(9/14/00 Charter Review Board)

**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, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING
OF SEPTEMBER 14th, THE YEAR 2000.
WE WILL PROCEED WITH OUR USUAL ORDER OF BUSINESS THIS EVENING AND
BEGIN WITH THE PLEDGE TO THE FLAG.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. LaBOUR.
MY APOLOGIES.
MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
>> CERTAINLY.
[ ROLL CALL TAKEN ]
>> YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU.
>> I WANT MS. WILLIAMS TO KNOW, SOMETIMES THERE IS NO SLACK FOR BEING AT
THE BEGINNING OF THE ALPHABET.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> THAT'S TRUE.
>>JAN SMITH:  BOARD MEMBERS, JUST FOR A MOMENT.
WE SHOULD OFFER OUR CONGRATULATIONS TO MR. BELTRAN FOR RUNNING A
GOOD CAMPAIGN AND FOR PUTTING HIMSELF OUT TO THE PUBLIC.
WE WISH YOU WELL WITH WHATEVER YOUR FUTURE ENDEAVORS ARE.
LOOK FORWARD TO SERVING OUT THIS TERM WITH YOU ON THE CHARTER REVIEW
BOARD.
>>HENRY BELTRAN:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>JAN SMITH:  WE HAVE MINUTES FROM AUGUST 10th AND AUGUST 24th.
I BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE RECEIVED THEIR PACKETS.
MS. LASHER DID NOT RECEIVE HERS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO DID NOT RECEIVE A PACKET FOR THIS EVENING'S
MEETING?
WE HAVE THE MINUTES FOR AUGUST 10th.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES?
>>GERALD WHITE:  MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  SECOND.
>>JAN SMITH:  MOTION BY MR. WHITE AND A SECOND BY MR. HURLEY TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 10th.
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
NOW THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 24th.
HAD YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THEM, BOARD MEMBERS?
>> I GOT THEM ON E-MAIL.
>> LET'S HOLD THOSE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING THEN.
OKAY?
WE'LL JUST HOLD THAT OFF.
WE HAVE SOME NEW FACES HERE THIS EVENING.
AND WE HOPE TO HEAR FROM EACH OF YOU THAT'S IN THE AUDIENCE THIS
EVENING.
WE HAVE A SIGN-IN LIST, AND I'LL TRY TO REMEMBER -- READ WHO HAS SIGNED
IN THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AND WHO IS JUST HERE VISITING.
EACH PERSON HAS FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, AND
ADDRESS ISSUES THAT RELATE TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD AND OUR
DELIBERATIONS.
MR. BART SIEGEL IS FIRST, AND THEN, NEXT, IS LEE ELAM.
MR. SIEGEL.
>>> GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS BART SIEGEL.
I'M A CPA, AND JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I'M A CANDIDATE FOR THE CLERK
OF THE CIRCUIT COURT.
AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TODAY.
IN MY OPINION, YOU SHOULD NEITHER ACCEPT SEX NOR POLITICAL
CONTRIBUTIONS FROM YOUR EMPLOYEES, THEIR FAMILIES, OR FROM THEIR
VENDORS THAT DO BUSINESS WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT.
IT IS SIMPLY NOT THE PROPER THING TO DO.
AND YOU HAVE TO ASSUME THAT THE FAVORS ARE BEING RECEIVED AS A
FUNCTION OF COERCION OR AN ATTEMPT TO GAIN FAVOR.
SINCE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS DO NOT SEEM TO BE EXERCISING PROPER
JUDGMENT AND DO NOT SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS FUNDAMENTAL
CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS BETWEEN THEMSELVES AND THEIR SUBORDINATES,
I BELIEVE THAT A RULE ADDRESSING THE SITUATION IS NECESSITATED AND
SHOULD BE ENTERED INTO THE CHARTER.
THAT'S ONE ISSUE.
I SEE THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT UNDERSTAND THIS,
AND THEY STRICTLY PROHIBIT THE INVOLVEMENT OF THEIR EMPLOYEES IN THEIR
CAMPAIGN.
WHEREAS OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS DO NOT, AND THEY ACTUALLY SOLICIT THE
INVOLVEMENT OF THEIR EMPLOYEE IN THEIR CAMPAIGN.
AND THE ONLY WAY TO REMOVE THIS PRESSURE FROM EMPLOYEES IS BY
PROHIBITING IT ON THE COUNTY LEVEL.
ALSO, I THINK THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY
VOTED FOR TERM LIMITS.
SOMEHOW, SOME OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE BECOME MORE ELECTED
THAN OTHERS.
THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE TERM LIMITS.
THIS SITUATION MUST BE RECTIFIED.
THE COUNTY CHARTER MUST BE AMENDED TO SUBJECT ALL ELECTED COUNTY
OFFICIALS TO EIGHT-YEAR TERM LIMITS.
IN ADDITION, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE A BAD POLICY THAT ALL
COUNTY-APPOINTED OFFICIALS, SUCH AS THOSE THAT WORK IN THE VARIOUS
AUTHORITIES ALSO BE SUBJECTED TO TERM LIMITS.
BECAUSE I'VE FOUND THROUGH MY OBSERVATIONS THAT SOME OF THEM CREATE
THEIR OWN LITTLE FIEFDOMS AND CAN'T BE REMOVED AND THEY BECOME VERY,
VERY POWERFUL AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS OUR INTENTION WHEN THEY WERE
ORIGINALLY APPOINTED.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION WITH SEVERAL OF MY
FRIENDS THINK THERE SHOULD BE AN INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR.
THESE PEOPLE I RESPECT.
I RESPECT THEIR OPINION, BUT I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THEM.
I'VE SENT YOU A LETTER OUTLINING MY REASONS FOR THE OBJECTION OF
CREATING THIS NEW BUREAUCRACY CALLED "THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE
AUDITOR."
I BELIEVE THIS IS AN ABUSE OF THE CHARTER AMENDMENT PROCESS.
THE CURRENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE THE COMPLETE
AUTHORITY TO HIRE ANY AUDITOR OR CONSULTANT THEY WANT AT THIS TIME.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IS PERCEIVED AS A
OBSTRUCTIONIST IN THIS PROCESS AND SOME FEEL THAT THE PRESENT CLERK OF
THE COURT CANNOT COMPETENTLY OVERSEE THE EXECUTION OF A PROPER
PERFORMANCE AUDIT.
AS YOU KNOW, HE'S SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE THE INDEPENDENCE -- HE'S
INDEPENDENTLY ELECTED AND HE SHOULD OVERSEE AUDITS.
TRADITIONALLY, YOU WOULD EXPECT THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, IF
THERE WERE A PERFORMANCE AUDIT TO BE PERFORMED, HE WOULD BE ASKED TO
OVERSEE IT, AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHETHER IT'S LACK OF EDUCATION,
WHETHER IT'S LACK OF ABILITY, HE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ABLE TO OVERSEE
PERFORMANCE AUDITS TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION.
I THINK BY PUTTING THIS IN THE -- BY MAKING THIS POSITION AS A FUNCTION OF
THE CHARTER AMENDMENT PROCESS, I THINK YOU ARE GOING TO HAMSTRING
FUTURE BOARDS WITH THIS POTENTIALLY DISRUPTIVE, INEFFECTIVE, NEW, AND
IN MY OPINION, REDUNDANT OFFICE.
I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD SOLVE A SHORT-TERM PROBLEM WITH A LONG-TERM
SOLUTION.
THE ANSWER TO THIS PROBLEM IS EITHER DISCIPLINE OR REPLACE THE CURRENT
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OR TO ELECT A NEW CLERK OF THE COURT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. SIEGEL.
HE'S MADE SOME COMMENTS THAT -- AFTER WE HEAR FROM ALL THE PUBLIC, I
WILL ASK OUR ATTORNEY TO COMMENT ON.
THE NEXT PERSON HERE TO SPEAK -- THERE'S THREE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN --
LISTED THEMSELVES TOGETHER, AND THE FIRST ONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK
IS MIKE CARDUCCI.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK ON THE SAME
SUBJECT SINCE I DID SPEAK LAST TIME.
IT WAS SAD TO SEE THAT WE WERE ONLY TWO ATTENDING YOUR MEETING.
I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF TO WRITE SOME THINGS AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME
THINGS TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS, AND I HOPE THEIR VIEWS ARE HELPFUL TO YOU
IN MAKING A DECISION.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT TO YOU IN THE MAP THAT SHOWS IN YELLOW THE
CITY OF TAMPA AND THE WHITE SHOWN IN DISTRICTING 1, 2, 3, AND 4, OUR
PRESENT STRUCTURE FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE THREE
AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS, OF COURSE, REPRESENT THE COUNTY AT LARGE
WITHOUT DISTRICT REPRESENTATION SPECIFICALLY.
I WOULD LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT A SYSTEM REALLY
DOES NOT MAKE A GOVERNMENT.
PEOPLE MAKE A GOVERNMENT.
AND I BRING TO YOU OUR PRESENT MOST FANATICAL MOVEMENT IN THE BUCS.
MR. DUNGY WAS A COACH TWO YEARS AGO WITHOUT THE PLAYERS AND HE
DIDN'T WIN.
BUT THE SAME SYSTEM WITH THE PLAYERS, HE DID WIN.
SO WE IN BUSINESS KNOW THAT A WINNING COMBINATION OF AN ORGANIZATION,
MEANING PROFITABLE IN THAT CASE, IT'S THE PEOPLE.
THE PEOPLE MAKE A BUSINESS GO.
THEY ALSO MAKE A GOVERNMENT GO.
A GOOD SYSTEM ONLY HELPS GOOD PEOPLE.
A GOOD SYSTEM WITH BAD PEOPLE WILL NOT SOLVE A PROBLEM.
WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT IS WORKABLE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HOPE WE CAN
TWEAK IT TO MAKE IT MORE VIABLE TO ADJUST TO THE LAWS OF THE LAND,
REPRESENTATION BY POPULATION.
I HAVE A MAP IN FRONT OF YOU THAT SHOWS THE AREA THAT HAS THE GREATEST
DENSITY AND THE LARGEST CONCENTRATION OF POPULATION TEN YEARS AGO
WAS BASICALLY TAMPA.
AND THEY CONTROLLED EVERYTHING IN THE COUNTY, AND RIGHTFULLY SO.
I NEVER QUESTIONED THE OPINION OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO LIVE IN THE AREA
THAT THEY MAKE THE DECISIONS.
I ONLY QUESTION PEOPLE WHO MAKE DECISIONS AND DON'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH
THEM.
NEEDLESS TO SAY, WE HAVE HAD MANY, MANY WARS OVER THAT VERY CONCEPT,
STARTING WITH THE REVOLUTION TO WORLD WAR II.
OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE HITLER RULE THE WORLD.
NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, BUT HE LIVES IN GERMANY.
REPRESENTATION AND LIVING UNDER THAT REPRESENTATION IS MORE
IMPORTANT.
IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, WE HAVE HAD A TREMENDOUS POPULATION EXPLOSION
IN THIS COUNTY, MUCH TO THE DISMAY OF PEOPLE THAT GO AROUND AND
WRINGING THEIR HANDS TO SAY WE NEED RAILROADS AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT
THINGS.
THE POPULATION IS NOT IN TAMPA.
THE POPULATION GROWTH IS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITUATION YOU SAY TO YOURSELF HOW BAD IS IT NOW
AND HOW BAD IS IT GOING TO BE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT MAP, WHAT YOU SHOULD SEE IS THAT THE GROWTH IS
ALL IN UNINCORPORATED AND IT IS ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.
IF YOU EXTRAPOLATE THOSE NUMBERS AS THE COUNTY'S PLANNING COMMISSION
HAS DONE, YOU WILL FIND THEY ARE CONSTANTLY ADJUSTING THEM UPWARD
AND ADJUSTING THEM UPWARD, YOU ARE PUTTING MORE PEOPLE IN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA.
ANY DECISION YOU MAKE WITH THIS CHARTER BOARD, REPRESENTING THIS
CENSUS CHANGE IN THE NEXT YEAR, HAS TO RECOGNIZE WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN IN THE NEXT CENSUS, AND IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
IF YOU TRY TO PUT THIS POPULATION INTO FOUR DISTRICTS, YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE A PROBLEM.
AND THE PROBLEM IS GOING TO EXIST WITH THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF HAVING AN
AREA WHERE MINORITIES HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE REPRESENTATION.
I SPOKE LAST TIME WHEN MS. TOKELY WAS HERE.
AND SHE RIGHTLY SAID, WE WANT REPRESENTATION.
AND SHE WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ARE GOING TO DO THAT IN FOUR DISTRICTS WHEN YOU
LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, DESPITE THE FACT OF WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK AT THE
MOMENT.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FUTURE GROWTH IN THE COUNTY, IT'S GOING TO
BECOME MORE PREVALENT THAT YOU CAN'T DO IT IN FOUR DISTRICTS.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT IN MORE THAN FOUR DISTRICTS NOW, YOU ARE
GOING TO WANT TO DO IT IN THE NEXT CHARTER.
ALL I'M SAYING TO YOU IS BE SMART ENOUGH TO DO IT NOW, PUT THE SEVEN
DISTRICTS IN, AND HAVE AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSIONER FOR EACH DISTRICT.
EACH ONE REPRESENTING PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE DISTRICT, SUPPORTING THE
PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE DISTRICT, AND HAVING HOPEFULLY THE SUPPORT OF
THE PEOPLE.
WITH THAT, I HAVE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WILL EXPOUND ON THIS SUBJECT, AND I
WILL NOT TAKE ANY MORE OF YOUR TIME.
I THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST AS A LAST PARTING
REMARK IS PUTTING AN OVERSEER ON TOP OF THAT, A STRONG ONE, WOULD BE
A DISASTER TO THIS COMBINATION.
I DON'T WANT TO BE NEGATIVE, BUT WE HAVE SEEN THAT IN OUR LOCAL AREA
AND I THINK IT'S WRONG AND THAT, AGAIN, IS ANOTHER SUBJECT.
CAN I LEAVE THAT MAP THERE FOR THE OTHERS?
>>JAN SMITH:  YES.
MR. ELAM.
I HAVE MR. ELAM AS 2.
BUT YOU CAN CHANGE THE ORDER.
THAT'S FINE.
MR. FERARRO.
>> MADAM CHAIRMAN, WHILE THEY'RE SETTING UP.
WE DO HAVE AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE.
IF THOSE ARE REDUCED TO SMALLER, IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR ALL OF US TO SEE.
AND MR. WHITE AND MR. WILKE IS KIND OF OUT ON THE SIDELINES AS WELL AS --
>>JAN SMITH:  FEEL FREE TO STAND UP BEHIND US.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  LEFT AND RIGHT FIELD CAN'T SEE WHAT'S GOING ON, RIGHT?
>>JAN SMITH:  GO AHEAD.
>> MY NAME IS VINCE FERARRO.
I'M A CPA AND A BRANDON RESIDENT.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOU ON REPRESENTATION.
OVER THE PAST YEARS -- I WAS BORN IN TAMPA AND EVERYTHING SEEMED TO BE
RUNNING SMOOTHLY IN THE PAST BECAUSE THE POPULATION WAS IN TAMPA.
AS MR. CARDUCCI SAYS THE POPULATION HAS SHIFTED.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT ASPECT OF THE CHARTER REVIEW, AND
THAT'S REPRESENTATION.
WHEN YOU LIVE IN A COMMUNITY, YOUR MIND THINKS LIKE THAT COMMUNITY,
AND YOU BELIEVE IN THAT COMMUNITY.
WHEN IT COMES CLOSE TO HOME, YOU'RE MORE ATTUNED TO THE ISSUES THAT IT
WOULD BE IF YOU WERE ACROSS THE COUNTY.
THAT'S ONLY HUMAN NATURE.
FAIR REPRESENTATION AT A COUNTYWIDE LEVEL NEEDS MEMBERS AND
REPRESENTATIONS ON BOARDS AND COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS FROM A
BROADER SPECTRUM.
BECAUSE IT'S ONLY NATURE TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN BACK DOOR FIRST.
IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND IF YOU REFER TO THE LARGER SHEET, APPOINTED
BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER, COUNTY COMMISSION IN HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY, THERE ARE 432 APPOINTED POSITIONS.
OF WHICH, 333 AND THE NUMBERS IN RED IS THE PERCENTAGES OR 77% ARE IN
TAMPA.
TEMPLE TERRACE HAS 15.
PLANT CITY HAS 9.
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA HAS 75.
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THERE ARE SEVEN, OF WHICH FIVE LIVE IN TAMPA,
AND TWO LIVE IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE M.P.O. HAS 15.
11 LIVE IN TAMPA.
NONE IN TEMPLE TERRACE, NONE IN PLANT CITY -- ONE IN TEMPLE TERRACE, ONE
IN PLANT CITY, AND TWO IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
THE M.P.O. IS A BOARD OF NINE, MAKING UP OF SEVEN IN TAMPA, ONE IN TEMPLE
TERRACE, ONE IN PLANT CITY, AND NONE IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
IN TOTAL OF A 463 ELECTED OR APPOINTED POSITIONS, 356 OF THEM LIVE IN
TAMPA.
UNINCORPORATED HAS 79.
IF YOU LOOK NOW TO THE SHORTER SHEET, WE'VE CONVERTED THAT TO
PERCENTAGES.
TAMPA RESIDENTS HAVE 76.9% OF THE REPRESENTATION.
COMPARE TO ITS POPULATION OF 31%.
TEMPLE TERRACE HAS 3.7% AGAINST 2.1% OF ITS POPULATION.
PLANT CITY HAS 3 -- 2.4 WITH A POPULATION OF 2.9.
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS 17% AND 64% OF
THE POPULATION.
IN CLOSING, I WOULD LIKE FOR Y'ALL TO CONSIDER THE WAY THIS COUNTY IS RUN
AND THE REPRESENTATIONS, NOT ONLY ON ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUT APPOINTED
OFFICIALS.
TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN THE BATTLE CRY OF OUR
FOREFATHERS.
TODAY, OUR BATTLE CRY IS NO VOICE, NO FAIR AND EQUAL REPRESENTATION, NO
TAXATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONSIDERING THIS ISSUE.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  MADAM CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION.
>>JAN SMITH:  YES, MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  QUESTION.
WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE --
>> I DIDN'T HEAR YOU?
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF CITIZENS WHO LIVE IN THE CITY
OF TAMPA THAT PAY TAXES?
>> I DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER.
>>JAN SMITH:  100%.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  OF THE PEOPLE THAT OWN PROPERTY?
IT'S 100%.
>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  AD VALOREM.
>>DENISE LASHER:  MSTU IS PAID IN UNINCORPORATED.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  MY POINT IS, I THINK YOU NEED TO LOOK BEYOND THE
PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION.
IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, CITY
RESIDENTS DO PAY COUNTY TAXES AND UNINCORPORATED RESIDENTS DO NOT
PAY CITY TAXES.
>> MY TIME IS RUNNING OUT.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  YOUR TIME HAS RUN OUT.
>> WE CAN DEBATE THIS ISSUE ON A LARGER SCALE IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  WE'LL DO IT AFTER THE MEETING.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. FERARRO, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION ALSO.
THE M.P.O. CURRENTLY HAS 14 MEMBERS.
WERE YOU NOT COUNTING THE APPOINTMENTS LIKE THE EXPRESSWAY
AUTHORITY AND THE AVIATION AUTHORITY --
>> WE LEFT THOSE OFF.
THEY ARE NONVOTING MEMBERS.
>>JAN SMITH:  THEY ARE NOW GOING TO BE VOTING MEMBERS.
IN FACT, THE COUNTY IS GOING TO GET ANOTHER APPOINTMENT TO THAT BOARD
AND THE NUMBERS ARE GOING TO CHANGE.
THE ONLY NONVOTING MEMBERS WILL BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
>> I DON'T THINK THE PERCENTAGES WOULD CHANGE THOUGH, IN RELATIONSHIP
THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.
TAXATION AND PAYING THE TAXES AS TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IF WE'RE LOOKING AT DOLLAR VOLUMES, STEVE, WITH A LARGE COMMERCIAL
PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, ALL CONCENTRATED IN
TAMPA, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT DOLLAR VOLUME IS ONE THING.
IF WE ARE LOOKING AT THE TAXES PER INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER VOTING PUBLIC,
I THINK YOU WILL COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT ANSWER ON WHERE THE MONEY
IS BEING PAID OUT.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  YOU ALSO NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPORTS
AUTHORITY, THE PORT AUTHORITY, AND THE AVIATION AUTHORITY, ALL WHO
HAVE TAXING AUTHORITY AND LOOK WHAT THE REPRESENTATION DIVISION
THERE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S AN ISSUE OF WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.
AND I THINK IT IS SHORTSIGHTED TO BELIEVE THAT FIVE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, THEY ARE ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CITY OF
TAMPA.
I HAVEN'T FOUND THAT.
PERHAPS YOU HAVE.
BUT I HAVE NOT FOUND THAT TO BE THE CASE.
>> I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF BRANDON FOR 22 YEARS.
AND BRANDON HAS ALWAYS HAD TO SCREAM FOR THE THINGS THAT IT NEEDED.
WE'VE BEEN LAST IN ROADS, LAST IN LIGHTS, LAST IN SCHOOLS.
I REMEMBER THIS COUNTY COMING UP TO US IN BRANDON AND TELLING US THAT
WE DIDN'T NEED ANOTHER SCHOOL BECAUSE BRANDON HIGH SCHOOL WAS ON
DOUBLE SESSION.
THAT BRANDON DID NOT NEED A SCHOOL.
IT NEEDED TO BE AT ARMWOOD.
BRANDON WAS STILL ON DOUBLE SESSION AFTER ARMWOOD.
AND BLOOMINGDALE WAS A SITE THAT WE HAD SHOWN THEM AS TO WHERE THE
SCHOOL SHOULD HAVE BEEN LONG BEFORE ARMWOOD.
WE HAD TO SCREAM AND HOLLER ALL THE WAY WE WENT.
