1 (2/8/01 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. [ GAVEL SOUNDING ] >>JAN SMITH: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WELCOME TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8th, 2001. THIS IS, IN FACT, THE FINAL MEETING OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WHICH WAS CONVENED ONE YEAR AGO TODAY. SO YOU ALL HAVE BEEN WORKING LONG AND HARD, IF YOU CAN BELIEVE -- FEBRUARY 9th, ACTUALLY. MR. HURLEY CORRECTED ME. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK DENISE LASHER TO LEAD ME IN A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >>JAN SMITH: MS. POUPART, MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. [ ROLL CALL TAKEN ] YOU HAVE A QUORUM. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO FOR THE MOMENT IS INSTEAD OF STARTING PUBLIC COMMENT RIGHT AWAY, I THINK WE'LL HEAR OUR TWO REPORTS ONLY SO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT -- WE'RE GOING TO WAIT ABOUT 15 MINUTES AND SEE IF ONE OF OUR MEMBERS MAKES IT HERE FOR THE MEETING. THERE WAS A DESIRE TO HAVE A GROUP PHOTO OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. 2 AND SO AS NOT TO INTERRUPT YOUR FLOW OF THOUGHTS AND YOUR COMMENTS WHEN WE BEGIN THE PUBLIC HEARING -- PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS. IF THAT'S OKAY, BOARD MEMBERS, WE'LL MOVE RIGHT INTO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT. MR. TINKLER AND MS. CAMPBELL. >>KENNETH TINKLER: GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS. KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. JUST BRIEFLY, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL RECEIVED THE FINAL SIGNED COPY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION. WE HAD EXTRAS IF NOT EVERYONE RECEIVED THAT. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THEM. >>JAN SMITH: MS. CAMPBELL, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? >>GERALD WHITE: I DID HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION TO THE ATTORNEY RELATING TO -- HAD THERE BEEN ANY ISSUES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA RELATED TO COUNTY RIGHTS VERSUS STATE RIGHTS? WITH THESE CHARTERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THERE HAS BEEN ANY COUNTY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT HAS CHALLENGED BASED ON CHARTER RIGHTS SO TO SPEAK? WE HAVE THIS ISSUE IN AMERICA NOW WHERE YOU HAVE STATES' RIGHTS. AND I'M WONDERING IF THIS HAS TRICKLED DOWN WHERE COUNTIES ARE NOW CHALLENGING THE STATES TO SELF-GOVERN, IF YOU WILL. >>KENNETH TINKLER: OFFHAND, I HAVEN'T HEARD OF RECENT MATERIALS AS FAR AS THE COUNTY CHALLENGING THE STATE. THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT COMES UP EVERY TIME THERE IS A CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION THAT IS LOOKED AT TO SEE IF 3 THERE IS HOME RULE AUTHORITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND WHAT THAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD ENTAIL. THAT'S THE MAIN TIME I HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT COMING UP AT COUNTIES VERSUS STATE AUTHORITY. >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>KENNETH TINKLER: YOU'RE WELCOME. >>JAN SMITH: MS. MERRITT, DO YOU HAVE AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT? YOU PROBABLY HAVE A LOT OF PAPERWORK TO FINISH UP WITH US. >>BARBARA MERRITT: GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS. I FIRST WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SERVE AS YOUR DIRECTOR THIS YEAR. IT WAS A CHALLENGING YEAR, AND I THINK -- I WAS MORE EXCITED ABOUT BEING ON THIS PART OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, BUT I DID MISS BEING AT THIS PART TOO. SO I JUST WAS REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE AMOUNT OF WORK WE COVERED THIS YEAR. I THINK WE COULD HAVE REWRITTEN THE WHOLE CONSTITUTION FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA. I KNOW WITH THE AMOUNT OF PAPER SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS I HAVE SENT, WE MAY HAVE. I WANT TO EXTEND MY THANKS TO THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT. STEVE VALDEZ, PATRICK MURRAY IS HERE. HE'S GOING TO TAKE OUR PICTURE TONIGHT. THEY WERE THE ONES THAT WOULD BRING YOUR COURIER PACKETS WHEN I COULDN'T GET YOU. 4 THE PLANNING COMMISSION GAVE ME A WHOLE NEW RANGE OF COMPUTER SKILLS THAT I WOULD HAVE NEVER GOTTEN. THE CLERK'S OFFICE, I COULDN'T SAY ENOUGH FOR ALL THE HELP YOU HAVE GIVEN US. THANK YOU CURRENTLY WORKING ON THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. WHEN I HAVE THE FIRST DRAFT, I ANTICIPATE PROBABLY A WEEK TO TEN DAYS I WILL GET IT OUT TO YOU SO YOU CAN LOOK AT IT. ANY CORRECTIONS, DELETIONS OR WHATEVER. WHAT I DIDN'T PASS OUT IS -- THIS IS THE WAY THE COUNTY WEB SITE FOR OUR CHARTER LOOKS. IT WILL STAY ON THE WEB SITE UNTIL AFTER THE 2002 ELECTION. THE ONLY THING THAT WILL CHANGE IS WHEN WE HAVE THE FEBRUARY 1st AND THE FEBRUARY 8th MINUTES. THEY WILL BE ADDED TO THE SITE AND THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. AS YOU WILL SEE, WHAT'S ON THERE, IT WILL BE STILL AN ACTIVE LINK. NOW THE MINUTES FOR THE 1st ARE STILL IN DRAFTING; WE WERE HOPING TO GET THEM TODAY, BUT THEY ARE A LITTLE BACKED UP. I WILL GET THOSE MINUTES OUT TO ALL OF YOU. AND BEFORE JAN SIGNS OFF ON THEM, I WILL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO -- IF THERE ARE ANY CORRECTIONS OR WHATEVER, IF WE HAVE TO MAKE ANY CORRECTIONS, WE'LL DO THAT AND WORK WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE. OUR OFFICE WILL BE CLOSING DOWN PROBABLY IN TWO TO THREE WEEKS. I WILL BE TRANSFERRING ALL OF OUR RECORDS TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT. 5 AND IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, I'VE GIVEN YOU A TELEPHONE NUMBER ON HOW TO REACH THE CLERK IF YOU NEED TO GET ANYTHING AFTER I'M GONE. AND I THINK THAT'S -- OH, I HAD TO DO THIS. OUR NEXT BOARD WILL MEET IN 2005. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, NOT DIRECTED TO BARBARA, BUT GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE END TONIGHT, ARE -- MS. MERRITT STILL GETS PAID IF SHE PUTS IN TIME, CORRECT? >>JAN SMITH: SHE CAN BE PAID UP UNTIL 60 DAYS PAST THE COMPLETION OF OUR WORK SO THAT SHE HAS TIME TO GET EVERYTHING COMPLETED. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I WANT TO MAKE SURE SHE -- >>BARBARA MERRITT: THANK YOU. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THE SECOND THING IS IF THE CHAIR WOULD BE AMENABLE TO SEND A THANK YOU LETTER TO ATTORNEY MARSHA RYDBERG. WE DID NOT HAVE TO UTILIZE HER -- HER TALENTS, BUT WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE HER PUTTING FORTH HER TALENTS IF WE NEEDED THEM. AND I JUST THINK A THANK YOU FROM ALL OF US THROUGH YOU WILL BE APPROPRIATE. >>JAN SMITH: I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. >>STEVE LaBOUR: BARBARA, YOU DID A FANTASTIC JOB. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU PUT UP WITH US. >>BARBARA MERRITT: I REALLY HAVE ENJOYED THIS BOARD. 6 I BRAG ABOUT YOU A LOT BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE THE BEST ARGUMENTS OUT OF ANY BOARD BECAUSE WE COME TO A CONCLUSION. I REALLY HAVE ENJOYED THIS. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ASKED MS. MERRITT AND ME TO DO AT THE LAST MEETING WAS TO INVITE MR. FOERSTER TO OUR MEETING TONIGHT. HE HAD ANOTHER COMMITMENT THIS EVENING AND COULD NOT BE HERE, BUT HE DID WRITE A LETTER. IT IS IN YOUR PACKET IT AND IT EXPLAINS HOW WE WILL PROCEED AND HOW HE WILL WORK WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO KEEP OUR WEB SITE UP AND RUNNING. ALSO, THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T APPROVED. BARBARA WILL SEND THEM OUT TO ALL OF YOU AND -- >>BARBARA MERRITT: MARY HELEN JUST GAVE ME THE 1st -- >>JAN SMITH: WHAT WE'LL DO IS IF YOU HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDITIONS THAT YOU WANT, YOU WILL PHONE THEM INTO BARBARA. AND IF THERE AREN'T ANY, I WILL JUST APPROVE THE MINUTES AS THEY ARE PRESENTED TO US SO THAT THEY CAN GO IN OUR FINAL DOCUMENTS. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR, WE DID RECEIVE THE LAST ONE SET OF MINUTES. >>JAN SMITH: BUT THE ONES FOR FEBRUARY 1st WERE JUST COMPLETED. >>GERALD WHITE: THE ONES BEFORE -- >>JAN SMITH: THEY ARE GOING TO BE PASSED OUT BEFORE -- >>GERALD WHITE: JANUARY 25th. 7 >>JAN SMITH: JANUARY 25th YOU HAVE. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE ONES FOR FEBRUARY 1st. AND YOU WON'T HAVE THE ONES FOR TONIGHT UNTIL A COUPLE OF WEEKS. >>GERALD WHITE: WE CAN APPROVE THE JANUARY 25th MINUTES? >>JAN SMITH: RIGHT. WE WILL DO THAT. AND JUST TO COVER A COUPLE OTHER THINGS. I ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK MARY HELEN CAMPBELL AND KEN TINKLER AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY STAFF FOR SUCH AN EXCELLENT JOB. THE TIME YOU HAVE SPENT HERE, ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE SALARIED NO MATTER WHAT AND YOU HAVE BEEN HERE ON LONG AND DIFFICULT NIGHTS WHEN YOUR FAMILIES HAVE HAD OTHER COMMITMENTS. YOUR CHILDREN HAVE BEEN ILL OR HAD PROGRAMS. AND YOU HAVE SPENT YOUR TIME HERE WITH US. WE COULDN'T HAVE ASKED FOR A MORE DEDICATED, HARD-WORKING GROUP OF ATTORNEYS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH BOTH FROM THE ENTIRE BOARD. [ APPLAUSE ] WE ALSO HAD GREAT ASSISTANCE FROM THE COUNTY'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT. AND I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE NAMES -- >>DENISE LASHER: WE ARE GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU FOR A MINUTE, MADAM CHAIR. I KNOW YOU ARE THANKING EVERYBODY. WE WANT TO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PUTTING UP WITH EACH AND 8 EVERY ONE OF US IN GIVING US AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS OUR VIEWPOINTS. AND LEADING US THROUGH THIS PROCESS. [ APPLAUSE ] >>DENISE LASHER: I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THERE ISN'T ANY POISON IVY IN THERE. >>JAN SMITH: PUSH THEM IN FRONT OF MY FACE FOR A MINUTE HERE. THANK YOU. THAT'S VERY LOVELY, AND IT HAS BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU. I KNOW WE'VE ALL STATED OUR OPINIONS RATHER FIRMLY, ONE AT A TIME. BUT WE'VE ALL LISTENED AND AT TIMES WE HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE FEISTY. LOOK AT THIS, THIS EVENING WE ARE GOING TO FINISH OUR WORK AND ALL WALK OUT OF HERE FRIENDS AND I DON'T THINK THERE IS A GREATER COMPLIMENT TO A BOARD OF PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS AND DIFFERENT THOUGHTS THAN TO SAY THAT YOU CAN DO THAT TONIGHT. AND I THINK YOU CAN. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR -- YOUR COMING TO ALL OF THE MEETINGS. I THINK THE ATTENDANCE OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD HAS PRETTY -- BEEN REAL PHENOMENAL. REALLY HAS. SOME PEOPLE DO NOT TAKE IT QUITE AS SERIOUSLY AS YOU ALL DID. AND THE PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTY OWE YOU A DEBT OF GRATITUDE. 9 THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SIT HERE AND CALL YOUR NAMES AND GIVE YOU ALL THE OPPORTUNITY. YOU ALL DID A GREAT JOB STATING YOUR POSITIONS. AND I THINK THAT THE COUNTY WILL BE LUCKY IF THEY HAVE OTHER CIVIC GROUPS, CITIZEN GROUPS, THAT ARE AS DEDICATED, LOYAL, AND AS VOCAL AS YOU ALL ARE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT HAS DONE A GREAT JOB FOR US. MIKE FOERSTER, STEVE VALDEZ, PATRICK MURRAY, KAREN MATCHES, HELEN R. BAKER, CINDY JONES, STACEY WILLIAMS, DONNA OLMSTEAD AND GERI FREEMAN. ASSISTED US IN THE NOTICES, THE WEB PAGES, FAXING, MAILINGS, ALL OF THAT PAPERWORK WE COULD NEVER HAVE ACCOMPLISHED ON OUR OWN AND MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR BARBARA TO DO THE WORK THAT SHE DID FOR US. WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE PEOPLE FROM HTV. GREG VAWTER, JOE DUVAL. OLGA MENDOZA AND THE STAFF AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE EACH EVENING TO MONITOR THE FLOOR AND KEEP THE MEETINGS GOING. MR. HUNTER AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF FOR THE RESEARCH AND COMPUTER HELP THEY GAVE US ON THE SURVEY, THE CLERK'S OFFICE, GALE, SUE, JULIA AND JUDITH, ALL OF THEM -- AS I THINK SOME OF YOU SAID LAST WEEK, JUST STAYING AWAKE DURING OUR MEETINGS. WE APPRECIATE IT AND THANK YOU SAUL OF -- ALL OF YOUR WORK OF GETTING THE MINUTES TO US AS TIMELY AS YOU COULD. 10 FINALLY, THE COUNTY COMMISSION STAFF. THE MEMBERS OF THE DIFFERENT STAFFS THAT STAYED IN TOUCH WITH US. MARTHA BINGHAM, WILL CRAIG AND CHARLOTTE EMRICK. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE TAKEN TIME OUT OF YOUR SCHEDULES TO BE HERE AND TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. WE WERE GOING TO TAKE OUR PICTURES. MR. BALES IS STILL NOT HERE. >>GERALD WHITE: HE USUALLY ARRIVES ABOUT 6:30, MADAM CHAIR. >>JAN SMITH: WHERE IS OUR PHOTOGRAPHER, IS HE STILL HERE? MAYBE HE TOOK A BREAK. I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO THEN IS WE WILL BEGIN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. IF SOMEONE IS SPEAKING, WE WILL ALLOW TO YOU FINISH YOUR COMMENTS BEFORE WE -- BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INTERRUPT IT FOR THIS GROUP PHOTO FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD REPORT. THE FIRST PERSON I HAVE SIGNED UP -- AND, OH, IT'S FIVE MINUTES THIS EVENING. YOU EACH GET FIVE MINUTES. IF YOU NEED IT ALL, TAKE IT; AND IF YOU DON'T, DON'T. MR. MIKE CARDUCCI IS FIRST AND THEN VINCENT FERRARO. >> YOU READ IT RIGHT LAST TIME. IF YOU GET 4, YOU TAKE 5; IF YOU GET 5, YOU TAKE 10. MADAM CHAIR, CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS, MY NAME IS MIKE CARDUCCI, 1427 CLARION DRIVE IN VALRICO. 