THE ONES THAT AIN'T SO GOOD, THEY AVOID ME. I'D AVOID ME TOO BECAUSE THEY KNOW I'M GOING TO FIND OUT SOONER OR LATER, AND I WILL DO IT RIGHT OVER THE MICROPHONE TO THE BOARD. THERE ARE NO SECRETS. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN GOVERNMENT. YOU AND I OWN THIS BUILDING CONTRARY TO SOME DEPARTMENT BUILDING PEOPLE THINK THEY OWN IT AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE US RECORDS. TWICE THEY CALLED THE SECURITY ON ME TO AVOID GIVING US RECORDS. IS THAT FUNNY? THAT'S A RIOT. I SAID, HEY, I'M GOING TO BE THE RICHEST LADY DOWN HERE BECAUSE THAT'S FALSE ARREST. JUST BECAUSE I ASK FOR PUBLIC RECORDS. THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING. AND THE AUDITOR WOULD HAVE SEEN THIS GOING ON. THE ADMINISTRATOR ALLOWED THOSE VERY PEOPLE TO KEEP THEIR JOB AND HID THE EVIDENCE. YOU DON'T THINK WE NEED AN AUDITOR. I CAN ELUCIDATE TILL YOU GUYS FALL ASLEEP. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MS. SMITH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS PARKER KEENE. AND I'M ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY FARM BUREAU. I'M ALSO SERVING ON THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL. AND I WORK FOR CARGILL FERTILIZER. SO I GUESS IF THIS IS A BUSINESS AGRICULTURE FORUM, I'M IN THE RIGHT PLACE. >>JAN SMITH: WE HAVE AN ORDER FOR THE SPEAKERS THAT ARE HERE TO ADDRESS THAT. I WAS ASKING FOR CITIZENS THAT JUST COME AND MAKE COMMENTS. YOU'RE A SCHEDULED SPEAKER THIS EVENING. SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND WAITING JUST A MOMENT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO IS NOT A SCHEDULED SPEAKER WHO DOESN'T WANT TO SPEAK AT THE ENDS OF THE MEETING WHO WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD NOW? BEING NONE, WE WILL NOW MOVE INTO THE PART OF THE AGENDA THAT OUR GUEST SPEAKERS AND WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR, AND THE FIRST GUEST SPEAKER IS MR. STEVE MYERS WITH THE CHAMBER. AND I ASSUME MR. MYERS, THAT'S THE DOWNTOWN CHAMBER, THE ADDRESS IS 401 EAST JACKSON. >> CORRECT, MADAM CHAIR. IT'S THE GREATER TAMPA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD FOR ALLOWING THE TAMPA CHAMBER TO COME AND MAKE A STATEMENT BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. I'M NOT SURE TO OFFER ANY SAGE ADVICE. I WISH I WERE. BUT I THINK WHAT WE DID WANT TO DO WAS EXPRESS, FIRSTLY, THE INTEREST IN THE CHAMBER IN THE WORK OF THE BOARD. YOUR MISSION IS A CRITICAL ONE, BECAUSE EVERY FIVE YEARS, IT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO REVISIT ITS FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND LOOK AT WAYS TO MAKE IT BETTER. HAVING SAID THAT, WHAT I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO DO IS EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT THE GREATER TAMPA CHAMBER, WHICH IS THE LARGEST CHAMBER IN THE COUNTY, HAS OVER 2,000 MEMBERS, REPRESENTS CLOSE TO HALF OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES. IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WHAT WE ARE DOING -- >>JAN SMITH: YOU ARE NOT UNDER -- YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR 15 MINUTES. >> WELL, I WON'T EVEN TAKE THAT LONG. BUT I WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO TO FACILITATE THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE CHAMBER IN THE PROCESS. I THINK THE FIRST THING WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IS THE MISSION OF THIS BOARD. NOT ONLY AS OUTLINED IN THE PUBLICATION THAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE FOR VISITORS WHO COME TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU, BUT MORE BROADLY. AND ONCE WE UNDERSTAND THAT MISSION, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TO COMMUNICATE THAT MISSION AND THE ISSUES THAT YOU ARE SEEKING TO ADDRESS DURING THIS BOARD'S WORK TO OUR MEMBERS, WHICH IS NOT A SIMPLE PROCESS BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS WE HAVE. THIRDLY, AFTER WE COMMUNICATE YOUR MISSION AND THE ISSUES YOU'RE ADDRESSING, WE'RE GOING TO BE SOLICITING INPUT FROM THOSE MEMBERS. AND THAT'S THE WAY WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS BOARD WITH COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A TASK FORCE THAT'S ABLY CHAIRED BY RICK ECKERT, ATTORNEY WITH HOLLAND & KNIGHT, AND ASSIST WITH OTHER MEMBERS TO -- THEY'LL BE REVIEWING THE MINUTES. SOME FOLKS WILL BE COMING TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS AND LISTEN AND LEARN ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING TO HELP EDUCATE OUR MEMBERS. WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING IS SETTING UP SOME KIND OF A ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION WHERE WE WILL INVITE OUR MEMBERS TO ATTEND. INVITE YOU, MADAM CHAIR, OR OTHER MEMBERS FROM THE BOARD TO PRESENT ITEMS OF WORK THAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY CONSIDERING, INVITE SOMEONE FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE TO SIMILARLY MAKE A PRESENTATION. SOME OF OUR MEMBERS OF OUR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HAVE WATCHED THESE VERY PUBLIC ACCESS TV PROCEEDINGS OF THIS BOARD'S MEETINGS, INCLUDING MR. KLEMAN'S PRESENTATION TO YOU A NUMBER OF MEETINGS AGO. AND BASICALLY, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO AFTER WE KIND OF GET SOME INFORMATION OUT TO OUR MEMBERS IS COME BACK AND PRESENT ANY THOUGHTS THAT WE HAVE TO YOU IN LIGHT OF THE ISSUES YOU ARE CONSIDERING AND DELIBERATING, THINGS LIKE THE COUNTY AUDITOR AND ANY OTHERS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE IN MIND. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED AT OUR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TODAY WAS THE POSSIBILITY OF ACTUALLY HAVING A SURVEY GO OUT TO OUR MEMBERS OR AT LEAST THOSE WHO ATTEND THE ROUND TABLE WE PLAN ON SCHEDULING TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER. AND OUR HOPE WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD HAVE MAYBE THREE OR FOUR SPEAKERS AT THE ROUND TABLE WHO COULD BRING DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES TO THE ISSUE OF THE WORK OF THIS BOARD. SO WITH THAT, I JUST WANTED TO LEAVE YOU WITH SOME INDICATION THAT THE CHAMBER IS VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND HOW WE PLAN ON APPROACHING PROVIDING INPUT BACK TO YOU. AND I'M CERTAINLY AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >>JAN SMITH: MR. MYERS, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND BARBARA IS GOING TO DO JUST WHAT I ASKED HER TO DO. MENTAL TELEPATHY. WE HAVE CARDS THAT MEMBERS TAKE AROUND TO DIFFERENT GROUPS. IT HAS SOME QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT HELP NEW REACHING OUT TO YOUR MEMBERS. AND SO WE APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR US AS THE CHAMBER WATCHES AND LISTENS AND RESEARCHES THE ISSUES BEFORE THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IF YOU DID COME BACK AND GIVE US YOUR OPINION. YOU COULD EVEN CRITIQUE US, I SUSPECT. PERHAPS SOMETIME IN THE FALL, AS I ASSUME WE WILL STILL BE MEETING THEN, AND WHEN YOU ALL HAVE -- EVEN IF IT'S JUST ONE OR TWO THINGS ON THE AGENDA THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS, IF YOU WOULD LET MS. MERRITT KNOW, WE'D BE HAPPY TO FIND A TIME ON THE AGENDA FOR YOU. >> WE'D BE GLAD TO DO THAT. IN FACT, WE NOTICE WITH INTEREST THE SURVEY YOU ALL HAVE ON YOUR WEB SITE. SO SEVERAL OF US HAVE ALREADY LOOKED AT THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR, AND WE'LL PLAN TO COME BACK IN THE FALL AFTER WE'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU AND OUR MEMBERS A BIT FURTHER. >>JAN SMITH: ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MYERS? >>GERALD WHITE: I WANT TO CONVEY MY THOUGHTS AS A MEMBER OF THIS BOARD. MY GREATEST CONCERN SINCE BEING ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS DOING SOMETHING THE PUBLIC DO NOT WANT. TONIGHT, WE HAD THE ASSISTANT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COME FORWARD WITH CONCERNS RELATED TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR POSITION. AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO MAKE A MISTAKE. I WANT TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT. AND SO THE EARLIER AS POSSIBLE YOU ALL CAN GIVE US THOUGHTS, OPINIONS ON SOME OF THESE CRITICAL ISSUES THAT WE MAY BE ADDRESSING WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. >> MR. WILKES, I APPRECIATE THAT. WE REALIZE YOUR TIME IS LIMITED AND WE WANT TO BE AS HELPFUL AS WE CAN. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HURLEY, IF I MAY SAY, MR. WILKES IS THE GENTLEMAN TO HIS RIGHT. >> I APOLOGIZE. YOUR TAGS ARE OFF. >>JAN SMITH: WE'RE KIND OF CROWDED UP HERE. BUT THAT'S MR. WHITE. >> MR. WHITE, I APOLOGIZE. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HURLEY WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT. >>DAVID HURLEY: YOUNG WE CAN DO ANYTHING THE PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT, BECAUSE THE PUBLIC HAS TO RATIFY IT. WE CAN DO ANY A RADICAL THING WE WANT TO DO UP THERE AND THEY CAN THUMB THEIR NOSE AT IT NO MATTER WHAT WE THINK IT IS. I SEE IT AS A DIFFICULT THING TO GET ANYTHING THAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, WE'RE CALLING FOR EVERYONE ELSE TO BE ACCOUNTABLE AND RESPONSIBLE. AND I REALLY THINK THE BUCK STARTS AND STOPS RIGHT UP HERE. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. MYERS. WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THE CHAMBER AGAIN. MR. PARKER KEANE. >> SHALL I START OVER AGAIN. AGAIN, I AM ON THE BOARD OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY FARM BUREAU AND I SERVE ON THE AG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND WORK FOR CARGILL FERTILIZER. I AM REALLY, I GUESS, APOLOGETIC FOR THE MOST PART THAT I'M SORT OF ILL-PREPARED FOR THIS EVENING. I RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF THIS MEETING AND KIND OF AN INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE. AND SINCE THAT TIME HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE -- I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND OUR LAST FARM BUREAU BOARD MEETING. SO I DON'T REPRESENT NOR AM I AUTHORIZED TO MAKE STATEMENTS ON EITHER OF THOSE BODIES. I CAN SAY THAT ON BEHALF OF THE -- MY ROLE ON THE AG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, CERTAINLY THE COUNTY HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF SUPPORTING THE FURTHERANCE OF THAT TYPE OF A COUNCIL. THEY SPENT ABOUT TWO YEARS AS A TASK FORCE PUTTING THAT TOGETHER, AND THE COUNTY HAS PROVIDED STAFF AND A GREAT SUPPORT TO FURTHER THIS -- THE AG SECTOR AND HAS BEEN A VERY HELPFUL BODY AND HAS BROUGHT SOME THINGS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND OTHER THINGS BECAUSE THE COUNTY'S BEEN WILLING TO SUPPORT THAT ACTIVITY. SO I THINK IT'S BORNE A LOT OF FRUIT ALREADY AND WILL CONTINUE TO. I'M ALSO NOT PREPARED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS AS CARGILL FERTILIZER OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT WE'VE WORKED ON SEVERAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE COUNTY AND WORKED WITH A LOT OF COUNTY STAFF AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WORK VERY WELL WITH THEM. SO IT'S -- IT'S JUST KIND OF WHAT I WOULD RATHER DO IS MAYBE, AS THE FELLOW BEFORE ME INDICATED, I'LL TAKE THIS BACK TO BOTH THE PARTIES IN THE AGRICULTURE AREA AND BE CERTAIN THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS PROCESS TO A FAIR DEGREE, AS MUCH AS I KNOW AND CAN LEARN. AND MAYBE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD AT SOME POINT TO PROVIDE SOME MORE INPUT. >>JAN SMITH: WELL, THANK YOU. WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. AND THE SAME IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME OF THE YELLOW CARDS THAT WE HAVE. AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK AT A LATER DATE AS YOU AND YOUR BUSINESS AND YOUR AGRICULTURAL GROUPS WATCH AND LISTEN AND HAVE SOME IDEAS FOR US, PLEASE CALL MS. MERRITT AND ASK HER IF YOU CAN COME AND SPEAK TO US, IF YOU ALSO FEEL THAT YOU CAN MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IN A FIVE-MINUTE TIME FRAME, YOU CAN COME AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, WHICH, OF COURSE, YOU ARE, AND JUST MAKE YOUR COMMENTS AT THAT TIME AS MAY OTHER MEMBERS OF CARGILL OR YOUR -- THE FARM BUREAU. WE WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO HEAR FROM EVERYONE. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I'LL OFFER THIS TO YOU BUT ALSO CHAMBER. I SEE MR. MYERS IS STILL HERE. CERTAINLY YOU CAN COME -- -- WELCOME YOU ANYTIME TO COME SPEAK TO US. IF YOUR ORGANIZATIONS WANT TO GIVE US BACKGROUND INFORMATION, WRITTEN MATERIAL, WE WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME THAT. AND WE ALREADY ARE GIVEN LOTS OF PAPERWORK, BUT THIS IS, I FOUND, TO BE A VERY GOOD BOARD IN READING WHAT WE'RE GIVEN. IT'S MOST HELPFUL TO US. IF YOU HAVE A STUDY OR HAVE AN ISSUE THAT YOU THINK YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO US SO WE CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THAT, OUTSIDE OF A FIVE-MINUTE PERSONAL APPEARANCE, WE'D APPRECIATE THAT. >> I WILL SAY THAT THE AG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL IS NOW IN THE FINAL PREPARATION PHASE OF PUTTING ESSENTIALLY THE ANNUAL REPORT TOGETHER TO PROVIDE TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND WILL BE PROVIDING THAT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION, WE CAN MAKE THAT SAME REPORT AVAILABLE TO THIS GROUP. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU. THE NEXT PERSON ON OUR AGENDA TO SPEAK IS MR. RALPH HUGHES. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I UNDERSTAND I HAVE 15 MINUTES. >>JAN SMITH: YES, YOU DO. >> MY NAME IS RALPH HUGHES. >>JAN SMITH: TELL US WHICH GROUP YOU'RE SPEAKING FOR. >> CHAIRMAN OF FLORIDA ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION -- CORPORATION. ONE OF THE MAJOR CORPORATIONS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY EMPLOYING APPROXIMATELY 700 EMPLOYEES. MR. HUNZEKER DID AN EXCELLENT JOB OF TELLING ONE SIDE OF THE STORY REGARDING THE APPOINTED COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. HOWEVER, THERE IS ANOTHER SIDE OF THE STORY, AND IT IS FAR MORE COMPELLING. AND I TRUST WHEN I MAKE SOME PREPARED COMMENTS THAT YOU WILL HONOR ME BY ASKING ME SOME OF THE SAME QUESTIONS. I SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF APPOINTED COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR AND TO REBUT COMMENTS MADE AT YOUR JUNE 1st MEETING BY CERTAIN BOARD MEMBERS. COMMENTS WERE, IT WAS STATED THAT IT WAS WRONG FOR MR. BEDKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD A RESOLUTION FOR CHARTER CHANGE PERTAINING TO THIS ISSUE IN THAT THEY HAD NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE WORDING OF THIS DOCUMENT PRIOR TO THE JUNE 1st MEETING. THEY FURTHER STATED THAT THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS. THEY ALSO STATED IT WAS NOT IN PROPER FORM AS BALLOT LANGUAGE HAD TO BE 75 WORDS OR LESS. THE FACTS ARE. THE DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN MR. BEDKE'S MOTION WAS PROVIDED EACH OF YOU BY ME AT YOUR APRIL 27th MEETING SEVEN WEEKS PRIOR TO THE JUNE 1st MEETING. MR. BEDKE MADE MINIMAL CHANGES IN THE DOCUMENT I PRESENTED. FURTHER, IF CONTRARIANS HAD REVIEWED THE DOCUMENT DURING THE SEVEN-WEEK PERIOD THEY HAD IT, THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND THE PROPOSED BALLOT LANGUAGE CONTAINED ONLY 59 WORDS, WELL BELOW THE 75-WORD LIMIT THAT THE CONTRARIAN STATED WAS A PROBLEM. COMMENT, ONE BOARD MEMBER STATED THAT ESTABLISHING THE OFFICE OF APPOINTED COUNTY INTERNAL AUDITOR WOULD CREATE ANOTHER LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY. FURTHER, THAT THIS OFFICE WOULD GROW FROM A SMALL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WITH A BUDGET OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO A LARGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES COSTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THIS BOARD MEMBER CITED EXAMPLES OF OTHER COUNTY OFFICES WHERE THIS HAD OCCURRED. FACT, THE DIRECT OPPOSITE IS TRUE. THE MISSION AND PURPOSE OF THIS OFFICE IS TO REIGN IN COST AND ASSIST THE BOCC IN BRINGING ABOUT EFFICIENCIES AND ECONOMIES IN OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. I HAVE PROVIDED EACH OF YOU WITH THE DOCUMENTATION TONIGHT PERTAINING TO THE PALM BEACH COUNTY APPOINTED COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. I SHOULD MENTION HERE THAT PALM BEACH COUNTY HAS THE SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT WE HAVE. ALSO, BROWARD COUNTY'S FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS SAME AS WE HAVE. MORE COMMISSIONERS, BUT SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT. AND THEY HAVE AN APPOINTED COUNTY AUDITOR PERFORMING SIMILAR DUTIES TO PALM BEACH COUNTY, BUT SOMEWHAT VARIED WITH AN EVEN SMALLER STAFF THAN PALM BEACH COUNTY. NOW, YOU WILL NOTE IN WHAT I PASSED OUT TO YOU THAT PALM BEACH COUNTY IS -- WELL, YOU KNOW THAT PALM BEACH COUNTY IS THE PROXIMATE SIZE OF OUR COUNTY BOTH IN LAND AREA AND IN POPULATION. AND YOU WILL NOTE WHAT I PASSED OUT TO YOU THAT THEY ESTABLISHED THIS OFFICE IN 1985 WITH 11 EMPLOYEES. YOU WILL NOTE THAT 16 YEARS LATER, 16 YEARS, THEY HAVE ONLY 12 EMPLOYEES. THEIR ANNUAL BUDGET STARTED AT 800,000 AND HAS DROPPED TO A NET OF $650,000. AND THEY PERFORM COMPLIANCE AND PERFORMANCE AUDITS. WELL, OUR OFFICE WOULD DO PERFORMANCE AUDITS ONLY. I SHOULD MENTION HERE THAT PALM BEACH COUNTY'S AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES ARE 20% BELOW OURS. FURTHER, OUR SALES TAX RATE IS 12.5% HIGHER THAN THEIR SALES TAX RATE. AND BROWARD COUNTY'S AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES ARE LOWER THAN OURS, AND THEIR SALES TAX RATE -- OR OUR SALES TAX RATE IS 12.5% HIGHER THAN BROWARD COUNTY'S. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S NO BASIS IN FACT FOR THE CONCERN EXPRESSED BY THE OPPONENTS TO THIS PROPOSAL. THE COMMENT BY THE CONTRARIANS THAT THIS WOULD BE ANOTHER LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY IS WITHOUT MERIT. A LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO GET THINGS DONE. THIS COMMENT IS NOT GERMANE TO THIS SUBJECT AT ALL. THE COMMENT BY THE CONTRARIANS THAT WE HAD BEST NOT MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ISSUE UNTIL THE PEOPLE HAVE DECIDED ON THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT THEY WANT HAS NO MERIT. THE FACTS ARE, WE'LL HAVE A BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT THE PEOPLE CHOOSE. WE ALL KNOW THAT. THE COMMENT THAT PERFORMANCE AUDITS ARE PERFORMED BY HEADHUNTERS AND THAT THEY ARE WITCH-HUNTS IS LUDICROUS. GOOD MANAGERS WELCOME THE ASSISTANCE OF PERFORMANCE AUDITORS. FURTHER, THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES OF OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT HAVE UNDERGONE PERFORMANCE AUDITS SINCE 1994, SIX YEARS AGO. AND THERE'S NOT BEEN ONE COMPLAINT OF A WITCH-HUNT. OUR PROBLEM IS, "A," THEY'RE EXPENSIVE, AND "B," THEY LANGUISH ON THE SHELF AFTER THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR TURNS IN HIS REPORT AND GETS PAID. A COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR WOULD NEVER ALLOW A PERFORMANCE AUDIT TO LANGUISH ON THE SHELF. DO PERFORMANCE AUDITS PAY OFF? YES, IF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE IMPLEMENTED. A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF OUR CABLE DEPARTMENT. THIS AUDIT COST US $50,000. AND IT REVEALED WE WERE NOT COLLECTING FRANCHISE FEES FROM THE CABLE TV PROVIDER. WE RECEIVED A CHECK FOR $1 MILLION FROM THIS PROVIDER IN MAY. AND WE'LL RECEIVE APPROXIMATELY $100,000 EVERY YEAR THEREAFTER. PERFORMANCE AUDITS -- WELL, I SHOULD MENTION HERE THAT THE INVOLVEMENT OF CITY ACTIVIST WHOSE KNEW OF THIS RECOMMENDATION OF PERFORMANCE AUDITS -- AUDITOR PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN THIS BEING PURSUED AND IMPLEMENTED. AND, OF COURSE, COLLECTED. AND EVEN NOW, SOME ARE SAYING, WELL, THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT CAN'T TURN THAT UP. THE COMPLIANCE AUDIT TURNED THAT UP. I TALKED TO RICHARD AKE AND HE CONFIRMED THAT THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT TURNED THAT UP. AND I HAVE A LETTER FROM FRANK TURANO, THE HEAD OF THE CABLE DEPARTMENT, WHO SAID WHAT I JUST SAID ABOUT THE MILLION DOLLARS AND PROXIMATE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS HEREAFTER, FOR $50,000, BECAUSE THAT ONE WAS IMPLEMENTED AND FOLLOWED UP ON. PERFORMANCE AUDITS PAY A HANDSOME RETURN. NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT, IF THEY ARE IMPLEMENTED AND DON'T LANGUISH ON THE SHELF. YOU WILL NOTE THAT I HAVE NOT SPOKEN YET THROUGH THE ASSISTANCE, THIS AUDITOR'S OFFICE WILL BE TO OUR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN CHALLENGING OUR $2.3 BILLION ANNUAL BUDGET AND ALL OTHER BUDGET ISSUES THAT COME BEFORE THEM DURING THE YEAR. COMMISSIONERS PAT FRANK AND RONDA STORMS BOTH TOLD THAT YOU THEY DESPERATELY NEED THIS ASSISTANCE. AND I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF POSSIBLY ONE, WILL TELL YOU THE SAME THING. I BELIEVE THIS ALONE WILL SAVE US MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS. AND I TRUST THAT YOU WILL IGNORE THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THIS FOR REASONS THAT ARE BEYOND MY UNDERSTANDING, EXCEPT TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. AND VOTE TO SUPPORT THIS ISSUE SO IT CAN BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT NOVEMBER 7th, 2000. AND I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS, SIMILAR QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED OF MR. HUNZEKER. DOES ANYONE HAVE A QUESTION? >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE A QUESTION. THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE ON COUNTY FINANCE, I WAS LOOKING AT THEIR TOP RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND AN AUDITOR POSITION WAS NOT IN THE TOP RECOMMENDATIONS FROM TAXWATCH OR THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT? >> TAXWATCH AND THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE DID NOT ADDRESS OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. THEY ADDRESSED AFTER SPENDING A YEAR. AND MEETING WITH OUR 50 DIFFERENT AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS. OR WAS IT 300. WHATEVER, ALL THOSE DEPARTMENTS. LOOKING FOR WAYS AND MEANS WHERE THEY CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS WHERE WE CAN OPERATE MORE EFFICIENTLY, MORE EFFECTIVELY, MORE ECONOMICALLY. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY CONCENTRATE ON. THEY MADE 147 RECOMMENDATIONS. AND ABOUT 77 OF THE LAST COUNT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, BUT NONE DEALING WITH ANY SUBSTANTIVE COST REDUCTIONS. NOW, DOMINIC CALABRO, PRESIDENT OF THE FLORIDA TAXWATCH APPEARED BEFORE THE BOARD AT THE BOARD'S REQUEST, JUNE 14th. IT'S NOW JUNE 22nd, EIGHT DAYS AGO. THEY ASKED HIM TO COME AND OUTLINE THE TOP FIVE COST-CUTTING RECOMMENDATIONS. HE DID THAT. HOUR AND A HALF WORKSHOP. AND POINTED OUT -- AND THERE WAS GIVE AND TAKE BETWEEN THE COMMISSIONERS AND DOMINIC CALABRO, THAT WE COULD SAVE AT THE LOWEST CONSERVATIVE FIGURE, 25 MILLION A YEAR ON THE HIGH SIDE UP TO $52 MILLION A YEAR IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF FLORIDA TAXWATCH. I THINK I'VE GONE BEYOND YOUR QUESTION, BUT OKAY. >>GERALD WHITE: MY OTHER FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE ST. PETE TIMES ON THE 12th THAT TALKS ABOUT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES. AND THIS OFFICE IS NOW SUFFERING BUDGET CUTS AS A RESULT OF FINDING WASTE IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NOW CONGRESS IS SAYING, HEY, WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE THIS -- THEY'RE NOT INCREASING THE BUDGET, THEY'RE DECREASING THE BUDGET EVEN THOUGH THE OFFICE IS DOING WHAT IT'S DESIGNED TO DO. DO YOU SEE THAT SAME FATE IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF SUCH A POSITION WAS CREATED? >> NOT BY ANY MEANS AT ALL. IF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID THEY WOULD LIKE THIS OFFICE, THEY NEED THAT HELP F THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPOINT A COUNTY AUDITOR UNDER THEM, THEY FUND THE BUDGET, THEY DIRECT THAT COUNTY APPOINTED INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR TO GO FORTH AND DO WHAT THEY WANT THEM TO DO, I DON'T SEE ANY WAY IN THE WORLD THEY'RE GOING TO CUT OFF FUNDING. THEY MAY BECOME DISSATISFIED WITH PERFORMANCE OF THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT. BUT THERE'S A WAY TO DEAL WITH THAT TOO, AND THAT'S AT THE NEXT CHARTER TIME. I DON'T SEE ANY WAY AT ALL FOR THAT TO BE A PROBLEM. AS FAR AS THE POLITICAL SCENARIO IN WASHINGTON, I THINK ALL POLITICS ARE LOCAL. AND I THINK WE HERE IN THIS COUNTY AND OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE ABSOLUTELY PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF DOING A GOOD JOB FOR THE PEOPLE. AND WE NEED TO GIVE THEM THIS TOOL TO WORK WITH, AND THEY WANT IT. >>DAVID HURLEY: MR. HUGHES, I WAS ASKED BY A RESIDENT ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN THEY SAW THIS GOING ON. YOU MAY HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS ALREADY. SOMEBODY SAYS RALPH HUGHES IS ALWAYS FOR PRIVATIZATION AND NOW HE WANTS TO DO SOMETHING IN THE COUNTY. AND I SAID, WELL, I'LL ASK MR. HUGHES WHAT THAT'S ABOUT. SO I'M SURE THAT YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT. >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THAT'S, AGAIN, ONLY HALF OF THE STORY. I HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A COMPETITIVE SITUATION INVOLVING THE PRIVATE SECT WE ARE THE PUBLIC SECTOR. AND EVERYTHING THAT IS POSSIBLE FOR US TO DO SHOULD GO OUT TO BID WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR BIDDING AGAINST THE PRIVATE SECTOR. AND I BELIEVE AND EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN THAT THE PUBLIC SECTOR USUALLY WINS. BUT WHEN THEY WIN, THEY CUT THE COST DRAMATICALLY. THE CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, THE MAYOR THERE, MAYOR STEVEN GOLDSMITH DID THIS AND ROAD AND STREET MAINTENANCE, COSTS CAME IN, 25% LOWER FROM THE COUNTY DEPARTMENT. I SAY THIS, IN SUMMARY TO YOUR QUESTION, THAT THE PUBLIC SECTOR SHOULD NEVER DO WHAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR CAN DO MORE EFFICIENTLY, MORE EFFECTIVELY AND MORE ECONOMICALLY. I NEVER SAID WE SHOULD PRIVATIZE ANYTHING. IF THE PUBLIC SECTOR CAN DO IT MORE EFFICIENTLY, EFFECTIVELY AND ECONOMICALLY, THAT'S WHERE IT OUGHT TO BE DONE. AND WE NEED TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I'M CONFUSED, MR. HUGHES. HELP ME OUT. PRESENTLY UNDER THE CHARTER AND HOW THE BOARD OPERATES, IF THEY -- IF THEY FELT THAT A DEPARTMENT WAS NOT PERFORMING, THEY COULD, AT THEIR NEXT COMING MEETING, PUT ON THE AGENDA AN ITEM TO ACTUALLY HIRE A -- AN AUDITOR TO PERFORM A PERFORMANCE AUDIT. AND THEY WOULD SET THAT OUT FOR BID AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD BID, AND WE WOULD GET A GOOD PRICE, AND THEY WOULD HIRE THAT PERSON. THEY WOULD DO THE AUDIT, AND IT WOULD COME BACK TO THEM, AND THEY COULD ACT ON ITS RECOMMENDATION. SO I'M CONFUSED HOW IN GETTING US A DEPARTMENT THAT DIRECTLY RESPONDS TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION, HOW DOES THAT MAKE IT MORE EFFECTIVE, MORE EFFICIENT, AND MORE COST SAVING TO THE TAXPAYER? >> WELL, THE SIMPLE SHORT ANSWER TO THAT IS, IF THIS BOARD DID IT, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE NEXT BOARD WOULD CONTINUE IT ON. THOSE THINGS CAN CHANGE WITH THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD AND THE POLITICAL ARENA. WE SHOULD DO THIS BY CHARTER CHANGE. WE SHOULD GIVE THE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS AND DECIDE IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS HAPPEN. REMEMBER, YOU GOOD PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN PUT A PROPOSAL ON THE BALLOT THAT HOPEFULLY YOU BELIEVE IN OR YOU WON'T PUT IT ON THE BALLOT THAT THE PEOPLE CAN THEN SPEAK TO. AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE -- AND THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE. I'M NOT A PROPHET, THAT THE PEOPLE WOULD SUPPORT THIS BY A LANDSLIDE. >>JAN SMITH: ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. BALLARD. >>TERRY BALLARD: MR. HUGHES, I DON'T KNOW IF OFF COPY SINCE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY COME BACK WITH THIS, AND I GOT IT ON THE MAIL IN THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD AND I THINK THERE WAS A COUPLE ATTORNEYS THERE. >> FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE. >>TERRY BALLARD: FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE. >> THAT'S PUBLIC RECORD. I DID GET A COPY OF THAT. >>TERRY BALLARD: I TAKE EXCEPTION WITH SOMETHING IN THERE. TO SHOW HOW IT CHANGED FROM THE DRAFT. AND I WANT TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS ON THAT. >> I DIDN'T DENOTE THAT KIND OF CHANGE. YOU ARE A CLOSER OBSERVATORY THAT THAN I AM. I THOUGHT IT WAS, IN EFFECT, MOVING IT FORWARD. PLEASE HELP ME OUT. >>TERRY BALLARD: THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT, CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT HOLDING AN ACTIVE LICENSE TO PRACTICE PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. THAT'S THERE. IN THE ORIGINAL DRAFT, IT HAD WITH THREE YEARS EXPERIENCE AND THE PERIOD. AND THIS HERE SAYS, OR SHALL BE QUALIFIED BY EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITING PRACTICE, AND PHYSICAL CONTROLS. THE WAY I'M INTERPRETING THAT -- AND, OF COURSE, I'M NO ATTORNEY, THAT WE'RE GIVEN OPTION IN THERE WHEN IT SAYS "OR" THAT WE COULD HIRE SOMETHING OTHER THAN A PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS EVER ANYTHING THAT I WANTED TO DO OR THERE. LATER ON TONIGHT AND I'LL SPEAK TO THIS WHEN WE GO INTO BOARD DISCUSSION IS THAT I'D RATHER HAVE IT SIMPLE LIKE WITH THREE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND PERFORMANCE AUDITED. BECAUSE THIS HERE -- AND IF YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENT ON IT NOW -- >> YEAH, I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON IT. I BELIEVE ABOUT THIS AS I DO ABOUT THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPOINTED COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. IF WE CAN'T TRUST THE JUDGMENT OF THE SEVEN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO HIRE THE RIGHT PEOPLE THAT ARE QUALIFIED TO DO THE JOB IN BOTH CASES, WITH THE AWESOME POWER THESE SEVEN COMMISSIONERS HAVE OF TELLING US HOW WE CAN OR CANNOT USE OUR LAND, DECIDING WHAT THE TAX RATES AND FEES ARE GOING TO BE, IF WE CAN'T TRUST THEM TO BE COMPETENT ENOUGH TO APPOINT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WELL QUALIFIED TO DO THIS JOB OR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S JOB AND YOU KNOW THE QUALIFICATIONS THERE. THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IN PINELLAS COUNTY, THE QUALIFICATIONS ARE THEY'LL APPOINT SOMEONE WHO'S EXPERIENCED IN MANAGEMENT AND CAPABLE OF DOING THE JOB. I FEEL THE SAME WAY ABOUT THIS. NOW, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND ADD ON A LOT OF -- IF I WERE GOING TO ADD ANYTHING, I WOULD ADD THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AMALGA REPORT DATED WHATEVER, WHICH ALL OF YOU HAVE, THEY CLEARLY SPELL OUT THE QUALIFICATIONS OF APPOINTED COUNTY AUDITOR, BUT THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITY AND ALL THE REST OF IT. BUT I TRUST WE BETTER BE ABLE TO TRUST THE JUDGMENT OF THE SEVEN PEOPLE WHO ARE RUNNING THIS COUNTY. ANYONE ELSE? >>JAN SMITH: I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT IN THAT IF THE COUNTY IN ORDER TO HIRE A PERSON SEEKING THIS JOB, YOU WOULD HAVE TO ADVERTISE THE REQUIREMENTS AS LAID OUT IN THE CHARTER. AND SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE CORRECT REQUIREMENTS AND, IN FACT, LEAVE IT SORT OF UNDECIDED AS TO EDUCATION, LICENSES, EXPERIENCE AND ALL, THEN YOU'RE LIABLE TO GET A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT AREN'T QUALIFIED TO DO THE JOB. SO I THINK HAVING QUALIFICATIONS -- TO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL PERSON IN A PROFESSIONAL JOB REQUIRES PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE CHARTER FOR WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO ASK FOR. >> WELL, THEY DO HAVE PROFESSIONAL -- I WOULD REMIND YOU OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. WHEN YOU ADVERTISED FOR AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. YOU DIDN'T SPELL OUT IN DETAIL. WHAT YOU DID IS YOU ADVERTISED AND LET PEOPLE KNOW THIS JOB WAS OPEN. AND THEN WHEN THEY CAME, YOU DECIDED AND MADE A SELECTION IN YOUR GOOD JUDGMENT ON WHO YOU FELT WAS BEST QUALIFIED IN AN ALL-AROUND BASIS TO DO THE JOB. >>JAN SMITH: I DO BELIEVE THERE WERE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE JOB. >> YOU DID THE SAME WITH THE CONFLICT ATTORNEY. YOU COULD BE TRUSTED TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION, THEN WE BETTER BE ABLE TO TRUST THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S MY ANSWER TO HIS QUESTION. >>JAN SMITH: IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS FOR MR. HUGHES. >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO MR. HUNZEKER'S REPORT TO US. >>JAN SMITH: WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO A GREATER DISCUSSION OF THE AUDITOR AFTER THE BREAK. AND IF MR. HUNZEKER IS GOING TO STAY, COULD YOU HOLD YOUR QUESTION WHEN WE GET INTO THE AUDITOR DISCUSSION, OR IS IT RELATING TO WHAT MR. HUGHES HAS SAID? >>GERALD WHITE: IT'S RELATED TO WHAT HE SAID. WELL, I'LL JUST ASK HIM -- >> IT'S OKAY. SHE CAN JUST STOP THE CLOCK. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. >>GERALD WHITE: READ THIS REPORT THAT WE GOT FROM THE -- AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OPINIONS ON THE ADMINISTRATOR -- ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT TO US, LET US KNOW. >> I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION, CAN THE BOCC THAT YOU ALL ASKED HIM, CAN THE BOCC DIRECT THE APPOINTED COUNTY AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS? THEY ABSOLUTELY CAN, BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE POWER TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL'S BUDGET REQUEST. AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE IT. NOW, THE OPTION FOR THE CONSTITUTIONAL IS, APPEALING IT TO THE STATE CABINET. IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTY. THE BOARD CAN SAY, WE WANT OUR APPOINTED AUDITOR TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITUATION. AND THEY ALSO, OF COURSE, WILL CHALLENGE THE BUDGET THAT COMES FORTH FROM THESE CONSTITUTIONALS AND PROVIDE THAT DETAILED INFORMATION OR CLEAR UP THE INFORMATION THAT COMES FROM THESE CONSTITUTIONALS TO THEM. THEY CAN DO THAT UNDER THAT -- UNDER THAT SCENARIO. THE OTHER THING WAS MADE WAS THAT THE STATE DISCONTINUED THE AUDITS OF THOSE ENTITIES CREATED BY LEGISLATIVE ACT. I WAS THERE. I PREPARED IN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. AND THE REASON THEY DISCONTINUED THEM IS BECAUSE SIMPLE FACT. THERE WAS NO TEETH IN IT, AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FORTH OF THOSE AUDITS THAT WERE MADE WAS LANGUISHED ON THE SHELF AND WERE NEVER IMPLEMENTED. THAT'S WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS AND THEY FIGURE,, WHY SPEND THE MONEY IF THESE THINGS ARE NOT GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED. SAME KIND OF PROBLEM WE GOT WITH THE PERFORMANCE AUDITORS HERE THAT MR. HUNZEKER TOLD YOU WE SPENT 1.6 MILLION DOLLARS AN WE GOT OUT OF IT WHAT I TOLD YOU. THANKS TO THE PERSISTENCE OF CIVIC ACTIVISTS LIKE MARILYN SMITH AND OTHERS AND ART MERISH WHO STAYED ON TOP OF THAT TO MAKE SURE THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS, IN FACT, IMPLEMENTED, CONSUMMATED. >>JAN SMITH: ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR MR. HUGHES? OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. HUGHES. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOURS. >>JAN SMITH: WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK, BUT I'M GOING TO MAKE AN OBSERVATION FIRST, SINCE I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH WHO THE CONTRARIAN WAS ON THIS BOARD. >> IT WAS MORE THAN ONE, IN ALL FAIRNESS. >>JAN SMITH: IN ALL FAIRNESS. BUT LET ME SAY TO EACH OF YOU, NONE OF US ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, AND NONE OF US ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG IN THE DECISION PROCESS WE MAKE INDIVIDUALLY WHEN WE CAST A VOTE. IT'S YOUR OPINION. IT'S YOUR RIGHT TO YOUR OPINION. AND YOU ARE NOT WRONG WHEN YOU EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS. SO WHEN YOU FEEL THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE A MISTAKE, REMEMBER THAT YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME OPINION AS THE PERSON SITTING NEXT TO YOU OR ACROSS THE ROOM FROM YOU. I'VE BEEN MARRIED FOR 31 YEARS, AND MY HUSBAND AND I DISAGREE ON OCCASION, BUT WE GET PAST IT. AND SO IT DOESN'T MAKE YOU RIGHT, AND IT DOESN'T MAKE YOU WRONG. IT MEANS THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. SO DON'T CONSIDER YOURSELF WRONG AND DON'T CONSIDER YOURSELF A CONTRARIAN IF YOU FEEL DIFFERENTLY ABOUT SOMETHING, YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT. THIS BOARD WILL BE -- >> WELL, WRONG -- NOBODY -- >>JAN SMITH: EXCUSE ME, MR. HUGHES. >> I DIDN'T SAY THEY WERE WRONG. >>JAN SMITH: THIS BOARD WILL BE ADJOURNED FOR A MOMENT. >> ON A PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. >>JAN SMITH: NO. EXCUSE ME, MR. HUGHES. >> I NEVER SAID ANYBODY WAS WRONG. CONTRARIAN DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE WRONG. IT MEANS YOU HOLD AN OPPOSITE VIEW. >>JAN SMITH: MR. WHITE STATED HE DIDN'T WANT TO BE WRONG AND I WAS RESPONDING TO HIM. I SAID HE'S NOT WRONG. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION. >> HE'S ABSOLUTELY NOT WRONG. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. HUGHES. BOARD MEMBERS, WE'RE ADJOURNED FOR 10 MINUTES. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND GET THROUGH A COUPLE OF QUICK REPORTS, AND THEN CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON THE AUDITOR. >>JAN SMITH: THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS BACK IN SESSION, PLEASE. AND WE'VE JUST GOT A FEW HOUSEKEEPING THINGS TO TAKE CARE OF. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, MR. KEN TINKLER, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT BACK TO US ON ANY ISSUES, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS, KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. I JUST WANTED TO REPORT TO YOU THAT YOUR RESOLUTION 2000 REGARDING THE OATH OF OFFICE HAS GONE TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. IT HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT DELAYED BECAUSE THE CLERK'S OFFICE HAD TO WORK OUT THE FORMATTING OF IT BECAUSE WE ONLY DO THIS EVERY FIVE YEARS AND WE HAD TO DUST OFF SOME THINGS FOR THAT. IT MAY BE ON THE NEXT MEETING WHICH IS IN JULY. IF THAT OCCURS, WE'LL CERTAINLY LET YOU KNOW AHEAD OF TIME IF YOU WISH TO BE THERE. THAT IS ALL I HAVE AT THIS POINT, MADAM CHAIR. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. OUR EXECUTIVE, BARBARA MERRITT, OUR BUSY BEE WILL TELL US OF HER ACTIVITIES. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS. I -- ON MY REPORT, I HAVE AN ACTIVITY RECAP. I WILL TELL YOU AND YOU KNOW BY THE AMOUNT OF MAILOUTS I HAVE BEEN AT THE COPY MACHINE AND BEEN DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH AND GETTING A LOT OF PAPERWORK IN. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO THANK THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT, HTV, AND THE COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT LAST MONTH WHEN I SHOWED YOU THE "COMMUNICATOR," YOU'LL SEE LITTLE SLIPS OF PAPER, I'VE GOT THEM THREE TO A PAGE. WE HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS IN FROM THE WATER BILLS. THAT WAS THE BEST OUTREACH WE HAVE DONE SO FAR. I WILL NEED A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION. DO YOU WANT ME TO FORWARD THESE COMMENTS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR MR. KLEMAN? OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL THE END? WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO DO. SOME THINGS ARE IN YOUR PURVIEW; SOME THINGS ARE NOT. >>JAN SMITH: HAVING READ ALL THE ONES YOU HAVE SENT SO FAR, I THINK IT WILL BE VERY INTERESTING TO FORWARD THEM TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AT SOME POINT IN TIME AND LET HIM RAISE THE ISSUES THAT ARE RAISED IN THERE THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD DOESN'T RAISE. FOR INSTANCE, PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES, GROWTH MANAGEMENT. BUT I THINK IT WILL BE IMPORTANT -- I DON'T -- IF YOU HIT THEM WITH -- YEAH. IF YOU HIT THEM WITH EVERYTHING AT ONCE, LIKE IF WE GO THROUGH THE WHOLE YEAR AND HE GETS A STACK THIS BIG, IT'S MY OPINION THAT HE'LL LOOK AT THE FIRST FIVE AND IT WILL STOP. SO I THINK IT WILL BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO COPY HIM AND BOARD MEMBERS WITH THE ONES AS THEY COME IN SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY ARE BEING INUNDATED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS AND LET THEM SEE WHAT WE'RE GET. >> YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO SEND COPIES TO THE ADMINISTRATOR AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? >>JAN SMITH: YOU CAN SEND THEM TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND LET THE CHAIRMAN DECIDE TO SEND THEM OUT. >> OKAY. THE OTHER THING, MR. WHITE HAD BROUGHT UP THE LAST TIME WAS HTV, THE RESHOWING OF THE MEETINGS. AT THE END OF THE MONTH, HTV WILL BE GOING 24 HOURS, SO WE WILL BE SHOWN SEVERAL TIMES A MONTH. SO THE WEB SITE FOR THE COUNTY HAS A SECTION FOR HTV, AND THE SCHEDULE IS ON THERE. IF YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE COMPUTER, I PUT THE WEB SITE THERE. IF YOU CALL ME, I'LL BE GLAD TO SEND IT OR FAX IT TO YOU, BUT WE WILL BE SHOWED SEVERAL TIMES COUNTYWIDE AFTER THE 29th. THE CITY HAS OFFERED TO SHOW THE MEETING IN ITS ENTIRETY TOMORROW, AND THEN AS TIME PERMITS IN THEIR SCHEDULE, ANOTHER TIME. MR. BELTRAN LAST WEEK ON THE 15th DID HIS "VISTA" SEGMENT. THAT WILL BE COMING UP SOMETIME NEXT WEEK. IT WAS VERY INTERESTING WATCHING HOW THEY DO THE DIFFERENT INTERVIEWS IN SPANISH. AND I HOPE THAT WILL GENERATE SOME INTEREST. HE HAS OFFERED ALSO TO GO OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY TO SPEAK. >>JAN SMITH: MS. MERRITT, DO YOU KNOW WHAT DAY THAT'S GOING TO BE AIRED, THE ONE WITH MR. BELTRAN? IF YOU CAN LET THE BOARD MEMBERS KNOW. >> I'LL LET THE BOARD MEMBERS KNOW. THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF WORKING UP THE SCHEDULE. AND THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO TELL YOU ALL. ON JULY 12th, MR. BALLARD WILL BE GOING TO THE AG ECONOMIC COUNCIL MEETING FOR US. AND IN YOUR PACKET, THERE'S THE AUDITOR INFORMATION MS. SMITH ASKED ME TO GET. I CONTACTED THE FOUR COUNTIES AND GOT YOU SOME TELEPHONE NUMBERS. IF YOU NEED ANY MORE INFORMATION, I'LL BE GLAD TO GET IT. MS. LASHER HAS SOME INFORMATION FROM THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE, I THINK YOU'VE PASSED IT OUT? >>DENISE LASHER: NOT YET. >> MS. LASHER WOULD LIKE YOU ALL TO HAVE THAT FOR YOUR RECORDS. AND I THINK THAT'S ABOUT ALL UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING. AND OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE THE 13th OF JULY. DR. McMANUS WILL BE HERE, DR. HORTON, AND IT JUST SLIPPED MY MIND. >> COMMISSIONER WACKSMAN, SORRY. COMMISSIONER WACKSMAN. SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS WOULD YOU LIKE TO FORWARD TO THEM AHEAD OF TIME. >>JAN SMITH: THE LOCATION OF THAT MEETING IS -- >> SECOND FLOOR, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ROOM, 601 EAST KENNEDY. AND IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN REACH ME DURING THE WEEK, 276-8181. ALSO IN YOUR PACKET -- >>JAN SMITH: GIVE THE FAX NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS. >> FAX NUMBER IS 276-8445. E-MAIL, CRBOARD@HILLSBOROUGHCOUNTY.ORG. IN YOUR PACKET ALSO I TOOK MINUTES FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON THE 13th OF JUNE, AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED ME TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD OR HOW YOU WANTED ME TO HANDLE THAT, CHAIRMAN SMITH. >>JAN SMITH: I THINK MR. LaBOUR WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT, ASK A QUESTION. >>STEVE LaBOUR: JUST A QUESTION. SHE CAN DO THIS FIRST. >>JAN SMITH: WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION OF THE AUDITOR, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST LET IT FLOW. SO IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR HER OF WHAT SHE IS DOING. >>STEVE LaBOUR: YOU HAD A QUESTION REGARDING THE SPECIAL MEETING. >> THEY ARE IN YOUR PACKET. >>JAN SMITH: JUST RECEIVE THEM. >>STEVE LaBOUR: MY QUESTION -- A COUPLE OF ISSUES. THE MINUTES THAT ARE ON OUR WEB PAGE THAT PEOPLE CAN ACCESS, I TAKE IT THAT YOU ONLY POST THE ONES THAT WE HAVE APPROVED AND YOU HOLD THE ONES THAT WE HAVEN'T APPROVED YET? >> THE MINUTES THAT ARE APPROVED ARE THERE. BUT ALSO THE CLOSED CAPTION MINUTES ARE AVAILABLE WITHIN DAYS. SO THAT WILL BE A LONG TRANSCRIPT OF WHAT HAPPENED. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I HAD A CITIZEN TELL ME THAT THEY TRIED TO GET OUR UP-TO-DATE MINUTES AS TO THE LAST MEETING AND THEY WEREN'T ON THE WEB PAGE. IF WE CAN ADD A LINE FOR THE MINUTES SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONES THAT ARE POSTED ARE THE ONES WE'VE APPROVED. >> OKAY. THAT WILL BE -- >>STEVE LaBOUR: AND WHERE THEY CAN GET A COPY OF THE MINUTES IF THEY ARE NOT ON THE WEB SITE. >> THERE, AGAIN, IF THEY CALL THE OFFICE, I HAVE DRAFT COPIES, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM SENDING YOU A COPY OF THE DRAFT, BUT IF YOU MAKE ANY CORRECTIONS, THAT CORRECTED COPY WILL BE A WEEK OR TWO BEFORE IT GETS TO THE WEB. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THE OTHER ISSUE IS I UNDERSTAND OUR SURVEY, WHICH PEOPLE CAN FILL OUT OR, I GUESS, THEY DOWNLOAD IT AND FILL IT OUT. IS THAT HOW IT WORKS? >> IT'S DONE TWO DIFFERENT WAYS, YES. >>STEVE LaBOUR: MY UNDERSTANDING IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS ANSWERED. SO WE NEED TO CHECK THE PAGE. >> OKAY. I'LL CHECK THE SURVEY PAGE. >>STEVE LaBOUR: IT IS ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. WE NEED TO CHECK THAT. >>DAVID HURLEY: YOU WANT IT ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE, IS THAT IT? >>STEVE LaBOUR: I DON'T WANT TO ANSWER IT AT ALL. >> IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE YES OR NO WITH A CHECKMARK AND THEY LEFT OFF THE NO. I SAW IT THE OTHER DAY. I'LL CHECK ON IT. THANK YOU. >>GERALD WHITE: DID YOU ALREADY MEET THE MAYOR'S OFFICE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA TO SCHEDULE AN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE BOARD? >> I'VE SENT THE MAYOR ANOTHER LETTER, CALLED THE OFFICE, AND THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO WORK IT INTO THE SCHEDULE. THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION I WAS ABLE TO GET. THE MAYOR OF TEMPLE TERRACE. I HAVE SENT HER MORE INFORMATION. I AM GOING TO HAVE OUR CHAIRMAN GIVE HER A CALL AND SHE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ALSO. >>GERALD WHITE: WERE YOU ABLE TO REACH JOANNA TOKELY WITH THE URBAN LEAGUE. >> YES, I WAS ABLE TO CONTACT MS. TOKELY BUT SHE IS OUT OF TOWN FOR TWO WEEKS. >>GERALD WHITE: SHE DIDN'T SCHEDULE A DATE? >> SHE DIDN'T SCHEDULE A DATE BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE HER CALENDAR WITH HER. >>DAVID HURLEY: THE MAYOR OF TEMPLE TERRACE WAS SERVING IN A FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT WAS DESCRIBED BY MR. KLEMAN. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM SOMEBODY WHO IS ACTUALLY LIVING IN THAT, AS OPPOSED TO THE ACADEMIC LOOK AT IT. >> OKAY. >>JAN SMITH: LET'S SEE. MS. CHAPEN WHO SERVED ON IT. IS SHE GOING TO GIVE US A LETTER? >> I DID SEND HER A LETTER WITH HER REMARKS FROM THE LAST TIME AND ASKED HER FOR SOME MORE INFORMATION NOW THAT SHE SERVED AS A CLERK OF THE COURT. I FELT SHE COULD GIVE US SOME POINTERS. I DID SEND HER THE MINUTES, THE TRANSCRIPT OF OUR LAST SPEECH BEFORE THE BOARD IN '95. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. >> DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THEM IN OR DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST ACCEPT THEM. >>JAN SMITH: AS ANYONE OR EVERYONE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES OF THE DRAFT COMMITTEE THAT MET ON JUNE 1st REGARDING -- >> JUNE 13th -- >>JAN SMITH: JUNE 13th REGARDING A DRAFT FOR THE COUNTY AUDITOR PROPOSAL? I KNOW MR. BALLARD HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF THE WORDING IN HERE. >>TERRY BALLARD: NOT THE MINUTES. THE MINUTES ARE FINE. >>JAN SMITH: THE MINUTES ARE FINE. MR. BALLARD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD TO RECEIVE THESE MINUTES. >>JAN SMITH: A MOTION AND A SECOND BY MR. HURLEY TO RECEIVE THE COMMITTEE REPORTS, THE MINUTES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: DO YOU WANT TO GO OVER THESE AND -- BECAUSE, AS YOU'VE NOTICED, NEITHER MR. AMBLER OR MR. BEDKE ARE HERE THIS EVENING, AND THEY ARE THE TWO GENTLEMEN. AND MR. BELTRAN AND MR. WHITE ATTENDED THE MEETING. I THOUGHT SINCE YOU WERE THERE THAT YOU WOULD JUST GIVE A BRIEF REPORT AND MR. TINKLER, WHO WOULD ANSWER QUESTIONS OR TELL US ANYTHING THAT WE MISSED. MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I GUESS I -- I'M SORRY. I GUESS I VIEWED THE COMMITTEE THAT ANY OF US WANTED TO SHOW AND HELP WORK WITH LEGAL TO DRAFT THE LANGUAGE THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD DO. YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT ANY DISCUSSION THAT THEY MIGHT -- I MEAN, WE CAN READ THE MINUTES, BUT I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT THEY PRESENTED BACK AND NOT -- NOT HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THEIR MEETING AND WHAT WAS SAID OR WASN'T SAID. THAT WILL BE WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST AND JUST MOVE ON. >>JAN SMITH: THAT'S FINE. >> IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE A COPY OF A TAPE OF THE MEETING, I HAVE A COPY IN THE OFFICE OR I CAN GET YOU A COPY FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE. SO YOU DON'T NEED ME ANYMORE? >>JAN SMITH: YES, WE DO. JUST HAVE A SEAT AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW AS SOON AS WE NEED YOU NEXT. >> CAN'T GO HOME. >>JAN SMITH: TO SORT OF START THE DISCUSSION OF THE AUDITOR OFF, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE AN OBSERVATION. IF YOU'LL RECALL, SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT BEGAN ON THE AUDITOR CAME ABOUT BECAUSE A COUPLE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CAME AND TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS AND THE FACT THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WHO COULD INDEPENDENTLY WORK WITH THE BOARD ABOUT THE BUDGET, BUT KEEPING THAT SEPARATE FROM THE AUDITOR AS WE DISCUSS THE AUDITOR POSITION SO THAT THERE ISN'T CONFUSION AS TO WHAT WE ARE DOING. SO THIS ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS FOR US TO DISCUSS ANYTHING THAT COMES TO YOUR MIND, INCLUDING THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE AUDITOR. MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY OF THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT HAS BEEN TURNED IN AND WHAT THE -- WHAT THE PRIORITY IS? >>JAN SMITH: WE ACTUALLY HAD NINE TURNED IN. I THINK TWO MORE CAME IN THIS EVENING. SO WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO RECALCULATE THE NUMBERS AND THEN MS. MERRITT AND I WOULD TRY TO PUT SOME ORDER TO IT. I SEE MARY LOU RIPPING HER LAST ONE. AND THEN AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE THAT AND USE THAT AS A GUIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DISCUSSIONS. BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT TABULATED BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET SOME OF THE ANSWERS UNTIL THIS EVENING. >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. >>JAN SMITH: IF YOU WANT HER TO GIVE A REPORT ON WHAT THE FIRST NINE SAID, WE CAN DO THAT QUICKLY. >>GERALD WHITE: THAT WOULD HELP A GREAT DEAL. >>STEVE LaBOUR: MADAM CHAIRMAN, WITHOUT ALL OF THEM IN, THAT MAY CHANGE. >>DAVID HURLEY: IT'S LIKE GETTING THE RESULTS BEFORE THE ABSENTEE BALLOTS ARE COUNTED. >>STEVE LaBOUR: WE KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. >>JAN SMITH: LIKE THE MISS AMERICA CONTEST -- >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, I SAY LET'S GO WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT. >>JAN SMITH: I DO THINK THAT IN ORDER FOR THE NINE NOT TO INFLUENCE THE OTHER FIVE, THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST WAIT AND HAVE A FULL REPORT WHEN -- AND IF YOU HAVE OR HAVEN'T DONE IT -- IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, PLEASE GET IT IN SO YOUR OPINION CAN BE COUNTED AS WE TRY TO GET OUR PRIORITIES ROLLING HERE. I THINK WE'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. >> MR. WHITE, I FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO IT IN EXCEL. SO IT'S REAL EASY JUST TO GO IN AND CHANGE THEM. >>JAN SMITH: OKAY. BOARD DISCUSSION. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS? >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE A CONCERN BEFORE WE RELATE IT TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. >>JAN SMITH: YES, SIR. >>GERALD WHITE: I NOTICE IN THE TAMPA TRIBUNE METRO SECTION. ANY TIME THE COUNTY HAS A PUBLIC MEETING THEY PUT AN AD IN THE PAPER TO INFORM THE PUBLIC. I WOULD LIKE FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD TO DO THAT, PUT AN AD IN THE PAPER THE DAY BEFORE THE MEETING. THE REASON IS, MADAM CHAIR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE USING ALL THE ELECTRONICS, THE TELEVISION, AND YET THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS NOT THERE. AND MAYBE THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT KNOWS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE THEY USE THOSE SAME TOOLS AND YET THEY PUT THIS AD IN THE PAPER. >>JAN SMITH: MR. WHITE, LET ME TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING PRESS RELEASES AFTER THE MEETING. MS. MERRITT USUALLY WILL WRITE SOMETHING UP AND I'LL LOOK AT IT, AND WE'LL SEND IT OUT TO ALL THE NEWSPAPERS. WE ALSO PUT THE ANNOUNCEMENTS ON THE E-MAIL AS TO THE MEETINGS ON OUR WEB SITE. AND WE FREQUENTLY HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO GET MUCH ATTENDANCE HERE AT THE MEETINGS FROM THE PRESS, BUT WE ALSO -- WE NOTICE THE MEETINGS AND WE REPORT ON THEM. THE PROBLEM WITH ADVERTISING AS THE ONE YOU JUST SHOWED US IS THE COST. IT IS A MAJOR COST. AND I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE, BUT MS. MERRITT, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND -- >> I CAN GET THE COSTS, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW, ALSO, MR. WHITE, THAT THE ST. PETERSBURG TIMES LAST FRIDAY -- I'M SORRY I DIDN'T PUT IT IN YOUR PACKET, I RAN OUT OF TIME -- DID HAVE A NOTICE ABOUT THE MEETING AND HOW TO CONTACT US. >>GERALD WHITE: I SAW THAT IN THE BULLETIN. >> FROM TIME TO TIME, THE BRANDON SHOPPER, THE OBSERVER, THE SENTINEL, HAVE ALL PUT THINGS IN ABOUT THE CHARTER. THEY DON'T PUT IT IN EVERY WEEK BECAUSE THEY ARE LOOKING FOR THINGS TO PUT IN. BUT WHEN WE DO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS, WE WILL HAVE NOTICES ABOUT THAT. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, LET'S TRY ONE TIME AND LET'S SEE DOES THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PICK UP. LET'S TRY ONE TIME THAT BEFORE OUR NEXT MEETING PLACE AN AD IN THE TRIBUNE, IN THE METRO SECTION, AND SEE WHAT -- DO WE HAVE A GREATER PARTICIPATION, PUBLIC MORE AWARENESS BECAUSE THEY HAVE READ IT IN THE TAMPA TRIBUNE. >>JAN SMITH: I MUST TELL YOU THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE -- PEOPLE ARE WATCHING IT ON TV. THEY ARE JUST NOT DRIVING DOWN HERE. THEY ARE LISTENING. WHAT I WOULD STILL LIKE BEFORE WE PUT AN AD IN TO GET THE PRICES AND LET THIS BOARD MAKE A DECISION OF HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PAY. WE HAVE REPORTS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO PAY FOR, AND WE HAVE THE ATTORNEY TO PAY, AND ALL OF THE EXPENSES OF MAILING AND EVERYTHING. AND OUR BUDGET -- WE'RE PROBABLY DOWN $5,000, $6,000. IF YOU WANT TO INVITE SOME GUEST SPEAKERS THAT REQUIRE A PAYMENT, THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE CONSIDERED ALSO. SO PERHAPS -- WE'LL BE MEETING FOR SEVERAL MORE MONTHS. YOU CAN GET US THE PRICES ON THE VARIOUS SIZES OF ADS AND BRING THEM BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING AND THE BOARD CAN MAKE A DECISION IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO PUT AN AD IN THE PAPER. >> FOR THIS YEAR 20 MEETINGS SCHEDULED AND WE ARE AT MEETING NUMBER 8. SO WE ARE NOT EVEN HALFWAY THROUGH. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THIS AD THAT MR. WHITE SHOWED US, THE COUNTY DOESN'T DO THIS BECAUSE THEY THINK IT'S EFFECTIVE. THEY DO IT BECAUSE IT IS REQUIRED BY LAW, THE SIZE. AND I ALSO KNOW IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO UTILIZE OTHER MEANS OTHER THAN A PAID ADVERTISING. >>JAN SMITH: MS. LASHER. >>DENISE LASHER: IT'S ALMOST 20 AFTER 8. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MEET UNTIL 9. MANY TIMES WE GO OVER. CAN WE GO AHEAD AND GET BACK ON THE AGENDA AND -- >>JAN SMITH: I KEEP SAYING LET'S HAVE SOME BOARD DISCUSSION. >>DENISE LASHER: -- AND DISCUSS THIS PROPOSAL BEFORE US. AND THEN IF WE HAVE TIME, WE CAN GO AND TALK ABOUT THE OTHER INFORMATION. BUT WE DO NEED TO GET THIS DONE -- DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO OR NOT DO. >>GERALD WHITE: I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE POSTPONE THAT. THE MAKER OF THE MOTION IS NOT HERE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE INDICATED IN HIS LETTER THAT -- WELL, THE MAKER OF THE MOTION IS NOT HERE. I DON'T KNOW HOW HE -- >>JAN SMITH: WELL, I THINK -- HE MADE THE MOTION TO DO THE DRAFTING AND GET IT TO THIS POINT. AND SO WE HAVE A DRAFT IN FRONT OF US, AND WE HAVE A SET OF MINUTES. AND SO I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS IT IF IT'S THE BOARD'S DESIRE TO DO SO. >>GERALD WHITE: I JUST WANTED TO BE FAIR TO HIM BY PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT HE'S NOT HERE. HE'S THE MAKER OF THE MOTION THAT PUT THIS ISSUE BEFORE US. >> MADAM CHAIR, I CAN ACTUALLY ADDRESS MR. WHITE'S CONCERN. I APOLOGIZE, FIRST OF ALL, TO THE BOARD FOR BEING LATE. I HAD A PRIOR ENGAGEMENT AND THIS WAS ABSOLUTELY THE SOONEST I COULD GET HERE. WE HAD A COMMITTEE MEETING ON THE DRAFTING, AND MR. BEDKE WAS COMPLETELY SATISFIED WITH THE RESULTS OF THAT COMMITTEE WORK. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, WISHED ME TO EXPRESS TO THE ENTIRE BOARD AND I WISH TO CONCUR IN THESE COMMENTS AND SENTIMENTS THAT WE FELT THE COMMITTEE PROCESS WAS VERY PRODUCTIVE, IT WAS A USEFUL DEVICE, BEING IN A SMALLER GROUP ALLOWED FOR A VERY EFFECTIVE AND TIMELY WAY OF BRINGING BACK MEANINGFUL WORK PRODUCT TO THE BOARD. MR. BEDKE IS IN COMPLETE CONCURRENCE AND HAS INDICATED TO ME -- KEVIN, I KNOW I CAN'T BE THERE ON THE 22nd, BUT YOU HAVE MY FULL AUTHORITY AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION TO PRESENT THIS AND THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE AND EXPLAIN WHAT THE CHANGES WERE THAT WE DID. I BROUGHT MY NOTES TODAY TO PROVIDE THAT EXPLANATION. THEY ARE IN LENGTHY DETAIL, OF COURSE, IN THE MINUTES, BUT I CAN SUMMARIZE THEM. >>JAN SMITH: WHY DON'T YOU SUMMARIZE FOR US. >>STEVE LaBOUR: POINT OF ORDER. I HOPE THAT DIRECTIVE OF MR. BEDKE WAS DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETING. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I HAD NO CONVERSATION WITH MR. BEDKE DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETING, WHICH GERALD WHITE WAS PRESENT FOR MOST OF. >>GERALD WHITE: WHEN BOARD MEMBERS MAKE A COMMENT, IN THE SPIRIT OF BOARD MEMBERS ARE MAKING A COMMENT, WE HAVE NO REASON THAT ANYONE UPON THIS GROUP IS CONDUCTING BUSINESS UNDER THE SUNSHINE. I KNOW MR. LaBOUR'S COMMENTS WERE MADE IN JEST AND IN GOOD SPIRIT, BUT FOR THE GOOD OF THIS BOARD, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO PROCEED WITHOUT THAT TYPE OF THING. >>JAN SMITH: MR. AMBLER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE, PLEASE. >>KEVIN AMBLER: YES, MA'AM. IF EVERYONE HAS THEIR ORIGINAL DRAFT -- THE ORIGINAL DRAFT WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THE CHANGES. BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU RIGHT NOW IS THE REVISED VERSION. THE FIRST CHANGE THAT WAS MADE WAS ON PAGE 2 OF THE ORIGINAL DRAFT, WHICH IS THE PARAGRAPH MARKED PAREN 2, CLOSED PAREN, BEGINS THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR WILL BE APPOINTED. I WANT TO GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO GET THERE. THE FIRST CHANGE MADE IN THAT PARAGRAPH WAS TO DELETE THE TERM OR THE PHRASE "A SUPER-MAJORITY VOTE" AND SUBSTITUTE IN ITS PLACE "FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES." THE REASON BEHIND THE COMMITTEE'S WORK IN MAKING THAT CHANGE WAS, WE FELT THAT THE TERMINOLOGY OF "SUPER-MAJORITY VOTE" MIGHT BE CONFUSING. IT DEPENDS ON HOW MANY OF THE COMMISSION ARE PRESENT AND SO FORTH. THIS MAKES IT CLEAR IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT IT REQUIRES FIVE VOTES OF THE COMMISSION IN ORDER TO APPOINT THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. >>DAVID HURLEY: CAN I ADDRESS THAT? >>JAN SMITH: YES, YOU CAN. AND I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION. >>DAVID HURLEY: IN THE EVENT WE WANTED SOMETHING WITH 9 OR 7 OR 37 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND WE COME OUT OF HERE, THE 5 WOULD NOT BE A MAJORITY. SO THE SUPER-MAJORITY WOULD BE FLEX -- WOULD RISE WITH THE TIDE. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT UPON THE ADVICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND KEN WAS THERE AT OUR MEETING, AND WE DISCUSSED THAT POINT, WE FELT THAT, FIRST OF ALL, IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD SUCH THAT WE ADDED ADDITIONAL BOARD MEMBERS, THERE ARE SOME AUTOMATIC CHANGES THAT WOULD OCCUR IN THE NUMBERS THAT WERE NEEDED, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A CHANGE TO THE CHARTER IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS, AND SO OTHER PROVISIONS IN THE CHARTER THAT HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON THAT CHANGE WOULD FOLLOW WITH THAT AS CORRECTIVE AMENDMENTS. SO FOR RIGHT NOW, IT WAS FELT THAT GIVEN THE PRESENT CONSTITUTION OF THE BOARD BEING SEVEN, AND TO ELIMINATE ANY CONFUSION, BECAUSE I BELIEVE SUPER-MAJORITIES CAN FLUCTUATE EVEN WITH THE SEVEN-MEMBER PANEL, DEPENDING ON HOW MANY COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT, AND I'LL DEFER TO YOU -- >> IF I CAN HELP WITH THAT. SUPER-MAJORITY IS DEFINED PRESENTLY UNDER A THE BOARD'S RULES. IT IS NOT DEFINED BY THE CHARTER. IF IT IS THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD'S INTENT TO HAVE FIVE MEMBERS MAKING THIS DECISION, IT WOULD BE EASIER TO STATE IT THAT WAY. IF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD HAS ANOTHER PROPOSAL TO MAKE IT NINE MEMBERS, 11 MEMBERS, THAT KIND OF IDEA, WE CAN INCLUDE IN THAT SECTION AN AMENDMENT INCREASING THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS REQUIRED TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. >>JAN SMITH: BUT IF THAT DIDN'T GO ON THE BALLOT THIS FALL, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO GO ON THE NEXT TIME, AND IF THAT'S DEFEATED, THEN -- >> THAT'S CORRECT. THE ONLY REASON TO HAVE FIVE VERSUS SUPER-MAJORITY IF YOU WANT TO INSIST THAT IT IS FIVE MEMBERS. IF YOU LEAVE IT TO SUPER-MAJORITY AND THAT TERM IS NOT PRESENTLY DEFINED IN THE CHARTER, THAT LEAVES IT UP TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO DECIDE WHAT SUPER-MAJORITY MEANS. >>KEVIN AMBLER: AND A SUPER-MAJORITY -- >>JAN SMITH: WHY NOT DEFINE THE SUPER-MAJORITY IN THE CHARTER? >> YOU CERTAINLY COULD. >>JAN SMITH: FOR THIS CIRCUMSTANCE. >>DAVID HURLEY: MAY I ASK? I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS -- AND I'M SEEING THEIR LIGHT AT THIS POINT. IF YOU WENT TO NINE BOARD MEMBERS, YOU MIGHT NOT WANT JUST HALF PLUS ONE. YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE IT ONE TO 11. THAT WOULD BE A PROVISION TO THAT PROPOSED CHARTER CHANGE. JUST LIKE THIS HAS A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS IT DOES, LIKE THE POLITICAL ACTIVITIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT CAN GO BACK INTO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. >>KEVIN AMBLER: IF AND WHEN THE CHARTER WAS CHANGED TO ADD THOSE ADDITIONAL INSPECTION, WE WILL ADD TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. >>JAN SMITH: DO TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS HAVE TO BE VOTED ON BY THE PUBLIC? OR DO YOU DO TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE. FOR INSTANCE, THE CHARTER MOSTLY REFERS TO "HEs" AS CHAIRMAN. ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE THE CHARTER SORT OF GENDER CORRECT WITHOUT -- WITHOUT AN AMENDMENT? >> I BELIEVE THOSE TWO ISSUES HAVE DIFFERENT ANSWERS. AS FAR AS CHANGING NUMBERS, AS LONG AS THE SUBJECT IS VERY MUCH RELATED, AS IN THIS AMENDMENT, IT INCLUDES CHANGING THE SECTION ON POLITICAL ACTIVITY. IT'S RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AT HAND. IF YOU WANTED TO HAVE ANOTHER CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT CHANGES THE "HEs" TO A MORE NEUTRAL TERM, IT IS PROBABLY BEST AS A SEPARATE ITEM TO RULE OUT ANY CONFUSION. SINCE YOU ARE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF WORDS TO PUT ON THE BALLOT, YOU DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE ANYTHING THAT YOU THEN CAN'T FIND THE SPACE FOR. >>KEVIN AMBLER: IF I MIGHT ADD TO IT. IF WE HAVE A PROVISION IN FRONT OF US THAT INDICATED WE WERE -- THAT IT WAS A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE CHARTER TO ADD FOUR MORE MEMBERS. TO BRING IT UP TO 11, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, INCLUDED IN THAT RESOLUTION FOR THE INCREASE IN NUMBER, IT WOULD SAY, TO CHANGE THE PROVISION DEALING UNDER 4.10 WITH THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR TO REFLECT A NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS, LET'S SAY NINE, FOR A VOTE. SO -- BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE RELATED TO THE SUBJECT OF INCREASING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR. >>JAN SMITH: MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: ALSO, I ATTENDED THE COMMITTEE MEETING. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS LOOKING FOR WAS CONSISTENCY WITH THE CHARTER THAT'S IN PLACE NOW. AND THE REASON THAT I SUPPORTED HAVING FIVE BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER ISSUES WITHIN THE CHARTER REQUIRE THAT SAME NUMBER. AND MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WAS IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE NUMBERS, THEN THE NUMBERS FOR THIS PARTICULAR BODY WOULD -- WOULD CHANGE AS WELL. SO YOU GO WITH WHAT'S IN THE BOOK ACROSS THE BOARD, WITH ANY SUPER-MAJORITY TYPE VOTING. IF THERE IS A CHARTER CHANGE, IT IS CHANGED ALONG WITH IT. REALLY, IT IS A SAFETY NET TO ENSURE THE FIVE. >>KEVIN AMBLER: IT WAS ALSO TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY BECAUSE YOU DID HAVE REFERENCES TO FIVE VOTES ON IMPORTANT ISSUES MENTIONED IN OTHER PLACES IN THE CHARTER. WE WANTED TO BRING THIS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THOSE OTHER PROVISIONS IN THE CHARTER THAT HAD THOSE, WHAT APPEARED TO BE, SUPER-MAJORITY VOTES. >>JAN SMITH: MR. TINKLER. >> I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS WOULD AUTOMATICALLY HAPPEN IF YOU MADE THE COMMISSION NINE MEMBERS. WE WOULD RECOMMEND IF YOU INCREASED THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS TO LOOK THROUGH THE CHARTER TO SEE WHATEVER NUMBERS YOU WISH TO CHANGE IN ALIGNED WITH THAT. THE FIVE IS ALSO MENTIONED UNDER THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, IF YOU WISH TO APPOINT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AT ONE MEETING, IT CAN BE DONE WITH FIVE, VERSUS TWO MEETINGS WITH FOUR. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WERE LOOKING FOR CONSISTENCY. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>KEVIN AMBLER: MOVING ON TO THE NEXT CHANGE. WE FELT THAT WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE CHANGES WHICH WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IN A MOMENT, THAT IT WILL NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO PUT A TERM LIMIT, AND WE DELETED THE LANGUAGE FOR A TERM OF FOUR YEARS FROM THAT FIRST SENTENCE IN SUBPARAGRAPH 2. AND, AGAIN, THE THINKING WAS THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION, IT REQUIRES FIVE VOTES TO HIRE THIS PERSON. THE COUNTY COMMISSION ALSO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TERMINATE THEM. THEY MOST LIKELY WOULD BE A CONTRACT DONE WITH THIS PERSON. THE CONTRACT WILL BE RENEWABLE, AND WE THOUGHT IT BETTER TO LEAVE THAT WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION THEN TO WRITE INTO THE CHARTER AN ACTUAL TERMINATION POINT FOR THAT POSITION. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT CHANGE OR WHY? AND THAT -- I THINK, ALSO, THAT WAS A RESULT OF SOME INPUT THAT GERALD WHITE HAD GIVEN WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT AS WELL. >>GERALD WHITE: WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CONSISTENCY WITH THE CHARTER WE HAVE IN PLACE, AND NOWHERE IN THE CHARTER IS ANYONE SUBJECT TO A TERM. EVERYBODY -- THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ARE APPOINTED. I WAS LOOKING FOR SOME CONSISTENCY. >>KEVIN AMBLER: IN THE NEXT SENTENCE, BEGINNING WITH THE WORD "BEFORE," WE DELETED IN THE THIRD LINE OF THAT SENTENCE -- ACTUALLY THE SECOND LINE, THE PHRASE "A SUPER-MAJORITY VOTE" AND, AGAIN, INSERTED THE WORDS "FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES" TO MAINTAIN THE CONSISTENCY WE DISCUSSED A MOMENT AGO. IN SUBPARAGRAPH 3, THE FIRST SENTENCE, THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR WILL BE A FULL-TIME OFFICER WHO HAS AT LEAST THREE YEARS' EXPERIENCE AS A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT OR A CERTIFIED AUDITOR. WE DELETED THAT SENTENCE AND LEFT THE REMAINDER OF THE PARAGRAPH INTACT. THE REASON FOR THE DELETION HAD TO DO WITH A LENGTHY DISCUSSION IN COMPARING AND CONTRASTING AND EVALUATING HOW TO PULL FROM THE BEST OF THE CHARTER PROVISIONS FROM ALACHUA COUNTY, CLAY COUNTY, OSCEOLA COUNTY, JACKSONVILLE/DUVAL COUNTY, AND I THINK THOSE WERE ALL THE ONES THAT WE HAD BEEN GIVEN EXCERPTS FOR. WE ANALYZE THOSE IN TERMS OF THE QUALIFICATIONS. WE ALSO TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE DISCUSSION THIS BOARD HAS BEEN HAVING, FOR EXAMPLE, ABOUT BROADENING -- EVEN THOUGH THIS ISN'T IN THE CHARTER YET, BUT IT WAS A CONCERN THAT THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED ABOUT BROADENING THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. AND NOT MAKING IT SO NARROW. SO WITH ALL OF THOSE FACTORS IN MIND AND LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAD FROM THE OTHER COUNTIES, WE FELT THAT THE LANGUAGE -- THE AUDITOR SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN ANY OTHER BUSINESS, OCCUPATION HERE. THE COMPENSATION SHALL BE FIXED, AND ALL THAT, THAT SHOULD REMAIN INTACT. WE GOT INTO THE -- I THINK WE GOT INTO THE ACTUAL QUALIFICATIONS. HOLD ON A MOMENT. AND WE SUBSTITUTED -- I DON'T THINK I WROTE IT IN MY HANDWRITTEN NOTES. IT WAS TO BE PULLED FROM THE OTHER CHARTER. LET ME JUST GET THAT IN FRONT OF ME. >> THE CHARTER JUST SAID THREE YEARS. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I WAS LOOKING TO SEE THE ONE THAT KEN HAD PREPARED, ONE, TWO -- >> IF I CAN HELP WITH THAT. ON PAGE 2, SECTION 3. >>KEVIN AMBLER: THIS IS THE ACTUAL -- THIS IS THE REVISED VERSION THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAD PREPARED. WHAT WE DID WAS WE SUBSTITUTED IN PLACE OF WHAT WE JUST DELETED, THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU SEE NOW, WHICH IS THAT THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR SHALL BE A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT HOLDING AN ACTIVE LICENSE TO PRACTICE PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, OR SHALL BE QUALIFIED BY EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING, INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITING PRACTICE, AND FISCAL CONTROLS. THE REMAINDER OF THAT LANGUAGE THAT YOU SEE THERE IS THE SAME AS IT IS ORIGINALLY. WE DELETED THE FIRST SENTENCE AS I EXPLAINED, AND THE FIRST SENTENCE THAT I JUST READ TO YOU WAS TAKEN AS A HYBRID, IF YOU WILL, I BELIEVE, OUT OF -- KEN, WAS THAT CLAY COUNTY? WE TOOK THAT OUT OF CLAY COUNTY. WE ACTUALLY IMPROVED ON THE CLAY COUNTY ONE JUST A BIT, BECAUSE THE CLAY COUNTY ONE, AND I HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE, WAS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING. THE CLAY COUNTY ONE READ, AT THAT TIME OF HIS OR HER APPOINTMENT AND THROUGHOUT HIS TENURE, THE COMMISSION AUDITOR SHALL BE A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT HOLDING AN ACTIVE LICENSE TO PRACTICE PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY IN THE STATE AND SHALL BE QUALIFIED BY PUBLIC EXPERIENCE AND INTERNAL PRACTICES AND FISCAL CONTROLS. THE PROMISE WITH THE LANGUAGE FROM CLAY COUNTY IS, IT TALKED ABOUT AT THE TIME OF HIS PERFORMANCE AND THROUGHOUT HIS TENURE. AND THAT MODIFIES THE CPA, BUT IT DOESN'T MODIFY THAT THE PERSON CAN BE QUALIFIED THROUGH EDUCATION, EXPERIENCE, AND GOVERNMENTAL TRAINING, AND HOW DOES THAT FIT WITH THE MODIFIER AT THE TIME OF EMPLOYMENT AND TENURE. IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE YOUR EXPERIENCE THROUGHOUT YOUR TENURE. TO ELIMINATE THAT BIT OF CONFUSION WITH THE INTRODUCTORY PHRASE OF THE CLAY COUNTY PROVISION, WE DELETED THAT AND CAME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU WHICH IS THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SUBPARAGRAPH THREE. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? I DIDN'T MEAN FOR THAT TO BE OVERLY CONFUSING. >> THE WORD "OR" IS CONFUSING TO ME. >>KEVIN AMBLER: WHICH WORD "OR" OR "SHALL BE"? >> WILL NOT HAVE TO HAVE A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT OR -- >>KEVIN AMBLER: THAT'S CORRECT. THEY DO NOT HAVE TO BE A CPA. >> I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE A CPA. >>KEVIN AMBLER: WHAT WE ARE LEAVING IT UP TO IS -- WE'RE LEAVING IT UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE COMMISSION AND THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS GIVEN IN OUR COMMITTEE DISCUSSION, AND I THINK THIS WAS MR. BEDKE'S EXAMPLE IS, FOR EXAMPLE, HIS FATHER WORKED FOR THE ARMY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS IN THE AGITANT GENERAL'S OFFICE AND DID ALL THE SAME TYPE OF FUNCTIONS THAT THE CPA AND PUBLIC AUDITOR WOULD DO BUT IS NOT DESIGNATED AS A CPA. BY 20 YEARS' OF EXPERIENCE AND DOING THIS TYPE OF FUNCTION, THIS PERSON WOULD BE QUALIFIED EXCEPT THEY DON'T HAVE A CPA LICENSE. RATHER THAN HAMSTRING THE COMMISSION, IT GIVES A BROAD PARAMETER FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS. NOW CERTAINLY IF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO NARROW THAT, AND THEY HAVE A WHOLE GROUP OF CANDIDATES, AND SOME ARE CPAs AND SOME ARE NOT, AND THAT GROUP OF FIVE THAT HAVE TO WORK FOR THE APPOINTMENT DECIDE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US THAT IT BE A CPA, THEY CAN DO SO. BUT IT DOESN'T CONSTRICT THEM FROM DOING SO, AND ALLOWS FOR OTHER TYPES OF EXPERIENCE TO QUALIFY. >>JAN SMITH: I WANT TO ASK MR. TINKLER A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. THE REQUIREMENT WHEN WE DO AUDITS -- WHEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HIRES AUDITS, WHEN THE -- FOR INSTANCE, WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS REQUIRED TO DO AN AUDIT, WE WERE REQUIRED TO COME UNDER THE AICPA YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS. AND I BELIEVE THE YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS SETS OUT THAT THE PEOPLE CARRYING OUT THE AUDITS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS WHICH WOULD MAKE THEM CPAs. AND SO, YOU WOULD HAVE A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE YELLOW BOOK STANDARD AND THE CHARTER, I BELIEVE, IF YOU CHANGE THIS. AND THE INTENT OF THE COUNTY HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO FOLLOW THE YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS. SO I THINK YOU HAVE A CONFLICT HERE. AND THAT WILL NEED TO BE RESOLVED. >> MADAM CHAIR, YOU CAN CERTAINLY INCLUDE THAT IN THIS PROVISION, IF YOU WHICH. THE AUDITS THAT AFFECT ORGANIZATIONS BEYOND THE CHARTER THAT USUALLY INVOLVE STATE LAW AND HAS SPECIFICS ON HOW THOSE AUDITS MUST BE CARRIED OUT. FOR THIS ONE, THIS IS IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW AT THIS POINT FOR GOOD FISCAL MANAGEMENT. AND, THEREFORE, YOU CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THE DECISION ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUDITOR. >>KEVIN AMBLER: MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE EXPLANATION THAT KEN GAVE US IN THE COMMITTEE DISCUSSION WAS THAT AN INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN A FISCAL AUDITOR OR THE TYPE OF AUDIT FUNCTIONS, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT PERFORMS. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HURLEY. >>DAVID HURLEY: I THINK ONE OF THE DIFFERENCE TOO IS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HIRING AN ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR AN ACCOUNTANT OUTSIDE, AND THE PURPOSE OF THE YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS WAS TO HAVE A MINIMUM SO THAT THOSE PEOPLE CAME TO YOU AND OFFERED A PROPOSAL, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE QUALIFICATION -- LET'S SEE, THEY'VE GOT THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER AND THEY MEET THE YELLOW BOOK STANDARDS AND THEY ARE DONE. THE ISSUE HERE WHERE WE ARE HIRING AN INTERNAL AUDITOR, THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE INTERNALLY WITHIN THE COUNTY, THE STATE GOVERNMENT, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHERE PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A PARTICULAR LICENSE TO DO THAT. I KNOW THE PARTICULAR LICENSE THAT I HAVE, IF I WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, I COULD DO IN THIS STATE WHAT I DO WITHOUT THAT LICENSE. AND THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT. AND I THINK THAT IN THE COUNTY -- THE THING I LIKE -- THAT WAS A PERFECT EXAMPLE I THINK FOR SOMEONE THAT HAD BEEN DOING THIS IN THE MILITARY THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN HANDLING BUDGETS THAT -- OURS WILL BE A PUNY LITTLE THING FOR WHAT THEY WERE HANDLING IN THE MILITARY. COULD BE VERY WELL QUALIFIED AND IT WOULD BE A SHAME. SORT OF WHAT HAPPENS IN PINELLAS WITH -- YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A MAN WITH A MILITARY BACKGROUND WHO HAS DONE A DARN GOOD JOB AS A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IN PINELLAS COUNTY. DID I SAY THAT THE WAY HE JUST WANTED ME TO SAY THAT TOO. FRED HAS DONE A WONDERFUL JOB WITH HIS MILITARY BACKGROUND. HE HAD TREMENDOUS QUALIFICATIONS BUT DID NOT HAVE THE CREDENTIALS OF THE MASTER'S DEGREE IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND COULD NOT SERVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. SO WE WOULD MISS AN OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT BY PUTTING DOWN. I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME GOOD OPPORTUNITIES OUT THERE. >>JAN SMITH: AND IN THAT REGARD, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY OF INTEREST TO MOST BOARD MEMBERS THAT, IN FACT, THE PERSON THAT CARRIES OUT THE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MR. MARQUIS IS A HIGHLY TRAINED, EDUCATED PERSON WITH A COUPLE OF ADVANCED DEGREES TO, IN FACT, SERVE IN THE CAPACITY. AND HE'S THE ONE THAT'S PROBABLY CARRYING OUT A GREAT DEAL OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES. MR. MARQUIS JUST LUCKED OUT IN HIRING HIM TO DO THAT. PERHAPS -- >>DAVID HURLEY: MAYBE BECAUSE FRED HAS THE EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE TO HIRE SUCH A PERSON. >>JAN SMITH: AND THAT'S A GOOD THING. BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S A NEED. IF YOU WANT THE PUBLIC TRUST, AND IF YOU WANT THE INDEPENDENCE, WHICH IS A PHRASE -- THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR TO COME UNDER THE BOARD. I THINK IF YOU WANT THAT INDEPENDENCE OR YOU WANT THE TRUST OF THE PUBLIC, YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENTS, AND I THINK ELIMINATING PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENTS SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN QUALIFY FOR THIS JOB IS -- IS -- IS PUTTING THE PUBLIC IN A POSITION OF MAYBE NOT HAVING THE ABILITY TO PUT FULL FAITH AND TRUST IN THE PERSON THAT'S CARRYING OUT THE JOB. AND I TEND TO AGREE WITH MR. BALLARD, THAT THE PHRASE HERE OUGHT TO SAY, AND SHALL BE QUALIFIED BY EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING. AND I THINK THE WORD "AND" TO ME IS VERY IMPORTANT RIGHT THERE AS IT IS APPARENTLY TO MR. BALLARD, AND I THINK TAKING AWAY A LEVEL OF PROFESSIONALISM IS NOT A GOOD THING, IN A GOVERNMENT THAT'S WANTING TO BE PROFESSIONAL. MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT MAYBE WE ALLOW MR. AMBLER TO CONTINUE WITH POINTING OUT THE CHANGES MADE FROM THE TWO DRAFTS AND WE GO BACK AND MAYBE TAKE EACH POINT. I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE TOTALITY OF WHAT THE CHANGES WERE, AND THEN MAYBE THEN GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFICS. >>JAN SMITH: MR. AMBLER. YOU'RE ON. >>KEVIN AMBLER: OKAY. THE NEXT CHANGE THAT WE MADE APPEARS ON SUBPARAGRAPH 5, AND WHAT WE DID THERE WAS WE TOOK THE EXISTING LANGUAGE AND WE ADDED TO IT THAT THE BUDGET FOR THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR SHALL BE APPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND THE REASON FOR THAT WAS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP, I THINK, BY MR. WHITE AND BY MR. BEDKE AND MYSELF, AND, ALSO, TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION YOUR CONCERNS, MADAM CHAIR, THAT SOMEHOW THE OFFICE OF THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR WILL GET OUT OF HAND AND TURN INTO AN UNRULY SEPARATE ENTITY UNTO ITSELF, UNBRIDLED BY FISCAL CONSTRAINTS. WE PUT IN THE BUDGET HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO SHOW THAT THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP THEM CONFINED WITHIN THAT LIMITED SPACE. NOT ONLY DOES THIS AUDIT OFFICE ASSIST THE COUNTY COMMISSION, BUT THE COUNTY COMMISSION STILL RETAINS THE CONTROL TO REIGN IN THE PURSE STRINGS SO THEY DON'T GET OUT OF HAND. THE NEXT CHANGE THAT WE MADE WAS IN SUBPARAGRAPH 6. AND FOR THAT, WE -- THE ORIGINAL READING WAS, THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR SHALL BE DEEMED VACANT IF THE INCUMBENT AND HAD A SEMICOLON. WE CHANGED THE SEMICOLON TO A COLON. TAKES UP RESIDENCE OUTSIDE THE COUNTY. WE LEFT THAT INTACT. SEMICOLON. WE TOOK OUT THE PHRASE "IS BY DEATH, ILLNESS, OR OTHER CASUALLY UNABLE TO CONTINUE TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE" AND SUBSTITUTED DIES, SEMICOLON, RESIGNED -- SHOULD BE A SEMICOLON AFTER RESIGNS, OR IS REMOVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES. SO THAT LANGUAGE, FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES WAS ADDED. A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE SHALL BE FILLED IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE ORIGINAL APPOINTMENT. HERE, AGAIN, WE FELT THAT THE LANGUAGE ABOUT ILLNESS AND CASUALTY, UNABLE TO PERFORM IN THE OFFICE AND THE LIKE WAS KIND OF SUPERFLUOUS LANGUAGE AND GOT US INTO A LOT OF ISSUES AS A LAWYER THAT I AND MR. BEDKE THOUGHT MIGHT BE UNNECESSARY, YOU KNOW. ILLNESSES, ADA, FAMILY LEAVE ACT. THE IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT IF THEY LEFT THE AREA AND WERE NOT RESIDENTS, IF THEY DIED, THEY RESIGNED, OR THEY WERE REMOVED BY THE BOARD, THOSE ARE THE MAIN POINTS. AND IF FOR ANY OTHER REASON THEY CAN'T PERFORM THE JOB, THEN THOSE WILL BE EVALUATED ON THEIR MERITS BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COULD BE A BASIS FOR REMOVAL. AND SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO FURTHER DEFINE THAT IN THE PROVISION. ONE GLOBAL COMMENT I'LL MAKE AT THIS POINT. WHEN WE'RE WRITING THIS. WE KIND OF TOOK THIS FROM THE CONCEPT WHEN YOU ARE PUTTING A CHARTER PROVISION TOGETHER, YOU'RE TRYING TO CREATE A CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION THAT WILL STAND THE TEST OF TIME. SO SOMETIMES LESS LANGUAGE IS BETTER BECAUSE YOU GIVE A BROAD DISCRETION TO YOUR COUNTY COMMISSION ONCE YOU SET THE PARAMETER IN PLACE TO ALLOW THEM THE LATITUDE TO CONTROL THAT PARTICULAR OFFICE. ANYWAY, THAT WAS KIND OF THE THINKING THAT WENT INVOLVED IN SIMPLIFYING THE LANGUAGE FOR SUBPARAGRAPH 6. SUBPARAGRAPH 7 IN 9 ORIGINAL DRAFT WAS DELETED. -- AND THAT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT READ THE COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR WILL NOT HOLD POLITICAL OFFICE OR TAKE PART IN ANY POLITICAL ACTIVITY OTHER THAN VOTING. REASON FOR THAT IS WE TIGHTENED UP THE LANGUAGE -- AND I'M COMING UP TO THAT IN A MINUTE, OUR VERY NEXT CHANGE. DOWN BELOW THAT IT LAST SECTION 2, SECTION 9.04, POLITICAL ACTIVITIES. AND THERE WE CHANGED THAT TO READ, IN THE -- RIGHT NOW IT READS, POLITICAL ACTIVITIES OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED AND CONTROLLED BY GENERAL LAW, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, AND ACCEPT THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S ASSISTANTS AND DIVISION AND OFFICE HEADS, COMMA, THE COUNTY'S INTERNAL PERFORMANCE -- AND WE ADDED THE WORD AUDITORS -- AND THE INTERNAL AUDITOR'S PERSISTENCE AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND HIS ASSISTANTS SHALL NOT HOLD ANY POLITICAL OFFICE OR TAKE PART IN ANY POLITICAL ACTIVITY RELATING TO COUNTY COMMISSION ELECTIONS OTHER THAN VOTING. SO WHAT WE DID THERE WAS IS WE TIGHTENED UP THAT LANGUAGE, WHICH IS IN ANOTHER PROVISION OF THE CHARTER TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER OFFICES I MENTIONED. AND WE DELETED THE REDUNDANCY IN THAT SUBPARAGRAPH 7 THINKING IT WASN'T ELSEWHERE. WE DIDN'T NEED IT. IT WAS COVERED HERE. >>JAN SMITH: I'M SURPRISED YOU DIDN'T NAME THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AS HIS OR HER. >>KEVIN AMBLER: WE WERE GOING TO. BUT WE WANTED TO TAKE THE LANGUAGE AS IT EXISTED. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. WE WANTED TO TAKE OUT "HIS" AND MAKING IT "THEIR" ASSISTANTS. >>