AND IT'S NOT FAIR FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
HE BROUGHT THE ISSUE ON.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. FERARRO.
I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF AREAS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THAT THINK
THEY ARE THE STEPCHILD.
MR. WHITE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A POINT THAT A LOT OF THESE
AUTHORITIES AND BOARDS THAT YOU ARE SPEAKING ABOUT, THE CHARTER HAS
NO CONTROL OVER.
A LOT OF THESE BOARDS ARE PUT TOGETHER THROUGH STATE STATUTE BY STATE
LAW.
AND SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT.
>>JAN SMITH:  THAT'S CORRECT.
WE COULD LOBBY FOR CHANGE.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. ELAM.
>> I'M LEE ELAM.
I'M AN ATTORNEY IN BRANDON.
AND I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 35 YEARS.
AND I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME RELIEF HERE, BECAUSE I AM GOING TO TELL
YOU WITH THE ELOQUENCE OF THE TWO PREVIOUS SPEAKERS, THERE'S NOTHING
THAT I CAN ADD THAT WON'T DISTRACT FROM WHAT THEY'VE SAID.
>>JAN SMITH:  THAT'S THE SHORTEST COMMENTS I'VE EVER HEARD FROM AN
ATTORNEY.
THAT'S CONCISE AND TO THE POINT.
THANK YOU, SIR.
JANET WILSON.
ARE YOU OUT THERE, JANET?
THERE SHE IS.
MS. WILSON.
SHE'S A PROBABLY.
>> JANET WILSON, SUN CITY CENTER.
I'M DOING MY CIVIC DUTY.
I DON'T REPRESENT ANY GROUP.
I WAS SO GLAD TO HEAR WHAT THE PREVIOUS PEOPLE SAID.
I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ON THAT ISSUE.
AFTER THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW, I BEGAN THINKING, THERE'S SOMETHING
WRONG HERE.
AND YOU STATED, STEVE, THAT 100% OF THE CITY PAY TAXES.
WELL 100% IN THE COUNTY PAY TAXES.
THE ONLY PRO-PROBLEM IS THERE IS 30% IN TAMPA AND 70% IN THE COUNTY.
THERE IS GOING TO BE A REVOLUTION.
WHY?
BECAUSE THERE ARE PROBABLY MORE PEOPLE HERE FROM TAMPA THAN THE
COUNTY.
THE COMMITTEE OF 99 HAD 66% FROM TAMPA BECAUSE THE COMMISSIONERS
MAKE APPOINTMENTS AND OF COURSE THEY WEREN'T ALL APPOINTED BY THE
COMMISSIONERS AND I THINK I MENTIONED THAT SUBJECT TO YOU AT THAT
MEETING.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE ORDINARY 30-SOME PERCENT FROM THE COUNTY.
SOMETHING IS WRONG.
YES, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE CITY AND COUNTY DO TOGETHER AND
IF THE CITY ELECTS THEIR COUNCIL, WHICH THEY DO, THAT SETS THE CITY TAX.
BUT THE COMMISSIONERS SET THE -- WHATEVER THEY CALL IT, THE URBAN
SERVICE CENTER TAXES.
AND THE REPRESENTATIVES ELECTED BY THOSE PEOPLE IN TAMPA, ELECTED
THOSE COMMISSIONERS WHO SET OUR TAXES IN THE COUNTY.
BUT WE DON'T GET TO SET THE TAXES OR VOTE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO SET THE
CITY TAXES.
SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.
THERE MAY BE MORE COMMERCIAL, MORE TAXES IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW, BUT
IT'S TIME TO START BUILDING OUT IN THE COUNTY AND NOT BUILD EVERYTHING
IN THE CITY SO ALL THE ROADS AND ALL THE CARS AND EVERYTHING HAVE TO
TRY TO COME TO TAMPA, WHICH HAS THE SAME PROBLEM OF ANY CITY ON
WATER, ONLY 180-DEGREE ENTRANCE INTO THE CITY.
SO YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE CONGESTION.
AND ONE WAY TO ELIMINATE IT IS TO MOVE SOME THINGS OUT INTO THE MIDDLE
OF THE COUNTY.
SO YOU HAVE A WAGON WHEEL TO GET TO IT.
AND YOU THINK AHEAD.
SEE THE FOREST INSTEAD OF JUST THE TREES.
I'M NOT GOING OVER THE PERCENTAGES.
I WAS GOING TO DO THAT.
THEY'VE GIVEN THEM TO YOU.
AND IT'S JUST A FACT.
SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THE THINGS THAT THE CITY AND THE COUNTY WOULD DO TOGETHER COULD BE
DONE BY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
IF YOU WANT CONSOLIDATION, THEN THERE'S NOTHING WRONG.
THAT'S THE THE WAY YOU'RE GOING.
IT'S ALMOST CONSOLIDATED NOW, BECAUSE MOST EVERYTHING IS FOR TAMPA, BY
TAMPA PEOPLE.
SO I WANT THAT CONSIDERED, THE WHOLE RESTRUCTURING.
NOW I DON'T AGREE WITH THE SEVEN SINGLE DISTRICTS BECAUSE DURING THE
LAST CHARTER REVIEW, I BELIEVE THEY HAD TO HAVE NINE TO MEET THE
MINORITY REQUIREMENTS.
AND WE DISCUSSED THAT AT THAT TIME.
THE MINORITIES THAT WERE HERE SPEAKING FOR SINGLE DISTRICTS, THEY
CHANGED THEIR MIND, BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TWO OUT OF NINE.
IF YOU HAVE ONE COMMISSIONER, HE HAS TO MAKE A DEAL NOW WITH SEVEN OR
NINE OTHERS OR YOU GET NOTHING.
THIS WAY WE VOTE FOR MAJORITY.
AND I WANT TO KEEP THAT RIGHT, BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE SOME
REPRESENT -- SOME ONE PERSON REPRESENTING YOU, BUT YOU CAN INFLUENCE
THE MAJORITY, AND IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD TO HAVE REPRESENTATION UNLESS
YOU HAVE SOME WAY TO HAVE POWER TO GO WITH THAT, AND THAT'S BY
INFLUENCING A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
I DON'T THINK IT IS ILLEGAL TO JUST HAVE TWO SENATORS FROM A STATE.
SO THERE MUST BE SOME WAY TO DO THIS.
THE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION, AND I WON'T SAY TOO MUCH ABOUT IT IS,
I HOPE YOU DON'T GO INTO THIS NONPARTISAN REPRESENTATION.
THAT'S JUST HIDING FROM THE CITIZENS INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED TO BE
ABLE TO GET ABOUT A PERSON.
NO ONE IS NONPARTISAN.
EVERYONE HAS THEIR PRINCIPLES, THEIR BUSINESS, OR THEIR VIEW OF THINGS,
AND ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP THE VOTERS UNDERSTAND THAT, IT HELPS
DEMOCRACY.
AND DO YOU WANT TEN -- I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I CAN SAY THIS OR NOT -- TEN
SPECIAL INTERESTS, TEN JOE REDNERS RUNNING AND YOU HAVE TO TRY TO
CHOOSE THE BEST ONE?
THIS WAY IT HAS BEEN WHITTLED DOWN AND UNTIL THEY ARE RUNNING AS A
PARTY AND IT IS CHANGED FOR THE WHOLE COUNTRY.
THANK YOU.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. MARK SHOW BRUN.
>> HELLO.
I THINK IT'S KIND OF A MIRACLE THAT A CITIZEN WHO IS NOT REALLY INVOLVED
IN POLITICS OR ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT LIVING THE GOOD LIFE COULD ACTUALLY
COME UP HERE AND BE HEARD.
I THINK THAT THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF FIRST AMENDMENT IS IMPOTENT
UNLESS IT'S TIED TO THE FREEDOM TO BE HEARD AND THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT
I'M TAKING ADVANTAGE OF TONIGHT.
I'M GOING TO ECHO SOME THINGS THAT BART WAS TALKING ABOUT.
THIS BUSINESS OF POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR A CAMPAIGN FROM A PUBLIC
-- YOU KNOW, FROM A PUBLIC OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, TAKING CAMPAIGN FUNDS --
ACCEPTING CAMPAIGN FUNDS FROM HIS EMPLOYEES, I THINK THAT THAT IS
CLEARLY A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND INAPPROPRIATE.
I READ THAT NEAT BOOK THEY HAVE FOR CANDIDATES THAT'S DISTRIBUTED BY
PAM IORIO, DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS, AND IT REALLY DIDN'T HAVE A RULING
ON THIS.
I REALLY FEEL LIKE THIS NEEDS TO BE INCORPORATED.
THAT'S MY FIRST POINT.
MY SECOND POINT IS, I, AS WELL AS MANY CITIZENS, REALLY BELIEVE IN TERM
LIMITS.
AND WE PAY TAXES.
WE SHOULD HAVE CONTROL.
THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF APPELLATE RULINGS THAT AFFIRM THIS.
SO I REALLY JUST WANTED TO STRESS HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS TO ME.
THE THIRD ONE IS THE CREATION OF NEW BUREAUCRACY CALLED "THE CREATION
OF A PERFORMANCE AUDITOR."
THAT JOB SHOULD BE DONE BY THE CLERK OF THE COURT.
I THINK THAT WE'VE HAD A WHOLE SERIES OF VERY INEPT CLERKS IN THE LAST 30
YEARS.
AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO BETTER TIMES, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE
NEEDLESS REPETITION.
AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE ANOTHER BURDEN THAT I, AS A TAXPAYER, WILL
HAVE TO SHOULDER.
AND SO, I URGE YOU VERY CAREFULLY TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF SUCH A
REFERENDUM.
IT'S THE JOB OF THE CLERK OF THE COURT.
SO I HOPE WE'LL GET A GOOD ONE.

>>JAN SMITH:  MR. RALPH HUGHES.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, RALPH HUGHES, TAMPA.
BEFORE I BEGIN MY PRESENTATION, I WANT TO SAY THAT I BELIEVE THAT FOR A
MEMBER OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WHO HAS BEEN A MEMBER FOR SIX
MONTHS AND DOESN'T EVEN KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE UNINCORPORATED
AREA PAY CITY TAXES ISN'T QUALIFIED TO SIT ON THIS BOARD.
THE PEOPLE IN UNINCORPORATED AREA PAY MSTU TAXES, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXES UNITS.
FURTHER, MADAM CHAIR, I THINK IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT WHEN I'VE
STOOD BEFORE THIS GROUP, AND SOME BOARD MEMBERS WANT TO ASK ME A
QUESTION AND NO QUESTIONS ARE ALLOWED, BUT TONIGHT, WE NOT ONLY ASK
QUESTIONS AND ANSWER QUESTIONS, WE ENTER INTO A DEBATE WHETHER IT WAS
SOMEONE WHO COMES HERE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION.
NOW, IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE QUESTIONS, LET'S DO IT.
I WOULD LOVE, MR. LaBOUR, FOR YOU TO ENTER INTO A DEBATE WITH ME, SIR.
I CAME BEFORE YOU AT ONE OF YOUR EARLIER MEETINGS AND SUGGESTED
SEVERAL PROPOSED CHARTER CHANGES DEEMED WORTHY OF YOUR
CONSIDERATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS ONE OF THESE TONIGHT.
YOU SHOULD CONSIDER PUTTING A CHARTER CHANGE PROPOSED ON THE BALLOT
FOR PEOPLE TO APPROVE OR REJECT THAT WILL LIMIT THE ANNUAL INCREASE OF
OUR COUNTY'S OPERATING BUDGET OF 3%, OR THE INFLATION RATE, WHICHEVER
IS LOWER.
KEVIN AMBLER, I REMEMBER VERY WELL THAT YOU SEEMED TO BE RECEPTIVE TO
THIS PROPOSED CHANGE AT THAT TIME.
I TRUST YOUR INTEREST REMAINS, AND IF I CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH ANY
INFORMATION I DID NOT INCLUDE IN MY PRESENTATION, SIR, PLEASE DO NOT
HESITATE TO ASK.
THIS IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT.
YOU WILL RECALL THAT PEOPLE OVERWHELMINGLY VOTED TO CHANGE OUR
STATE CONSTITUTION TO LIMIT THE ANNUAL INCREASE AND ASSESSED VALUE OF
HOMESTEAD PROPERTY TO 3% OR THE INFLATION RATE, WHICHEVER IS LOWER.
THIS WENT INTO EFFECT JANUARY 1 OF 1995 AND MANY OF OUR LOWER INCOME
AND/OR RETIRED SENIOR CITIZENS' HOMES HAVE BEEN SAVED AS A RESULT.
WHY SHOULD WE TAKE THIS ACTION?
"A," OUR COUNTY SPENDING AND OPERATING BUDGET CONTINUES TO SPIRAL
UPWARD AND OUT OF CONTROL.
IT HAS INCREASED AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 5.4% OVER RECENT YEARS OR THREE
TIMES OUR ANNUAL POPULATION GROWTH RATE OF 1.8%.
AND OVER THREE TIMES THE ANNUAL INFLATION RATE WHICH IS ONLY 1.5%.
"B," THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MET LAST NIGHT AND APPROVED AN
INCREASE IN OUR OPERATING BUDGET OF 80.3 MILLION DOLLARS AND 8.2%
INCREASE IN OUR OPERATING BUDGET, BRINGING IT TO A STAGGERING
$1,600,000,000.
IF THE PROPOSED CHARTER CHANGE I SPOKE TO ARE IN EFFECT NOW, THE BUDGET
INCREASE WOULD BE LIMITED TO $15 MILLION INSTEAD OF OVER $80 MILLION.
WOULD WE BE TYING THE HANDS OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT SO WE WOULD
NOT DEAL WITH UNEXPECTED EMERGENCIES OR CONTINGENCIES IF THE CHARTER
CHANGE IS NOT APPROVED BY THE PEOPLE?
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
THIS PROPOSAL WILL ALSO INCLUDE PROVISION THAT AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF
THE SIX BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL OVERWRITE THIS POSITION.
OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BOASTS WE HAVE HAD LOWER PROPERTY TAXES
OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS.
THIS IS A FACT BUT MISLEADING.
IT WILL ONLY BUY A MEDIUM-SIZED PIZZA.
THE PROPOSED BUDGET APPROVED LAST NIGHT WILL NOT EVEN DO THAT.
THIS SO-CALLED TAX REDUCTION AMOUNTS TO ONLY $6 FOR THIS $125,000 HOME.
FOLKS, WE HAVE AN OUT-OF-CONTROL TAX AND SPEND COUNTY GOVERNMENT.
OUR TAXES AND FEES ARE AMONG THE HIGHEST IN THE STATE.
IF YOU WANT ME TO RECITE THE FIGURES FOR YOU I WILL BE HAPPY TO DO SO.
WE MUST TAKE ACTION TO STOP OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT FROM TAKING THIS
EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF MONEY OUT OF THE POCKETS OF THE PEOPLE.
LET ME TELL YOU SOME NEWS THAT MOST OF YOU HAVE NOT HAVE HEARD AS
YET.
COMMISSIONER PLATT IS LEADING A CHARGE THAT IF SUCCESSFUL WILL HAVE
OUR SALES TAX INCREASING TO 8 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR PLUS A 5-CENT INCREASE
IN OUR LOCAL GAS TAX, PLUS A 2% TAX ON ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS.
DOES OUR COUNTY NEED ALL THIS MONEY?
NO.
FURTHER, WE'RE GOING TO WORK HARD TO MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN.
BOARD MEMBERS, PLACE THIS PROPOSAL ON THE BALLOT SO THE PEOPLE HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE CONTROL OF THEIR COUNTY GOVERNMENT, ENABLING
THEM TO KEEP MORE OF THEIR OWN MONEY IN THEIR OWN POCKETS.
I BELIEVE THIS PROPOSAL WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE PEOPLE OF
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IN A LANDSLIDE, AND IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE
PEOPLE, IT SHOULD BE DONE, AFTER ALL THAT'S WHAT DEMOCRACY IS ALL
ABOUT.
DO I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
I DIDN'T THINK SO.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. HUGHES.
>> THANK YOU KINDLY.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. PENROSE.
>> GOOD EVENING.
I'M BILL PENROSE FROM PLANT CITY.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT ABOUT LIMITING THE TERM OF ALL PUBLIC
OFFICIALS TO EIGHT YEARS.
I AGREE WITH BART.
AS YOU RECALL, THE FOUNDING FATHERS IN THIS COUNTRY FOUNDED THAT
PUBLIC SERVICE SHOULD BE A LIMITED TIME, WHERE A CITIZEN WOULD COME IN,
DO HIS OR HER PUBLIC DUTY, AND GO BACK TO HIS OR HER JOB.
THAT WAS A PRETTY GOOD DEAL UNTIL THE RISE OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES.
THE PARTIES CAME ALONG AND THEY SWEPT EVERYBODY ASIDE.
UNDER THE SPOIL SYSTEM.
NEW IDEAS CAME IN, WHETHER YOU LIKED THEM OR NOT.
THIS WENT FAIRLY WELL UNTIL AFTER THE CIVIL WAR UNTIL THE CIVIL SERVICE
IDEA CAME ABOUT WHERE THE BUREAUCRATS WERE ABLE TO BUILD A HUGE BASE
TO CIRCUMVENT THE WILL OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.
TERM LIMITS.
CONSTANT TURNOVER.
NEW IDEAS COMING IN.
OLD BUREAUCRACIES OF THE PAST ARE SWEPT ASIDE AND GROWTH AND TRUST
IN THE CIVIC ADMINISTRATION IS INCREASED.
I ENCOURAGE THAT WE DO THIS IN THE NEXT CHARTER REVISION.
THANK YOU.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. PENROSE.
RON WOLF.
>> GOOD EVENING.
I'M RON WOLF.
I LIVE AT 1414 DEIRDRE DRIVE IN RUSKIN.
I'M APPEARING THIS EVENING TO DISCUSS FAIR GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATION
AND HOW THIS POPULAR NOTION APPLIES TO OUR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE.
MOST PERSONS I KNOW AGREE THAT THE RIGHT OF DECISION SHOULD -- BELONG
TO THE MAJORITY, BUT THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION TO ALL.
IT IS ALSO UNDERSTOOD THAT SOME PERSONS ARE MORE INTERESTED IN WILLING
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS THAN OTHERS.
IN MY OPINION, THE ENGINE THAT DRIVES CITIZEN VOTER PARTICIPATION IS FAIR
REPRESENTATION.
AND A FEELING THAT A SINGLE VOICE CAN REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
WHEN LOOKING AT THE CURRENT ALIGNMENT OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT, THOSE
PERSONS RESIDING IN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY MAY BE
UNFAIRLY REPRESENTED, AND A MAJOR OVERHAUL OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT
MIGHT BE NEEDED.
I WRITE A WEEKLY COLUMN IN THE "OBSERVER" NEWS CALLED "THE VOICE OF
RUSKIN."
DISTRIBUTED TO APOLLO BEACH, BALM, GIBSONTON, RIVERVIEW, RUSKIN,
SUMMERFIELD CROSSING, SUNDANCE, SUN CITY CENTER, AND WIMAUMA.
THESE COMMUNITIES ARE IN DISTRICT 4, REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER RONDA
STORMS WHO RESIDES IN VALRICO.
MORE THAN 100 READERS HAVE CONTACTED ME QUESTIONING THE
ADEQUATENESS AND FAIRNESS OF COUNTY REPRESENTATION IN DISTRICT 4.
PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT A CRITICISM OF COMMISSIONER RONDA
STORMS, AS MOST READERS FEEL SHE'S DOING A GREAT JOB.
IT IS MORE A FEELING THAT THE GEOGRAPHIC SIZE AND DIVERSIFIED NEEDS OF
VARIOUS COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT, LIKE COMPARING BRANDON TO
RUSKIN, MAKES IT AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK FOR ANY ONE COMMISSIONER.
IN FACT, DURING AN APPEARANCE AT THE RUSKIN CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETING
ON APRIL 3rd, COMMISSIONER STORMS COMMENTED, QUOTE, I HAVE THREE
900-POUND GORILLAS IN MY DISTRICT, BRANDON, PLANT CITY, AND SOUTH
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, END QUOTE.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO COMMISSIONER STORMS, I'M WONDERING HOW MANY
900-POUND GORILLAS CAN ONE PERSON BE EXPECTED TO HANDLE.
IN PREPARATION OF WRITING A COLUMN DEALING WITH COUNTY
REPRESENTATION IN DISTRICT 4, I DISCOVERED A COUPLE OF INTERESTING THINGS
I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU THIS EVENING.
ONE, FOLLOWING MANY UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO HOME RULE GOVERNMENT
IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FOR OVER 30 YEARS, THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS HAS ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE PROPOSING A HOME RULE
CHARTER FOR THE VOTERS TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE IN A COUNTYWIDE
REFERENDUM HELD IN NOVEMBER OF 1993.
PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION, THEY WERE GOVERNED BY FIVE COUNTY
COMMISSIONER, ALL ELECTED AT LARGE.
THE NEW ALIGNMENT WE HAVE TODAY CALLED FOR SEVEN COMMISSIONERS,
FOUR FROM SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND THREE TO BE ELECTED COUNTYWIDE.
FOLLOWING A DELAY DUE TO OBJECTIONS BY THE U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE
FIRST COMMISSIONERS ELECTED UNDER THE CHARTER TOOK OFFICE ON MAY 28th,
1985.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING UNDER THE CHARTER DELIBERATIONS SEVERAL
SECTIONS OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT WERE CONSIDERED, INCLUDING THE
ADOPTION OF SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS.
THIS WAS DEFEATED BY ONE VOTE.
WHILE THE STRUCTURE WE HAVE TODAY WAS PASSED BY ONE VOTE.
IN THE 1980s, TAMPA HAD A POPULATION OF SLIGHTLY LESS THAN 300,000, AND
THAT REPRESENTED 70% OF THE POPULATION OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.

IN 1999, TAMPA POPULATION WAS INCREASED TO 300,000 BY ANNEXING PROPERTY
NEAR THE PASCO COUNTY LINE.