11 I THANK YOU FOR BEARING WITH ME IN MY CIVICS LESSONS OF LAST PRESENTATION, BECAUSE I HEARD SO MANY PEOPLE QUESTION THE VALUE AND WHY WE SHOULD HAVE REPRESENTATION WITH -- FAIR REPRESENTATION WITH POPULATION. IT AMAZES ME THAT ANYONE WOULD CONSIDER THAT AS A QUESTIONABLE TENET OF OUR GOVERNMENT, BUT APPARENTLY THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT FEEL THAT WAY. TONIGHT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE DIFFERENT ATTACK AND ASK SOME QUESTIONS AND CONTINUE THE TEACH EXERCISE AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL BEAR WITH ME BECAUSE THIS IS YOUR LAST PUBLIC MEETING. AND YOU 14 PEOPLE, BARBARA MERRITT AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS AND OTHERS INVOLVED WITH THIS BOARD, HAVE TAKEN LONG, HARD WORK FOR 12 MONTHS. AND YOUR EFFORTS SHOULD WELL BE ACKNOWLEDGED. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO CREDIT MR. RALPH HUGHES FOR BEING HERE EVERY WEEK TO SPEAK. BUT IT'S A COMMENDABLE JOB, AND THE COUNTY, I DON'T SPEAK FOR THEM OBVIOUSLY, BUT CERTAINLY SHOULD RECOGNIZE THIS HONORABLE ACTIVITY AND WE, AS CITIZENS, SHOULD APPLAUD IT, EVEN IF WE DON'T AGREE SOME OF YOUR CONCLUSIONS ARE. IT WILL BE MOST UNFORTUNATE IF YOU LEAVE TONIGHT WITHOUT MAJOR WORTHWHILE EFFORTS THAT SHOW A RESULT. LOOK AT THE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE RESOLVED AND ASK YOURSELF, IS THAT WORTH THE TIME WHEN YOU AND THIS BLUE RIBBON GROUP OF PEOPLE HAVE FINALIZED THESE DECISIONS NOT THAT THEY ARE IN EFFECT, BUT ONLY THE DECISION TO PUT IT ON A REFERENDUM TO 12 ALLOW THE PEOPLE TO VOTE ON IT. ASK YOURSELF, DID I ANALYZE THE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE? AND ALTHOUGH YOU AS INDIVIDUALS MAY NOT AGREE WITH THE ALTERNATIVES REQUESTED BY SUBSTANTIAL GROUPS, SHOULD THE ALTERNATIVE BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2002? DO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT AND CLEAR CONSCIENCE TO KEEP THIS ALTERNATIVE FROM THE CITIZEN VOTE? YOU MAY ASK IF IT IS NOT BROKE AND DON'T FIX IT. MAY I TELL YOU THAT THIS IS AN AXIOM OF FAILURE AND A THEORY OF PROCRASTINATORS WHO REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR CHANGE AND UNFORTUNATELY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM; THEREFORE, CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR CHANGE. AS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT, THE VERY FIRST REASON WHEN I GO INTO THE FAILING COMPANY WHO FELT IF IT ISN'T BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERALLY THE REASON FOR THE FAILURE. THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION HAS EXPLAINED IN NEW WAYS ALMOST EVERY DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT. THE LEGISLATURE, IN ALMOST EVERY VARIATION IN THEIR AMENDMENTS, ALTER AND REDEFINE THE CONSTITUTION. EVERY MAJOR BUSINESS REVIEWS ANNUALLY THE RIGHTS AND WRONGS IN THEIR BUSINESS PLANS AND GOALS. NOT THEIR DIRECTIONS NOR THEIR GOALS, BUT THE STRUCTURE AND TACTICS ARE ALWAYS ANNUALLY REVIEWED. NOW WE ARE SAYING TONIGHT, IF THE LAST FIVE YEARS SINCE THE LAST BOARD MEETING AND THE FIVE YEARS THAT WILL SUCCEED THIS BOARD AND THE FOUR YEARS THEREAFTER TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM, YOU'RE WILLING TO SIT IN A STATUS QUO POSITION FOR ALMOST 15 13 YEARS WITH THE TREMENDOUS GROWTH OF OUR COUNTY? IF THAT IS YOUR DECISION, I WOULD LIKE TO TELL YOU I AND MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO QUESTION THE WISDOM OF THAT DECISION. AS YOU VOTE FOR NO ALTERNATIVES, WHICH YOU HAVE DONE, THE VOTE IS FOR STATUS QUO. IF YOU ARE SAYING TO ME AND OUR GROUP AND THIS COUNTY TONIGHT, THAT THIS COUNTY SHOULD STAY PUT FOR 15 YEARS IN A STATUS QUO, I TELL YOU SOMEONE IS GOING TO QUESTION THAT POSITION. I AM NEVER SURE OF NUMBERS WITHOUT ANALYSIS, BUT THAT, ALONE, MAY BE THE GROUP THAT SUGGESTED MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT PUTTING IT ON THE BOARD. I WILL GIVE YOU, AS A FOR INSTANCE. WE RECOMMENDED AS F.A.I.R. SEVEN SINGLE DISTRICTS WITH A FACILITATOR-TYPE CHAIR. I REVIEWED THE TAPES, AND YOU KNOW I WATCH THE TAPES EVEN AFTER I LEAVE HERE, THAT DR. HORTON OF THE NAACP REQUESTED THAT STRUCTURE. YOU HEARD SOBAC REQUEST THAT STRUCTURE. YOU HEARD THREE OR FOUR CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE SUGGEST THAT STRUCTURE. YOU HEARD GORDON COMMEE REQUEST THAT STRUCTURE. YOU HEARD ALMA GONZALEZ HASKINS REQUEST THAT FOR THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY. RON WOLF AND HIS CONSTITUENTS REQUEST THAT STRUCTURE. I'M NOT SURE IF THE NUMBERS ALONE WILL SUFFICIENTLY CARRY THE VOTE IN 2002, BUT I THINK THE NUCLEUS IS ALMOST THERE. YET EVERY WEEK OUR GROUP ENLARGES. 14 I ASK YOU, AGAIN, PLEASE RECONSIDER YOUR RIGHT, YOUR OPTION TO MAKE THE CITIZENS VOTE ON THIS DECISION OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT. MR. VINCE FERARRA WILL EXPLAIN WHY THE PARTS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA IS BROKEN FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO LIVE IN TAMPA AND DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BROKEN. IT'S NOT A TOTAL BREAKDOWN, BUT IT IS A PART BREAKDOWN, AND I REFER THOSE TO VINCE. AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR BEING SO KIND AND LETTING US TO SPEAK AND THAT IS DEMOCRACY AT BEST EVEN IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH US AT TIMES. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. MR. FERARRA. >> THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SPEAK. OVER THE SEVERAL MONTHS. I KNOW YOU ARE TIRED OF HEARING US, BUT WE ARE GOING TO GO AT IT ONE MORE TIME. THE PREAMBLE OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HOME RULE CHARTER READS, WE, THE PEOPLE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN GREATER LOCAL SELF-DETERMINATION TO EXERCISE MORE CONTROL OVER OUR OWN DESTINY, TO CREATE A MORE RESPONSIBLE AND EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT AND TO GUARANTEE EQUAL CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS TO ALL, SO AVAIL OURSELVES TO THE OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED BY THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION TO BECOME A CHARTERED COUNTY AND DO HEREBY ORDAIN TO ESTABLISH BY THIS HOME RULE CHARTER A NEW FORM OF GOVERNMENT OF AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. 15 HOW ARE WE DOING IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY WITH HOME RULE? FIVE OF SEVEN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LIVE WITHIN A FEW MILES OF EACH OTHER IN SOUTH TAMPA. THE CITY OF TAMPA SERVES A NEED FOR THE TAMPA AREA. FIVE OF SEVEN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REPRESENTING THE COUNTY LIVE IN TAMPA SERVICE AREA. TWO OF THE SEVEN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LIVE WITHIN 64% OF THE POPULATION IN NONTAMPA AREA. HARTLINE, AND ALMOST ALL TAMPA BUS SERVICE, IS PAID BY THE COUNTYWIDE TAXES. REMEMBER THE PAVILION FIASCO VARIANCE ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN A COMMERCIAL AREA NOW AS A HIGHWAY GOES THROUGH THE CENTER. DESPITE VIOLENT LOCAL CITIZENS REJECTIONS, ZONING ALLOWS SULFUR SMELTING, CEMENT PLANTS, ROSIN BOARD PLANTS, USING ALMOST THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY. SOBAC AND RESIDENTS OBJECTED TO THE RISK OF WATER SHORTAGE. LOW AQUIFER CAUSES SINKHOLES IN CONTAMINATED WELLS IN SOUTH COUNTY. DESAL PLANT WITH RISK OF CONTAMINATION APPLIES TO BUILDING ON APOLLO BEACH. SAME AREA APPROVED FOR SCHOOLS AND HOMES. SOBAC OBJECTED. JAILS AND RECYCLED PLANTS BUILT IN THE HCC AREA. FISHHAWK. STARTS HOMES WITH NO MAJOR ROADS TO MOVE THE TRAFFIC. TWO SUPERMARKETS ON LITHIA-PINECREST ROAD AND BLOOMINGDALE 16 RIGHT ON THE CORNER AND A THIRD ONE BEING BUILT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS CREATING TRAFFIC MESSES. CITIZENS HAVE COMPLAINED. SELMON EXPRESSWAY APPROVES A PLAN TO DROP UP 30,000 CARS AT LUMSDEN AND PAULS. NO ADDED ROADS WERE PLANNED TO MOVE THE TRAFFIC FROM THAT CONGESTED AREA. THE SAME AREA WHERE THE REGIONAL MALL DUMPS ONTO HIGHWAY 60. GREAT PLANNING PROCESS. THE MAIN STREET PROJECT IS ALSO IN THE SAME AREA IN A HIGHLY CONGESTED AREA OF 30,000 CARS BEING DUMPED DAILY. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW A QUARTER OF A MILE TO A HALF A MILE DIFFERENCE OF EXTENDING THE CROSSTOWN IS GOING TO RELIEVE THE TRAFFIC WHEN YOU ARE PUSHING IT INTO MORE RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITH LESS ACCESS ROUTES. READ THE NEWSPAPER AND YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE OTHER FIASCOES GOING ON AROUND IN OUR COMMUNITY. IF WE LIVED IN TAMPA, I WOULDN'T CARE. NOT IN MY BACKYARD. THAT'S THE REASON FOR HOME RULE. PLANNING BOARDS AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ZONING BOARDS SHOULD BE FORCED TO LIVE WHERE THEIR WISDOM DECISIONS. WE, HEREBY, REQUEST THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER -- RECONSIDER THE SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WITH A FACILITATOR SELECTED BY THEIR PEERS. THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION FOR THE FUTURE OF -- THAT THE PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO VOTE FOR. 17 THE CONSTITUTION STATES THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE. EXCEPT IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THE GOVERNMENT IS BY AND FOR THE SELECT FEW WHO ARE ABLE TO CONTROL. WE ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. FERRARO. ED PASILLO AND THEN RALPH HUGHES. IS ED HERE? YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK? OKAY. THANK YOU. RALPH HUGHES. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. RALPH HUGHES, TAMPA. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU FIVE GOOD SOLID REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE TONIGHT TO PLACE A PROPOSAL ON THE BALLOT THAT WILL GIVE THE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THEY SUPPORT PLACING A LIMIT ON THE ANNUAL INCREASE ON A PORTION OF OUR COUNTY'S ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET. I BELIEVE ANY ONE OF THESE FIVE REASONS JUSTIFIES YOUR VOTING YES TO THIS PROPOSAL. I ASK THAT YOU PICK THE REASON OR REASONS YOU PREFER AND VOTE YES. THE FIVE REASONS ARE, ONE, YOU ASK THE PEOPLE TO COME FORTH AND LET YOU KNOW WHAT THEY WANTED. 18 THEY DID SO. IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSAL BY A MARGIN OF OVER TWO TO ONE. AND THOSE WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL WERE SOME OF THE MOST HIGHLY RESPECTED AND INFORMED MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. TWO, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION THAT HAS CAUSED SOME OF YOU CONCERN SHOULD NOT BE A CONCERN. I, AS CHAIRMAN OF A MAJOR CORPORATION IN OUR STATE, WITH EXTENSIVE INVOLVEMENT IN LEGAL MATTERS OVER THE YEARS, NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT I HAVE WRITTEN PORTIONS OF LOCAL AND STATE LAWS, STAND HERE TO SAY TO YOU, WITHOUT RESERVATION, THAT THIS IS THE POOREST EXCUSE FOR A LEGAL OPINION I HAVE EVER SEEN. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR QUESTION. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT A 3% BUDGET CAP. WE ARE, INSTEAD, TALKING ABOUT A LIMIT ON THE ANNUAL INCREASE IN A PORTION OF OUR COUNTY OPERATING BUDGET BASED ON A COMBINATION OF OUR INFLATION RATE AND POPULATION GROWTH RATE. YOU WILL NOTE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S RESPONSE CITED THREE CASES, MARION COUNTY, DADE COUNTY, AND CHARLOTTE COUNTY. EACH OF THESE CASES PERTAINED TO MILLAGE RATES, OUR SETTING A CAP ON MILLAGE RATES. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT A CAP ON MILLAGE RATES OR ABOUT MILLAGE RATES PERIOD OR ABOUT A CAP. THIS, QUOTE, LEGAL OPINION SIMPLY IS NOT GERMANE TO THE PROPOSAL WE ARE CONSIDERING. THREE, I BELIEVE THIS LEGAL OPINION IS WORTHLESS AND WILL SOON PROVE TO BE SO. 19 IF YOU DO NOT VOTE TONIGHT TO PUT THIS PROPOSAL ON THE BALLOT, WE WILL LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO FOR FIVE YEARS OR MORE. ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOU VOTE YES TONIGHT AND FOR SOME UNFORESEEN REASON THAT I CANNOT IMAGINE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION IS UPHELD, AND IT WON'T BE, WE CAN ALWAYS TAKE IT OFF THE BALLOT. FOUR, SOME FEAR IF THIS GOES ON THE BALLOT AND THE PEOPLE APPROVE IT, IT WILL BE CHALLENGED IN COURT. I DO NOT THINK SO FOR A SIMPLE REASON. IT WILL COST UP TO A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO CHALLENGE THE DECISION OF THE PEOPLE. PLUS, AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MONEY SHOULD THE CHALLENGER LOSE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE COST OF THE COUNTY DEFENDING THIS ACTION. JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. A CHALLENGE SIMPLY WILL NOT TAKE PLACE. FIVE, IF YOU VOTE TONIGHT TO PLACE THIS ISSUE ON THE BALLOT, EVEN IF TEN OF YOU DO NOT, YOU WILL BE SENDING A STRONG MESSAGE THAT WOULD BE LOUD AND CLEAR, NOT ONLY TO OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT, BUT TO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT YOU ARE RESPONDING TO THE PLEAS FROM THE PUBLIC. AND THAT THEY WOULD BE WISE TO GOVERN THEMSELVES ACCORDINGLY. PICK ANY OR ALL OF THE FIVE REASONS I HAVE JUST GIVEN YOU AND VOTE TO PLACE THIS LIMITATION ON THE ANNUAL INCREASE AND A PORTION OF OUR COUNTY'S OPERATING BUDGET ON THE BALLOT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SPEAK TO IT NOVEMBER 2002. 