TODAY, THE CITY OF TAMPA REPRESENTS ONLY 30% OF THE POPULATION IN
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS 64% OF THE POPULATION.
THE CITIES OF TEMPLE TERRACE AND PLANT CITY HAVE THE REMAINING 6% OF
THE POPULATION.
DURING THE 1980s, THE COUNTY WAS MANAGED BY POLITICIANS FROM THE CITY
OF TAMPA.
THEY THEN REPRESENTED THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY, AND
RIGHTFULLY SO; HOWEVER, OVER THE YEARS, THE POPULATION HAS SHIFTED TO
UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, BUT THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT
REPRESENTATION HAS NOT MOVED WITH IT.
ALL MEMBERS OF THE TAMPA CITY COUNCIL LIVE IN TAMPA, AND THEY RUN THE
CITY AND HAVE REPRESENTATION ON EVERY MAJOR COUNTY BOARD AND
COMMISSION.
THE IMPORTANT THING TO KNOW IS THAT FIVE OF THE SEVEN COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS LIVE IN TAMPA.
THAT 72% OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LIVING IN TAMPA, WHICH REPRESENTS
ONLY 30% OF THE COUNTY POPULATION.
BASED UPON POPULATION PROJECTIONS PROVIDED BY THE HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, DISTRICT 4 WILL SOON BE THE
LARGEST DISTRICT IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
IN FACT, IT WILL SOON BE LARGER THAN DISTRICTS 1, 2, AND 3 COMBINED AND
WILL SOON MATCH THE POPULATION OF THE CITY OF TAMPA.
IN CONCLUDING, WITH THIS BACKGROUND I PRESENTED, THE QUESTION BECOMES
ONE OF HOW DO WE BRING ABOUT FAIR REPRESENTATION BY GIVING EVERY
CITIZEN AN EQUAL VOICE IN THE AFFAIRS OF THEIR GOVERNMENT.
AND I OFFER IN CONCLUDING THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS.
ONE, KEEP THE NUMBER OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SEVEN TO AVOID ANY
IMPACT ON THE COUNTY BUDGET.
TWO, TAKE THE COUNTY POPULATION OF 1 MILLION CITIZENS AND CREATE SEVEN
SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, EACH REPRESENTING 150,000 PEOPLE.
MAKE IT MANDATORY FOR EACH COMMISSIONER TO RESIDE WITHIN THE DISTRICT
BEING REPRESENTED.
AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, ELIMINATE THE THREE AT-LARGE DISTRICTS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. WOLF.
MR. MICHAEL HEARN.

>> GOOD EVENING.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THIS CHANCE TO SPEAK AND MY PREDECESSOR
RON WOLF SUMMED UP A LOT OF THE FEELINGS WE HAVE IN SOUTH COUNTY.
ONE QUICK THING.
MOST OF YOU HEARD ABOUT THE CONCEPT THAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET THE
FOUR CHAMBERS IN SOUTH COUNTY TO WORK TOGETHER.
APOLLO BEACH, RUSKIN, SUN CITY CENTER, AND RIVERVIEW.
WE ARE TRYING TO ACT LIKE A ECONOMIC COMMUNITY MORE THAN WE NEED TO
ACT LIKE A POLITICAL ONE.
THE REASON I SAY THAT IS ON MY DESK, I'VE GOT FIVE LETTERS SAYING
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE SECESSION MOVEMENT WE HAD IN HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY.
NO, I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT, AND NO, WE ARE NOT TAKING IT SERIOUSLY
EITHER.
I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE IN SOUTH COUNTY
FEEL THEY HAVE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY WITH EVERYONE ELSE IN THIS COUNTY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. HEARN.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE
CHARTER REVIEW BOARD THIS EVENING?
>> I SIGNED UP.
>>JAN SMITH:  BUT THERE'S NO YES OR NO BY YOUR NAME.
I'M SORRY, PLEASE COME UP MR. HECKMAN.
MY APOLOGIES TO YOU.
>> THAT'S NO PROBLEM.
MY NAME IS NOT PALLATON.
HE DIDN'T WEAR A TIE.
MIKE AND DENISE AND STEVE MAY NOT KNOW WHO I'M TALKING ABOUT.
LET ME JUST -- MY NAME IS DAVE HECKMAN.
I LIVE IN VALRICO, BEAUTIFUL DOWNTOWN VALRICO.
THAT'S STARTING TO BECOME SOMEWHAT OVERPOPULATED.
I HAVE A HANDOUT HERE I'D LIKE TO GIVE EACH MEMBER.
IS THIS AN OPEN MIKE?
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  I HOPE SO.
>> IT'S NOT NECESSARY TO WAIT FOR THE HANDOUT.
I THINK THE HANDOUT JUST MORE OR LESS EXPLAINS WHERE I'M COMING FROM
AND MR. CARDUCCI, MR. FERRARO, MR. ELAM, AND MR. WOLF.
I HAPPEN TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL OF THEM.
THE THING I WANT TO EMPHASIZE IS TWO WORDS, FAIR AND EQUAL
REPRESENTATION.
THAT DOES NOT EXIST TODAY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
THE SPEAKERS THAT SPOKE BEFORE ME I THINK HAVE DEMONSTRATED HOW THE
BALANCE OF THE POPULATION AND MAYBE EVEN THE TAXPAYERS ARE SHIFTED
OUT INTO THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY.
A COUPLE OTHER POINTS THAT I -- THAT I JUST -- JUST SOME NOTES THAT I MADE
WHILE THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMITTEE.
THE COMMENT BY MR. WHITE THAT THE COMMISSION HAS NO CONTROL OVER
BOARDS AND COUNCILS IS PROBABLY TRUE; HOWEVER, THAT'S ONE OF THE
REASONS THAT I AND OTHERS ARE HERE, BECAUSE IF WE HAD -- LET'S TAKE, FOR
EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAD -- IF WE FOLLOWED THE RON WOLF PROPOSAL, WHICH I
HAPPEN TO FAVOR, WE WILL THEN HAVE FIVE UNINCORPORATED AREAS WITH THE
COMMISSIONERS, AND THEY WOULD APPOINT PEOPLE TO THE COUNCILS AND THE
BOARDS THAT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE FROM DOWNTOWN TAMPA.
AND SO THAT IMBALANCE THAT EXISTS TODAY WILL GO AWAY.
I THINK THAT'S A VALID POINT.
I BELIEVE THAT -- I BELIEVE THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT ALL THE DISTRICTS HAVE
TO BE WITHIN 5% OF EACH OTHER IN POPULATION.
THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM.
YOU COULD HAVE THE DISTRICT THAT PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY FOR MINORITY.
AND WOULD YOU HAVE TO CREATE THE OTHER SIX DISTRICTS SO AS THEY WOULD
BE WITHIN 5% OF THAT AREA.
SO IT'S A MATTER OF SIMPLE ARITHMETIC.
JUST A NOTE THAT I MADE WHEN MR. LaBOUR WAS TALKING.
I'M SORRY -- YEAH, WHEN MR. LaBOUR WAS TALKING ABOUT UNINCORPORATED
COUNTY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU KNOW, BUT FISHHAWK IS DOWN SOUTH,
MIDWAYS, I GUESS, BETWEEN BLOOMINGDALE AND SUN CITY, YOU MIGHT SAY.
THOSE RESIDENTS DOWN THERE BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE NOT ON WATER
RESTRICTIONS.
THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE PUMPING RECLAIMED WATER.
THAT'S NOT A FACT.
THE COUNTY NEVER GOT AROUND TO HOOKING IT UP.
THEY DON'T KNOW THAT.
THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS -- THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE, I THINK, THAT I CAN
MENTION THAT COULD PROBABLY BE PREVENTED IF WE HAD, LIKE WE SAID,
RONDA STORMS, WHO I HAVE A GREAT RESPECT AND I WORKED HER CAMPAIGN.
BUT, YOU KNOW, LIKE SHE'S GOT THREE 800-POUND GORILLAS LIKE MR. WOLF
SAID, AND IT'S JUST TOO MUCH FOR ONE TO BEAR, I BELIEVE, EVEN THOUGH SHE'S
A HARD WORKER.
ONE OTHER POINT.
THE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY, THERE IS NO APPOINTMENT TO THE EXPRESSWAY
AUTHORITY.
I WORKED FOR D.O.T. FOR 32 YEARS, WHICH THE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY IS PART
OF F.D.O.T.
THERE ARE NO APPOINTMENTS TO THE AUTHORITY EXCEPT FROM THE GOVERNOR.
ALL OF THE POSITIONS CREATED BY LEGISLATIVE MANDATE.
AGAIN, I'M SIMPLY HERE, FAIR AND EQUAL REPRESENTATION.
THE TIME HAS COME, THE CENSUS IS GOING TO DICTATE IT.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ANYHOW.
IT'S LIKE MIKE CARDUCCI SAID -- BOB YOUNG YIELDS TO ME, BUT I'M ONLY GOING
TO TAKE ANOTHER MINUTE.
IT'S -- YOU KNOW, YOU GET OUT FRONT AND DO SOMETHING NOW, YOU KNOW, IT'S
BETTER THAN TRYING TO CATCH UP.
IF YOU WANT TO CATCH THE TRAIN, YOU'RE WAITING AT THE STATION.
YOU DON'T COME LATE AND TRY TO GRAB IT AND JUMP ON LIKE I USED TO DO
WHEN I WAS A KID UP IN PENNSYLVANIA RIDING THE COAL TRAINS.
I HAD AN EXTRA FIVE MINUTES, BUT OKAY.
BUT BASICALLY, I THINK I MADE MY POINTS.
I HOPE I DID.
I HOPE YOU TAKE IT UNDER SERIOUS ADVISEMENT.
WE HAVE -- I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY.
I'M TREASURER OF MY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
THEY ARE 100% ON BOARD WITH THIS.
THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS.
THERE WILL BE A LOT OF AT-LARGE PEOPLE VOTING FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT
WERE NOT VOTING BEFORE.
SO I THINK FAIR, EQUAL IS MY SLOGAN OF MY CAMPAIGN.
AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ON THE LITERATURE THAT I HANDED OUT.
I WILL BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. WHITE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  MS. WILLIAMS PUT UP A PROPOSAL AND GAVE US AN IDEA AT
THE LAST MEETING ABOUT TERRITORIZING SOME OF THE SEATS.
HOW -- HAVE YOU ALL GAVE THAT ANY THOUGHT?
>> YES, WE HAVE.
RON WOLFE HAS GIVEN IT THOUGHT.
MIKE CARDUCCI, MYSELF, ELAM, VINCE FERRARO, AND WE -- I DON'T WANT TO
SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT READ BETWEEN THE LINES.
SEVEN DISTRICTS TO US WILL WORK.
NOW, WE TALKED TO A MEMBER THAT'S VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THE COUNTY
AND WAS THINKING ABOUT TAKING THAT LARGE AND SPLITTING THEM
GEOGRAPHICAL.
IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK WITH THE FORMULAS THAT ARE GOING TO BE -- THAT
ARE IN PLACE.
THE CIVIL RIGHTS PORTION IS GOING TO KNOCK THAT IN THE HEAD PROBABLY.
IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.
AND, AGAIN, IT GETS AWAY FROM FAIR AND REASONABLE.
YOU KNOW, IT -- I MEAN, SOUTH COUNTY, LET'S FACE IT -- HOW MANY -- CAN I ASK
FOR A SHOW OF HANDS?
HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE SPENT SUBSTANTIVE TIME IN THE VALRICO AREA IN THE
LAST SIX MONTHS?
HOW MANY PEOPLE?
SO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE EVERY DAD GUM TIME I LEAVE THE HOUSE THERE'S A
NEW SUBDIVISION BREAKING GROUND.
I LIVE AT ST. CLOUD AND LUMSDEN AND IT'S EVERYWHERE.
FISHHAWK GOES IN THERE AND THEY ARE PERMITTED TO BUILD THAT 8000-UNIT,
I BELIEVE IT IS, AND THEY ARE PERMITTED TO BUILD A TWO-LANE ROAD THAT
CONNECTS TO AN EXISTING ROAD THAT'S SUBSTANDARD.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT -- YOU KNOW, MAYBE IF WE HAD REPRESENTATION,
MAYBE THAT WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.
NOTHING AGAINST RONDA, BECAUSE SHE WAS PROBABLY BUSY WITH SOME
OTHER PROBLEM IN VALRICO OR SOMEWHERE.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. HECKMAN, YOUR TIME IS UP.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME APPEAR HERE THIS EVENING, AND I HOPE
THAT WHAT WE'VE SAID WILL BE CONSIDERED WITH DUE CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU.
>>JAN SMITH:  AS AN OBSERVATION, ON SOUTH COUNTY, IT WILL PROBABLY GO
THE SAME WAY AS NORTHWEST HILLSBOROUGH WITH DALE MABRY AND THE ONE
ROAD FOR EVERYBODY TO GET ON TO WHEREVER THEY ARE GOING AND THE
SAME WITH TAMPA PALMS WITH BRUCE B. DOWNS.
I THINK WE ARE MOVING THE NEXT PROBLEM TO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WOULD HOPE THAT WE DON'T DO THAT, BUT I HAVE A GREAT FEAR THAT IT WILL
HAPPEN AGAIN.
BOARD MEMBERS, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE REPORT.
MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE, I THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING THIS EVENING, FOR
BRINGING YOUR COMMENTS.
AND THE BOARD CERTAINLY HAS LISTENED CAREFULLY AND ALTHOUGH THEY
MAY NOT HAVE COMMENTED THIS EVENING, YOUR ISSUES WILL CERTAINLY BE
DEBATED AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
MS. CAMPBELL, WHEN YOU BEGIN THIS EVENING, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD
LIKE YOU TO ADDRESS IS AN ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED THIS EVENING REGARDING
CAMPAIGN FUNDS FROM EMPLOYEES.
COULD YOU ADDRESS THE STATE AND LOCAL LAW ON THAT?
ALSO, THE ISSUE OF TERM LIMITS ON CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, THE CHANGE
THAT OCCURRED IN JACKSONVILLE AND WHAT THAT CLARIFICATION IS THERE.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  CERTAINLY.
FOR THE RECORD, MARY HELEN CAMPBELL WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE.
FIRST OF ALL, I'M DEALING WITH THE SOLICITATION OF CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS FROM EMPLOYEES OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.
IN THE FLORIDA STATUTES, THERE'S TWO BODIES OF LAW THAT WILL DEAL WITH
THIS.
ONE WE REFER TO AS A LITTLE HATCH ACT.
IT'S MIRRORED A LOT BY THE FEDERAL LAW THAT PROHIBITS ANYBODY FROM
COERCING A SUBORDINATE INTO EITHER CAMPAIGNING FOR THEM, CONTRIBUTING
TO THEIR CAMPAIGNS OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
THERE ARE ALSO PROVISIONS IN THE FLORIDA ETHICS CODE THAT PREVENTS, FOR
INSTANCE, MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION, WHICH THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY WOULD
FALL UNDER ALSO.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, AS YOU MAY KNOW, OUR CHARTER ADOPTS THE
FLORIDA CODE OF ETHICS AS OUR CODE OF ETHICS FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVES WHICH ARE
FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DEALING WITH POLITICAL ACTIVITY.
THERE ARE CIVIL SERVICE RULES ALSO.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN SEEING THOSE, I CAN PUT A PACKET TOGETHER SO YOU
CAN SEE WHAT WE HAVE LOCALLY ON THE BOOKS DEALING WITH THOSE ISSUES.
REGARDING THE TERM LIMITS, SOME COUNTIES HAVE IN THEIR CHARTER PUT THE
CONSTITUTIONALS UNDER THEIR CHARTERS AND IN THAT WAY HAVE IMPOSED
TERM LIMITS ON THEM.
AS YOU KNOW VERY WELL, OUR CHARTER DOES NOT AFFECT THE
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS.
SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CHANGE PRIOR TO IMPOSING A TERM LIMIT.
THERE IS A TERM LIMIT, AS YOU KNOW, ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS PRESENTLY IN THE CHARTER.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
ON THAT?
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  ON TERM LIMITS, IF THERE WAS TO BE A REFERENDUM PLACED
ON THE BALLOT FOR THE VOTERS TO DECIDE, IF THE CHARTER REVIEW DIDN'T
WISH TO PUT THE CONSTITUTIONALS UNDER THE COUNTY, WHICH I TAKE IT
WOULD BE THE FIRST REFERENDUM THAT WOULD HAVE TO WIN AND THEN THERE
WOULD BE THE SUBSEQUENT TERM LIMITS FOR THE CONSTITUTIONALS, COULD
CITIZENS PETITION TO HAVE THAT ISSUE PLACED ON THE BALLOT?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  YES, THAT IS THE THIRD WAY IN OUR CHARTER THAT
IT CAN BE AMENDED IS BY CITIZEN INITIATIVE.
AND THAT HAS THE SAME RESTRICTION THAT IS BOARD THAT THEY ONLY ARE
PLACED ON GENERAL ELECTION BALLOTS, BUT THAT IS A PROCESS IN PLACE.
THAT THEY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  THANK YOU.
>>JAN SMITH:  TO CLARIFY MR. LaBOUR'S QUESTION, THAT'S ISSUES THAT COME
UNDER THE CHARTER?
THAT THE CITIZENS CAN RAISE THE INITIATIVE ON?
OR CAN THEY RAISE AN INITIATIVE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
SEPARATELY?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  THEY WOULD HAVE -- IT WOULD HAVE TO BE
DRAFTED IN SUCH A WAY AS DO YOU WANT TO PUT THE CONSTITUTIONALS UNDER
THE CHARTER AND MAYBE DO A TWO-STEP.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT NECESSARILY HAS TO BE TWO DIFFERENT BALLOTS, BUT
IT COULD BE CRAFTED AND OBVIOUSLY WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL THOSE
IN OFFICE, THEIR TERM ENDS.
>> MADAM CHAIR.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. WHITE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I CONTACTED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND HAD
MARY HELEN PULL CHAPTER 103 OF A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, POLITICAL
PARTIES AND COMMITTEES.
THE LAW IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA -- I KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE HEARD THAT
THE FUNDS FROM CANDIDATES, THEIR FILING FEES AND ALL GO TO THE POLITICAL
PARTIES.
I JUST WANTED Y'ALL TO HAVE THIS AND READ THIS AND KNOW THAT POLITICAL
PARTIES IS A PART OF STATE LAW, AND THE STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION
FROM THE LOCAL LEVEL TO THE STATE LEVEL IS LAW.
AND IT'S A PROCESS OF INVOLVING CITIZENS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL ALL THE WAY
UP TO THE STATE LEVEL TO RUN POLITICAL PARTIES, REPUBLICAN AND
DEMOCRATIC PARTIES, INDEPENDENT PARTIES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.
VALUABLE INFORMATION TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT UNTIL WE GET INTO
THE CONVERSATION OF NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. AMBLER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  I HAVE A BRIEF FOLLOW-UP QUESTION MS. CAMPBELL'S
COMMENT OF THE THIRD METHOD FOR WHICH CITIZENS CAN GET SOMETHING ON
THE BALLOT.
WHAT IS THE PETITION REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES
THAT A GROUP CAN HAVE TO DO THAT.
I HEARD DIFFERENT NUMBERS.
I WONDER IF YOU KNEW THAT?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  BASED ON THE NUMBERS WHO HAVE VOTED IN A
PREVIOUS ELECTION.
IT IS QUITE A COMPLICATED FORMULA.
AT VARIOUS TIMES SINCE I HAVE BEEN WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,
WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT.
I WORKED WITH THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO GET OUR POPULATION SHIFTS.
I MEAN, IT'S SET OUT.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN AND IT MAY CHANGE AS POPULATION CHANGES
AND ELECTIONS.
BUT IT DOES REQUIRE AS A BASIS THAT SIGNATURES BE COLLECTED FROM
VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COUNTY.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULDN'T GET AN INITIATIVE WITH ONLY SOMEBODY,
WITH PEOPLE FROM THE CITY OF TAMPA THAT WOULD AFFECT OUR CHARTER.
IT DOES -- THE WAY THE FORMULA WORKS, YOU HAVE TO GET PEOPLE FROM
VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COUNTY TO SIGN THE PETITION, AND THEN, OF COURSE,
THE NAMES ARE VERIFIED BY THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  ANY SENSE FOR A ROUGH ESTIMATE?
WE ARE NOT GOING TO HOLD IT IN STONE.
10,000, 20,000, 50,000.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I REALLY DON'T KNOW.
I CAN TELL YOU WHAT WE COULD DO.
THE LAST TIME WE WORKED THIS UP WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE NUMBERS WOULD CHANGE GREATLY, BUT I WILL BE HAPPY
TO BRING THAT BACK FOR INFORMATION.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  MADAM CHAIR, IT MIGHT BE USEFUL TO HAVE THAT
INFORMATION.
WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF INTERESTED CITIZENS COME OUT TO OUR BOARD
MEETINGS, MAYBE SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE VERY, VERY ENERGETIC ABOUT
DOESN'T END UP GETTING ACTED UPON BY THIS GROUP, BUT THEY SHOULD KNOW
WHAT THE PROCESS IS FOR HOW THEY CAN DO IT SOME OTHER ROUTE.
AND IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO HAVE THAT PACKET AVAILABLE.
>>JAN SMITH:  IT'S IN THE STATE LAW, AND IT IS PERCENTAGES.
AND PERHAPS --
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I THINK IT'S 8%.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE AT THE NEXT MEETING I CAN COME BACK WITH KIND OF AN
OVERVIEW OF HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS SO WE HAVE THAT, AND THAT WAY
BARBARA COULD HAND IT OUT IF SOMEBODY WANTED SOME MORE INFORMATION
ON IT.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  ONE OTHER REQUEST WHILE WE HAVE OUR COUNTY
ATTORNEY.