20 I THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AND A PERSONAL THANK YOU TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU WHO ARE WILLING TO GIVE OF YOUR TIME AND ENERGY FOR ONE FULL YEAR TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTY AS YOU COMPLETE YOUR SERVICE AND SACRIFICE TONIGHT. GODSPEED. I WISH THE VERY BEST FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. HUGHES. AND THIS BOARD IS VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE TIME YOU'VE SPENT HERE AND IN PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THIS BOARD TO HELP THEM MAKE DECISIONS. WE KNOW THAT YOU'VE GIVEN EVERY NIGHT OF THE LAST YEAR THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETS, AND WE THANK YOU FOR IT. MS. BETTY CRISLIP AND THEN PIERRE MATHURIN. >> THANK YOU. BETTY CRISLIP, 4405 WEST PLATT, TAMPA. IN THE YEAR THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN SO GENEROUSLY OF YOUR TIME, MANY OF YOU, MOST OF YOU, AND MANY OF THE PUBLIC HAVE COME TO YOU WITH WHAT THEY BELIEVE ARE PERCEIVED PROBLEMS. AND I HAVE SAID AND OTHERS HAVE SAID THAT THE CAUSE OF WHAT IS PERCEIVED AS PROBLEMS ROUGHLY FALL INTO TWO CATEGORIES. ONE IS A LACK OF POLITICAL WILL AND THE OTHER THE CAUSE IS A STRUCTURAL DEFECT IN GOVERNMENT. I SUBMIT, AGAIN, TO YOU THAT THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED ARE MOSTLY ALMOST ENTIRELY A MATTER OF POLITICAL WILL. 21 WHETHER IT BE THE NEED FOR VISION, WHETHER IT BE A PROBLEM WITH RESIDENCY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS, OR WHETHER IT BE LIMITS ON BUDGET INCREASES. THOSE ARE ALL PROBLEMS FROM A LACK OF POLITICAL WILL OF THE CITIZENRY. AND THE ONE PROBLEM THAT YOU PERCEIVED AS STRUCTURAL CORRECTLY WAS THE MATTER OF AN AUDITOR. BECAUSE THE COUNTY COMMISSION DOES NEED AN INDEPENDENT VOICE ANSWERABLE ONLY TO THEM ON BUDGET MATTERS. YOU HAVE DONE THESE. NOT TO MAKE CHANGES. I HOPE YOU SEE, AND I THANK YOU FOR NOT RUSHING IN TO MAKE CHANGES. AND I HOPE YOU WON'T FEEL THAT NOT DOING SO IS A FAILURE OF FAILURE ON YOUR PART. I SEE IT AS A SIGN OF GREAT MATURITY ON YOUR PART AND YOU REALIZE THAT JUST TINKERING WITH GOVERNMENT IS REALLY NO SOLUTION AT ALL. AND AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO PUT THINGS ON THE BALLOT AS SIMPLY LIKE A SURVEY OR REFERENDUM, THAT IS REALLY NOT A SOLUTION EITHER. WE KNOW THAT FROM THE MATTER OF THE RAPID RAIL THAT PASSED. AND SOME OF US ALSO FEEL THAT ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHY YOU SHOULDN'T PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT IS THE C.I.T., AND WE HAVE A STADIUM WHICH WE ARE PAYING FOR. AND SO JUST A REFERENDUM IS NOT A GOOD IDEA UNLESS YOU PERCEIVE THAT THERE IS A STRUCTURAL FLAW IN GOVERNMENT. 22 I THINK YOU'VE MADE THE MATURE CHOICES. YOU'VE GONE WITH THE AUDITOR. YOU'VE SAID THE OTHERS ARE POLITICAL WILL. AND IF YOU THINK THAT THE BUDGET NEEDS TO BE CAPPED OR PEOPLE NEED TO BE ELECTED MORE FROM THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, THAT IS A QUESTION TO GET CITIZENS AROUSED AND TO COME DOWN AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. AND THAT WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM. YOU'VE TAKEN A MATURE COURSE, AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR IT. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MS. CRISLIP AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS THIS EVENING. MR. PIERRE MATHURIN. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS PIERRE MATHURIN, 3409 WEST CARACAS. I FIRST OF ALL WANT TO THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU SITTING ON THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. I KNOW IT IS AN IMPORTANT THING TO ALLOCATE A YEAR OF YOUR TIME TO THIS NOBLE CIVIC FUNCTION. I KNOW FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE THAT DOING SOME VOLUNTEER WORK FOR THE COUNTY THAT IT CAN BE A SOURCE OF GREAT PERSONAL FULFILLMENT AND AT THE SAME TIME, IT COULD BE VERY FRUSTRATING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. THEY MAY NOT -- MAY OR MAY NOT FIT IN THE OVERALL SCHEME OF THINGS. I NOTICED THAT SOME OF THE ISSUES HAVE SORT OF BEEN RESOLVED 23 BY YOUR BOARD. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT IF WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THIS COUNTY, THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY CONSIDER INCREASING THE SIZE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO AT LEAST NINE MEMBERS TO FULLY REFLECT THE POPULATION INCREASE THAT THIS COMMUNITY HAS EXPERIENCED OVER THE YEARS. KEEPING IT AT SEVEN COMMISSIONERS, THAT'S A WHOLE LOT OF CONSTITUENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT -- THAT ONE COMMISSIONER WILL HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR. ANOTHER THING IS, I FEEL -- AND I MUST AT LEAST QUALIFY MY STATEMENTS, BECAUSE I DO LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, THAT THE NEEDS OF A GREAT MAJORITY OF THE COUNTY RESIDENTS IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY ARE NOT BEING MET FROM WHAT I CAN GATHER FROM MY TRAVELS AND TALKING TO PEOPLE. WE SHOULD -- THE STRUCTURE OF THE COUNTY -- OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR A CITY. AND IN THAT RESPECT, I FULLY SUPPORT THAT COMMUNITIES SUCH AS BRANDON, SUCH AS CARROLLWOOD, SUCH AS TOWN N' COUNTRY BE STRONGLY URGED TO FOLLOW A PROCESS TO LEAD TO INCORPORATION INTO CITIES FOR THEMSELVES SO THEY HAVE MORE LOCAL CONTROL OVER MATTERS SUCH AS ZONING, TRAFFIC, AND WHATNOT. GIVEN THAT, I KNOW I HAVE WRITTEN YOUR BOARD AS TO A PROPOSAL I HAD TO SPLIT THE COUNTY INTO THREE SEPARATE COUNTIES, MUCH LIKE HOW PINELLAS COUNTY WAS SPLIT OFF IN 1912 AND FORMED ITS OWN COUNTY. ORIGINALLY PINELLAS COUNTY WAS PART OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. PERHAPS THAT MIGHT BE A SOLUTION. 24 I KNOW IT MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT TIME, BUT IT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IN THE NEXT FOUR YEARS UNTIL THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETS AGAIN. I SUGGESTED THREE, MAYBE EVEN TWO -- TWO SEPARATE COUNTIES, AN EASTERN AND A WESTERN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH DISAGREEMENT ABOUT REPRESENTATION, ABOUT THE PEOPLE FEEL THAT TAXES COLLECTED IN THEIR AREA ARE BEING SPENT ON OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTY, AND PERHAPS SPLITTING THIS COUNTY MIGHT ULTIMATELY PROVIDE SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS TO SOME OF THESE -- SOME OF THESE NEEDS AND CONCERNS THAT MANY OF OUR CITIZENS HAVE VOICED OVER THE YEARS. SO I DO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT. AND AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS OVER THE PAST YEAR. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. MATHURIN. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN THIS EVENING. MR. KARL WARREN AND ELLA COFFEE. >> GOOD EVENING. KARL WARREN, TAMPA, FLORIDA. FIRST, I WANT TO COMMEND THIS BOARD FOR ITS DEDICATION, ITS TIME, AND ITS COMMITMENT TO THIS YEAR-LONG PROCESS. WE MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE, BUT I MUST SAY, THIS HAS BEEN ONE OF THE HARDEST-WORKING BOARDS THAT I HAVE SEEN IN THIS COMMUNITY IN A LONG TIME. AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND YOUR ATTORNEYS, KEN AND MARY, 25 FOR YOUR HARD WORK. DESPITE SOME OF THE FEISTINESS AT TIMES, I THINK THIS BOARD REALLY REPRESENTED DEMOCRACY IN ACTION. SO I COMMEND YOU ON THAT; HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT DESPITE WHAT I CONSIDER THE WORK -- THE LIMITED WORK -- THE WORK PRODUCT, IT HAS BEEN AN IMPROVEMENT OVER PREVIOUS BOARDS, AT LEAST WE GOT SOMETHING OUT OF HERE. AND THAT'S AN IMPROVEMENT. YOU TAKE ONE STEP, YOU MIGHT EVENTUALLY WALK A MILE. BUT I STILL BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME ISSUES HERE. I STILL BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE OF SYSTEMATIC SANCTIONING OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTION TO REDEPLOY LARGE BLOCKS OF BLACK POPULATION INTO AREAS THAT ARE BASICALLY 5-TO-1 RATIO. FIVE WHITES TO ONE BLACK, THAT THIS SITUATION BEGS FOR SOME CONSIDERATION OF FAIR AND EQUITABLE REPRESENTATION IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT. GENTRIFICATION HAS OCCURRED. MOST OF THE INNER CITY HAS BEEN REDEPLOYED OUT INTO THE COUNTY AREA. THE VOTING STRENGTH OF THE BLACK POPULATION OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY DILUTED BY SANCTIONING AND UNDER THE AEGIS OF GOVERNMENT ACTION. I SAY TO THIS BOARD TONIGHT, I SUSPECT THIS IS GOING TO END UP IN LITIGATION PROBABLY SOONER THAN WE THINK BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM. THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME CONSIDERATION. I HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT NUMBERS. 26 AND YET CHICAGO HAS ABOUT 46 ALDERMEN, AND THEY GET THINGS TAKEN CARE OF. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 46. NOW IF THEY CAN DO IT, WHY CAN'T WE AT LEAST CONSIDER BROADENING AND ENLARGING SO THERE COULD BE BETTER REPRESENTATION. I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO GET A HOLD ON SPENDING IN THIS COMMUNITY. WHEN WE CAN REMEMBER THE VOTERS VOTED DOWN THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER, BUT SOMEHOW IT GOT FUNDED, DESPITE WHAT THE VOTERS WANTED. THE AQUARIUM, THE VOTERS DIDN'T NECESSARILY WANT THE AQUARIUM, BUT IT GOT DONE. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE STADIUM OUT THERE, WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT DEAL. WE KNOW THAT THE AFFLUENT, THEY ARE ABLE TO COME TO GOVERNMENT, MAKE GOVERNMENT A TIT FOR THEM TO SUCK ON FOR THE TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR THEIR PLAY TOYS AND THEIR CULTURAL EXCESSES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CULTURAL EXCESSES WHILE THERE ARE MANY NEEDS IN THIS COMMUNITY GOING UNATTENDED. I BELIEVE THIS FACT BEGS FOR SOME KIND OF FISCAL LIMIT PLACED ON GOVERNMENT IN A STRUCTURE SENSE. AND I AGREE. THIS MAY NOT BE THE FORUM TO ATTEND THIS. AND I WILL BE WORKING HARD TO GET TO THE RIGHT FORUM TO SEE SOMETHING HAPPEN, BUT I SAY, THERE WAS A GOOD PLACE FOR 27 DISCUSSING THAT PROBLEM IN THIS COMMUNITY AND NEED TO HAVE HAD A PLACE TO DISCUSS IT BECAUSE IT'S GETTING OUTRAGEOUS. OKAY. TAXPAYERS ARE STEADILY PICKING UP THE TAB FOR EXCESSES OF PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD THEIR OWN PLAY TOYS. AND WE CAN NO LONGER CONTINUE THAT IN THIS COMMUNITY. I BELIEVE THAT SOME GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS IF YOU KEEP UP WITH YOUR CURRENT EVENT. WE'RE GETTING READY TO BUILD A MUSEUM, ASKING THE COUNTY FOR $17 MILLION. WE ARE GETTING TO BUILD $100 MILLION THING DOWNTOWN AND EVERYTHING. COUNTY GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO HAVE TO PICK UP PART OF THAT TAB. I'M SAYING WE CAN'T -- WE CAN'T TELL CITY GOVERNMENT HOW TO DO IT -- ITS THING BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GO TO THEIR CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. -- YES, I'M CLOSING. I'M SAYING TO THIS COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING IN THIS MATTER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND, AGAIN, I COMMEND ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR GREAT WORK. AND YOU ALL HAVE DONE SOME GOOD WORKS. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. AND MR. WARREN, WE THANK YOU. I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH EVERY CHARTER AND CHARTER 28 REVIEW BOARD WE'VE HAD IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE THANK YOU FOR SPENDING TIME WITH US. >> THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MS. ELLA COFFEE AND GRANT WALTERS. IS ELLA HERE? I DIDN'T SEE HER. OKAY. GRANT WALTERS. I'M SORRY, YES, YOU DID. CAN'T READ. MR. RON WOLF. >> THIS EVENING I'M SUCKING ON A THROAT LOZENGE SO YOU HAVE TO BEAR WITH ME. THIS IS THE FINAL MEETING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, AND I'M SURE MOST OF YOU ARE VERY INTERESTED IN SEEING THESE MEETINGS COME TO A CLOSE, BUT I'M NOT. AND I'M NOT BECAUSE I THINK THERE REMAINS ON THE TABLE SOME UNFINISHED BUSINESS. NOW THIS CHARTER THAT WE'VE ALL BECOME VERY FAMILIAR WITH HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 15 YEARS, AND THE QUESTION IS, WITH THE CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY IN UNINCORPORATED AREA, IS THERE A REASON FOR CHANGE? NOW, THE F.A.I.R. -- I'M A CO-FOUNDER OF F.A.I.R., THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH THOUSANDS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITIZENS, ONE ON ONE AND SMALL GROUPS AND WE HAVE RECEIVED UNIVERSAL ENDORSEMENT OF ACCEPTANCE. 