YOU SAID YOU COULD DO A LITTLE PACKET ON THE ETHICS RULE AND APPLICABLE
-- SINCE OUR FIRST SPEAKER MADE SUCH A POINT ABOUT THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO
SHOW THAT EVEN THOUGH WE MAY NOT TAKE ACTION ON EVERY ITEM, THAT WE
CAN AT LEAST ACT AS A CONDUIT TO PROVIDE THAT TYPE OF INFORMATION.
COULD YOU PUT THAT PACKET TOGETHER?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I SURE CAN.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  CAN WE ARRANGE TO SEND THAT TO OUR FIRST SPEAKER OR
FIRST TWO SPEAKERS.
>>JAN SMITH:  I'M SURE IT CAN BE GOTTEN TO HER AND MS. MERRITT --
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I CAN GET THE PACKETS TO BARBARA AND I WILL A
FEW COPIES NEXT MEETING IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED IN SEEING THEM.
>>GERALD WHITE:  SECTION 5.05 IN OUR CHARTER, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS
SPOKE TO THIS ONCE BEFORE, THE PERFORMANCES BOND.
I WAS WITNESSING THE PAST COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING AND THIS ISSUE
DID COME UP DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION.
AND MR. LaBOUR MENTIONED A FEW MONTHS AGO ABOUT A POSSIBLE FIX OF THIS
SECTION OF THE CHARTER WITH CHANGING FROM GENERAL LAW TO COUNTY
ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING.
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU CAN GIVE US SOME LANGUAGE THAT CAN FIX THIS?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I CERTAINLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, IF
THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD.
I THINK THE POINT THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE.
THE PERFORMANCE BOND, WHAT IT SAYS IN THE CHARTER IS FOR THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL LAW.
GENERAL LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE HIM TO POST A BOND.
>>GERALD WHITE:  THAT SEEMS TO BE THE PROBLEM.
THERE IS NO LAW, SO WHY DO WE HAVE -- WHY DO WE CONTINUALLY CARRY THIS
IN THE CHARTER?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  IT WAS IN THERE WHEN THEY ADOPTED IT.
AND AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE'S NEVER -- I MAY BE WRONG, BUT SINCE I HAVE
BEEN HERE, NEVER A REQUIREMENT --
>>JAN SMITH:  STATE LAW CHANGED AFTER THE CHARTER.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  DID FOR THE BOARD AND THE CLERK AND THOSE.
THEY DID AWAY WITH IT, AND THE BOARD DID ENACT ORDINANCES
THAT REQUIRED THE SAME LEVEL THAT THE STATE LAW USED TO REQUIRE.
SO WE HAVE THOSE BY ORDINANCE ALSO NOW FOR THE CONSTITUTIONALS AND
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
>>GERALD WHITE:  MY OVERALL QUESTION FOR THE ENTIRE CHARTER, WHEN
THERE ARE THINGS NO LONGER LEGAL OR NO LONGER JUSTIFIED, WHAT'S THE
PROCESS TO SWEEP IT AND TAKE IT OUT?
>>JAN SMITH:  A CHARTER CHANGE ON THE BALLOT.
>>GERALD WHITE:  WE WOULD HAVE --
>>JAN SMITH:  WHICH IS WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT YOU DON'T GET INTO
MINUTIA IN CHARTERS.
I'M SURE SOME OF YOU HAVE READ AM OF THESE OTHER CHARTERS AND THEY GET
REALLY INTO THE LEVELS OF DETAIL THAT YOU'RE -- YOUR CHARTER IS SUPPOSED
TO BE YOUR CONSTITUTION AND THEN YOU HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE CODES AND
LAWS THAT FILL IN.
SO WE CAN GET A LITTLE CARRIED AWAY SOMETIMES WITH MINUTIA IN
CHARTERS.
I'M SAYING THAT AS A CAUTION.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  I'M JUST SAYING COULDN'T WE DESIGN A SELF-CORRECTING
MECHANISM.
RATHER THAN GETTING INTO THE MINUTIA, HAVING SOME PROVISION IN THE
CHARTER THAT WILL ESSENTIALLY AUTOMATICALLY SUNSET SUPERFLUOUS
INFORMATION LIKE THE PERFORMANCE BONDS THAT NO LONGER HAVE A LAW
ATTACHED TO APPROXIMATE.
IS THERE A WAY TO CRAFT THAT?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  THE STATE LAW SAYS IT IS ONLY APPROVED BY THE
VOTERS.
I THINK MAYBE WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO DO HERE WHERE IT WAS -- IF
GENERAL LAW -- IF GENERAL LAW REQUIRES IT, WE HAVE TO POST A BOND
WHETHER OUR CHARTER SAID YES OR NO.
SO I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE REASONING OF HAVING THIS IN THERE.
MAYBE THEY WERE TRYING TO GET THERE -- IF GENERAL LAW AND ACCORDANCE
WITH GENERAL LAW IF IT HAD BEEN AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, RATHER THAN
SET AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD BE NULLIFIED BECAUSE OF CHANGE IN STATE
LAW.
IN ACCORDANCE TO STATE LAW AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.
IN THIS CASE, THE GENERAL LAW DOES NOT EXIST.
THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM IS.
PERHAPS WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT, IF THERE IS SOMETHING --
>>GERALD WHITE:  I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO GIVE US THE RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE
TO FIX SECTION 5.05, SEEING AS THOUGH IT IS NO LONGER A GENERAL LAW THAT
RELATES TO THIS PARTICULAR SECTION OF THE CHARTER.
>>JAN SMITH:  IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION?
MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  MADAM CHAIR, I DON'T UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S AN ISSUE OF
WHETHER OR NOT A BOND NEEDS TO BE POSTED, CAN THE COUNTY COMMISSION
DIRECT THEMSELVES OR THE -- I MEAN, TODAY?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE DONE ON THEMSELVES AND
THE CONSTITUTIONALS.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  I THINK IT IS A MOOT POINT THAT KEEPS GETTING BROUGHT UP
BY A PARTICULAR CITIZEN THAT SEEMS TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
I THINK THAT CITIZEN NEEDS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AND CONVINCE FOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO DO IT, INSTEAD OF TRYING TO
USE THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD TO CHANGE IT.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT -- AND JUST TO SPEAK TO MR. AMBLER, WHILE I THINK IT'S
A REASONABLE THING TO WANT TO PERHAPS LOOK AT HOW THERE CAN BE SOME
SELF-CORRECTING, IT'S A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE, AND YOU'VE GOT TO BE VERY,
VERY CAREFUL IN DOING THAT.
AT THIS POINT, I THINK I WOULD BE VERY LEERY TO DO THAT.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  ACTUALLY ALL I WAS CONTEMPLATING WHAT WE SEE IN
CONTRACTS IF ANY PROVISION OF THIS CHARTER BECOMES INVALIDATED BY ANY
LAW OR WHATEVER.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  THAT'S WHAT MAKES CHARTERS DIFFERENT FROM CONTRACTS.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  SEVERABILITY WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER
ELECTION TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  WE WILL SEE WHATEVER PROPOSAL YOU HAD AND
SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO MEET YOUR -- YOU KNOW, SO WE WILL HAVE SOMETHING
TO LOOK AT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I THINK AS FAR AS THE MOST OF THE WOMEN ON THE BOARD
WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FEMININE GENDER ON THE CHARTER SINCE WE ARE
BASICALLY EXCLUDED.
MS. WILLIAMS AND THEN MR. HURLEY.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS IN YOU ANSWERING QUESTIONS, BUT
DOES THE -- THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, DOES HE POST A PERFORMANCE BOND
NOW?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  NO, BECAUSE IT SAYS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GENERAL LAW, WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE HIM TO POST A BOND.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  COULD THE COMMISSION IF THEY WANTED HIM TO -- REQUIRE
HIM TO DO THAT BY A MAJORITY VOTE OR WHATEVER?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  MAY BE AN ISSUE IF OUR CHARTER SAYS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL LAW.
THERE IS NO GENERAL LAW.
IF THEN WHAT THEY WOULD BE MIGHT BE IN CONTRAVENTION OF WHAT THE
CHARTER IS SAYING.
THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THEY CAN'T REQUEST THAT HE POST A BOND AND HE
CAN POST IT.
YOU KNOW --
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  TO DO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO SAY AS REQUIRED BY
GENERAL LAW OR BY ORDINANCE --
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  OR BY BOARD ORDINANCE.
OR BOARD RESOLUTION.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. HURLEY.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  I TEND TO AGREE WITH MR. LaBOUR.
IT DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM.
I DON'T SEE IT AS A BIG PROBLEM, AND IF WE ARE GOING TO PUT ANYTHING ON
THE BALLOT, I WOULD RATHER IT BE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES RATHER THAN
SOMETHING THAT'S, FOR WANT OF A BETTER TERM, HOUSECLEANING.
I JUST WANT -- I THINK THAT MESSING UP THE SPACE IN THE THING IS REALLY
SOMETHING THAT WOULD BOTHER ME.
>>GERALD WHITE:  MY COMMENT AND I'LL BE FINISHED WITH THIS.
I CONSIDER EVERYTHING IN THIS CHARTER SUBSTANTIVE, NO MATTER HOW
SMALL ONE MIGHT THINK IT IS OR HOW MANY CITIZENS MAY COME AND SPEAK ON
IT.
WE VALUE EVERY CITIZENS' INPUT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE HAVE SO FEW PUBLIC
INPUT THAT COMES TO THIS MEETING.
SO EVERYTHING IN THIS CHARTER IS IMPORTANT TO ME, AND IF SOMETHING IS
WRONG, I WANT TO BE AN ADVOCATE OF MAKING IT RIGHT.
THAT'S WHY I PUT IT ON THE FLOOR.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. WHITE.
MS. CAMPBELL, NOW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR REGULAR
ATTORNEY REPORT?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  YES, I WOULD.
JUST TO INFORM THE BOARD THAT AT THE LAST BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS' MEETING, THEY DID ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT WILL NOW
INCLUDE TO UPHOLD THE COUNTY CHARTER IN THEIR OATH OF OFFICE.
IT GOT BUMPED A COUPLE OF MEETINGS BECAUSE OF THEIR SUMMER BREAKS AND
OTHER THINGS, BUT THEY DID PASS THAT, AND IN FACT, I JUST SENT THAT TODAY
TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO BE FINALIZED.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COPY OF IT, IT'S BASED ALMOST EXACTLY ON
THE RESOLUTION THAT THIS BOARD PASSED.
BUT IF ANY --
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  MADAM CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION WE
SEND A LETTER TO MR. DAVIS WITH A COPY OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED
SINCE HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN BRINGING IT TO US.
>> SECOND.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO, MADAM CHAIR, REQUEST THAT YOU
SEND A LETTER TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THANK THEM
FOR IMPLEMENTING THAT.
>>JAN SMITH:  OKAY.
WE CAN DO THAT TOO.
MAKING A LIST OVER THERE, BARBARA.
DO THAT BEFORE NEXT SUNDAY.
YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  YES.
THE FINAL THING I WANTED TO TOUCH BASE ON VERY BRIEFLY.
THE ISSUE HAD COME UP A FEW MEETINGS AGO ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS
BOARD COULD PROPOSE A FORM OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT THAT DIFFERS IN
WHATEVER EXTENT TO THE THREE THAT ARE LISTED IN THE FLORIDA STATUTES.
I DID A FAIRLY BRIEF LEGAL OPINION.
PAST CHARTER REVIEW BOARDS HAD HAD SOMEWHAT OF A DIFFERENCE OF
OPINION IN THE ISSUE.
IN 1991, FRED KARL AND LYNN CASH WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
ISSUED A FAIRLY LONG LEGAL OPINION THAT WENT INTO THE LEGISLATIVE HITCH
AND -- HISTORY AND CONCLUDED THAT, YES, YOU COULD AMEND A CHARTER TO
A FORM THAT DIFFERS FROM THE THREE IN THE STATUTE.
HE NOTED, AS I DID IN MY LEGAL OPINION, THERE'S NO CASES OR ATTORNEY
GENERAL OPINIONS ON POINT, AND ONCE AGAIN, UNFORTUNATELY, I MUST TELL
THE BOARD THERE IS SOME DEGREE OF RISK, BUT I DO FEEL QUITE COMFORTABLE
THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.
I DID PUT A FOOTNOTE THAT ORANGE COUNTY CHAIRMAN VOTES ALL THE TIME,
WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE OPTIONAL FORM WITH THE CHAIRMAN WHO
VOTES ONLY IN THE CASE OF A TIE.
TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT HAS NOT BEEN CHALLENGED AND THAT
STILL IS ENFORCED TODAY.
THE OTHER OPINION THAT I HAVE ATTACHED WAS DONE TO THE '85-'86 CHARTER
REVIEW BOARD FROM MR. LAWSON, JOHN LAWSON.
BY THE TERMS OF HIS LEGAL OPINION, AND IT HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW,
UNDERSTOOD THAT HE BELIEVED YOU WERE TIED TO THE THREE.
IF YOU READ THE PLAIN WORDING OF THE STATUTE, ONE SECTION SAYS IF YOU
ARE ADOPTING YOU "SHALL" HAVE THESE.
AND THE NEXT SECTION SAYS A COUNTY CHARTER "MAY" HAVE ONE OF THE
FORMS.
MR. KARL'S OPINION GOES TO THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AS TO WHY THE
LEGISLATURE CAME UP WITH THE TWO DIFFERENT VARIATIONS AND BASICALLY
IT'S BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THEY WERE ALLOWING A BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TO PROPOSE A CHARTER BY ORDINANCE, AND IF THE BOARD DID
IT BY ORDINANCE, THEY HAD THREE CHOICES.
VERSUS ANOTHER SECTION OF 125 THAT IF THEY HAD A CHARTER COMMISSION,
THEY ARE NOT TIED IN TO JUST THE THREE.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT IT IS OUR OPINION THAT YOU CAN VARY SO MUCH THAT
GIVES THE BOARD FLEXIBILITY AS YOU START TO LOOK AT WHAT KIND OF FORMS
AND WHAT VETO POWERS YOU WANT TO GIVE OR WHAT CHAMPIONSHIP DUTIES
YOU MAY WANT TO DO.
I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS IN THE STATUTE
THAT YOU SET OUT THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS CLEARLY IN
YOUR CHARTER AND SOME OTHER THINGS AS WE GET TO THAT POINT IN THE
PROCESS.
I CERTAINLY CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DEPTH.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I HAVE ONE OTHER THOUGHT RELATED TO THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY, BUT I AM NOT GOING TO PROPOSE ANYTHING.
I DON'T THINK -- NOTHING ELSE TONIGHT.
BUT THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAD RELATED TO THE POSSIBLE CONFLICT WITH THE
CHARTER OF PLACING SOMETHING ON TWO SEPARATE BALLOTS, I WOULD LIKE
THE BOARD TO CONSIDER FIXING THAT PROBLEM WITH SOME LANGUAGE SO THAT
THE NEXT CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WON'T HAVE TO EXPERIENCE THE SAME
THING THAT WE WENT THROUGH RELATING TO THE 2000 BALLOT VERSUS PUTTING
SOMETHING ON THE 2002 BALLOT.
I THINK THAT HAD AN IMPACT IN OUR DEBATE.
I THINK IF WE HAD SOMETHING CLEAR, I THINK OUTCOME OF OUR FIRST MAJOR
VOTE WOULD HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN DIFFERENT.
SO I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THAT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I THINK, MR. WHITE, WHEN WE GET INTO THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR
NOT WE ARE GOING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO HOW THE CHARTER REVIEW
BOARD IS APPOINTED AND THE TIME FRAMES THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD
MEETS, THAT'S A GOOD ISSUE TO RAISE AT THAT TIME.
MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  AND I THINK THAT MS. LAYNE ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE, AND I
THINK SHE'S COME UP WITH -- MS. LASHER, I'M SORRY.
GOT MY DENISEs WRONG.
I'M SORRY.
SHE WOULD BE WILLING TO HELP US THROUGH THAT DISCUSSION.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I BELIEVE KEN TINKLER IS GOING TO ADDRESS THE
PINELLAS DISTRICTING PLAN.
SO HE LOOKED INTO THAT ISSUE.
>>JAN SMITH:  GOOD EVENING, MR. TINKLER.
>>KEN TINKLER:  GOOD EVENING.
KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF THE BOARD WAS AWARE THE LEGAL OPINION ON THE
PINELLAS COUNTY DISTRICTS AND HOW THEY ARE CHANGING.
THE PRESENT MAKEUP OF THE PINELLAS COUNTY DISTRICT HAVE THE
COMMISSIONERS ELECTED AT-LARGE, BUT EACH HAD TO RESIDE IN A SPECIFIC
DISTRICT.
THEY HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT, BUT THEY HAVE ADDED SINGLE-MEMBER
DISTRICTS TO THEIR CURRENT SYSTEM AS WELL SHOP IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
>>JAN SMITH:  MS. LASHER.
>>DENISE LASHER:  WHEN THEIR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WAS HERE, HE SAID
THAT THEY HAD -- AT-LARGE, THAT THEY WERE GOING TO SEVEN AND THREE OF
THOSE WERE AT-LARGE?
>>KEN TINKLER:  THAT'S CORRECT.
>>DENISE LASHER:  AND THEY -- BUT -- SO THEY HAVE SOME SINGLE MEMBERS,
AND THEY ALSO HAVE AT-LARGE.
>>KEN TINKLER:  RIGHT.
ADDED IN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE THOSE PREVIOUSLY.
>>DENISE LASHER:  BEFORE THAT HAD FIVE COMMISSIONERS.
>>KEN TINKLER:  FIVE COMMISSIONERS THAT HAD TO RESIDE IN A PARTICULAR
DISTRICT BUT ELECTED BY THE ENTIRE COUNTY.
>>DENISE LASHER:  HOW MANY SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS.
>>KEN TINKLER:  FIVE AT LARGE.
>>DENISE LASHER:  DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS?
>>KEN TINKLER:  WE DID INCLUDE THAT IN THE OPINION.
IT HAS THE OVERLAY MAPS.
>>JAN SMITH:  WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET ONE.
IT HAS MAPS INCLUDED IN IT.
TWO DIFFERENT WAYS OF BREAKING DOWN THE AT-LARGE AND THE SINGLE
MEMBER.
>>DENISE LASHER:  MY PACKET WASN'T DELIVERED THROUGH THE MAIL.
I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.
SO NOW THEY HAVE SEVEN COMMISSIONERS, CORRECT?
>>KEN TINKLER:  THAT IS CORRECT, FOR THIS COMING CYCLE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  THEY IMPLEMENTED THIS CHANGE, THIS CHARTER CHANGE ON
A SPECIAL ELECTION.
>>KEN TINKLER:  THEY ARE IMPLEMENTING IT WITH THIS COMING ELECTION?
>>GERALD WHITE:  IT'S ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON, RIGHT?
>>KEN TINKLER:  THIS WAS ADOPTED LAST YEAR.
IT IS NOW BEING IMPLEMENTED --
>>DAVID HURLEY:  ADOPTED IN THE SPECIAL ELECTION.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THEY HAD 900,000 RESIDENTS
AND PASSED WITH JUST 2300 VOTES?
>>KEN TINKLER:  YES, SIR.
IT WAS A VERY SMALL TURNOUT.
>>JAN SMITH:  NOT UNLIKE OUR RECENT ELECTIONS.
>>DENISE LASHER:  VOTED ON IN MARCH DURING THE PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE.
>>KEN TINKLER:  IN 1999 AS A SPECIAL ELECTION.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. TINKLER.
BOARD MEMBERS, THERE IS A YOUNG LADY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO SAT ON THE
FIRST CHARTER REVIEW BOARD THAT I SERVED ON IN 1919, MARYANN LADUTKO.
IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU HERE THIS EVENING, AND I'M SURPRISED THAT YOU HAVEN'T
HAD ANYTHING TO SAY TO US SO FAR.
>> OBSERVING.
>>JAN SMITH:  AH, YES.
SHE GETS TO HEAR MANY OF THESE DISCUSSIONS AGAIN.
THANK YOU FOR COMING.
WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
MS. MERRITT, DO YOU HAVE AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT, PLEASE.
>>BARBARA MERRITT:  I'LL MAKE IT SHORT TONIGHT.
THE THREE WEEKS, I DID A LOT OF RESEARCH, AND I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU GOT
YOUR PACKETS, YOU SAW DIFFERENT THINGS IN THERE.
I GOT A LITTLE CREATIVE, I THINK.
OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE SEPTEMBER 28th.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SCHEDULED.
SO AS YOU HAD REQUESTED, YOU WANTED TO HAVE TIME TO DO MORE
DELIBERATION.
I WAS LOOKING FOR SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM Y'ALL TO DECIDE WHETHER YOU
WANT SPECIFIC RESEARCH ON CERTAIN ITEMS OR IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAYBE
DECIDE TO AGENDA CERTAIN THINGS ON THE CHARTER.
IF YOU WANT TO GO TO YOUR SUBCOMMITTEES OR DO YOU STILL WANT TO TALK?
THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO KNOW.
THE OTHER THING IS, I HAVE SOME HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS.
WE HAVE NO MEETING SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2001.
TO GET ON THE CALENDAR, I REALLY NEED TO GET BACK TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' SECRETARY SO THEY KNOW -- MAKE SURE WE HAVE A
PLACE TO MEET.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
>>JAN SMITH:  SEE IF YOU CAN GET US ON THE -- FOR THE SAME SCHEDULE WE'RE
ON NOW, THE SECOND AND FOURTH AND TO CONTINUE THAT THROUGH -- WHAT'S
THE DATE THAT WE HAVE TO ADJOURN SINE DIE?
>>BARBARA MERRITT:  I ASSUME SINCE YOU STARTED FEBRUARY 9th, THAT
FEBRUARY 10th WOULD BE -- THE 11th IN JANUARY WOULD BE THE SECOND
THURSDAY AND THE 24th.
AND ONE OTHER THING.
I'VE GOTTEN CALLS FROM NUMEROUS BOARD MEMBERS.
THE 28th OF DECEMBER IS A MEETING THAT WE HAVE ON THE CALENDAR.
AND I GUESS CHRISTMAS AND HOLIDAY PLANS ARE STARTING TO KICK IN.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'LL HAVE A QUORUM.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY "MERRY CHRISTMAS" AND
"HAPPY HOLIDAYS."
>>JAN SMITH:  THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  WE EITHER HAVE TO DECIDE TO SUSPEND THE RULES FOR
DECEMBER OR COME UP WITH A SECOND DATE
>>BARBARA MERRITT:  THAT WAS MY OTHER --
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  I HAVE A FEELING BY THEN WE MIGHT BE NEEDING --
>>BARBARA MERRITT:  NEED TO MEET?
>>JAN SMITH:  WHY DON'T WE LEAVE IT UNTIL WE SEE MAYBE INTO THE FIRST
WEEK OF NOVEMBER, SEE WHETHER OUR BOARD MEMBERS ARE GOING TO BE
HERE, AND THEN WE'LL MAKE A DECISION.
CAN YOU JUST HOLD THE MEETING --
>>BARBARA MERRITT:  I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT.
THE OTHER THING.
MAYOR GRECO WILL BE HERE ON OCTOBER 12th.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF ANYONE WOULD HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
MAYBE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET THEM TO ME AND MAYBE GIVE THE MAYOR
AN IDEA OF WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM HIM.
>>JAN SMITH:  JUST TO THE DELIGHT OF THE PEOPLE IN SOUTH COUNTY AND THE
THREE GORILLAS DOWN THERE, HE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT CONSOLIDATION.
SO GET YOUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER ON THAT, WHETHER HE'LL GO THERE OR NOT,
I DON'T KNOW.
THANK YOU, MS. MERRITT.
I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU ALL SOMETHING THAT I FOUND INTERESTING.
IN THE -- IN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVES, HE HAS
AN ENTIRE PROCESS LAID OUT FOR HOW THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
GOES THROUGH THE AUDITING PROCESS AND HOW HE AND HIS STAFF MANAGE
AUDITS.
AND IT WAS INTERESTING TO LEARN THAT PRIOR TO THE SERVICE OF FRED KARL
AS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THE CLERK WAS CONSIDERED, IN FACT, THE
COUNTY'S CHIEF BUDGET OFFICER.
DURING MR. KARL'S TENURE AS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THAT WAS CHANGED,
AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BECAME THE CHIEF BUDGET OFFICER AT THAT
TIME.
SO I JUST THOUGHT THAT WAS AN INTERESTING TIDBIT YOU ALL WOULD BE
INTERESTED IN HEARING.
SINCE IT'S 20 AFTER 7, I THOUGHT WE WOULD TAKE OUR BREAK NOW, COME BACK
ABOUT 7:30, AND WE'LL GET INTO OUR DISCUSSIONS.
THIS MEETING IS IN RECESS.

>>JAN SMITH:  THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS BACK IN SESSION.
IT LOOKS LIKE THE -- THE PUBLIC HAS DESERTED US.
WELL, MARYANN IS BEHIND THERE.
WE HAVE A COUPLE HERE.
GOOD.
WE DO HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END OF THE
MEETING IF YOU MISSED YOUR OPPORTUNITY IN THE FIRST HALF, WE'LL GIVE YOU
ANOTHER SHOT AT THIS -- ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS BOARD --
SAY THAT WRONG.
AND I NEED TO TELL YOU, BOARD MEMBERS, I WON'T BE HERE AT THE NEXT
MEETING.
MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE SCHEDULED A VACATION AND I'LL BE ABSENT, BUT I'M
HOPING AS WE DISCUSS ISSUES -- LOOK AT THAT, MR. WHITE IS JUST SO HAPPY
ABOUT THAT.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>>GERALD WHITE:  YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THAT?
>>JAN SMITH:  I'M HOPING THAT AS WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSIONS THIS IS
EVENING, WE'LL HAVE SOME DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GOING IN AT THE NEXT
MEETING LAND HURLEY, VERY HAPPILY, WILL MANAGE THE NEXT MEETING AND
LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  GERALD IS LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I CAN JUST IMAGINE WHAT MOTIONS MIGHT PASS WHEN YOU'RE
NOT HERE IS.
>>JAN SMITH:  A VACATION WE STARTED PLANNING IN JANUARY.
AND WE DON'T GET TO DO ANYTHING ON THE SPUR OF THE MOMENT.
I HAD MOST OF THIS IN PLACE OR I WOULD HAVE TRIED TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
THIS EVENING'S MEETING WAS SET ASIDE FOR US TO TALK LIKE WE DID LAST TIME,
UNLESS SOMEONE HAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ANYONE HAD GONE THAT FAR OF ISSUES.
BUT MR. LaBOUR, I'LL LET YOU START IT.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  SINCE I WAS CHASTISED LAST MONTH FOR NOT TALKING, I
GUESS I'LL TALK THIS TIME.
>> THAT REALLY HAPPENED?
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  I REALLY DO APPRECIATE, CONTRARY TO WHAT MIGHT BE
BELIEVED BY SOME IN THE AUDIENCE, I DO APPRECIATE THE CITIZENS THAT COME
DOWN AND SPEAK.
AND I WOULD STRONGLY URGE ALL AREAS OF THE COUNTY TO BE AS ORGANIZED
AND AS DELIBERATIVE AND AS THOUGHTFUL AS THE SOUTH COUNTY GROUP WAS
TONIGHT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
WHAT I GLEANED FROM A DISCUSSION LAST MONTH, AND I REALLY DID SIT BACK
AND LISTEN TO ALL OF YOU, THAT I WALKED AWAY WITH BELIEVING THAT -- I
THINK WHAT WE ARE WRESTLING WITH IS -- WE HAVE -- WE HAVE A LARGER
COUNTY TODAY THAN WE EVER HAD.
AND THAT WE'RE HEARING NOT JUST FROM TONIGHT BUT FROM THE VERY FIRST
MEETING CITIZENS WHO ARE FRUSTRATED THAT THEY FEEL THEY ARE FARTHER
-- THEY ARE FARTHER FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT THAN THEY EVER HAVE BEEN.
I'VE BEEN WRESTLING WITH THE THOUGHTS AS TO WHAT -- WHAT HAS CAUSED
THAT.
IS IT, IN FACT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T FEEL THE ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO ARE
ELECTED REALLY UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEMS IN THEIR PARTICULAR AREA?
IS IT -- IS IT THE ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT?
AND THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE NOT ABLE TO DEAL WITH THE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE DEPARTMENTS IN A WAY IN WHICH THEY
THINK IS HELPFUL.
AND I WOULD BE HONEST WITH YOU, I STILL DON'T HAVE ANSWERS TO A LOT OF
THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT I DO FIND IT INTERESTING, A CONCEPT TO LOOK AT TWO
THINGS.
ONE, THE -- HAVING OUR AT-LARGE MEMBER -- MEMBERS WHO ARE ELECTED TO
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESIDE IN A SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC
AREA.
I THINK THAT -- I DON'T KNOW HOW I ULTIMATELY WOULD VOTE ON THAT ISSUE,
BUT I THINK IT'S -- I THINK IT'S A TIME THAT HAS COME THAT WE NEED TO LOOK
AT IT, AND I THINK THAT THIS GROUP WOULD BE VERY DILIGENT IN LOOKING AT
ALL SIDES OF THAT ISSUE.
AND THE SECOND IS THE PROSPECTS OF MAYBE EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF
SEATS BY -- AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MAGIC NUMBER WOULD BE,
BUT I WOULDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE MORE THAN A COUPLE, BUT TO TAKE A LOOK
AT THAT AS WELL.
AGAIN, I THINK THAT IS ONE THAT WILL TAKE THAT TASK VERY SERIOUSLY.
I STILL PERSONALLY HAVE NOT COME UP WITH THE FEELING OF AN ELECTED
CHAIRMAN OR A SUPER CHAIRMAN VERSUS WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE AT-LARGE AND THE NUMBER
OF DISTRICTS FIRST, BECAUSE I THINK THAT MIGHT HELP US GET TO THAT
DECISION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT FIXES SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT
HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED.
SO THAT'S WHERE I AM.
>>JAN SMITH:  THANK YOU, MR. LaBOUR.
MS. WALDRON.
>>ARLENE WALDRON:  I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT STEVE SAYS, AND IT'S
KIND OF -- THE ANSWER TO THOSE QUESTIONS ARE TWOFOLD.
I HEAR A LOT ABOUT, IT'S THE GROWTH IN THE COUNTY THAT'S CAUSING THE
DISCREPANCIES AS ONE ISSUE.
AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUE, THE LACK OF LEADERSHIP.
SO WHILE WE'RE GOING TO -- AND IT'S HARD TO KNOW WHAT THAT MAGIC
NUMBER IS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE WE SHOULD START WITH JUST SOME
SIMPLE QUESTIONS.
DO WE -- I MEAN, CAN WE START WITH -- DO WE THINK WE NEED AT-LARGE?
ARE WE GOING TO DO ALL SINGLE DISTRICT?
CAN WE TAKE THIS UP IN BITE-SIZE PIECES AND MAKE THAT DECISION, FIND OUT
AS A MAJORITY, DO WE THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS OR
DO WE THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ALL SINGLE DISTRICT.
MAYBE WE MAKE THAT DECISION.
THEN IF IT GOES TOWARDS THE AT-LARGE, THEN WE DISCUSS, DO WE HAVE THEM
LIVE IN CERTAIN AREAS.
MAYBE WE JUST BREAK THIS DOWN IN BITE-SIZED PIECES.
I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND A LOT OF ANSWERS ALL AT THE
SAME TIME, BUT AS A SUGGESTION, MAYBE WE COULD JUST START WITH THAT
DECISION SO AT LEAST WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH FORMING SOME KIND OF --
SOMETHING TO PUT OUT ON THE FLOOR THAT THE CITIZENS CAN COME AND
SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS.
YES, I LIKE THAT; NO, I DON'T, AND HERE ARE THE REASONS.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  MY QUESTION, AND I KNOW WHEN THEY'RE DRAWING STATE
REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICTS, THEY REPRESENT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEOPLE,
GIVE OR TAKE A FEW.
DO WE HAVE ANY SUCH RULE IN SETTING OUR COUNTY COMMISSION DISTRICTS
THAT THEY REPRESENT A GIVEN NUMBER OF PEOPLE?
>>JAN SMITH:  THEY HAVE TO BE, LIKE, WITHIN 3 TO 5 --
>>GERALD WHITE:  I THOUGHT IT WAS 1%.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  NO, NO.
THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M ASKING.
I'LL USE THE INSTANCE IN SUN CITY CENTER WHERE ONE OF OUR -- WE WERE SPLIT
IN THE MIDDLE, STATE REPRESENTATIVE-WISE, BUT ONE REPRESENTATIVE JUMPED
ACROSS 674 AND PICKED UP AN AREA OUT THERE IN ORDER TO PUT THE RIGHT
NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN HIS REPRESENTATIVE -- IN HIS -- IN HIS DISTRICT.
DO THEY HAVE TO REPRESENT A CERTAIN NUMBER, GIVE OR TAKE?
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  YES.
>>JAN SMITH:  IT'S -- LET'S LET MARY HELEN ANSWER IT, BUT IF YOU HAVE FOUR
DISTRICTS, THE INTENT IS TO HAVE THEM AS NEARLY EQUAL AS POSSIBLE IN
POPULATION.
THERE CAN BE A WAIVER OF, I THINK, IT'S 5% BETWEEN ONE DISTRICT AND
ANOTHER.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS, DO THE DISTRICTS HAVE TO
CONTAIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEOPLE?
I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING TO IS WITH OUR GROWTH, ARE SOME OF OUR DISTRICTS
OUTGROWING THAT?
DID I ASK THAT QUESTION RIGHT?
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  MARY HELEN CAMPBELL FOR THE RECORD.
SECTION 403 SAYS THAT THE FOUR DISTRICTS SHALL BE DIVIDED AS NEARLY
EQUAL IN POPULATION AS POSSIBLE.
THE INTENT WAS EVEN THOUGH DISTRICT 4 IS HUGE, AND SOME OF THE OTHER
DISTRICTS ARE SMALLER, IT'S THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
THAT IS WHY EVERY TEN YEARS WE HAVE TO, AFTER THE CENSUS COMES OUT,
REDRAW THOSE LINES.
SO IT MAY BE A BLURRING OF ISSUES WHERE -- I THINK ALL -- THE DISTRICTS WILL
BE THE SAME IN POPULATION.
THE THING ABOUT DISTRICT 4, IT'S BIGGER AND MORE SPREAD OUT AND
PROBABLY A LOT -- MORE DIVERSE THAN THE OTHER DISTRICTS.
IT'S EQUAL IN POPULATION IS THE WAY IT'S DIVIDED OUT.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  I UNDERSTAND IT OR I DON'T THINK I ASKED MY QUESTION
RIGHT YET OR YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M TRYING TO GET TO.
I'LL USE DISTRICT 4 SINCE I LIVE IN IT.
IF IT GOES OVER X NUMBER OF PEOPLE, HAS IT OUTGROWN THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT PERSON CAN REPRESENT?
LIKE YOUR CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF
PEOPLE IN THEM.
YOU KNOW, THEY ARE DRAWN THAT WAY.
>>GERALD WHITE:  IF I UNDERSTAND HER QUESTION RIGHT, I THINK THE DISTRICTS
--
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  HELP ME OUT, GERALD WHITE WHITE THE DISTRICTS WILL
GROW WITHIN THE TEN-YEAR TIME FRAME BETWEEN CENSUS.
WHEN THE CENSUS IS COMPLETED AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
REDRAW THE LINES, THEY HAVE TO DO WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MARY
HELEN IS TALKING ABOUT.
BUT ONCE THAT IS DONE, THERE'S NOTHING TO -- I DON'T KNOW IF THE COUNTY --
IN OTHER WORDS, CAN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REDRAW THE LINE WITHIN
FIVE YEARS WITHIN THAT TEN-YEAR PERIOD.
>>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL:  I WOULD BE AFRAID SOMEONE WOULD SAY THAT'S IN
CONTRAVENTION OF OUR CHARTER.
UNLESS THEY WANT TO PROPOSE A CHARTER CHANGE TO MAKE IT FIVE YEARS OR
DO SOME OTHER KIND OF REDISTRICTING.
>>GERALD WHITE:  NOTHING IN THE CHARTER TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH
OTHER THAN SOMETHING IN THE BALLOT.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  HELP ME OUT.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.
>>DENISE LASHER:  I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE ASKING.
WE ARE LIMITED TO ONLY FOUR SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS.
SO AS THE POPULATION GROWS, AND WHEN THEY REDISTRICT, EACH ONE OF
THOSE DISTRICTS WILL HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN THEM.
IT DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO ADD MORE --
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  SO IN OTHER WORDS --
>>DENISE LASHER:  -- SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS UNLESS YOU CHANGE THE
CHARTER.
NOW IN THE U.S. CONGRESS, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU CAN ADD MORE
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS AS THE POPULATION GROWS.
AS FAR AS THE STATE GOES, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THE STATE LIMITS THE
NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS WE CAN HAVE WITHIN OUR STATE
AND I THINK WE ARE AT THAT MAX NOW.
EVEN WITH THE NEW CENSUS AND NEW REDISTRICTING, THERE WOULDN'T BE A
NEW STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT CREATED OR STATE DISTRICT CREATED.
THERE MAY BE REDRAWING OF LINES TO REFLECT CHANGES IN POPULATION.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN -- THAT SAME THING WOULD HAPPEN IN THE COUNTY.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  SO IN OTHER WORDS, A COUNTY COMMISSION --
>>DENISE LASHER:  NO LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  A COUNTY COMMISSIONER COULD END UP REPRESENTING
200,000 PEOPLE.
>>DENISE LASHER:  TWO YEARS FROM NOW, A HALF MILLION PEOPLE.
>>JAN SMITH:  MAY BE LESS.
PEOPLE CAN MOVE OUT OF THE DISTRICT.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  I WAS THINKING AND WAS WONDERING IF COUNTY COMMISSION
COMES UNDER --
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  IN FEDERAL DISTRICTS, YOU HAVE A LIMITED POPULATION.
>>DEE WILLIAMS:  THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  YOU HAVE TO ADD A DISTRICT.
>> AT THE STATE LEVEL, YOU ARE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF STATE --
>>JAN SMITH:  WE ARE ALL GOING TO TRY TO TALK AT ONCE.
THE ORDER OF SPEAKERS IS SUPPOSED TO BE MR. HURLEY, MR. LASHER, YOU'RE
OFF, MR. AMBLER AND THEN MR. LaBOUR.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP, WE'RE
PARTICULARLY TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE DISTRICTS.
IT IS SOMETHING WE PROBABLY SHOULD DISCUSS.
THE 250,000, WHICH IS BASICALLY GOING TO BE THE SIZE OF THE DISTRICTS AFTER
-- WE GET THE CENSUS REPORT AND GROWING, 250,000 AND GROWING, IS
PROBABLY GOING TO BE DIFFICULT FOR US TO HAVE A DISTRICT THAT MEETS THE
REQUIREMENTS OF JUSTICE WHEN IT COMES OUT TO CREATING A MINORITY
DISTRICT OR A DISTRICT THAT HAS A GOOD LIKELIHOOD.
I DON'T THINK WE CREATE A MINORITY DISTRICT.
WE CREATE A DISTRICT THAT HAS A GOOD LIKELIHOOD OF CREATING TO THE
BOARD.
YOU HAVE A HARD TIME OF DOING THAT WITH 250,000, PEOPLE NO MATTER HOW
YOU SLICE THE PIE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
THE RECURRING THEME, AND I CAN TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FROM BOTH SIDES
OF THE AISLE.
BEN WACKSMAN WAS TALKING ABOUT, THERE ARE JUST SO MANY PEOPLE.
IN FACT, HE WAS NOT SURPRISED WHEN I TOLD HIM HOW MANY SECONDS THAT
MEANT PER CONSTITUENTS, BUT THE RECURRING THEME IS NOT GETTING THAT
REPRESENTATION.
I THINK WE DO NEED TO GET THAT WHERE WE HAVE REPUTATION.
ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE, TOO, IS THE COST OF CAMPAIGNS.
GOSH, IF YOU LOOK -- SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WE ARE RAISING $150,000 TO RUN
FOR COUNTY COMMISSION.
I THINK WE NEED -- WITH SMALLER DISTRICTS, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE TO RAISE AS
MUCH MONEY.
IF WE HAVE EIGHT SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND EFFECTIVELY CUT THEM IN
HALF, $125,000 APIECE.
IF WE HAVE AN AT-LARGE ELECTED PERSON FOR THE CHAIRMAN, SIMILAR -- LIKE
THE THIRD THING IN THE LIST THAT MARY HELEN PASSED OUT, I GUESS IT WAS
FROM THE ATTORNEY FROM THE LAST BOARD.
THEN WE CAN HAVE AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT REPRESENTATION
CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE.
NOW, THE ARGUMENT THAT WE HAVE AT THIS OPPORTUNITY WE CAN VOTE FOR
A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION.
TO ME, IT'S KIND OF A WEAK ARGUMENT BECAUSE I ONLY GOT TO VOTE FOR ONE
STATE REPRESENTATIVE, ONE U.S. REPRESENTATIVE.
I GET TO VOTE FOR BOTH SENATORS AND FOR THE GOVERNOR, BUT I DON'T GET TO
VOTE FOR A MAJORITY OF ANY LEGISLATIVE BODY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE
COUNTY COMMISSION.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE THEORY BEHIND IT, BUT I THINK IT IS A WEAK theory IN A
COUNTY WITH A MILLION PEOPLE.
YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A REAL HARD TIME TELLING ME THAT EACH OF THE
THREE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT RUN AT-LARGE -- AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT
-- THEY MUST HAVE RAISED SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO RUN
AT-LARGE.
THIS IS A MASSIVE COUNTY.
IT IS A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING.
IT'S HARD TO KNOW PEOPLE.
I THINK IF YOU GET TO 125,000, THAT'S NOT EXACTLY A VILLAGE, BUT YOU'VE GOT
AN OPPORTUNITY THAT THE PEOPLE IN THAT AREA COULD KNOW SOME MORE
ABOUT THE PERSON RUNNING FOR THAT OFFICE, NOT JUST -- YOU KNOW, THROUGH
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE INVOLVEMENTS THAT THESE PEOPLE MIGHT
HAVE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US LOOK AT THAT VERY STRONGLY.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE HERE WHERE WE WANT TO GET
REPRESENTATION.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. AMBLER.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  ARE WE CONFINING OUR DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW JUST TO THIS
TOPIC OR --
>>JAN SMITH:  I THINK YOU CAN DISCUSS WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE AND MAYBE --
WHEN WE GET A LITTLE -- MAYBE A HALF HOUR WE WILL BRING IT DOWN TO A
COUPLE OF ISSUES.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  I GUESS I'LL BE-- BEGIN BY ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE AND JUST
TO ECHO WHAT ARLENE WALDRON SAID IF WE TAKE IT IN BITE-SIZED CHUNKS AND
DECIDE WHAT ISSUES WE WANT TO TACKLE FIRST, OTHERWISE WE WILL BE ALL
OVER THE MAP.
WE NEED TO BREAK IT DOWN INTO THOSE KIND OF COMPONENTS, DO WE WANT
ONLY SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND SOME AT-LARGE DISTRICTS, AND NOW
DAVID HURLEY HAS SUGGESTED YET A THIRD OPTION, WHICH WOULD BE ALL
SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WITH AN AT-LARGE CHAIRMAN.
BUT WE'VE GOT TO GET INTO SOME KIND OF FORMAT TO GET THIS IN A
DIGESTABLE FORMAT TO BREAK IT INTO OPTIONS.
THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO ECHO ON THAT.
I WANTED TO COME BACK FOR A MINUTE TO A COMMENT MADE FROM PUBLIC BY
RALPH HUGHES, BECAUSE I DID BRING THIS IDEA UP, I THINK VERY EARLY ON IN
OUR FIRST MONTH OR SO OF MEETING, ABOUT PUTTING A BUDGET CAP.
AND IT REALLY DOES GO HAND IN HAND.
IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE BEEN CONCENTRATING ON, WITH OUR INTERNAL
PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, THE WHOLE OBJECTIVE OF KEEPING A LID ON TAXATION,
ON KEEPING A LID ON SPENDING, PUTTING CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE,
GIVING THE COMMISSIONERS A TOOL TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT BUDGET IN
CHECK.
HAVING A CHARTER PROVISION THAT REQUIRES THEM TO STICK TO THE LESSER
OF A 3% INCREASE IN THE OPERATING BUDGET OR AN INFLATION RATE WILL
FORCE PEOPLE TO SHARPEN THEIR PENCILS AND DO THE RIGHT JOB FOR THE RIGHT
REASONS.
IF THEY HAVE TO EXCEED IT -- FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FEELS IT IS REALLY NECESSARY BECAUSE OF WHATEVER EXTRAORDINARY
CIRCUMSTANCE, THEN IT COULD BE OVERWRITTEN, AND I THINK THE PROVISION
THAT MR. HUGHES PROPOSED WAS SIX BOARD MEMBERS.
I WOULD PERSONALLY SUPPORT FIVE AS A SUPER-MAJORITY, BECAUSE I THINK IF
YOU CAN GET ANYTHING BY FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THEN IT WOULD
FAIRLY JUSTIFY THE VOTE.
BUT BY HAVING THAT SORT OF OVERRIDE PROVISION PUT IN THERE, YOU HAVE A
SAFETY VALVE.
IF YOU NEED TO EXCEED THAT CAP, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND AMEND
YOUR CHARTER.
BUT ALSO PUT A MANDATE IN THERE, AND IF THE VOTERS SAY THEY WANT A CAP
ON THEIR COUNTY BUDGET OR THEY WANT ACCOUNTABILITY IF YOU ARE GOING
TO EXCEED IT, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR THING TO DO.
IT'S NOT QUITE LIKE A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT, BUT IT'S CLOSE.
IT'S SAYING, LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS.
WE HAVE TO DO THAT AS INDIVIDUALS.
AND I THINK THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD.
WE ONLY HAVE A COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH OF UNDER 2%, AND YET THE
FIGURES IN THE BUDGET APPROVED TODAY SHOW AN INCREASE OF 8.2%.
WELL, THAT MONEY HAS GOT TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE.
I MEAN, WE TRY TO LOOK AT THE ATTRITION RATE OF INCREASE AND GROWTH TO
PICK UP SOME OF THAT SLACK.
BUT IF WE ARE ONLY GROWING AT 1.6% OR 1.7%, AND INCREASING THE BUDGET BY
8%, THAT WILL TRANSLATE INTO HIGHER AD VALOREM TAXES OR INTO
SOMETHING OTHER THAN A TAX, WE CALL IT A FEE, OR CALL IT A GAS TAX, OR
CALL IT ANOTHER NAME.
IT'S A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO RAISE THAT REVENUE
SOMEWHERE TO MEET THOSE BUDGET INCREASES.
I THINK THE IDEA OF BUDGET CAP IS SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD IS SOMETHING
THAT IT COULD EASILY CONSIDER.
I THINK IT MAKES SENSE AS A COMPANION TO THE FINE WORK THAT WE DID ON
PUTTING TOGETHER A PACKAGE FOR THE PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, AND IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT.
IT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA.
IT'S AN IDEA THAT'S OVERDUE.
I DON'T SEE IT BEING SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION THEMSELVES IS GOING
TO IMPOSE NECESSARILY ON THEMSELVES OR BE SEEN BEING BROUGHT UP BY
PETITIONS.
THIS IS THE BODY.
IF ANYBODY IS GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT, THIS IS GOING TO
MAKE IT HAPPEN.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  I WOULD BE CERTAINLY INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT THE ISSUE,
MR. AMBLER.
THE MOTION I MADE AND WAS PASSED THREE MEETINGS AGO, LAST MEETING AND
THIS MEETING AND THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE.
I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS OUR DISCUSSION ON STRUCTURE AND WILL HAVE TIME
TO TALK ABOUT OTHER ISSUES.
QUITE FRANKLY, DEPENDING ON HOW THE STRUCTURE MIGHT COME OUT, MY
EFFECT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FINE TUNE THOSE KIND OF ISSUES.
BACK TO STRUCTURE, I AGREE WITH MS. WALDRON THAT I THINK WE NEED TO TRY
TO FIGURE OUT -- I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY HAVE TO LIMIT OURSELVES BY
SAYING, TONIGHT, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO LOOK AT A STRUCTURE THAT LOOKS
LIKE -- THAT WILL BE A MAKEUP OF SINGLE-MEMBER AND AT-LARGE DISTRICTS.
I THINK WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE OBVIOUS CHOICES OF EITHER HAVING
SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS ONLY AND INCREASING A NUMBER OR HAVING A
COMBINATION THEREOF.
PERHAPS -- I HAVE TO ADMIT I AM A LITTLE IGNORANT AS TO REALLY HOW ALL
THE LINES WERE DRAWN NOW.
I CERTAINLY KNOW THAT IT'S POPULATION DRIVES THEM.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT PARTICIPATION.
I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING ISSUE AS TO HOW PEOPLE ARE PARTICIPATING IN
THOSE DISTRICTS AND GOING OUT AND VOTING.
AND ALSO LOOKING AT REALISTICALLY WHERE WE SEE THE NUMBERS MIGHT
GROW TOO.
I THINK WE HAVE TO REMEMBER IN THIS BODY, WE ARE LOOKING AT SOMETHING
THAT'S NOT -- FIRST OF ALL, WON'T EVEN GET IN THE BALLOT IN 2002.
IF WE DO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE, I SUSPECT THERE WILL BE A TRANSITIONING
TIME BEFORE THAT WILL HAPPEN.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY FIVE OR SIX YEARS BEFORE A NEW
STRUCTURE THAT EVEN EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY MIGHT EMBRACE IS GOING
TO TAKE EFFECT.
SO I THINK WE OWE IT TO THOSE VOTERS TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHERE WE THINK
THAT THE GROWTH IS GOING TO BE.
I SUSPECT THE PEOPLE IN NORTHWEST BELIEVE THEY ARE JUST AS IMPACTED
THAN THE PEOPLE IN THE SOUTH.
SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LOOK TO THE CHAIR OF OFFERING -- IF WE COULD GET
SOME GUIDANCE OF MAYBE YOU MIGHT WANT TO INSTITUTE A COUPLE OF
COMMITTEES TO TAKE A LOOK AT -- ONE, WE TAKE A LOOK AT JUST
SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND ONE COMMITTEE THAT WILL LOOK AT A
COMBINATION OF BOTH, AND AT OUR NEXT MEETING WE MIGHT HAVE KIND OF A
-- I DON'T KNOW WHO COULD GIVE IT, IF PAM IORIO OR THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, OR SOMEBODY JUST GIVE US KIND OF A REFRESHER COURSE OF
WHAT RECONSTITUTES THE DISTRICTS TODAY, WHAT IS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
PEOPLE, AND MAYBE SOME SUGGESTION WHERE IS THEY THINK THE GROWTH AND
THE CHANGES ARE GOING TO BE, AND ALSO THE IMPACT ON WHERE ARE THE
MINORITY -- YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE THE MINORITY RESIDENCES IN OUR COUNTY
AS WELL.
BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I DID TALK TO MR. HOSLER ABOUT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT
AT SOME POINT IN TIME WHEN THE BOARD GOT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY
WANTED TO DO THAT.
I'LL COME BACK TO THAT.
MR. WHITE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  WELL, MADAM CHAIR, I'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF THINKING
OVER -- SINCE WE LAST MET, AND I'VE SAT DOWN WITH THE ELDERS IN MY
COMMUNITY AND AND CHIT-CHATTED A WHILE ABOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS THAT
WE HAD GONE THROUGH UP UNTIL TO POINT, AND TALKED WITH THEM, AND
EXPLAINED WITH THEM, AND SHOWED THEM, AND THEY'VE ADVISED ME AND
THEY TALKED TO ME, AND I'M GOING TO SHARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE
CAME TO AGREEMENT ON.
AND THE FIRST THING IS, WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND DECIDE -- WELL WE NEED --
I HAVEN'T DECIDED -- I'M IN FAVOR OF GIVING THE CITIZENS A CHOICE.
TAKING THREE DIFFERENT PROPOSALS TO PUBLIC HEARING.
ONE OF THEM WOULD BE WITH AN ELECTED EXECUTIVE, COUNTY MAYOR.
THE OTHER ONE WILL BE WITH AN ELECTED CHAIRMAN.
AND THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE WITH THE STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE
NOW.
I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND FORMULATE THESE THREE DIFFERENT
PROPOSALS, MAKE EACH ONE OF THEM SOLID AS A ROCK AND TAKE THEM TO
PUBLIC HEARING AND LET THE PEOPLE SPEAK ON THEM.
WE ARE JUST 14 CITIZENS OUT OF 960,000 RESIDENTS.
AND THEY HAVE CHARGED US, THROUGH THE CHARTER PROCESS, WITH DOING
THE RESEARCH, GOING THROUGH THIS INFORMATION, AND PRESENTING
SOMETHING TO THEM AND LET THEM MAKE THE DECISION THROUGH THE PUBLIC
HEARING PROCESS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M PREPARED TO DO.
I WOULD LIKE TO PUT TOGETHER THE THREE DIFFERENT SOLID PROPOSALS, AND
TAKE THEM TO PUBLIC HEARING AND LET THE PEOPLE SPEAK ON EACH ONE OF
THEM.
I'M IN FAVOR OF TAKING THE ISSUE OF PARTISAN VERSUS NONPARTISAN
ELECTIONS TO PUBLIC HEARING.
I THINK WE NEED TO JUST GO AHEAD AND FORMULATE THESE PROPOSALS
THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS AND GET TO WORK.
WE ONLY HAVE X NUMBER OF MEETINGS LEFT BEFORE OUR DUTIES EXPIRE AND
LET THE PEOPLE COME IN AND SPEAK.
THE CONCERN THAT WAS RAISED RELATED TO MS. WILLIAMS' IDEA WAS, TODAY,
ONE CITIZEN CAN RUN FOR FOUR DIFFERENT SEATS.
UNDER MS. WILLIAMS' SCENARIO, IT WOULD GO TO TWO, YOU CAN RUN FOR THE
DISTRICT OR THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA SEAT.
THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S WHERE I AM TODAY.
I PULLED A COUPLE OF -- I WENT TO MY LIBRARY AND RAN INTO AN ARTICLE THAT
WAS -- IN THE "TIMES" ON DOTTIE BERGER, RELATED TO LENGTH OF YEARS OF
SERVICE WHEN SHE WAS IN A DISTRICT SEAT AND THEN SHE RAN FOR THE
COUNTYWIDE SO SHE COULD POSSIBLY HAVE SERVED 12 YEARS.
WE NEED TO DECIDE THAT.
I'M PREPARED TO TAKE THAT TO PUBLIC HEARING, WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO
REMOVE TERM LIMITS OR KEEP TERM LIMITS.
I BELIEVE WE NEED TO TAKE THESE CRITICAL ISSUES THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE
COME AND TALKED TO US ABOUT AND LET THE PEOPLE THROUGH THE PUBLIC
HEARING PROCESS SAY YES OR NO AND GOVERN OURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.
THERE'S ANOTHER ARTICLE IN HERE RELATING TO THE CLEARANCE PROCESS THAT
WAS DONE IN 1997.
SO IT'S GOOD READING.
HELPFUL INFORMATION.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT IT, BUT I'M READY TO ROLL UP MY
SLEEVE AND PUT TOGETHER SOME SOLID PROPOSALS.
I THINK MR. KLEMAN HAS GIVEN US SOME -- A GOOD GUIDANCE IN HIS
PRESENTATION.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD DOCUMENT TO USE.
AND I DID SPEAK WITH PROFESSOR JARRETT, POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA.
I TALKED WITH HIM ABOUT HIS ARTICLE THAT HE WROTE IN THE "TAMPA
TRIBUNE."
AND BASED ON ALL THESE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD, EVERYBODY HAS GOT --
EVERY IDEA THAT HAS COME FORWARD, THERE'S SOMETHING GOOD IN ALL OF
THEM.
AND SOMETHING BAD IN ALL OF THEM.
SO I'M JUST READY TO ROLL UP THE SLEEVES AND PUT THREE GOOD PROPOSALS
TOGETHER AND TAKE THEM TO PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL GOVERN OURSELVES
FROM THERE.
>>JAN SMITH:  SO YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING PUTTING THREE PROPOSALS ON THE
BALLOT AS TO THREE DIFFERENT -- ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT?
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  YOU WOULD HAVE TO IF YOU ARE GOING TO PUBLIC HEARING.
>>JAN SMITH:  I'M JUST CURIOUS DO YOU WANT TO PUT -- IS YOUR GOAL TO GIVE
THE CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO PICK AND CHOOSE FROM THREE PROPOSALS ON THE
BALLOT?
OR IS THAT -- ARE THOSE THREE PROPOSALS THE ONE YOU WANT TO TAKE TO
PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M CURIOUS TO WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I WON'T COMMIT TO THE BALLOT; BUT I WILL COMMIT TO THE
PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU WILL GET THE MOST
FRUIT, THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL GET THE MOST PUBLIC INPUT.
YOU KNOW, THE CITIZENS -- I THINK MR. KLEMAN TOLD US -- I WENT BACK AND
REVIEWED THE TAPE WHERE MR. KLEMAN MADE HIS PRESENTATION AND HE TOLD
US THAT THE CITIZENS ARE TAKING CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES, THEY'RE WORKING,
DOING THINGS THAT FAMILIES DO.
THIS CHARGE HAS BEEN GIVEN US TO.
WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND FORMULATE THREE DIFFERENT PROPOSALS WITH
THREE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS AND LET THE PEOPLE COME IN AND TALK ABOUT
THEM.
THAT'S WHAT I'M PREPARED TO DO, TAKE THEM TO PUBLIC HEARING.
NOT TAKE THEM TO BALLOT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I THINK IT'S INTERESTING YOU RAISE THAT.
ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH BARBARA MERRITT, AND
ALSO WITH A FACILITATOR, WHO IS A PERSON WHO WORKS WITH VARIOUS
GOVERNMENTS TO TRY TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD AND REACH SOME KINDS OF
CONSENSUS, AND ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS WHETHER OR
NOT WE SHOULD DIVIDE THEM.
AND THAT'S -- THAT WAS MY THOUGHT BEFORE WE DID THE AUDITOR THAT WE
SHOULD LOOK AT THAT STRUCTURE TO SEE WHERE, IN FACT, IF THERE WAS AN
AUDITOR IT WOULD FIT IN THE STRUCTURE.
SO BASED ON THE VIBES I GOT FROM THE BOARD, WE DID NOT MOVE THAT WAY.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME, AND DEE WILLIAMS RAISED IT EARLY, LET'S FOLLOW
THROUGH THE CHARTER AND SEE WHAT WE AGREE AND DISAGREE WITH.
TO SOME EXTENT, IF WE WERE GOING TO LEAVE THE GOVERNMENT IN THE
STRUCTURE THAT IT'S IN NOW, I THINK THAT'S VIABLE WAY TO APPROACH THIS.
THE OTHER THING IS WHEN WE LEFT THE LAST MEETING, WE SAID WE WERE GOING
TO, OR AT LEAST I SUGGESTED THAT WE MIGHT DEBATE TWO PARTICULAR ISSUES
THIS EVENING AND SEE, TAKE A STRAW VOTE.
NOT A BINDING VOTE, BUT A STRAW VOTE TO SEE IF WE WANTED TO, IN FACT, PUT
A COMMITTEE TOGETHER TO MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE TALKED ABOUT DISCUSSING THE ISSUE OF TERM LIMITS AND THE ISSUE OF
PARTISAN AND NONPARTISAN RACES AND WHETHER THAT WAS A PLACE TO START
WHEN YOU LOOK AT STRUCTURE.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS BOARD'S SENTIMENT IS, HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT.
THE ISSUE OF TERM LIMITS, I THINK, IS AN ISSUE THAT WE COULD EACH GIVE OUR
OPINION ON, BUT PERHAPS OUGHT TO SIT BACK AND WAIT AND SEE WHAT
HAPPENS IN THE CITY OF TAMPA.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS FALL.
AND IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING JUST TO SEE WHAT THE REACTION TO IT IS.
THE ISSUE OF PARTISAN AND NONPARTISAN RACES, CERTAINLY IN A
PRESIDENTIAL YEAR, IT'S A GOOD DEBATE TO HAVE.
BACK TO JUST ONE ISSUE.
AND IT'S NOT REALLY RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE, BUT TO SOME EXTENT, IT IS
BECAUSE.
I LISTEN TO PART OF THAT GROWTH MANAGEMENT FORUM THAT IS IN TOWN THIS
-- YESTERDAY AND TODAY.
AND THE CITIZENS THAT SPOKE AT THAT FORUM WERE BASICALLY SPEAKING THE
SAME LANGUAGE WE ARE SPEAKING TONIGHT, AND THAT'S REPRESENTATION.
DO THEY HAVE REPRESENTATION?
AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT CITIZENS ON ONE LEVEL TRYING TO WORK WITH
THEIR GOVERNMENT AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAD REPRESENTATION.
SEEMS TO ME THAT OUR BUDGET AND OUR OPERATING BUDGET IN HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY IS REALLY DRIVEN BY WHAT WE HAVE AND MAINTAINING AND
OPERATING THAT AND WHAT WE THINK WE NEED, AND THEN MAINTAINING AND
OPERATING THAT.
AND THE -- THE -- THE ISSUE OF THE BUDGET AND WHETHER OR NOT I WOULD
AGREE TO PUT A CAP ON IT IS SOMETHING THAT -- TO A GREAT EXTENT, EVEN OUR
ELECTED OFFICIALS AT THIS POINT IN TIME DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL.
AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS, SOUTH COUNTY PARTICULARLY HAS A MYRIAD
OF APPROVED D.R.I.'S.
THERE'S STILL SOME IN THE NORTHWEST AND STILL SOME IN THE EASTERN PART
OF THE COUNTY, TOO, I THINK.
THOSE D.R.I.'S -- EXCUSE ME, DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT WERE
APPROVED OVER 20 YEARS AGO, AND MOST OF THOSE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO MEET
CONCURRENCY, BECAUSE THEY WERE APPROVED BEFORE THAT POLICY WAS PUT
IN PLACE.
SO AS A RESULT, WHEN THOSE DEVELOPMENTS COME IN FOR THEIR BUILDING
PERMITS, THERE IS GOING TO BE A LEVEL OF SERVICE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THOSE
DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE TECHNICALLY APPROVED AND THERE ISN'T A SUNSET
THERE.
SO THE IDEA OF A 3% IS INTERESTING IF, IN FACT, AND I DON'T KNOW, I THOUGHT
I SAW RON WEAVER COME IN.
HE'S A LAND USE ATTORNEY.
THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY, I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW IT'S AFFECTED BY
THOSE, BUT IF YOU COULD, IN FACT, CONTROL GROWTH WITHIN THE URBAN
SERVICE BOUNDARY, WHERE YOU TECHNICALLY HAVE YOUR SERVICES IN PLACE
AND CAN EASILY CONNECT TO THEM, THEN YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO REDUCE
OPERATING COSTS BY EXPANDING FURTHER OUT AT LOWER DENSITIES AND
LESSER ECONOMIES OF SCALE.
SO THE ISSUE OF THE BUDGET REALLY HAS A LOT TO DO WITH OUR GROWTH
MANAGEMENT IN THIS COUNTY AND SOME PEOPLE MAY FEEL THAT WE'RE NOT
MANAGING GROWTH, THAT WE HAVE NO GROWTH MANAGEMENT, BUT WE'RE
ALSO -- THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE BOUND BY DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE
BEFORE SOME OF THEM EVEN CONSIDERED RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
AND I WOULD HATE TO HAMSTRING THEM AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO
MOVE INTO THOSE AREAS WHERE I KNEW REALLY WHAT WAS GOING TO BE
EXPECTED.
IF YOU ALL WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR ISSUE -- DO YOU WANT TO
STAY ON TRACK AND JUST GRIND ONE ISSUE DOWN TONIGHT?
DO YOU WANT TO DO TERM LIMITS AND JUST SEE WHAT THE REACTION IS TO THE
BOARD?
AND SEE -- OR DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AROUND
THIS TABLE, AND I'M ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE I HAVE HEARD FOR MONTHS
AND MONTHS, THAT NOT ONLY IS THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION FRUSTRATED
WITH US, BUT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, BUT THE PUBLIC IS
FRUSTRATED WITH THEM.
AND IF THAT'S REALLY TRUE, AND THERE IS SUCH A BELIEF THAT WE NEED TO
CHANGE THE STRUCTURE, I REALLY HAVE TO ASK, WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT
FAVOR THAT CHANGE, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN NOTICED THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
THIS DISCUSSION THIS WEEK AND IN TWO WEEKS.
AND I AM REALLY JUST A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED THAT PEOPLE THAT ARE
CLAMORING FOR THESE CHANGES AREN'T HERE.
AND I REALLY HOPE THEY WILL.
MAYBE IT WILL HAPPEN.
MR. HURLEY.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  I THINK GERALD HAS A POINT.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DISCUSS AS A MOTION TO PUT ON THE BALLOT, YOU
DON'T GET PEOPLE HERE.
WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT PUTTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR ON THE BALLOT, WE
HAD A CROWD TO TALK ABOUT THAT ISSUE BECAUSE THEY HAD SOMETHING
THAT'S TANGIBLE.
I THINK -- I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD DOCTOR AS FAR AS STRUCTURE OF
GOVERNMENT, WE CAN DISCUSS TERM LIMITS, WHICH I ALREADY HAVE, WHICH
ARE EFFECTIVE IN THE STATE.
THE SUPREME COURT SAID THEY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE FOR FEDERAL OFFICES
BECAUSE THAT'S THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
AS FAR AS DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT, IF YOU WANT TO WAIT TO SEE WHAT THE
CITY OF TAMPA DOES, THERE IS NOT A LOT OF WEIGHT IN DISCUSSING IT RIGHT
NOW.
PARTISAN, NONPARTISAN MAY NOT GET A LOT OF TRACTION.
WE STARTED OFF TALKING ABOUT STRUCTURE AND I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO GET
INTO A DISCUSSION OF THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS.
I CREATED A LITTLE GRAPHIC THAT I WANT TO PASS OUT -- I KNOW, IT IS A
SURPRISE, ISN'T IT, JOHN.
COMPARING HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO EIGHT STATES.
AND UNDERSTAND THAT EVERY ONE OF THOSE STATES HAS TWO SENATORS,
EVERY ONE OF THOSE STATES HAVE A CONGRESSMAN.
IN FACT, YOU GO TO THE MINORITY LEADER IN THE SENATE, IT REPRESENTS FEWER
PEOPLE BY ABOUT 400,000 THAN OUR COUNTYWIDE COMMISSIONERS.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT THAT, THAT'S HOW THEY WERE ELECTED TO OFFICE.
SO I THINK -- AND I'VE GOT ENOUGH HERE FOR EVERYBODY HERE AND ANYBODY
IN THE AUDIENCE AND BARBARA CAN PASS THEM OUT.
OKAY.
WELL, YOU CAN DO THAT AS WELL.
BUT -- I'LL PASS THEM BOTH WAYS.
BUT I THINK WE HAVE A LARGE POPULATION HERE, AND WE ARE TRYING TO
REPRESENT IT -- BE REPRESENTATIVE WITH JUST A FEW PEOPLE.
AND WE HAVE STATES ARE LEGISLATURES, GOVERNORS, AND ALL KINDS OF
THINGS THAT HAVE A MUCH SMALLER POPULATION THAN HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY.
MUCH OF THEM HAVE A LARGER AIR -- AREA.
DELAWARE AND RHODE ISLAND ARE NOT THAT MUCH BIGGER AREA WISE.
SO I WANT TO DISCUSS THAT NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. LaBOUR.
>>STEVE LaBOUR:  IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WHEN SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
IORIO WAS HERE, HAVING BEEN PREVIOUSLY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SHE ADVOCATED AN ELECTED MAYOR.
AND I THINK THAT FROM HER ARGUMENTS, WHEN WE ASKED HER QUESTIONS, THIS
GRAPH WOULD SUPPORT WHAT SHE WAS SAYING.
THAT WE'VE GROWN SO LARGE AS A COUNTY.
OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT IS LOOKING DOCTOR AND IT WAS INTERESTING IN
LISTENING TO ALL OF YOU LAST MONTH THAT THAT ISSUE WAS NOT -- REALLY
DIDN'T SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT IN THAT WE THOUGHT THAT -- OR
COLLECTIVELY, IT SEEMED LIKE INTERPRETING EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS THAT
WE MIGHT SATISFY THAT -- THAT CLOSER REPRESENTATION BY MORE DISTRICTS
OR AT LEAST MAKING OUR AT-LARGE FOLKS LIVE WITHIN A PARTICULAR
GEOGRAPHIC AREA.
SO I'M JUST -- MY QUESTION TO YOU, MR. HURLEY, IS DO YOU THINK THAT -- I
KNOW YOU ARGUE FOR SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT ONLY, IS THAT CORRECT?
>>DAVID HURLEY:  MY VIEW AT THIS POINT -- AND I'M TRYING TO SOLIDIFY A
VIEW.
IN THE PERSPECTIVE, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE DISTRICTS THAT GETS YOU
DOWN TO 120 IF WE DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT TO 8,
THAT WILL GET YOU TO 125,000 APIECE.
THAT GIVES YOU SOME GROWING ROOM.
IT WILL BE A WHILE UNTIL WE REACH 2 MILLION POPULATION WHERE WE GET
BACK TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
IF WE HAD A COUNTYWIDE ELECTED INDIVIDUALS WHO WOULD BE THE
CHAIRMAN.
I'M NOT LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WHO WILL HAVE VETO POWER.
I'M NOT LOOKING FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOD.
I'M LOOKING FOR A CHAIRMAN THAT CAN HAVE SOME DIRECTION AND SOME HELP.
GERALD WITH WE DON'T NEED --
>>GERALD WHITE:  I WAS GOING TO SAY, WHAT'S WRONG WITH GOD.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  I WOULDN'T WANT ONE JUST FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
BUT I THINK WE CAN HAVE SOME HELP IN SEVERAL OF THESE DIFFERENT THINGS
THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BY DOING THAT.
AND I'VE GIVEN IT CONSIDERATION, BUT I THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS.
IF YOU GO TO AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIRMAN, WHAT ARE THE POWERS THAT HE
HAS?
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
I THINK THAT'S -- HE OR SHE -- I USE THE LATIN MANUS THAT MEANS "NO GENDER."
TWO YEARS OF LATIN, I HAVE GOT TO USE IT FOR SOMETHING.
BUT I THINK THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE, AND I THINK
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MR. KLEMAN SAID IN HIS PRESENTATION THAT STUCK
IN MY MIND ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS IS, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE,
FIND OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM IS, AND THEN SEE WHAT SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE.
AND WE'VE HEARD REPEATEDLY, YOU'VE HEARD FROM SOUTH COUNTY.
WE'VE HAD PEOPLE FROM EAST COUNTY, BRANDON.
WE'VE HAD PEOPLE ALL OVER THE COUNTY SAYING I'M NOT GETTING ENOUGH
REPRESENTATION.
IT'S TOO MASSIVE.
AND WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES WITH THAT POINT.
AND I THINK THAT THE OTHER POINT THAT WE'VE HAD, AND THIS IS THE
FRUSTRATION WE GET FROM THE LEGISLATURE IS THEY DON'T HAVE SOMEONE TO
DIRECT TO, THE ELECTED COUNTY CHAIRMAN WITH LIMITED POWERS COULD
ADDRESS THAT ISSUE AS WELL.
SO I DO SEE SOME THINGS THAT ARE BROKEN THAT COULD BE CHANGED AND
REPAIRED, BUT I THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO BE VERY
CAREFUL ABOUT, AND ESPECIALLY THE -- THE POWERS OF THE COUNTY
CHAIRMAN, COUNTY MAYOR, WE CAN CALL HIM ANYTHING WE WANT TO CALL
HIM -- EXCEPT GOD.
BUT THAT'S WHERE I AM ON THAT.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. BEDKE AND THEN MS. LASHER AND THEN MS. TUTTLE.
>>MIKE BEDKE:  I'M NOT SURE I WANT TO PUT OFF TOO AWFUL LONG A DISCUSSION
OF TERM LIMITS.
MAYBE FOR THIS EVENING, THAT'S OKAY.
BUT I DONT I WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE OUTCOME THE TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
MAYORAL DISCUSSION AND DEBATE, BECAUSE WHAT I THINK WE HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT ON THIS BOARD OR AMONG THIS BODY, MEMBERS OF THIS BODY,
IS REAL TERM LIMITS, AND THAT IS TO PRECLUDE PEOPLE FROM MOVING FROM
SEAT 1 TO SEAT 2 TO SEAT 3, AND THEY ARE ON THERE FOREVER.
AND I THINK -- I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AT SOME POINT.
BECAUSE WHAT I SAID AT OUR LAST MEETING IS, IN MY OPINION, WE SHOULD
EITHER HAVE TRUE TERM LIMITS OR WE OUGHT TO ABOLISH TERM LIMITS, ONE OR
THE OTHER.
BUT THIS IS JUST -- IT'S A JOKE, FRANKLY.
SO THAT'S ONE POINT.
I'M NOT SO SURE WE OUGHT NOT HAVE A DISCUSSION ON PARTISAN VERSUS
NONPARTISAN IF FOR NO OTHER REASON IT WILL GET PEOPLE DOWN HERE TO FEEL
COMPELLED TO DISCUSS SOME OTHER THINGS.
MY GUT REACTION AS TO WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE SOME AT-LARGE DISTRICTS
OR ONLY SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS IS THAT THE AT-LARGE PLAY AN IMPORTANT
ROLE.
AND IT'S NOT SO THAT I CAN VOTE NECESSARILY FOR A MAJORITY, BUT IT IS SO
THERE ARE PEOPLE THERE WHO MAY SYSTEMATICALLY BE IN A BETTER POSITION
TO BALANCE INTERESTS AND TO TAKE A MORE GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE.
WE HEARD COMMISSIONER STORMS WHEN SHE SPOKE SAY, THERE'S NOTHING
WRONG WITH THE FACT THAT I'M FIGHTING TO GIVE MY CONSTITUENTS THEIR
PIECE OF THE PIE.
BUT ONE OF THE CRITICISMS OF THE CURRENT BOARD IS, THEY'RE SEVEN PEOPLE
GOING IN SEVEN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, OR THEY'RE GOING STRAIGHT DOWN
PARTY LINES.
AND I THINK IF SYSTEMICALLY WE CAN ADDRESS THAT SO PEOPLE REALLY ARE
IN A BETTER POSITION TO STEP BACK AND MAKE DECISIONS THAT ARE IN THE BEST
INTEREST OF ALL RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD THING.
NOW, I UNDERSTAND IN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY
THEIR ROLE, AND THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER STORMS SAID.
SHE SAID, I THINK THE AT-LARGE PEOPLE SERVE AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION.
I'M HERE TO FIGHT FOR MY PEOPLE.
THAT'S MY ROLE.
IF I WERE AT THE AT-LARGE SEAT, I WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT ROLE.
SO I THINK THAT'S AT LEAST WORTHY OF FURTHER DISCUSSION.
>>JAN SMITH:  MS. LASHER.
>>DENISE LASHER:  WELL, I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS.
I THINK THAT IN ORDER TO LOOK AT THE FORM OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT WE
HAVE, I THINK YOU HAVE TO START AT THE TOP BECAUSE WHAT YOU DO AT THE
TOP WILL INFLUENCE OR MAYBE NOT INFLUENCE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO
FURTHER DOWN.
SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO DECIDE -- I THINK THAT WE NEED TO START HAVING
A CONVERSATION ABOUT MAYOR OR ELECTED COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OR KEEP
IT THE WAY IT IS.
THEN MOVE ON TO THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS THAT WE HAVE AND
WHETHER WE HAVE ALL SINGLE MEMBERS OR WHETHER WE CHANGE THE
AT-LARGE GEOGRAPHIC REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S HOW I ENVISION IT.
THAT YOU NEED TO START AT THE TOP.
IF WE ARE GOING TO STUDY COUNTY STRUCTURE, AND THIS IS A TOPIC THAT
WE'VE HEARD DISCUSSED IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS, AND
THE CITIZENS WANT US TO TAKE IT UP FOR DISCUSSION, AND OTHER ELECTED
OFFICIALS WANT US TO CONSIDER THAT.
SO, TO ME, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE OUR NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS DISCUSSING
THAT.
AND MY PERSONAL OPINION ON ENLARGING THE DISTRICT AT THIS TIME, I WOULD
BE OPPOSED.
I THINK THAT IT CREATES EVEN MORE DIFFICULT TIMES TO BUILD CONSENSUS
WHEN YOU HAVE MORE PEOPLE ON A BOARD.
AND I DON'T SEE WHERE WE WOULD BE SERVED SIGNIFICANTLY BY INCREASING
IT.
MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE AT-LARGE, I THINK I'VE EXPRESSED THAT BEFORE.
I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING US MOVE TO WHAT PINELLAS COUNTY HAS
FOR THEIR AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE
COMMISSIONERS THAT SIT ON THE BOARD THROUGH THE THREE AT-LARGE
COMMISSIONERS AND THE ONE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT, FROM YOUR LOCAL
DISTRICT.
THAT WAY YOU ARE ACTUALLY VOTING FOR A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD.
AND I LIKE THAT IDEA PERSONALLY.
I JUST THINK THAT BY ENLARGING IT, THE BOARD COULD POTENTIALLY BECOME
MORE DYSFUNCTIONAL THAN WHAT SOME PEOPLE THINK IT CURRENTLY IS.
THAT'S ALSO OPEN FOR DEBATE.
AND I THINK IF PEOPLE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE CURRENT BOARD, AND MAYBE
SOME OF THE PERSONALITIES, SOME PEOPLE FEEL OF THE PEOPLE UNABLE TO GET
ALONG, THEY CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES AT THE BALLOT BOX.
WE SHOULDN'T BE CHANGING THE CHARTER BASED ON OUR PERCEPTION OF SOME
ELECTED OFFICIALS CURRENTLY AND HOW THEY WORK TOGETHER.
IT NEEDS TO BE BASED ON, IS THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT REALLY EFFECTIVE?
NOT ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THOSE POSITIONS EFFECTIVE.
THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO SOME OTHER THINGS LIKE TERM LIMITS AND -- I KNOW
THAT FROM WHAT I'VE READ, WHEN TERM TERM LIMITS HAVE BEEN PUT ON THE
BALLOT IN THE MOST RECENT HISTORY, THE VOTERS HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY
ENDORSED THEM.
DOING AWAY WITH THEM AND ELIMINATE TERM LIMITS I DON'T THINK IS GOING
TO BE SUCCESSFUL BASED ON PREVIOUS HISTORY ON THAT ISSUE.
SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND.
I THINK WE SHOULD START AT THE TOP AND WORK OUR WAY DOWN IN THE FORM
OF GOVERNMENT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND REITERATE WHAT I SAID BACK AT THE
BEGINNING OF THIS CHARTER GROUP, AND THAT I THINK A GOOD WAY TO
APPROACH IT IS TO ALLOW YOU ALL TO CHOOSE A COMMITTEE TO SERVE ON AND
TO HAVE THREE COMMITTEES.
THE STRUCTURE WE HAVE NOW WITH SOME MINOR OR MAJOR TWEAKING, THE
COMMISSION CHAIRMAN AND HOW YOU WOULD PROPOSE THAT GOING THROUGH
THE CHARTER, HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT WILL COME UP WITH WHAT THEY
BELIEVE IS THE BEST POSSIBLE FORM OF THAT, AND DOT SAME WITH THE ELECTED
EXECUTIVE.
AND THEN IF WE CAN GET THROUGH A COUPLE OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS WITH
EACH GROUP, THEN I THINK YOU HAVE SOMETHING FOR THE WHOLE BOARD ON
EACH ONE TO TALK ABOUT AND DETERMINE WHETHER THEY LIKE IT OR WHETHER
THEY DON'T LIKE IT AND ULTIMATELY EITHER TO, YOU KNOW, WHITTLE IT DOWN
TO WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT
ELECTED EXECUTIVE STRUCTURE OR ARE WE GOING TO STAY WHERE WE ARE
WITH SOME CHANGES OR ARE WE GOING TO GO SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.
AND I WOULD COMMEND TO YOU TO READ THE TWO ARTICLES BY FRED KARL
THAT WERE PASSED OUT TO YOU, BECAUSE I THINK THEY ARE VERY INTERESTING.
BUT I -- I STILL WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU ALL HAVE THAT IN THE BACK OF YOUR
MIND FOR THE NEXT FEW MINUTES AS TO HOW THAT WOULD -- HOW YOU WOULD
LIKE TO THINK ABOUT DOING THAT, BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THE STRUCTURE
HAS TO BE DETERMINED.
MS. TUTTLE, THEN MR. AMBLER AND THEN MR. WHITE.
>>MARY LOU TUTTLE:  MADAM CHAIR, I AM -- IT'S VERY HARD TO FOLLOW YOU,
YOU KNOW THAT, BETWEEN DENISE AND MIKE.
YOU'VE ALL SAID FAIRLY MUCH WHAT I WAS THINKING IN TERMS OF, AND I
WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND SUGGEST THAT WE PROPOSE NOW THAT WE
CHOOSE A COMMITTEE TO BE ON.
I THINK IT'S GREAT.
BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY OF US HERE TO REALLY ORGANIZE ANYTHING.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE FOR EVERYONE TO KEEP ONE LITTLE THING IN MIND.
IT'S NOT THAT IT CAN'T HAPPEN.
BUT IF YOU GET BEYOND SEVEN COMMISSIONERS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME
MAJOR EXPENSIVE RENOVATION OF THIS BUILDING.
IT WAS -- IT WAS -- WE BOUGHT A SHELL.
AND THEN THEY FIXED IT TO FIT THE PATTERN OR THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WE
HAVE AND THE NUMBER THINGS WE NEEDED.
SO KEEP THAT IN MIND.
IF WE GET UP TO NINE OR TEN OR WHATEVER, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE
A VERY EXPENSIVE RENOVATION AND A LOT OF PROBLEMS AND EVERYTHING
THAT GOES WITH IT.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND JUST SUGGEST THAT PERHAPS NOW WE
COULD DECIDE WHAT COMMITTEE WE WANTED TO BE ON.
REALLY THE MEAT OF THE WHOLE THING.
[ SWITCHING CAPTIONERS ]

>> AND SO WHAT I JUST PUT OUT ON THE FLOOR FOR EVERYONE TO THINK ABOUT
-- AND I DO ENDORSE THE COMMITTEE APPROACH, MADAM CHAIR.
JUST AS AN OVERVIEW, A GLOBAL CONCEPT FOR US ALL TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT
WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT POPULATION SHIFTS, WE'RE GOING TO BE GUIDED BY
THE CENSUS.
ASK YOURSELF, ARE WE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE IN TRYING TO
DECIDE THESE ISSUES NOW BEFORE WE KNOW THE RESULTS OF THE 2000 CENSUS.
>>JAN SMITH:  LET ME INTERJECT ONE THING.
AT THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, THE DISCUSSION CAME UP IF WE WERE TO
GO TO MORE DISTRICTS AND THEY WERE TO BE SINGLE MEMBER, HOW MANY
DISTRICTS WOULD WE NEED TO HAVE TO ACCOMPLISH THE ABILITY FOR A
DISTRICT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ELECT A MINORITY CANDIDATE.
AND THAT STATEMENT CAME BACK BY WAY OF INFORMATION FROM THE
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS' OFFICE AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT IT
WOULD TAKE NINE DISTRICTS.
>>KEVIN AMBLER:  OKAY.
I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT NUMBER.
>>JAN SMITH:  THAT WAS FIVE YEARS AGO.
>> WHICH BRINGS ME TO THE FINAL POINT I HAD.
IF WE WERE TO TRY TO TWEAK SOMETHING -- I'LL EXPRESS MY PERSONAL VIEW.
I DON'T FAVOR AN ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIAL, A MAYOR OR COUNTY CHAIRMAN,
BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO ADD A NEW LAYER OF GOVERNMENT THAT'S NOT
NECESSARILY NEEDED.
WHAT I DO LIKE ABOUT OUR PRESENT FORM IS HAVING AT-LARGE AND
SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, IT'S KIND OF LIKE COMBINING YOUR SENATE AND
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN ONE BODY.
SENATORS REPRESENT EVERYBODY, FOR EXAMPLE, IN A STATE, AND YOUR HOUSE
MEMBERS REPRESENT CERTAIN POPULATION CENTERS.
ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU'VE DONE IS COMBINE THE TWO, AND THE ANALOGY IS
PERFECT, GIVEN THE GRAPH THAT DAVID HURLEY MADE SHOWING
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPARED TO OTHER STATES.
WE LITERALLY HAVE A BODY OF SEVEN THAT ARE COMBINED SENATE AND HOUSE.
SO YOU GET BOTH VIEWS MIXED TOGETHER.
YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE CLASHES BECAUSE OF THOSE VIEWS.
GIVEN THE POPULATION SHIFTS, I WOULD EXPECT TO SEE THAT WE DO NEED MORE
SINGLE-MEMBER REPRESENTATION.
WHAT I COULD SEE THIS COUNTY GOING TO WOULD BE A 6-3 FORMAT WHERE YOU
HAD SIX INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS AND THREE AT-LARGE DISTRICTS WITH THE
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY DEE WILLIAMS SO THAT WE
COULD ENSURE THAT IN THE AT-LARGE CENTERS, BY REQUIRING THEM TO LIVE IN
A CERTAIN AREA, THEY COULD THEN GUARANTEE THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE
THAT ONE PERSON REPRESENTING THE ENTIRE COUNTY, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE
A CONCENTRATION OF THOSE AT-LARGE DISTRICTS REPRESENTED FROM ONE
AREA OF THE COUNTY.
IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO, I MEAN, IF THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADING, THAT'S MY PERSONAL VIEWPOINT.
I WANT TO COME BACK TO THE OVERALL THEME, IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.
IF IT IS BROKEN, LET'S IDENTIFY WHAT'S BROKEN BEFORE WE TRY TO OFFER ALL
THE FIXES.
>>JAN SMITH:  WELL, PROBABLY THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO THAT IS TO LITERALLY
GO AROUND THE TABLE ON EACH ITEM AND SAY DO YOU FAVOR AN ELECTED
EXECUTIVE, A COMMISSION CHAIRMAN, OR LEAVE IT ALONE, AND MAYBE THAT'S
SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO.
MAYBE THE COMMITTEES ARE DIVIDED BETWEEN JUST TWO COMMITTEES.
MAYBE IT'S LEAVE IT ALONE OR COMMISSION CHAIRMAN, OR LEAVE IT ALONE, IT'S
THE OTHER.
WE REALLY NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GET THERE.
MR. WHITE, THEN MR. BALES.
>>GERALD WHITE:  I AM TRYING TO TAKE THE APPROACH OF ALL FOR ONE AND
ONE FOR ALL.
WE GOT 14 MINDS HERE, BRILLIANT MINDS, DYNAMIC CITIZENS.
WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET A GRIP ON IS THE TERM "CHIEF EXECUTIVE," IS
THE TERM, "COUNTY MAYOR."
"CHAIR."
"COUNTY CHAIR."
I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT'S NOT THE TITLE THAT THE CITIZENS
THAT HAVE SPOKE AGAINST THIS ARE IN FAVOR FOR.
IT'S IN THE DETAILS.
WHAT DO THESE TITLES HOLD?
WHAT'S UNDER -- WHAT'S THE POWER OF THESE PARTICULAR OFFICES, SEATS?
AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALL 14 OF US LOOK AT EACH ONE OF THESE
SCENARIOS AND DEFINE IT FOR THE PUBLIC.
DEFINE WHAT IS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE COUNTY MAYOR WOULD BE.
DEFINE WHAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS
ELECTED WOULD BE.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAVE OUR SYSTEM THAT'S IN PLACE NOW.
THAT'S WHAT -- THAT'S -- THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE, AND THEN
ALLOW THE PEOPLE TO VENT THEMSELVES ON THAT.
AND BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM ALL 14 OF THESE MEMBERS IN THE NOTES
-- THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING, READING WHAT EVERYBODY HAD TO
SAY IS EVERY LAST ONE OF US HAS A DIFFERENT IDEA ABOUT -- WELL, NOT EVERY
ONE OF US, BUT MOST OF US HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ON HOW THINGS SHOULD BE
DONE.
LET'S TAKE ONE OF THE ISSUES AND REACH A CONCLUSION ON IT.
PUT TOGETHER A PACKAGE IN THIS RESPECT, IN THAT RESPECT, AND THE OTHER
RESPECT, AND THEN I THINK WE'LL BE GETTING SOMEWHERE, THROUGH THE
COMMITTEE PROCESS, AND THAT WAY WE CAN -- WE ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO -- TO
GET IN ON THIS.
AND GO BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER JAN PLATT SAID WHEN SHE TALKED
ABOUT MR. SIMMONS, WHO SERVED AS THE COUNTY CHAIR FOR --
>> 17.
>>GERALD WHITE: -- 17 YEARS.
AND WHAT THE CITIZENS WAS USED TO FROM THAT ERA, FROM THAT TIME.
AND STILL HAVE A DESIRE FOR THAT TODAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO SQUASH THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO VENT THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SILENCE THIS ISSUE FOR A LONG TIME TO COME.
AND THE ONLY WAY THAT I SEE THAT YOU CAN DO THAT IS ALLOW THE PEOPLE
TO SPEAK ON THEM THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
PUT THEM TOGETHER AND LET THE PEOPLE SPEAK.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. BALES.
HE'S GOT IT ALL WRITTEN DOWN.
WE'RE READY.
>>JOHN BALES:  SHORT LIST.
THE -- I APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE APPROACH, AND WHEN YOU FIRST RAISED
IT, I WAS IN FAVOR OF IT THAT TIME.
I AM STILL IN FAVOR OF IT.
MY CONCERN IS, THOUGH, TODAY WHEN I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING
COMMITTEES, I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE A COMMITTEE FOR THE
FORM OF GOVERNMENT FOR TERM LIMITS, FOR DIRECTING, ET CETERA.
I DO NOT THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE COMMITTEES BASED ON -- VARIOUS
COMMITTEES BASED ON ONE ISSUES BECAUSE HUMAN NATURE, AS IT IS, IF YOU
ARE ON A COMMITTEE THAT IS ON ONE OF THE ASPECTS OF AN ISSUE, THEN YOU
ARE GOING TO PRETTY MUCH MAKE YOUR MIND UP IN THAT COMMITTEE.
I DON'T GIVE -- ANY MOTIVE BEYOND JUST THINKING THAT MAYBE A COMMITTEE
IS A GOOD IDEA, BUT I THINK ONE WAY OF KILLING AN ISSUE IS TO BREAK IT DOWN
IN DIFFERENT GROUPS.
THOSE GROUPS GET TOGETHER, FORM AN OPINION, AND THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO
CHANGE, AND YOU KNOW YOU NEED TEN PEOPLE.
SO I RECOMMEND -- IN FACT, ABOUT AS STRONG AS I AM GOING TO BE -- I'LL
STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT WE DON'T HAVE COMMITTEES THAT BREAK DOWN
PART OF ONE ISSUE.
LET ME FINISH, PLEASE.
I DO NOT BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO TAKE THE
FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND BREAK IT DOWN INTO THREE DIFFERENT ASPECTS
BECAUSE I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING, IN EFFECT, IS KILLING IT BECAUSE THOSE
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET IN A GROUP, AND THEY ARE GOING TO FORMULATE
THEIR OPINION, AND THEY ARE GOING TO DEVELOP AN ATTITUDE, AND THEY ARE
NOT GOING TO CHANGE.
ON THE OTHER HAND, THOUGH, IF WE HAD A COMMITTEE THAT WAS TO REVIEW
ALL OF THE IDEAS, AS MR. WHITE HAS SUGGESTED, REVEREND WHITE SUGGESTS,
THAT WE HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT FORMULATES THREE DIFFERENT IDEAS AND
WE DISCUSS IT AS A GROUP, ALL 14 OF US, I AM IN FAVOR OF THAT.
OR A TERM LIMIT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I NEED TO CLARIFY WHAT I SAID SO THAT I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING.
I DID NOT WANT TO HAVE A COMMITTEE TO JUST DISCUSS TERM LIMITS OR A
COMMITTEE TO DO PARTISAN/NONPARTISAN.
WHAT I SUGGESTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD AND
WHAT I STILL THINK, AND I THINK IT REFLECTS WHAT GERALD IS ASKING FOR, AND
THAT IS TO LET PEOPLE VOLUNTEER TO SERVE ON A COMMITTEE THAT LOOKS AT
THE THREE FORMS THAT ARE LAID OUT IN THE CHARTER OR ANY DERIVATIVE
THEREOF.
IF YOU ACCEPT MR. KARL'S OPINION, THAT YOU CAN MODIFY ANY OF THOSE THREE
FORMS.
AND TO LOOK AT EVERY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN A CHARTER TO
SUPPORT THAT.
SO, FOR INSTANCE, IF I WERE TO SAY I -- I'M ON A COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO
TALK ABOUT THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE WITH COMMISSION DISTRICTS, I MIGHT SAY
THAT I CAN SEE AN ELECTED EXECUTIVE.
I WANT TERM LIMITS.
I CAN SEE EITHER SINGLE MEMBER OR THE MIXED DISTRICTS, WHICHEVER WAY I
THINK I WOULD GO IF I HAD THAT FORM.
I MIGHT GO A DIFFERENT WAY IF I HAD A DIFFERENT FORM.
HOW WOULD I MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS BOARDS?
HOW WOULD THE SALARIES BE STRUCTURED?
HOW WOULD I APPOINT AN ADMINISTRATOR AND AN ATTORNEY TO ANSWER ALL
OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ANSWERED IN OUR CHARTER UNDER THIS FORM OF
GOVERNMENT, WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE UNDER EACH ONE AND HOW THIS
SUBCOMMITTEE COULD PROPOSE WHAT THEY THINK IS THE BEST POSSIBLE
SCENARIO FOR THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE WITH A BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS.
AND -- AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING IN OUR CHARTER, BUT
IT WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE SOME OTHER THINGS, TOO, THAT WE DON'T THINK
ABOUT NOW BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE BOARD MAKES THE APPOINTMENTS NOW.
MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE VARIOUS AUTHORITIES WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE
TO BE DETERMINED, WHETHER IT COMES UNDER THE EXECUTIVE OR UNDER THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE
VETO POWER ON THE BUDGET, ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE VETO OVER LAND USE
AND ZONING, OR ARE YOU NOT GOING TO GIVE THAT LEGISLATIVE BODY -- THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY IS GOING TO BE LAND USE AND ZONING, AND THEN WHAT ARE
YOU GOING TO DO WITH ORDINANCES?
AND SO MY GOAL WAS TO GET THREE SEPARATE CHARTERS IS BASICALLY WHAT
IT AMOUNTS TO, THREE SEPARATE CHARTERS THAT HAVE BEEN WELL THOUGHT
OUT, WORKED TO DEATH BY THESE COMMITTEES, AND THEN BROUGHT FORWARD,
AND THEN LOOK AT THEM.
IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT TO GO.
IF, INSTEAD, YOU WANT TO GO RIGHT AROUND THIS TABLE RIGHT NOW AND SAY,
I DON'T WANT AN ELECTED EXECUTIVE.
I DON'T WANT A COMMISSION CHAIRMAN.
I WANT WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
I WANT TO CHANGE IT.
OR, YES, I FAVOR THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE.
I HAVEN'T MADE UP MY MIND ON SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS.
MAYBE I WANT THE OTHER.
BUT I THINK IN ORDER TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, WE HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE,
AND WE'VE GOT TO MAKE OUR PLANS THIS EVENING, AND WE'VE GOT ABOUT TEN
MINUTES TO DO IT IN.
SO AM I OFF TRACK WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MR. BALES?
>>JOHN BALES:  I THINK WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
WHAT I BELIEVE IS WE SHOULD USE THE COMMITTEE PROCESS AS WE DID FOR THE
INTERNAL AUDITOR.
BASICALLY WE MADE A DECISION ON WHETHER WE MADE A MOTION, A MORE
BROAD-BASED MOTION ON WHETHER WE WERE GOING TO HAVE AN INTERNAL
AUDITOR.
THEN WE DISCUSSED THE PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES OF IT.
WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT THERE.
THEN WE CAME WITH A BASIC FORMAT.
THEN WE SENT IT TO A COMMITTEE TO COME OUT WITH THE NUANCES THAT
YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
I AM A STRONG BELIEVER IN THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS OR I DON'T HAVE A
PROBLEM WITH DETAILS BECAUSE I TAKE CARE OF THEM.
BUT FIRST OF ALL WE HAVE TO GET TO PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES.
I DISAGREE WITH HAVING COMMITTEES GO OUT ON A VENTURE AND TAKE ON A
BROAD GROUP OF ISSUES AND COME BACK.
I BELIEVE THAT WILL END UP WITH THIS BOARD OR GROUP NOT MAKING ANY
DECISIONS.
I WOULD LIKE TO GET PAST THE PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE.
IF WE HAD A COMMITTEE NOW THAT SAYS, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT FORM
OF GOVERNMENT -- THAT'S ONE WE BROUGHT UP -- FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
I WANT A COMMITTEE TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT THE THREE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT IT PHILOSOPHICALLY IF WE WANT TO GO TO THOSE THREE
FORMS THEN SEND A COMMITTEE OUT TO DO THE NUANCES ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
I BELIEVE BY CREATING GROUPS, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE BE
MAGNETIZED BY BEING IN THAT GROUP, AND THAT TEN PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO
MAKE A DECISION.
SO ONCE AGAIN, IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE COMMITTEES, I WANT IT TO BE BASED
ON ISSUES AS A WHOLE AND NOT BE BASED ON INDIVIDUAL PARTS OF ANY
PARTICULAR ISSUE.
THAT'S MY OPINION.
>>JAN SMITH:  OKAY.
MR. LaBOUR, THEN MR. BEDKE.
>> TO QUOTE MY RESPECTED COLLEAGUE TO MY RIGHT, I AM GOING TO BE BOLD
AND MAKE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON -- AND I AGREE WITH MR. AMBLER.
IF YOU RECALL, I'M GOING TO LOOK AT ALL THESE ISSUES ABOUT WHAT'S BROKEN
AND CAN IT BE FIXED WITH THE CHARTER OR -- OR CAN IT BE FIXED SOMEWHERE
ELSE.
AND THE COST.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT.
AND ALL -- AND I THINK THERE WAS ONE OTHER THAT ESCAPES ME RIGHT NOW.
BUT ANYWAY, AS FAR AS WHAT -- IF IT'S BROKEN, IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME PEOPLE
AREN'T COMING DOWN HERE AND SAYING HERE'S OUR SUGGESTION OF HOW TO
CHANGE STRUCTURE.
I THINK WE'VE HAD MORE THAN ENOUGH TESTIMONY FROM A WIDE RANGE OF
PEOPLE AND PROFESSIONALS IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAVE SAID THAT
GOVERNMENT ISN'T REACTING TO THE ISSUES WE FEEL ARE IMPORTANT, AND
THEY'RE FRUSTRATED.
AND I THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME MORE AND
MORE DETACHED FROM THE CITIZENRY.
NOW, WHETHER THAT'S DESIGNED BY THE PERSONALITIES WHO ARE ELECTED OR
THE WAY IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT IS RUN, AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT
THAT'S THE FRUSTRATION I'VE BEEN HEARING EVERY SINGLE MEETING.
SO I -- PERSONALLY, I THINK IT POSSIBLY COULD BE A STRUCTURE ISSUE, GIVEN
-- I CAN SEE WHY A RONDA STORMS IS FRUSTRATED IN TRYING TO DO THE VERY
BEST JOB SHE CAN FOR HER DISTRICT.
IT'S SO LARGE.
NOW, THROW IN WHAT PAT FRANK AND CHRIS HART AND JAN PLATT HAVE TO DO
IN TRYING TO REPRESENT THE WHOLE ENTIRE COUNTY.
SO I THINK THAT THERE MIGHT -- I THINK IT MIGHT BE A STRUCTURE ISSUE.
SO I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WHAT MR. BALES WAS SUGGESTING, THAT IT'S
DIFFICULT TO -- WE DON'T WANT TO POLARIZE OUR PEOPLE OR OUR FELLOW
BOARD MEMBERS BY BREAKING UP INTO GROUPS AND KIND OF PITTING ISSUES
AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.
I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO.
BUT IF WE USE THE MODEL OF THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR AS A
PROCESS THAT WE LIKED, NO MATTER WHAT OUR ULTIMATE VOTE WAS, I THINK
ALL OF US AGREE I LIKED THE PROCESS.
IF YOU RECALL, IT WAS SPARKED BY A VERY SPECIFIC DOCUMENT THAT WAS
PLACED BEFORE US AT A MEETING IN WHICH WE HAD A DISCUSSION WHICH
ENABLED US TO COME TO SOME CONSENSUS TO SAY, OKAY, LET'S FORM A
COMMITTEE TO TRY TO TIGHTEN THIS THING UP OR LOOK AT COMING BACK WITH
SOME MORE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE.
I THINK MR. BEDKE, MR. AMBLER, AND MYSELF ARE LEANING TOWARDS, FROM
WHAT THEIR DISCUSSION IS, ARE LEANING TOWARDS VERY SIMILAR, YOU KNOW,
POSITION ABOUT STRUCTURE.
I THINK MAYBE ONE OF US JUST HAS TO STEP FORWARD AND SAY I'D BE WILLING
TO THROW AN OUTLINE ON THE TABLE FOR US TO LOOK AT.
AND IF MR. HURLEY BELIEVES THAT HE'S GOT A FAIRLY GOOD OUTLINE, AND I
WANT TO HEAR MORE, MAYBE NEXT MEETING HE'S GOT TO THROW AN OUTLINE,
AND AT LEAST WE HAVE A DOCUMENT TO START FROM AND TO LOOK AT AS
OPPOSED TO PHILOSOPHICALLY KEEP TALKING ABOUT, WELL, IS IT NINE, IS IT
SEVEN, IS IT CHAIRMAN, IS IT MAYOR.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST TO THOSE WHO MIGHT HAVE A STRONG OPINION OR HAVE
REALLY THOUGHT THROUGH THIS, IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR THE NEXT MEETING
THAT YOU BRING IT SOMEWHAT IN OUTLINE FORM.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST.
NOW, THE BOLD PART IS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT FOR OUR
OCTOBER 17th MEETING -- IF THAT'S OUR MEETING -- OR AT LEAST A MONTH FROM
NOW --
>> 12th.
>>JAN SMITH:  THE ONE ON THE 12th IS THE ONE THE MAJOR IS COMING.
>> THAT'S FINE.
GLAD TO HAVE HIM.
THAT WE PUT ON THE AGENDA THAT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A STRAW VOTE ON
NONPARTISAN RACES AND TERM LIMITS.
THAT GIVES THE COMMUNITY ONE WHOLE MONTH TO DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO
COME DOWN AND TALK ABOUT IT, AND IF WE DON'T GET PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT
IT, THAT'S FINE.
WE CAN TAKE A STRAW VOTE.
WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION, TAKE A STRAW VOTE, AND GET THAT ISSUE OUT --
>>JAN SMITH:  YOU WANT TO DO THAT TONIGHT?
>> I DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL THE CITY HAS THEIR REFERENDUM.
>>JAN SMITH:  I DON'T EITHER.
>> I WOULD MAKE THAT AS A FORM OF A MOTION.
>>GERALD WHITE:  COULD YOU DO IT IN SEPARATE MOTIONS?
>> SURE.
>>JAN SMITH:  IF YOU ARE TRYING TO MOVE THIS, WHY DON'T YOU JUST MAKE A
MOTION RIGHT NOW, AND LET'S SEE WHAT THE VOTE IS AROUND THE TABLE.
>> NO.
>>JAN SMITH:  WHY NOT?
>> BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY BELIEVE THEY COULD HAVE
SOME INPUT TO WHAT ULTIMATELY WE MIGHT EVEN DECIDE ON A STRAW VOTE.
THAT'S WHY I AM SUGGESTING.
PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS TO SPRING
THIS TONIGHT.
I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD TALK ABOUT IT -- THINK ABOUT IT.
>>JAN SMITH:  I THINK ANYTHING ANYONE WANTS TO SPRING IS FAIR GAME.
>> IF YOU WANT TO DO IT TONIGHT, MY MOTION WON'T GET A SECOND, WE WON'T
VOTE ON IT.
BUT I MADE A MOTION, MADAM CHAIRMAN.
I'LL MAKE IT -- I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SEPARATE THE TWO OUT IF THAT'S
-- SO THE FIRST MOTION IS THAT ON THE OCTOBER 12th MEETING, IF THAT'S THE
DATE -- IS THAT THE DATE?
>> 12th AND 26th.
>> 12th, THAT WE PLACE ON OUR AGENDA A STRAW VOTE FOR HAVING PARTISAN
OR NONPARTISAN RACES.
>> SECOND.
>>JAN SMITH:  WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?
MR. WHITE.
>>GERALD WHITE:  WELL, YOU KNOW, WE ARE A FORMAL, LEGAL BOARD, AND I'M
JUST NOT INTO STRAW VOTES.
I WANT TO EITHER DO SOMETHING OR DON'T DO IT.
LET'S NOT PLAY AROUND WITH IT WITH A ROOM.
AND I REALLY WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON THE BIG PICTURE, THE WHOLE
PROGRAM OF GOVERNMENT, AND NOT TAKE IT PIECE BY PIECE.
WHY DON'T WE JUST FORM THE COMMITTEES AND, IN MY OPINION, AS MANY AS 14
MEMBERS CAN SERVE ON EACH COMMITTEE, MEET OUTSIDE IN A COMFORTABLE
PLACE, ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES, FORMULATE THE PROPOSALS, EACH ONE OF THEM,
AND THEN WE CAN GO FROM THERE.
>>JAN SMITH:  YOU THINK THAT'S A SIGN?
>>GERALD WHITE:  IN THOSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS, IN THOSE COMMITTEE
MEETINGS, ALL OF THESE ISSUES CAN BE VOTED ON TO EITHER BE IN OR OUT OF
EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPOSAL.
>>JAN SMITH:  WE ARE GOING TO KEEP THIS DISCUSSION TO THE MOTION ON THE
FLOOR.
MR. HURLEY.
>>DAVID HURLEY:  I KIND OF LIKE THE IDEA OF SOME STRAW VOTES.
LET'S FIND OUT IF WE'RE SEVEN AND SEVEN OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE,
THEN WE KNOW THAT WE MIGHT AS WELL NOT -- YOU KNOW, WE ARE PROBABLY
NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BEAT THAT UP.
IF WE ARE TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE 10 OR 12 PEOPLE THAT ARE KIND OF FOR
SOMETHING, THEN WE KNOW WE HAVE SOME DIRECTION WE CAN GO.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THOSE STRAW VOTES BECAUSE THE FINAL VOTE
AFTER WE'VE HAD OUR PUBLIC HEARING IS THE ONLY ONE THAT REALLY COUNTS.
TECHNICALLY, I THINK, EVEN BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING, IT'S A STRAW VOTE
NO MATTER WHAT WE CALL IT.
IT'S STILL REALLY A STRAW VOTE UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WHEN WE DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO SEND IT TO THE BALLOT.
SO I WOULD -- I MEAN, I COULD VOTE ON THOSE ISSUES TONIGHT.
IN DEFERENCE TO MR. LaBOUR, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WAITING TILL THE
12th OF OCTOBER.
>>JAN SMITH:  MR. BEDKE AND MR. AMBLER SPEAKING TO THE MOTION.
>> I WAS ABOUT -- BEFORE STEVE MADE HIS MOTION, I WAS ABOUT TO MAKE THE
MOTION THAT WE KNOCK OUT TWO THIS EVENING BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A
CONSENSUS ON WHAT I'LL CALL REAL TERM LIMITS AND TO FIND OUT WHETHER
I'M THE ONLY PERSON WHO WANTS TO DISCUSS PARTISAN OR NONPARTISAN, IF SO,
THAT'S OKAY, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO STRUCTURE.
THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT AT-LARGE, SINGLE-MEMBER, ET CETERA.
BUT I --
>> ARE YOU ASKING ME TO AMEND MY MOTION?
>> NO, BECAUSE I THOUGHT -- I THOUGHT YOUR POINT WAS ACTUALLY WELL
TAKEN THAT WE SHOULD HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE EVEN DO THAT,
ALTHOUGH I --
>>JAN SMITH:  THEY MIGHT TAKE A POSITION AND THEN GET THEM DOWN HERE
SAYING THIS IS SOMETHING THE BOARD IS GOING TO PUT OUT.
LIKE HE SAID, YOU GET THE THING GOING.
>> BUT THE REAL POINT IS WHETHER IT'S THIS EVENING OR OCTOBER 12th, I THINK
LET'S KNOCK THOSE TWO OUT BECAUSE I SUSPECT WE CAN GET THROUGH THEM
QUICKLY.