29 HOW CAN SO MANY CITIZENS BE WRONG? NOW, YOU ALL RECEIVED COPIES OF THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS PAPER RECOMMENDING THINGS FOR CHANGE. WHILE WE WOULD HAVE PREFERRED THE 7-0 TO THE 6-1 STRUCTURE, WE DID APPRECIATE THE MOVEMENT IN THE DIRECTION OF SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. WE WERE PARTICULARLY IMPRESSED WITH THE COMMENTS MADE BY MR. BALES AND MR. BEDKE WHEN THEY DESCRIBED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO SUBORDINATE THEIR PERSONAL VIEWS TO WHAT THEY RECOGNIZED AS THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE THEY HEARD FROM DURING THESE DELIBERATIONS. VICE-CHAIR HURLEY APPARENTLY HEARD THESE SAME VOICES. MR. LaBOUR SHOWED GREAT LEADERSHIP BY PREPARING AND DISTRIBUTING HIS MEMORANDUM TO CRB MEMBERS IN OCTOBER LISTING OPTIONS 1-A, 1-B, AND 1-C. PRIOR TO THIS, A SUBCOMMITTEE HAD WORKED UP A STRUCTURE CALLING FOR NINE COMMISSIONERS, AN EXPANSION OF THE COST OF GOVERNMENT. NOW MOST SEEMED TO AGREE THAT INCREASING THE TAXPAYERS' COST OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT WAS NOT A GOOD IDEA. SO IT DIDN'T GO ANYWHERE. MS. TUTTLE MADE AN ELOQUENT STATEMENT REMINDING FELLOW CRB MEMBERS THAT THEIR MISSION WAS TO PLACE SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT, TO ALLOW THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO DECIDE. AND SHE VOTED TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. MS. WALDRON TOOK A SIMILAR POSITION. 30 FINALLY, MR. WHITE REMINDED EVERYONE THAT DR. HORTON OF THE NAACP FAVORED THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER COMMISSIONERS AND A CHAIR ELECTED BY THEIR PEERS. AS YOU KNOW THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD DID NOT CONSIDER AND RIGOROUSLY DEBATE THIS OPTION. LET'S KEEP IN MIND THAT F.A.I.R. WILL NOT DECIDE THE BEST STRUCTURE FOR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WILL NOT MAKE THIS DECISION EITHER. NOW WHETHER YOU HAVE DEEP-SEATED PERSONAL BELIEFS OR ARE INFLUENCED BY THE VIEWS OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO PLACED YOU ON THIS BOARD OR HAVE ADOPTED THE MAJOR POLITICAL PARTY LINE, IT IS IRRELEVANT. YOUR ONLY PURPOSE IS TO DECIDE WHETHER THERE IS SUFFICIENT INTEREST SHOWN BY THOSE WHO WOULD HAVE APPEARED BEFORE YOU TO ALLOW YOU TO VOTE TO PLACE THIS ON A REFERENDUM FOR 2002 SO THAT THE VOTERS, THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CAN DECIDE. AS I WAS LEAVING THE OFFICE, I HEARD MY FAX MACHINE GO OFF, AND IT IS ANOTHER ENDORSEMENT FROM AN ORGANIZED GROUP THAT WE HAVE BEEN SOLICITING, THAT IS F.A.I.R., FROM THE APOLLO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION. AND I WON'T READ THE WHOLE LETTER, BUT IT READS OUR MEMBERSHIP COMPRISED OF 60 BUSINESS VOTERS TO ADOPT THE F.A.I.R. REPRESENTATION BY COMMITTING THE SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS IN LIEU OF THE THREE AT-LARGE DISTRICT. SHOULD BE MANDATORY FOR EACH DISTRICT TO BE REPRESENTED BY A 31 COMMISSIONER THAT RESIDES IN THAT DISTRICT. IN SUMMATION, WE SUPPORT F.A.I.R.'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE BY PLACING THIS ON A COUNTYWIDE REFERENDUM IN NOVEMBER OF 2002. VERY TYPICAL, AND THIS I SEE IT WAS ADDRESSED TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. I'M SURE YOU HAVE ALL RECEIVED A COPY OF THIS PLUS OTHER ENDORSEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF THE EFFORTS OF F.A.I.R. TO GET OUT THE INFORMATION TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITIZENS. SO I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT F.A.I.R. AND ITS MANY SUPPORTERS HAVE DEMONSTRATED THIS INTEREST THAT I SPEAK OF. AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU CONDUCT A RECONSIDERATION VOTE. I REALIZE THAT WE ARE UNABLE TO INSERT THE 7-0 OPTION PREFERRED BY F.A.I.R. THEREFORE, F.A.I.R. AGREES TO SUPPORT THE 6-1 STRUCTURE, KNOWN AS 1-C, AND TO WORK HARD TO COMMUNICATE THE BENEFITS OF THIS STRUCTURE TO ALL HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITIZENS. WE NOW NEED THREE MORE VOTES TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. WOLF, WE APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU HAVE GIVEN TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'VE HAD A PHONE CALL FROM BETH KALICKY FROM VALRICO. SHE STATES THAT SHE SUPPORTS THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS AND 32 PLEASE RECONSIDER VOTE ON GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE, SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WITH FACILITATOR-TYPE CHAIR. MR. BALES, WE ARE GLAD THAT YOU JOINED US. AND PATRICK HAS BEEN WAITING TO TAKE OUR PICTURE, SO WE ARE GOING TO INTERRUPT -- >> EXCUSE ME, MADAM, I'M SIGNED UP. >> YOU ARE BUT WE HAVE KEPT PATRICK WAITING FOR ALMOST AN HOUR TO DO THE PICTURE. ARE YOU GOING TO WAIT TEN MORE MINUTES? OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS ARE MARILYN SMITH AND AL DAVIS AND THE END OF THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP. IF SOMEBODY'S NAME IS NOT ON THE LIST, PLEASE LET BARBARA KNOW. MS. SMITH. >> IT'S THE END. MARILYN SMITH, GRANDMOTHER AT LARGE. STRANGER TO NONE OF YOU, DON'T THINK. HI, JOHN. YOU MADE IT. I GO BACK TO THE SUMMARY PAGE, SOME REALLY IMPORTANT ITEMS ON HERE AND I THINK PERHAPS MAYBE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MISUNDERSTOOD THE INTENT OF THE OPERATING LIMIT BUDGET. WE NEVER, EVER TALKED ABOUT PUTTING A CAP ON AD VALOREM TAXES OR MILLAGE. 33 YOU KNOW, YOU ASKED A QUESTION IN ANTICIPATION OF AN ANSWER THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SPENDING MONEY, NOT COLLECTING MONEY. IT'S DIFFERENT. YOU KNOW, IT GOES IN AND IT GOES OUT. IT'S THE OUT PART THAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT. IT IS GOING OUT WAY TOO FAST AND IN NOT PROPER METHODS BECAUSE OF BAD MANAGEMENT. HOWEVER, I DON'T THINK YOU ARE GOING TO CHANGE YOUR MINDS ON THAT BECAUSE IT IS ALREADY SCREWED UP, AND YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO UNSCREW IT. WE WILL LEAVE IT ALONE. THEY MADE A BAD DECISION BECAUSE YOU GOT A BAD ANSWER AND A BAD ANSWER FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND I WILL SPEAK -- I'LL ADDRESS THAT SUBJECT LATER. WITH THEM. SO WE'RE GOING TO JUST DO AWAY WITH NUMBER 4 RIGHT NOW ABOUT THE INCREASING OF THE OPERATING SPENDING. BUT NUMBER 5 ON YOUR SUMMARY IS WHAT I GUESS WE ARE ABSOLUTELY GOING TO BE GOING WITH, WHICH IS A VERY GOOD POSITIVE MOVEMENT. RATHER THAN, OH, SHOULD WE HAVE EVERY FIVE YEARS OR EVERY EIGHT YEARS ON OUR CHARTER REVIEW. WITH THE WAY OF DYNAMICS OF THIS COUNTY, WE SHOULD STICK TO EVERY FIVE, I TELL YOU THAT AGAIN JUST SO YOU DON'T FORGET BECAUSE WAITING IN EIGHT YEARS COULD MAKE A DISADVANTAGE FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE GROWTH OF OUR WHOLE AREA. 34 WE DO NEED THE COUNTY AUDITOR SLASH AMENDED TO ALSO READ BUDGET ANALYST. IF YOU HAVE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT WENT ON JUST THIS LAST WEEK AT OUR BOARD MEETING YESTERDAY, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND WHY WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THAT. THERE'S BEEN AN AWFUL LOT OF MONEY GOING IN WRONG DIRECTIONS TO DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE TOTALLY WASTEFUL, HAVE NEVER ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING. WE'VE ALSO GOT MONEY GOING TO THE LIKES OF THE TAMPA CHAMBER. AND I KNOW SOME OF YOU FOLKS ARE BIG ON THE CHAMBER. WELL, I'M NOT. NOT WHEN THEY COME UP HERE AND THEY TELL ME THAT WE NEED TO PASS A PROGRAM THAT THEY'VE COME IN WITH A COMPANY THAT IS GOING TO NOT ONLY TAKE ALL MY WATER BUT POLLUTE MY AIR. BUT IT'S GOOD. ONE OF THEM WAS GOING TO HIRE A WHOLE 16 PEOPLE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME IS GOING TO PUT TONS, TONS OF POLLUTION INTO THE AIR AND TAKE -- TRY TO TAKE MORE POTABLE WATER. THEY ARE NOT ON ALL RECLAIMED WATER. YOU GOT TO READ THE FINE PRINT. AS YOU LAWYERS WILL KNOW THAT UP THERE, THE FINE PRINT. BUT THE POINT BEING, THE CHAMBER GETS PAID TO BRING IN PEOPLE TO HURT OUR ENVIRONMENT. NOW I AM NOT A TREE HUGGER IN ANY WAY. BUT THE POINT IS, I'M VERY SIDUOUS ABOUT IT. AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF THIS AREA IS GOING DOWNHILL AND IT IS CRITICAL. 35 I DON'T THINK WE GIVE THE CHAMBER MONEY TO RUN OUT AND DO IT TO US, WE ARE INVITING DISASTER. PEOPLE ARE MOVING HERE ANYWAY BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHY? WE'VE GOT CHEAP LABOR. BUSINESS LIKES CHEAP LABOR. THAT'S WHY THEY ARE GOING TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES, BIG LABOR. BIG DRESS MANUFACTURERS ARE SUBBING OUT THEIR MANUFACTURING TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES. CHEAP LABOR. FLORIDA HAS CHEAP LABOR. PEOPLE ARE MOVING HERE UNINVITED. SO WHY DO WE HAVE TO PAY SOMEBODY TO GO OUT AND SAY, HEY, YOU NEED TO MOVE HERE. THEY'RE COMING HERE ANYWAY. TO ME THAT'S STUPID. IT'S A WASTE OF OUR MONEY. WE CAN'T PUT UP A GATE AND TELL THEM, HEY, YOU WEREN'T INVITED BY A PARTICULAR GROUP, THEREFORE YOU CAN'T COME IN. THEY COME ACROSS THE SHORES TO COME HERE. IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO BE, BUT WE WANT TO KEEP IT A GREAT PLACE TO BE. WE DON'T WANT TO DEFILE AND IMPUTREFY IT BY ALLOWING PEOPLE TO COME IN AND TO INVITE THE WRONG KINDS OF INDUSTRY. NOTHING WRONG WITH BRINGING IN NEW BUSINESS. WE NEED THAT. BUT WE NEED CLEAN BUSINESS, NOT THE KIND THAT'S GOING TO DESTROY OUR WATER AND THE KIND THAT'S GOING TO WRECK THE AIR 36 AND BELIEVE ME I'M LIKE THE CANARY, i KNOW WHEN THE AIR ISN'T GOOD. I START COUGHING. WE KNOW WE ARE IN TROUBLE. THE POINT IS, I'M GLAD I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THESE MEETINGS. YOU HAVE WORKED VERY HARD. I KNOW THIS ISN'T FUN, BUT YOU HAVE GOTTEN TO KNOW SOME VERY INTERESTING PEOPLE ALSO, NOT ONLY OF THE POPULATION, OF AMONGST YOURSELVES, I'M SURE. SO WITH THAT I'LL SAY, LET AT LEAST GET ONE GOOD AMENDMENT GOING ON THERE. IF NOTHING ELSE, YOU'VE GOT ONE GOOD AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MRS. SMITH. EVERYONE ALWAYS BENEFITS FROM MARILYN'S COMMENTS. MR. AL DAVIS. >> MADAM CHAIRMAN AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, GREETINGS. AL DAVIS, 3724 EAST WILDER. MADAM CHAIRMAN, TWO QUESTIONS I WOULD LIKE TO POSE, AND FOR CLARITY, AND I WANT TO KNOW FIRST, WILL THAT COUNT AGAINST THE FIVE MINUTES THAT I HAVE EVEN THOUGH I MAY NOT USE IT? >>JAN SMITH: WHY DON'T YOU MAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND WE'LL LET YOU ASK YOUR QUESTIONS IF TIME PERMITS. >> THANK YOU. I DISADVANTAGED MYSELF TONIGHT BECAUSE I LEFT MY GLASSES, AND I WOULD -- YOU KNOW, I WOULD HAVE PERHAPS BEEN ABLE TO SEE A 37 LITTLE BIT. BUT ANYWAY. THE FIRST QUESTION IS, HOW MANY METHODS ARE THERE AVAILABLE TO THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO AMEND THAT CHARTER? >>JAN SMITH: THERE ARE THREE. >> OUTSIDE OF THE BOARD. >>JAN SMITH: TWO OTHER FORMS. THE CITIZENS' INITIATIVE IS ONE, AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY A VOTE OF 5-2 CAN PUT SOMETHING ON A REFERENDUM. >> OKAY. SO THE CITIZEN INITIATIVE -- >>GERALD WHITE: LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. >>JAN SMITH: BUT THAT'S NOT DEFINED IN OUR CHARTER. THAT'S A WAY THAT IT COULD BE DONE. THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A CITIZENS INITIATIVE PROBABLY. MR. DAVIS. >> SO THE -- THOSE TWO THAT YOU MENTIONED BESIDE THE BOARD DOES NOT HAVE THE -- NOT HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL, WHAT THEY CALL IT, AN OFF YEAR TO BRING A MATTER TO THE CITIZENS FOR A CONSIDERATION? >>JAN SMITH: I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. >> NEXT QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR, IS I GUESS LAST MEETING WAS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING OF WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THIS BOARD TO CONDUCT TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHAT MAY BE SUBSEQUENT PLACED IF THEY DO ANYTHING ON THE BALLOT. >>JAN SMITH: YES. 38 IT WAS THE TWO MEETINGS IN JANUARY WERE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. PLUS -- PLUS WE HAD TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS BACK IN THE SUMMER ON THE AUDITOR. >> OKAY. NOW -- MAYBE I MISSED IT, AND COULD VERY WELL BE THAT I DIDN'T READ IT QUICK ENOUGH, BUT THERE ARE THOSE ISSUES THAT THIS BOARD HAS CONSIDERED TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT. HAD THAT BEEN DECIDED YET? >> I'M SORRY. I WAS LOOKING AT THE PAPERS. WOULD YOU SAY YOUR QUESTION AGAIN? >> OKAY. THOSE ISSUES, IF ANY, TO BE DECIDED, TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT, HAD THIS BOARD MADE A DECISION YET? >>JAN SMITH: I BELIEVE THAT SEVERAL OF THE ISSUES THAT WE TOOK TO PUBLIC HEARING, WE'VE DECIDED NOT -- AS -- AT LEAST AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME NOT TO TAKE TO THE REFERENDUM. ONE, THE INTERNAL AUDITOR/BUDGET ANALYST IS GOING TO GO TO THE BALLOT UNLESS SOMETHING DRASTICALLY CHANGES THIS EVENING. AND THERE IS THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING CAP THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN DECIDED. >> OKAY. SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT MAY BE, IF ANYTHING, THE 3% CAP -- OR THE CAP THAT IS -- MAYBE GIVEN SOME SERIOUS CONSIDERATION OF BEING PLACED ON THE BALLOT. >>JAN SMITH: THIS EVENING, YES. >> THE REASON I ASKED, MADAM CHAIR, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE 39 SURE THAT I SPEAK TO, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE, IF THAT IS THE CONSIDERATION THAT YOU'RE GIVING. SO NOW MY TIME STARTS TICKING I GUESS. AND I COMMEND, MADAM CHAIRMAN, YOU AND THE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD, YOU KNOW, FOR YOUR DILIGENCE AND YOUR HARD WORK. I HAVE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IN THE PAST, AND AS A CITIZEN AND ALSO AS AN OBSERVER, I REALLY APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, YOUR TIME, AND I BELIEVE I CAN SPEAK THE SENTIMENT OF THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO ALSO THANK YOU FOR YOUR JOBS THAT YOU HAVE DONE. AND IF YOU DO DECIDE TO PLACE ANYTHING ON THE BALLOT, OBVIOUSLY THAT IS YOUR PREROGATIVE, THEN IF YOU DO DECIDE NOT TO PLACE ANYTHING ON THE BALLOT, DON'T FEEL BAD. YOU KNOW, WE LIVE IN A DYNAMIC COMMUNITY, THAT IS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND WE ARE FOREVER GROWING AND THERE ARE CHANGES THAT ARE OCCURRING. BUT WE WANT TO HAVE A SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE THAT IS FLEXIBLE AND RESPONSIVE. IF -- >>JAN SMITH: YOU HAVE A FEW SECONDS LEFT. 30 SECONDS. >> I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND THAT YOU PUT THAT CAP ON THE BALLOT BECAUSE YOU WILL BE RESTRICTING YOURSELF -- I MEAN, -- YOU WILL BE RESTRICTING GOVERNMENT. AND THOSE THREE PARTS OF GOVERNMENT, LEGISLATIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE OR EXECUTIVE, I THINK IT WILL BE MORE OF A 40 BURDEN, BUT YOU DO HAVE THE OPTION, AND WE CAN DO IT IF IT'S NECESSARY IS GO BY INITIATIVE IF WE FEEL THAT SOMETHING THAT IS BROKEN NEEDS FIXING AND SO FAR, I'M NOT CERTAIN IF I SEE THAT YET, MADAM CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. DAVIS. WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS THIS EVENING. WE'VE HAD ANOTHER PHONE CALL FROM SHIRLEY MAY OF APOLLO BEACH THAT SUPPORTS THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ASKS US TO ELIMINATE THE LARGE BOCC SEATS. FEELS THAT PROPER ATTENTION IS NOT GIVEN TO SOUTH COUNTY AND CANNOT HAVE FAIR REPRESENTATION WITH CURRENT STRUCTURE. WE HAVE NO VOICE. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIR. >>JAN SMITH: WAIT JUST A MOMENT, PLEASE. ANYONE ELSE HERE THIS EVENING WHO WISHES TO TALK DURING OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF OUR MEETING. OKAY, BEING THAT THERE IS NO ONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK, MAKE YOUR COMMENT BRIEF SO WE CAN GET UP AND GET THE PICTURE TAKEN. >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I NEED TO KEEP MY MIND ON LOCK TONIGHT AND MR. DAVIS RAISED A CONCERN. WE'VE HAD SOME CITIZENS TONIGHT REQUEST THAT WE READDRESS STRUCTURE. WE'VE TAKEN PREVIOUS VOTES ON THOSE ISSUES. AT OUR LAST MEETING, 13 OUT OF THE 14 CHARTER REVIEW BOARD 41 MEMBERS VOTED FOR ONE FORM OF CHANGE OR ANOTHER. CAN WE READDRESS THESE STRUCTURE ISSUES? CAN WE REVOTE THESE ISSUES? >>KENNETH TINKLER: KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. THE THREE MOTIONS THAT FAILED LAST TIME CONCERNING STRUCTURE EACH FAILED BY -- NEITHER -- NONE OF THEM CAME UP WITH TEN VOTES. OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN RENEW THAT MOTION AND RETAKE THAT MOTION AGAIN. SINCE IT DID NOT PASS ORIGINALLY, THAT COULD BE RENEWED AT THIS MEETING UNDER ROBERT'S RULES. NOT AN ACTION THAT THE BOARD HAS TAKEN. IT IS NOT A RECISION ISSUE BUT A RENEWAL ISSUE AT THIS POINT BUT WILL STILL REQUIRE TEN -- >>GERALD WHITE: I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT, MADAM CHAIR, FOR THE PUBLIC. >>JAN SMITH: WHEN WE GET INTO THE BOARD DISCUSSION, WE WILL DO THAT. BOARD MEMBERS, PATRICK HAS WAITED A LONG TIME. WE APPRECIATE IT. WE WILL HAVE A RECESS FOR JUST ABOUT FIVE MINUTES. >>JAN SMITH: I HAVE THREE RESOLUTIONS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE SERVED THIS BOARD SO WELL. THE FIRST ONE, IF I MAY READ IT TO YOU, IS "A CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION PRESENTED TO MARY HELEN CAMPBELL, IN RECOGNITION OF YOUR SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND ITS 42 CITIZENS BY PROVIDING INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, SIGNED THIS 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2001." [ APPLAUSE ] >>KEVIN AMBLER: WE WOULD HAVE GIVEN YOU A PLAQUE, BUT WE ARE SAVING MONEY. [ LAUGHTER ] >>JAN SMITH: AND A SECOND CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO MR. KEN TINKLER, IN RECOGNITION OF YOUR SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, ITS CITIZENS, BY PROVIDING INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL TO THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, SIGNED THIS 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2001. AND, AGAIN, WE COULDN'T HAVE MADE IT WITHOUT THE TWO OF YOU. WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT. [ APPLAUSE ] >>JAN SMITH: AND LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BARBARA MERRITT, AND WHAT CAN I SAY ABOUT HER THAT HASN'T BEEN THOUGHT OR SAID ALREADY. SHE HAS BEEN DILIGENT, HARD-WORKING, LOYAL TO THIS BOARD, MOVED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING ALL OF HER WORK DONE, AND HAS A FEW MORE HOURS TO SPEND WHEN WE'RE FINISHED. BUT IT HAS BEEN A TRUE PLEASURE TO WORK WITH HER. AND I KNOW THAT EACH OF YOU FEELS THAT SHE HAS MADE YOUR SERVICE ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD A LITTLE BIT EASIER AND KEPT US ALL INFORMED. MS. MERRITT, THIS CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION IS PRESENTED TO YOU IN RECOGNITION OF YOUR SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND ITS CITIZENS BY SERVING AS EXECUTIVE 43 DIRECTOR OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. AND MAY I SAY, SHE ALSO DID A MARVELOUS JOB OF CREATING ALL OF THESE FOR US. [ LAUGHTER ] [ APPLAUSE ] >>JAN SMITH: JUST LOOK AT HIM. >>BARBARA MERRITT: THANK YOU, PATRICK. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS, NOW -- WE COULD LET HER TAKE THE REST OF THE DAY OFF, BUT I DON'T THINK SO. MR. WOLF, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE, PLEASE? CERTAINLY. >> I COULDN'T AGREE MORE WITH THE SENTIMENTS EXPRESSED BY THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD REGARDING THE PERFORMANCE OF BARBARA MERRITT. IT HAS BEEN OUTSTANDING. I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T PROVIDE INPUT FROM CITIZENS WHO RELIED UPON HER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION TIMELY AND ACCURATELY. I MIGHT ADD TO THAT, I SEEM TO RECALL AT A PREVIOUS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING SOME MENTION OF, HEY, LET'S LOOK AT THE BUDGET, WE MIGHT HAVE SOME FUNDS LEFT OVER FOR DISCRETIONARY NATURE. IF THAT PROVES TO BE A CASE, AS A CITIZEN AND TAXPAYER OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND THE 44 CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO SOME FORM OF A PERFORMANCE BONUS FOR BARBARA MERRITT. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ] >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. WOLF. NOW, BOARD MEMBERS, IT'S ALMOST 7:30. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK, WE'LL DO THAT. IF IT'S THE SENTIMENT OF THE BOARD OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL DO THAT. BUT THERE ARE GOODIES IN THE BACK. IF YOU DON'T WANT THEM TO GO STALE OR WE CAN MAYBE SEE WHAT WE CAN DO IN 20 AND 30 MINUTES AND THEN TAKE A BREAK. WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THAT? THE BOARD MEETING IS NOW OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT. MR. HURLEY AND THEN MR. AMBLER. >>DAVID HURLEY: MADAM CHAIR, I WAS READING OUR -- IT'S NOT THE MINUTES BUT IT IS THE TRANSCRIPT -- THE TRANSLATION THAT GOES ALONG THE -- FOR THE HEARING-IMPAIRED THIS WEEK, AND TRYING TO SEE WHERE WE WENT AND HOW THINGS WERE GOING LAST WEEK, AND I BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE WERE CONSIDERING THREE ISSUES AT ONE TIME AND AS FAR AS STRUCTURE, IT MAY HAVE DELUDED SOME THOUGHT AS FAR AS THE DIRECTION. AND I WOULD LIKE TO RENEW THE BOARD'S POSITION ON WHAT WE CALLED 1-C, WHICH IS THE 6-1 FORMAT. >>GERALD WHITE: SECOND. >>JAN SMITH: WE HAVE A MOTION TO RENEW THE BOARD'S POSITION ON THE 1-C, WHICH IS THE SIX SINGLE MEMBERS AND AN ELECTED 45 CHAIRMAN. THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY MR. HURLEY AND SECONDED BY MR. WHITE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I'M SORRY, MS. WALDRON. >>ARLENE WALDRON: FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS, I THINK IT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE -- THAT WE RECONSIDER THIS ISSUE. WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY HEARD FROM CITIZENS WHERE THIS -- THIS DOES AFFECT PEOPLE. AND I AGREE MARY LOU TUTTLE MADE A WONDERFUL COMMENT AT THE LAST MEETING. I MEAN, YOU DID. YOU SAID THAT YOU -- WHAT SHE SAID, YOU MAY RECALL, SHE SAID I COME ONTO THIS BOARD A YEAR AGO THINKING THAT WE NEEDED NO CHANGES IN STRUCTURE. AND I REMEMBER THAT. I REMEMBER YOU SAYING THAT. AND SHE CONFESSED THE LAST MEETING, SHE GOES, BUT YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T AFFECT ME BECAUSE I LIVE IN THE CITY AND I HAVE A COUNCIL -- CITY COUNCILWOMAN THAT LIVES UP THE STREET, BUT SHE GOES, I'VE LISTENED AND I'VE HEARD AND THE CITIZENS FEEL THEY ARE NOT BEING REPRESENTED. AND I THINK THAT -- I JUST RESPECT YOU SO MUCH FOR MAKING THAT COMMENT BECAUSE YOU DID LISTEN, YOU HAD AN OPEN MIND, AND EVEN THOUGH THIS ISSUE DOES NOT AFFECT YOU PERSONALLY, YOU HAD THE COURAGE TO SAY IT DOES AFFECT OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY. I MEAN, IT AFFECTS ME BECAUSE I LIVE IN BRANDON. 46 SO I -- I KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT. BUT I JUST HIGHLY RESPECT THE COMMENT THAT YOU MADE BECAUSE YOU ARE A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SPENDING A YEAR STUDYING AN ISSUE AND BEING OPEN-MINDED AND SAYING, OKAY, THIS DOESN'T AFFECT ME BUT I CARE SO MUCH ABOUT THIS COUNTY THAT I WANT THE CITIZENS WHOM IT DOES AFFECT TO HAVE THIS COMMUNITY TO VOTE. I JUST ASK THE BOARD MEMBERS TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THAT AND JUST KIND OF PUT ASIDE MAYBE YOUR FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS AND AT LEAST BE VERY OPEN-MINDED TO WHAT THE CITIZENS OF UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAVE SAID TO US. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. BALES. >>JOHN BALES: I, AGAIN, WANT TO PUT MY -- MY SUPPORT BEHIND THIS. I THINK THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS BOARD. I'M HOPING THAT EACH OF YOU WILL CONSIDER, AGAIN, YOUR VOTE FOR OR AGAINST, BUT THINK HARD ABOUT IT AND THINK LONG, AND GIVE THE CITIZENS A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THIS ISSUE. I HOPE THAT EVERYONE HAS KEPT AN OPEN MIND. I HOPE EVERYONE HAS LOOKED AT THESE ISSUES. I HOPE THAT PERSONS HAVE HEARD THE DESIRE OF THE CITIZENS TO WANT TO HAVE THE SIX SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS SO THAT IT REDUCES THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS FOR EACH COMMISSIONER, AND I HOPE WE'VE ALL HEARD THE CITIZENS -- ESPECIALLY TONIGHT -- SAYING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE STRUCTURE, WHICH IS "C," WHICH HAS THE COUNTY CHAIR. ONCE AGAIN, I -- PLEASE WHOLEHEARTEDLY CONSIDER IT AND PLEASE 47 CONSIDER SUPPORTING IT. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. HURLEY. >>DAVID HURLEY: YES. I HAVE TALKED WITH SEVERAL OF THE LEGISLATORS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, AND THEY -- IN DEFERENCE TO THE LEGISLATORS, I WILL QUOTE THEM BUT I WON'T TELL TO WHO THEY ARE BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE UNSEEMLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN SAID IN CONFIDENCE. THEY HAVE DESCRIBED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S FORM OF SELECTING THEIR CHAIR ANNUALLY THROUGH A -- THEIR COLLEGIAL THING. THE WAY IT WORKS OUT THE WAY THEY DESCRIBE IT AS SCHIZOPHRENIC. I DON'T MEAN THAT AS A DETRIMENT TO ANYONE WITH A MENTAL ILLNESS, BUT A DESCRIPTION I'VE HEARD OF IT. THEY DON'T SEE THAT AS A MANDATE FROM THE PEOPLE BECAUSE THAT IS SELECTED INTERNALLY AMONG SEVEN PEOPLE AND NOT POPULARLY AT LARGE BY THE PEOPLE HERE IN THE COUNTY. THE REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT IS WHAT THE REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS, THAT'S WHAT WE DID WHEN WE ESTABLISHED THE UNITED STATES. WE SAID WE WOULD HAVE REPRESENTATIVES, AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES WOULD GO REPRESENT US AND WHEN WE HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVES IN SUCH A MISH-MASH WHEN WE HAVE THE THREE AT-LARGE, IT CREATES AN ISSUE, I THINK, THAT DOES NOT BODE WELL, AND WE DO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION AT THE LOWER LEVEL INDIVIDUALLY. I ALSO, ALTHOUGH I NOW LIVE IN TAMPA, I SPEND A THIRD OF MY 48 TIME IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY LIVING IN APOLLO BEACH AND A THIRD OF MY TIME LIVING IN BRANDON AND A THIRD IN SOUTH TAMPA. SO I THINK I HAVE A GOOD FEEL FOR THE COUNTY. I WAS ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSKIN CHAMBER AT ONE TIME. I HAVE BEEN QUITE ACTIVE AND I AM STILL ACTIVE DOWN THERE. I THINK I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT OWNS A TUX, SO I HAVE TO DO THE AWARDS BANQUET EVERY YEAR. BUT WE -- I BELIEVE THAT THE PEOPLE THERE NEED THAT OPPORTUNITY. THEY DESIRE IT, AND I THINK THEY OUGHT TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THAT ON THE BALLOT. AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE, BECAUSE I'VE STUDIED THESE DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT. I THOUGHT THAT OUR ADMINISTRATOR, MR. KLEMAN, DID AN EXCELLENT JOB OF EDUCATING US TO SOME OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GOVERNMENT WE COULD LOOK AT. I DID A LOT OF READING ON THIS OVER THE LAST YEAR, AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT THE 6-1 FORM THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED IS THE BEST OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE FOR COMING UP WITH SOMETHING. IF THE PEOPLE DON'T VOTE FOR IT, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THIS OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. IT WILL BE THE PEOPLE COMING TO THE POLLS TO MAKE THIS IN 2002 AND NOT YOU OR ME. BUT I DO BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE ON THE BALLOT. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: I, TOO, WON'T BENEFIT FROM THIS IN THE SENSE 49 I AM A RESIDENT OF TAMPA AND EVEN WORSE, I LIVE IN SOUTH TAMPA, THAT HORRIBLE PLACE THAT HAS BEEN PORTRAYED SOMETIMES. BUT SERIOUSLY, I -- I'VE GONE BACK OVER THIS LAST WEEK AND I'VE LOOKED AT THE POPULATION STATISTICS AND WHERE OUR POPULATION IS MIGRATING TO, AND I JUST -- I THINK -- I COMMEND F.A.I.R. AND THEIR WORK AND QUITE FRANKLY, A YEAR AGO WHEN I STARTED THIS -- THIS TENURE ON THE BOARD, I DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE ANY CHANGES IN THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT. THE ONLY THING THAT I LIKED THAT I HEARD WAS MS. WILLIAMS' SUGGESTION THAT WE HAVE GEOGRAPHIC RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS AND I THOUGHT THAT IS PROBABLY AS FAR AS I WANTED TO GO. I COMMEND THOSE THAT REALLY CAME DOWN AND GAVE US THE RESEARCH. I ALSO OFFERED THE 6-1 AS A COMPROMISE BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF FOLKS THAT REALLY FELT STRONGLY ABOUT AN ELECTED CHAIR, AND I THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE A WAY OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE OUR BOARD BE ABLE TO COME WITH A COMPROMISE POSITION. IT WAS TO MY SURPRISE AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT THIS STRUCTURE WAS THE ONE THAT GOT CLOSEST OF BEING PASSED BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE THE LEAST POPULAR. AND SO I WAS -- WHILE I WAS -- I FELT GOOD ABOUT THAT, I'M DISAPPOINTED WE DIDN'T ULTIMATELY GET THE ADDITIONAL THREE VOTES. AND I JUST ASK THOSE WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL TO PLEASE RE-EXAMINE IN YOUR HEART AND YOUR MIND AGAIN AS TO REALLY WHY IT WOULD BE SO TERRIBLE IF WE DID OFFER THIS TO THE VOTERS TO 50 TAKE A LOOK AT. IF IT'S CLEARLY NOT THE DIRECTION THAT THIS COUNTY SHOULD GO, WE WILL HEAR -- IT IS SO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW. WE WILL HEAR FROM THE VOTERS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY FEEL IT'S WRONG. AND I THINK THAT WE OWE THEM THAT -- THAT OPPORTUNITY GIVEN THE WAY THIS COUNTY IS GROWING AND THE -- THE AMOUNT OF TESTIMONY WE HEARD OVER A YEAR OF PEOPLE JUST FEELING THEY ARE GETTING FARTHER AND FARTHER AWAY FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT. AND I THINK WE OWE IT TO THE VOTERS OF THIS COUNTY TO MAKE THAT -- TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS -- WHAT WOULD BE, I'M SURE, CALLED A RADICAL CHANGE, AND IF -- LIKE I SAID, IF IT WAS NOT RIGHT FOR THIS GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT, IT WILL BE VOTED DOWN OVERWHELMINGLY. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. AMBLER. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I'LL TRY TO KEEP MY COMMENTS UNDER FOUR PAGES. [ LAUGHTER ] AS WAS POINTED OUT TO -- BY ME -- FROM MR. HURLEY FROM OUR LAST MEETING. I WISH WE HAD AN OPTION 1-D, BECAUSE IF I COULD PUT MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS ASIDE FOR A MOMENT AND SAY YOU WANTED TO GIVE THE VOTERS THE BEST OPTION OF SOMETHING TO CHANGE TO, WHAT I HAVE HEARD IN LISTENING VERY CAREFULLY TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT IS AN OPTION THAT WOULD BE SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. I DON'T THINK I'VE HEARD AN OUTCRY IN THE LAST SEVERAL 51 MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD THROUGH ALL OUR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE COUNTY ELECTED CHAIR. I KNOW THAT THIS BOARD BECAME CONSUMED WITH THAT DISCUSSION, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR THAT AS AN OUTCRY FROM THE PEOPLE. SO THE REAL ISSUE THAT WAS COMING FROM MY PERSPECTIVE FROM GROUPS LIKE F.A.I.R. WAS TO COMPLETELY MAKE THIS A FAIR REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT, YOU WANT TO SPREAD OUT THAT REPRESENTATION AMONG THE SMALLEST GROUP OF POPULATION SO THAT THOSE COMMISSIONERS ARE CLOSEST TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD THEIR MISSION STATEMENT TO BE. THAT COULD ONLY BE ACHIEVED UNDER THE -- A SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT PLAN AND DOESN'T REQUIRE AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR. IT REQUIRES -- IT COULD FUNCTION UNDER THE SAME INTERNALLY ELECTED CHAIR ISSUE THAT WE HAVE NOW OR SYSTEM FOR -- ON THE ONE-YEAR TURNAROUND CYCLE. IF YOU LIKE THAT CHAIR AND THEY ARE A CONSENSUS BUILDER, YOU CAN ELECT THEM AGAIN. THE PROBLEM THAT I PERSONALLY HAVE WITH THE 6-1 PROPOSITION IS THAT IT NECESSARILY REQUIRES ME TO VOTE FOR THE ELECTED CHAIR. AND SO I'M GOING TO DIRECT A FEW OF MY COMMENTS TO WHAT I HAVE AS A PROBLEM WITH THAT PARTICULAR COMPONENT OF THE 1-C PROPOSAL. FIRST, I AM CONCERNED THAT WITH AN ELECTED CHAIR, THAT I COULD BE STUCK WITH SOMEBODY FOR FOUR YEARS, AND I THINK THAT YOU COULD DO A LOT OF DAMAGE IN FOUR YEARS. IF THEY ARE SUPPOSEDLY THE LEADER AND THE DIRECTION THEY TAKE US IS IN A POOR DIRECTION, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SUFFER 52 THROUGH IT. NOW, WHAT -- WHAT COULD LEAD TO THAT POOR PERFORMANCE? YOU CAN HAVE A VERY ENTHUSIASTIC IDEALISTIC INDIVIDUAL WITH A MISSION STATEMENT, WITH GOOD INSIGHT AT PROVIDING A VISION FOR THE COUNTY, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE WAY WE HAVE STRUCTURED THE ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR POSITION, WE DIDN'T TACKLE IT; WE COMPROMISED, BUT WHAT WE ARE LEFT WITH IS A VERY WATERED-DOWN SET OF DUTIES THAT ESSENTIALLY LEAVES THAT CHAIR WITH NO REAL SUBSTANTIVE POWER DIFFERENCE THAN THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS. AND THEN BY DOING SO, EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE AN ELECTED CHAIR IN NAME ONLY, YOU WANT THEM TO BE THE COUNTY LEADER, YOU HAVE THAT POWER NOW WITH THE INTERNALLY ELECTED CHAIR. BUT IF YOU ARE TRYING TO ELEVATE THIS PERSON TO SOME HIGHER INTEREST, YOU HAVE SET THEM UP FOR FAY YOUR BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN THEM THAT POWER AS PART OF OTHER CHANGES TO THE CHARTER THAT WILL GIVE THEM THE POWER TO, FOR EXAMPLE, HAVE A VETO OR AN OVERRIDE. NOW I BELONG STRONGLY IN THE SEPARATION OF POWERS IN GOVERNMENT. THERE ARE REASONS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS SET UP A FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT HAD AN EXECUTIVE, A LEGISLATIVE, AND A JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. I WAS VERY PROUD OF THE AMERICAN SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. DURING THE PRESIDENTIAL -- WELL, SOME CALLED IT A DEBACLE, I CALLED IT THE SPECTER OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION THAT FOLLOWED AFTER THE BALLOTS WERE CONTESTED. I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE AMERICAN PROCESS IN ACTION. 53 BUT THAT'S BECAUSE YOU SAW WITHOUT ANARCHY, THE LEGISLATIVE, THE JUDICIAL AND EXECUTIVE FORMS OF GOVERNMENT ALL TRYING TO WORK TOGETHER TO WORK WITH THE ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES SET UP TO SOLVE IT. NOW IF YOU THINK THERE IS SOMETHING BROKEN WITH OUR GOVERNMENT, THEN WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED AND I REGRET WE HAVE RUN OUT OF TIME TO DO THAT TONIGHT IS OUR LAST OPPORTUNITY, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED SERIOUSLY CHANGING OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO LOOK AT AN EXECUTIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT WITH A COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY ELECTED CHAIR THAT WAS IN A SEPARATE BRANCH, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, AND THIS BOARD AS A GROUP DECIDED NOT TO GO THAT DIRECTION. SO WE ARE STUCK WITH WHAT WE HAVE. AND OPTION 1-C LEAVES US WITH A WATERED-DOWN ELECTED CHAIR POSITION WHICH I THINK IS DOOMED FOR FAILURE, AND THAT FAILURE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE REST OF US AS CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY HAVE TO SUFFER THROUGH IN BLOCKS OF FOUR-YEAR TERMS. SO I SUPPORT AN INTERNALLY ELECTED CHAIR, ONE THAT CAN BE ELECTED ON A ONE-YEAR ROTATING BASIS, SUCH THAT IF YOU LIKE HIM, YOU CAN KEEP THEM, IF YOU DON'T, GET ON A FAST TRACK TO CHANGING. WE'VE HEARD PLENTY OF DATA IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, MUCH OF IT SUBMITTED BY RALPH HUGHES, TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE TO BE PROUD OF IN OUR COUNTY. OTHER COUNTIES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY ARE LOOKING TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AS A MODEL OF HOW TO DO THINGS RIGHT. SOME MAY DISAGREE, AND ON SOME POINTS, MAYBE THAT'S TRUE, BUT 54 I THINK WE HAVE A LOT TO BE PROUD OF IN OUR PRESENT FORM OF GOVERNMENT. AND SO, AGAIN, MY CONCLUDING COMMENT IS, IF YOU REALLY WANTED A TRUE OPTION TO TAKE TO THE VOTERS, I THINK THAT OPTION WOULD HAVE BEEN A SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS FORMAT AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION TO MAKE AS FAR AS WHAT I KNOW GIVEN THE LIMITATIONS AS TO HOW WE WENT TO PUBLIC COMMENT. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. AMBLER. MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YOU KNOW, 13 CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS VOTED TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT. 13 OF US. I DECLARE AS A MEMBER OF THIS BOARD THAT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY STRUCTURE GOVERNMENT IS BROKEN. BASED ON THE FACT THAT 13 MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD VOTED TO CHANGE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S STRUCTURE. NOW I DO NOT WANT TO LEAVE HERE TONIGHT WITHOUT FIXING THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE DECLARED THROUGH OUR VOTE THAT STRUCTURE IS BROKEN. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SPECIAL APPEAL TO THE PLANT CITY RESIDENTS THAT ARE A PART OF THIS BOARD. TO BE HONEST, I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED THAT THE "NO" VOTES CAME FROM THE COUNTY RESIDENTS AND MEMBERS OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. HOW COULD THE PLANT CITY PEOPLE NOT WANT THEIR OWN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE? 55 I'M ASKING YOU TO RECONSIDER YOUR VOTE. I'M ASKING YOU TO THINK BACK OVER THE 12-MONTH PERIOD WE'VE HEARD FROM SENATOR HARGRETT TALK ABOUT THE PROBLEMS OF REPRESENTATION FOR THE BLACK COMMUNITY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN UNINCORPORATED AREA. HE TALKED ABOUT THE REGRESSION -- THE GROWTH OF THE COUNTY. WE HEARD FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION TALK ABOUT THE GROWTH. WE HEARD FROM REPRESENTATIVE BRADLEY. WE'VE HEARD DYNAMIC TESTIMONY WHY WE SHOULD MAKE THIS CHANGE. MR. BELTRAN, YOU KNOW, I WILL MAKE A SPECIAL APPEAL TO YOU ON BEHALF OF THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY. WOULDN'T YOU LIKE TO SEE A HISPANIC BE A PART OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION IN A SINGLE-MEMBER SETTING? YOU CAN HAVE THAT. THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT IS TO CREATE A SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT. DO THAT FOR YOUR PEOPLE. WE HAVE SEVEN VOTES. ALL WE NEED IS THREE. MADAM CHAIR, YOU HAVE LED THIS BOARD. 13 OF YOUR MEMBERS VOTED FOR CHANGE. YOU WERE THE ONLY DISSENTING VOTE. >>JAN SMITH: AND I'M PROUD OF THE WAY I VOTED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD CAST THAT VOTE AGAIN. >>GERALD WHITE: I'M ASKING TO YOU ACCOMMODATE THE 13 MEMBERS THAT ASK FOR CHANGE. >>JAN SMITH: IT ONLY TAKES A 10-4 VOTE. 56 MY VOTE COULD BE INSIGNIFICANT. IF YOU ARE FINISHED -- >>GERALD WHITE: I'M NOT THROUGH, MADAM CHAIR. I'M ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT 13 OF YOUR BOARD MEMBERS VOTED TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT. MS. LASHER, YOU WANT BRIGHT FUTURE IN POLITICS IN THIS COMMUNITY, THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY, HISPANIC COMMUNITY IS VERY IMPORTANT. I'M ASKING YOU TO GIVE THE MINORITY COMMUNITY A SHOT. IT'S NOT THE END -- THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GO TO THE POLLS AND VOTE. ALL I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS SHOW SOME POLITICAL LEADERSHIP BY PROVIDING THE COMMUNITY A CHANCE AT THE BALLOT. AND I WILL TELL YOU, IT WILL GO A LONG WAY FOR YOUR POLITICAL FUTURE. MR. AMBLER, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT ME TO VOTE FOR THIS CAP. THAT I DON'T TOTALLY AGREE WITH -- >>JAN SMITH: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A DEAL-MAKING SESSION HERE. >>GERALD WHITE: MADAM CHAIRMAN, I'M NOT MAKING DEALS; I'M TALKING. >>JAN SMITH: PLEASE CONFINE YOUR ISSUES TO THE ISSUES AND DON'T ADDRESS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF BOARD BECAUSE THIS THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR OPINIONS. >>GERALD WHITE: I PRAYED OVER THIS FOR WEEKS AND THESE ARE MY THOUGHTS. MR. AMBLER, I DON'T WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE BUT I AM GOING TO 57 MEET YOU HALFWAY AND VOTE FOR YOUR PROPOSAL AND I WANT YOU TO MEET ME HALFWAY AND VOTE FOR MINE. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS ASKING CITIZENS TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE. I'M ASKING YOU TO GIVE THE CITIZENS A CHANCE ON THIS 6-1 PLAN. MS. WILLIAMS, YOU'RE BRIGHT, DYNAMIC WOMAN -- >>JAN SMITH: MR. WHITE, I HAVE TO ASK YOU TO STOP SINGLING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD -- >>STEVE LaBOUR: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I BELIEVE THAT ANY MEMBER, WHETHER WE AGREE WITH -- >>JAN SMITH: BUT I THINK THAT -- >>STEVE LaBOUR: I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO -- >>JAN SMITH: NOT TO PICK ON PEOPLE. THAT'S UNFAIR WHITE WHO IT I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T MEAN TO BE PICKING ON ANYONE. I'VE LEARNED SO MUCH FROM ALL OF YOU, I REALLY HAVE. I BELIEVE I AM A BETTER MAN BECAUSE I HAVE SERVED WITH YOU ALL. I'VE LEARNED SO MUCH. AND NOW I'M JUST TRYING TO REITERATE WHAT I'VE LEARNED FROM YOU. MS. WILLIAMS, ALL I'M ASKING IS JUST TO GIVE THE PEOPLE A SHOT, GIVE THEM A CHANCE. THAT'S IT. GIVE THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY TO ELECT A REPRESENTATIVE OF THEIR CHOICE. >>JAN SMITH: WE'RE GOING TO GO AROUND THE WAY THE HANDS WERE RAISED, PLEASE. 58 >>GERALD WHITE: I'VE HEARD OVERWHELMING TESTIMONY. AND WE CANNOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE REALITY THAT 13 MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD SAID THAT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT IS BROKEN. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. JUST THIS LAST OPPORTUNITY. JUST GIVE THE VOTERS A CHANCE. >>JAN SMITH: MS. LASHER AND THEN MR. BEDKE AND THEN MR. BELTRAN. >>DENISE LASHER: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AND, MR. WHITE, YOU HAVE MADE SOME PASSIONATE PLEAS TO EVERYBODY HERE. AND I DON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY THE COMMENTS YOU'VE MADE. I DON'T THINK THEY WERE MEANT DEROGATORY, BUT I'VE STATED BEFORE WHEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HAVING MINORITY REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD THAT I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE REPRESENTATION OF OUR DIVERSE POPULATION ON THE BOARD. AND THOSE DISCUSSIONS CAME ABOUT I THINK WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT DISCUSSING EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS. BUT, AGAIN, AS I STATED BEFORE, THERE'S NEVER, NEVER A GUARANTEE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN ON THE BOARD, NOR THAT WOULD YOU HAVE A HISPANIC, NOR AN ASIAN, NOR A MALE, NOR A FEMALE, NEVER A GUARANTEE NO MATTER HOW YOU DRAW THE DISTRICTS. IT DEPENDS ON WHO RUNS FOR THOSE SEATS AND WHETHER THE PEOPLE IN THAT PARTICULAR DISTRICT WANT A PARTICULAR PERSON TO BE THEIR COMMISSIONER AND WHOEVER GETS THE MOST VOTES WINS. AND IT MAY BE MINORITY, AND IT MAY BE A MALE, IT MAY BE A 59 FEMALE, IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHO THE INDIVIDUALS ARE THAT ARE RUNNING. YOU CAN HAVE A MINORITY RUNNING IN A DISTRICT WHERE THE MINORITIES ARE TRULY IN THE MINORITY OF OUR REGISTERED VOTERS. SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE MINORITY AND THAT PERSON CAN WIN BECAUSE THAT PERSON WOULD BE THE BEST CANDIDATE OF ALL THOSE RUNNING, AS FAR AS THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS WOULD SEE. SO THERE'S NO GUARANTEE NO MATTER HOW YOU DRAW UP THE DISTRICTS. THERE'S NEVER ANY GUARANTEE. I THINK AREAS IN OUR COUNTY DO HAVE ALREADY A SINGLE-MEMBER COMMISSIONER. WHEN YOU SAY PLANT CITY, WOULDN'T YOU LOVE TO HAVE ONE. WELL, THEY HAVE A SINGLE-MEMBER COMMISSIONER, AND THAT PERSON IS RONDA STORMS. CURRENTLY THAT'S THEIR SINGLE-MEMBER COMMISSIONER IF I UNDERSTAND THE DISTRICTING CORRECTLY. I HAVE LISTENED TO THE PEOPLE, AND I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT MR. AMBLER HAS MADE THIS EVENING THAT WHAT WE'VE HEARD WAS A 7-0. AND I WAS OPPOSED TO THAT WHEN I FIRST THOUGHT ABOUT IT. I MEAN, WHEN THESE DISCUSSIONS WENT ON. AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE -- WE'RE HAVING THIS DEBATE A LITTLE TOO LATE. AND I WOULD HAVE -- I WOULD CONSIDER IT FURTHER, BUT THE RESERVATIONS I HAVE WITH GOING TO SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS ARE THAT I'M AFRAID THAT WE'LL BECOME VERY PAROCHIAL. 60 BECAUSE SO MANY OF THE SERVICES THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO DELIVER, YOU KNOW, MANY OF THEM RELATE TO NEIGHBORHOODS AND AREAS OF THE COUNTY, NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTION. WHO IS GOING TO GET THOSE DOLLARS WHEN THE COMMISSIONERS GET UP THERE TO MAKE THAT DECISION OF WHERE THAT $5 MILLION IS GOING TO BE SPENT OR THAT $20 MILLION. EACH ONE OF THEM IS GOING TO SAY, I HAVE A NEED IN MY AREA. EVEN THOUGH THEY DEPEND ON STAFF TO GIVE THEM RECOMMENDATIONS, IT'S STILL ULTIMATELY LEFT UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHERE THAT MONEY IS SPENT. AND MY FEAR IS THAT EACH COMMISSIONER WOULD WANT THOSE PARTICULAR FUNDS, WHETHER IT BE FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION, WHETHER IT BE FOR LIBRARIES, FOR SIDEWALKS, FOR NEW PARKS, FOR FIRE STATIONS, THEY ARE GOING TO WANT THOSE SERVICES AND THOSE PARTICULAR CAPITAL PROJECTS IN THEIR DISTRICT. AND THE WAY WE HAVE IT NOW, WE HAVE THREE AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS THAT REPRESENT EVERYBODY. AND SO THEY ARE NOT -- THEIR JOB IS TO LOOK AFTER THE NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COUNTY. AND THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SPOKESPEOPLE FOR THOSE INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS. AND I THINK THAT THEY ALL DO A GOOD JOB; I REALLY DO. I KNOW THAT MANY AREAS FEEL THAT THEY HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT, AND THEY'VE FELT THAT WAY FOR SOME TIME, AND THERE ARE TRULY SOME ISSUES THERE. AND I THINK THAT THE COMMISSION NEEDS TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TELLING US FOR THE LAST YEAR AND THAT 61 WE'VE BEEN HEARING NOT JUST THE LAST YEAR, BUT I'VE BEEN HEARING THESE COMMENTS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS THAT PEOPLE IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA FEEL LIKE THEIR NEEDS ARE NOT BEING MET. AND I REALLY HOPE THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION TAKES A LOOK AT THIS AND FIGURES OUT WHAT IS THE PROBLEM. AND I'M NOT SO SURE THAT GOING TO SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WILL SOLVE IT. I THINK IT CREATES SOME ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE, AND THAT IS, THE PAROCHIALISM THAT OCCURS WHEN YOU HAVE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. AND THE COMMENT WAS MADE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION DOESN'T LIKE HOW WE ELECT OUR CHAIR. WELL, THEY ELECT THEIR OWN CHAIR. THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION EVERY YEAR ELECTS THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL CHAIR. AND THAT'S HOW THEY DO IT. AND MY OTHER CONCERN WITH HAVING A CHAIR THAT'S ELECTED FOR FOUR YEARS. IT COULD BE SOMEBODY WHO HAS NEVER SERVED ON THE COUNTY COMMISSION BEFORE. WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT KIND OF JOB THEY WOULD DO. AND I PREFER THAT THE COMMISSIONERS ELECT THEIR OWN CHAIR UNLESS WE GO TO A TOTALLY DIFFERENT FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHERE YOU HAVE A MAYOR TYPE OF CHAIRMAN. THEN THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT SITUATION. BUT I WOULD -- I JUST HAVE FEARS OF HAVING AN ELECTED CHAIR 62 THAT WILL SERVE FOR FOUR YEARS. CHANCES ARE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE SERVED ON THE COMMISSION BEFORE, AND WE WOULD HAVE NO IDEA WHAT KIND OF JOB THEY WOULD DO LEADING THIS COMMISSION AS A CHAIRMAN. THOSE ARE MY RESERVATIONS. I LIKE THE IDEA. THERE IS DEFINITELY SOME ADVANTAGES THAT I WOULD SEE GOING TO SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I SEE TOO MANY DISADVANTAGES TO WHAT OUR CHOICES -- WHAT THE CHOICES HERE. AND I JUST WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU MY RESERVATIONS WITH IT. BUT I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE CITIZENS IN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND HOW THEY FEEL SERVICES AND HOW THEY ARE BEING DELIVERED AND HOW THEIR NEEDS ARE BEING MET. I LIVE IN UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND I HAVE SOME OF THOSE SAME FRUSTRATIONS, AND I THINK SERIOUS STUDY NEEDS TO BE MADE OF THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE BY THE COUNTY COMMISSION. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. BEDKE. >>MIKE BEDKE: THANK YOU. I UNFORTUNATELY DOUBT THAT MANY MINDS WILL BE CHANGED THIS EVENING, BUT I CHANGED MY MIND OVER THE COURSE OF OUR DELIBERATIONS. I CAME ON THIS BOARD SUPPORTING WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A FOUNDING PRINCIPLE OF OUR CURRENT CHARTER, AND THAT WAS THAT EACH VOTER HAD THE ABILITY TO ELECT A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD. AND I LIKED THAT FOR MANY OF THE REASONS THAT WERE STATED BY 63 YOU, DENISE. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PAROCHIALISM. UNFORTUNATELY, AND I HATE TO SAY THIS, I HAVE NOT SEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF STATESMANSHIP BY THE BOARD OVER THE YEARS. SO I'M WILLING TO GIVE UP A LITTLE BIT OF THAT POWER AS A VOTER TO GO WITH THIS PLAN. AND IT'S MAINLY BECAUSE WE HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW MUCH WE VALUE DIVERSITY IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND I THINK THIS PLAN FOSTERS DIVERSITY. THE VOTERS HAVE CRIED OUT FOR ACCOUNTABILITY. AND I THINK IT MAKES THIS -- THIS PLAN MAKES IT EASIER TO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE BY BRINGING GOVERNMENT CLOSER. EARLY IN OUR PROCEEDINGS, WE HEARD A LOT, A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. AND PEOPLE ASKED US TO TRY TO WRESTLE WITH THAT, AND WE FOUND OUT THAT CONSTITUTIONALLY, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT MOVING TOWARDS THIS PLAN WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR SOMEBODY TO LAUNCH A CAMPAIGN WITHOUT A TREMENDOUS WAR CHEST, AND I THINK WOULD GIVE US, AS VOTERS, A BETTER OR AT LEAST A GREATER CHOICE OF CANDIDATES. ANOTHER OF THE CONCERNS, AND I THINK DEE VOICED THIS VERY ELOQUENTLY EARLY ON, WAS ABOUT THE POWER AND PUTTING TOO MUCH POWER IN AN ELECTED CHAIR OR A POPULARLY ELECTED CHAIR. AND I WEIGHED THAT FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BUT I THINK THAT I'VE CONCLUDED THAT THE POWER REALLY COMES FROM THE PEOPLE. AND THIS INDIVIDUAL, A POPULARLY ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR, WOULD 64 DERIVE HIS OR HER POWER FROM BEING THE ONLY PERSON ELECTED COUNTYWIDE. I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE A PLATFORM OR AN AGENDA THAT TO SOME EXTENT WOULD BE VOTED UP OR DOWN. FINALLY, THE LAST COMMENT I'LL MAKE IS ABOUT EXPERIENCE AND BEING STUCK WITH SOMEBODY FOR FOUR YEARS THAT WE DON'T LIKE. I'VE LIVED WITH ANY NUMBER OF ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT I HAVEN'T LIKED FOR LONGER THAN FOUR YEARS. AND, DENISE, I THINK -- THERE'S A GOVERNOR THAT COMES TO MIND THAT I THINK YOU AND I BOTH LIKE WHO NEVER HELD ELECTED POSITIONS BEFORE. BUT I THINK HE'S DOING A PRETTY GOOD JOB. AND I DON'T WANT TO FALL INTO THAT TRAP, BECAUSE I THINK ON THE ONE HAND, WE CAN'T SAY WE WANT TO REFORM AND WANT TERM LIMITS AND SICK AND TIRED OF THE SAME OLD PEOPLE AND SICK AND TIRED OF THEM PASSING AROUND THAT CHAIR POSITION THAT CONVENIENTLY GENERALLY THEY GET WHEN THEY'RE UP FOR THEIR TERM, AND THEN ARGUE WE WANT THIS EXPERIENCED BODY. SO, WHILE I DOUBT ANY MINDS WILL BE CHANGED THIS EVENING, I HOPE A COUPLE ARE. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. BEDKE. MR. BELTRAN. >>HENRY BELTRAN: I CONCUR WITH MR. AMBLER, BECAUSE EVERYBODY THAT HAS COME OVER HERE TO SPEAK TO US AND TO THE COMMUNITY HAVE ASKED REPRESENTATION. AND WHAT A BETTER WAY OF DOING IT THAN HAVING SEVEN 65 SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. SO THAT EACH ONE WILL HAVE RESIDENCE IN THE AREA, SO EACH ONE HAS THEIR OWN REPRESENTATION HERE. AND BY DOING THIS, THAT COMPLAINT WILL END BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO REPRESENTATION IN THAT AREA. THIS WAY, THEY SHOULD HAVE IT. AND I FEEL THAT THE ELECTED CHAIR SHOULD BE ELECTED WITHIN THE GROUP OF THE SEVEN COMMISSIONERS SO THAT THEY CAN CHANGE IT, THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT THAT WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO OUR COUNTY. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. BELTRAN. MR. HURLEY. >>DAVID HURLEY: THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT ONE OF THE CO-FOUNDERS OF F.A.I.R. IS SITTING OUT HERE AND HE SAID THAT THE 6-1 ALTERNATIVE WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO GIVE A BIT OF A GO TO SEE IF THAT WOULD WORK. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT COMMISSIONER STORMS, ALTHOUGH SHE DOES REPRESENT PLANT CITY, AND SHE'S DOING A GOOD JOB OF IT, HAS ABOUT 400 SQUARE MILES, ABOUT THE THIRD OF THE SIZE OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE FOR HER DISTRICT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU ARE REAL FAMILIAR WITH THAT PART OF THE COUNTY, IN MY BUSINESS, I AM. I HAVE DRIVEN TO FORT LONESOME AND BEYOND. AND IT'S APTLY NAMED. SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO -- ANYBODY WHO LIVES IN FORT LONESOME, 66 I'M NOT TRYING TO SLAM YOU. IT IS A LONG WAY OUT THERE. BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY, BUT A LONG WAY OUT THERE. IF YOU COME THROUGH THE EAST SIDE OF THE COUNTY THROUGH KEYSVILLE THROUGH PLANT CITY, YOU CAN BE DRIVING FOR QUITE A WHILE AND DRIVE ON SOME OF THOSE ROADS FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND NOT SEE ANYBODY, BUT IT IS A BIG DISTRICT AND ALTHOUGH I THINK SHE'S DOING A GOOD JOB, I THINK SHE HAS A VERY VARIED DISTRICT. IT IS VERY DIFFERENT. THE LEGISLATURE MAY ELECT THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE. IT DOES NOT ELECT THE GOVERNOR. AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO KEEP IN MIND, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT MAKING A STRONG EXECUTIVE HERE, WE ARE SETTING UP A DIFFERENT SPOT. AND MIKE ALREADY GOT AHEAD OF ME ABOUT HAVING A GOVERNOR THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ELECTED TO OFFICE BEFORE. I WAS ALSO ACTIVE IN SOUTH COUNTY. I LIVED IN THAT DISTRICT FOR WHEN THE SECESSION MOVEMENT CAME UP A FEW YEARS AGO, AND I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT YEAR IT WAS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU I WENT TO SOME MEETINGS THAT WERE HELD -- ONE OF THEM WAS AT THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH IN GIBSONTON, AND I THOUGHT, BOY, THIS IS IN A CHURCH. AND THERE WERE SOME HOT PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE GETTING THEIR REPRESENTATION. A COUPLE OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THERE THAT I HAD TO SAY I 67 ADMIRED THEM BECAUSE THEY HAD THE COURAGE TO GO IN THERE AND TALK TO THOSE PEOPLE. I THINK THERE WAS ONE EITHER AT EAST BAY OR ONE OF THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS, ONE DOWN IN THAT AREA AS WELL. AND THAT AREA OF THE COUNTY IS VERY HOT TO SEE SOME CHANGE. AND I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF WE DON'T BRING IT OUT -- AND I -- UNFORTUNATELY, I'M PROBABLY LIKE MIKE, I DON'T SEE A LOT OF CHANGES TO SEE THREE PEOPLE CHANGE THEIR MIND, THAT WE WOULDN'T SEE THOSE PEOPLE PUSHING REAL HARD ON A REFERENDUM ON A -- TO GET THE PEOPLE MOVING BEHIND IT. AND I GUARANTEE, IF YOU GET THE PEOPLE MOVING BEHIND IT, IT WILL CHANGE. AND SO -- AND I THINK IT WILL BE EASIER TO GET NEW PEOPLE INTO GOVERNMENT WITH A SMALLER DISTRICT. I DON'T THINK THAT THE SIX DISTRICTS IS REAL SMALL. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO GONE TO EIGHT SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT AND ONE ELECTED CHAIR. WITH THE SIX SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS MAKE IT A WHOLE LOT EASIER FOR SOMEBODY TO SAY, YEAH, I CAN KNOCK ON THAT MANY DOORS. IT IS INCLUSIVE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REPRESENTATION. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD GIVE THIS A CHANCE. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. HURLEY. MR. BALLARD AND MS. WALDRON. >>TERRY BALLARD: MR. AMBLER, I RECKON, SAID IT THE BEST OF MY VIEWS. 68 I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE 7-0; HOWEVER, THAT -- THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MAY WANT TO ADDRESS IT, BUT I DON'T THINK -- WE DIDN'T HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON IT, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO WITH IT. I'VE HEARD THE MOST ABOUT NOT HAVING AN ELECTED CHAIR. SO THE ONE THAT I DID VOTE FOR, AND YOU'RE RIGHT, I DID VOTE FOR ONE OF THEM WAS NUMBER 1-A, AND THAT WAS THE REASON OF IT, IS TO SPREAD THE AT-LARGE AROUND IN THE COUNTY. SO THAT ONE FAILED, AND SO THIS -- AND WHAT I'VE HEARD MOSTLY IN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HAVE THE SEVEN-MEMBER DISTRICTS. AND IT'S A DRASTIC CHANGE. I LIKE THE WAY IT IS NOW, BUT IT IS ANOTHER ONE THAT THE VOTERS COULD LOOK AT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MS. WALDRON. [ INAUDIBLE ] >>KEVIN AMBLER: SHE'S GOING TO LET ME GO FIRST. >>JAN SMITH: TWO PAGES. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I WILL. WELL, FIRST, I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE SEVEN-MEMBER DISTRICTS AS OPPOSED TO THE ELECTED CHAIR ISSUE. YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING UNDER THAT OPTION, AND I'M SURPRISED IT ULTIMATELY DID NOT GET ON OUR FINAL SHEET, BECAUSE THAT OPTION CREATES SELF-IMPOSED TERM LIMITS. WITH SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, YOU CAN'T RUN FOR AN AT-LARGE. 69 ONCE YOU REACHED YOUR TERM LIMIT, YOU'RE DONE. THIS PLAN DOESN'T SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. THE PLAN OF 6-1. ALL RIGHT. WHAT IT WILL ALLOW IS A SCENARIO WHERE SOMEONE RUNS FOR A SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT, SERVES OUT THEIR EIGHT-YEAR TERM AND RUN OSEN A PLATFORM I'M AN EXPERIENCED SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND NOW WANTS TO RUN FOR COUNTY CHAIR AND SERVES ANOTHER EIGHT YEARS AND IS IN FOR 16. YOU CAN DO THAT NOW BUT WHAT I AM SUGGESTING IF WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM WITH GREATER REPRESENTATION AND I KNOW THAT F.A.I.R. ALSO SUPPORTS TERM LIMITS, THEN ONLY A SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT FORMAT WITHIN THE NUMBER OF SEATS THAT WE PRESENTLY HAVE WOULD ACCOMPLISH THAT. BUT THAT ISN'T ON THE TABLE. AND I WASN'T PART OF THAT COMMITTEE THAT ENDED UP PUTTING THE OPTIONS. I DID VOTE FOR ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS ON THE TABLE. I DIDN'T VOTE TO LEAVE STATUS QUO. ALL RIGHT. SO I WANT TO COME BACK TO GERALD'S COMMENTS. FIRST, 13 OF US DID MAKE A VOTE, BUT IT WASN'T THE VOTE THAT YOU REPRESENTED IT TO BE. WE DIDN'T SAY IT WAS BROKEN. WHAT WE SAID WAS, 13 OF US SAID WE WOULD BE OPEN-MINDED TO EXAMINING THE OPTIONS FOR A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE. AND IT WAS REFERRED TO A COMMITTEE. 70 AND I REMAINED OPEN-MINDED THROUGHOUT THAT ENTIRE PROCESS TO LISTEN TO THAT, AND I WANTED TO GO TO PUBLIC HEARING AND HEAR WHAT THE OUTCRY WAS. AND I THINK AS I SPOKE IN MY LAST COMMENTS, I THINK THE OUTCRY WAS FOR THE 7-0, NOT FOR THE 6-1. SO WE ARE TRYING TO SUGGEST HERE THAT IS THE BEST OF THE ALTERNATIVES WE HAVE LEFT. BUT LET ME SUGGEST TO YOU, I VOTED FOR OPTION 1-A. I VOTED FOR THAT BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT ACCOMPLISHED TWO THINGS. OPTION 1-A WAS TO CREATE THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR THE THREE AT-LARGE. NOW, THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD THAT ARGUED THAT BY DOING THAT, YOU'RE CREATING ESSENTIALLY OTHER SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. WELL, I SUGGEST -- SUBMIT TO THOSE OF YOU THAT VOTED THAT WAY THAT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE REASON -- AND THAT ARE SUPPORTING OPTION 1-C, THAT WAS A REASON TO SUPPORT OPTION 1-A. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU FEEL IN YOUR MIND. NOW I DON'T HAPPEN TO FEEL THAT RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS DOES CREATE A NEW SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT. WHAT I HAD SUGGESTED IN MY SUPPORT OF OPTION 1-A WAS BY IMPOSING A RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR YOUR AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS, YOU SPREAD OUT THE DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF YOUR COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A FACT OF LIFE THAT YOU KNOW BEST WHAT IS AROUND YOU. AND SO, IF YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU HAVE LIVED IN FOR 71 MANY, MANY YEARS IN ONE PART OF THE COUNTY, YOU ARE GOING TO KNOW THAT PART OF THE COUNTY BETTER THAN THE OTHERS. NOW YOU REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COUNTY, BUT IT'S JUST A FACT OF LIFE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO KNOW YOUR PART OF THE COUNTY BETTER AND THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS WAS TO SPREAD OUT THAT GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF YOUR COMMISSIONERS. SO THAT -- SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A GREATER SENSITIVITY AMONG YOUR AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS, NOT THAT THEY WERE REPRESENTING ONE PERSON LESS. THEY STILL REPRESENTED EVERY SINGLE VOTER IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, BUT YOU WERE BRINGING TO THE TABLE THAT INSIGHT THAT YOU GET FROM DEMOGRAPHICALLY BEING LOCATED GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCATED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTY. THAT'S WHY I SUPPORTED THAT AS A CHANGE. THAT WAS A CHANGE. WE DON'T HAVE THAT NOW. ALL RIGHT. NOW, MINORITY REPRESENTATION WAS ONE OF YOUR PITCHES, GERALD, AND I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THIS. AT PRESENT, EVERY VOTER IN THIS COUNTY, INCLUDING MINORITIES HAVE A SAY-SO IN VOTING FOR A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION. YOU GIVE UP THAT RIGHT WHEN VOTING FOR THIS 6-1 PLAN. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A CONSTRUCTIVE CHANGE IN OUR GOVERNMENT. FINALLY, I'LL JUST MAKE THIS COMMENT. I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT OR APPROPRIATE THAT ANY OF US TRADE 72 VOTES OF ONE MEASURE FOR ANOTHER AS A COMPROMISE TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. I THINK YOU NEED TO VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT. IF YOU THINK THAT MY BUDGET LIMITATION IS WRONG, THEN VOTE THAT WAY. I'M NOT GOING TO -- I'M NOT GOING TO PERSUADE YOU OTHERWISE, BUT YOU VOTE BECAUSE YOU HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS, YOU'VE HEARD THE PEOPLE SPEAK, AND YOU ARE VOTING YOUR CONSCIOUS. YOU ARE VOTING FOR TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. NOT BECAUSE YOU HAVE BARGAINED AWAY FOR A DIFFERENT MEASURE. I APPRECIATE THE PLEA FOR US -- EACH ONE OF US THAT HAD VOTED AGAINST MEASURE 1-C TO CHANGE OUR MINDS -- >>GERALD WHITE: JUST ASKED YOU TO MEET ME HALFWAY, THAT'S ALL. >>KEVIN AMBLER: I UNDERSTOOD THAT. I RATHER YOU VOTE FOR EACH MEASURE ON ITS OWN MERIT. IF YOU DON'T THINK MY MEASURE HAS MERIT, THEN DON'T VOTE FOR IT. AFTER YOU HEAR MY ARGUMENTS TONIGHT, AND THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION. I ASK YOU TO AT LEAST STAY OPEN-MINDED LIKE I DID ON THIS TO HEAR THE FINAL ARGUMENTS ON THAT BEFORE YOU CAST YOUR VOTE. [ LAUGHTER ] >>JAN SMITH: MS. WALDRON AND THEN MR. LaBOUR. >>ARLENE WALDRON: BEFORE SOMEONE CALLS THE QUESTION, AND I 73 BET AT 8:00, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION, I'D LIKE TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION THAT I LEARNED TODAY AND PERHAPS MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS ALREADY KNOW THIS, BUT WHEN THE -- WHEN THE CENSUS IS COMPLETED, IT APPEARS THAT THERE WILL BE SOME ADDITIONAL HOUSE DISTRICTS ADDED. AND THEY ARE ESTIMATING THAT THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS WILL BE REPRESENTING ABOUT 600,000 RESIDENTS. THE SENATE DISTRICTS WILL BE REPRESENTING APPROXIMATELY 400,000, AND THE NEW HOUSE DISTRICTS WILL BE REPRESENTING 133,000. WITH OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE, A SINGLE DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS IS CURRENTLY -- WILL BE REPRESENTING APPROXIMATELY 250,000 RESIDENTS, AND OUR AT-LARGE DISTRICT -- COMMISSIONERS ARE REPRESENTING A MILLION PEOPLE. SO IF YOU JUST KIND OF KEEP THOSE NUMBERS IN MIND IN COMPARISON, YOU KNOW, IT JUST MIGHT ADD SOME VALUE OF INCREASING THE SINGLE DISTRICTS. IN CONCLUSION, WE ALL HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE. WE ALL HAVE OUR CITIZEN VOTE THAT WE COULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CAST, BUT RIGHT NOW, WE JUST ARE ASKING TO LET THE CITIZENS CAST THEIR VOTE, TO JUST GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY. IT WILL BE TWO YEARS OF DEBATE, EDUCATION, YOU KNOW, AND IF NOTHING ELSE, THAT'S A PLUS RIGHT THERE THAT THE PEOPLE ARE GETTING INVOLVED. AND JUST LET THE CITIZENS HAVE THEIR FINAL VOTE. THANK YOU. 74 >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR AND THEN MS. TUTTLE. >>STEVE LaBOUR: THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MS. WALDRON. YOU TOOK A COUPLE OF THE COMMENTS I WAS GOING TO MAKE. BUT I ALSO WANT TO TAKE THE TIME TO APOLOGIZE TO F.A.I.R. AND I ALSO WANT TO CORRECT THE RECORD. WHILE IT APPEARS THAT NOW WE HAVE TEN VOTES FOR SEVEN SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT WHICH IS WHAT A SHOCK AND SURPRISE BECAUSE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE OPTIONS, IF YOU'LL RECALL, I AT THE LAST MINUTE THREW IN 1-C, AND IT WAS NOT POPULAR. BUT I GOT AT LEAST THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD TO SAY, ALL RIGHT, WE'LL THROW IT IN THE MIX TO TAKE A LOOK. THERE WAS NO ONE ON THIS BOARD WHO IS NOW -- WHO SEEMS TO BE SO FUNDAMENTALLY SUPPORTIVE OF 7-0, BUT GOSH DARN IT, I JUST DON'T LIKE THAT CHAIRMAN THAT NOW THEY JUST CAN'T VOTE FOR 6-1. I THINK IT IS DISINGENUOUS AND ALMOST DISHONEST. AND SO WITH F.A.I.R., I SAY I APOLOGIZE. THIS IS GOING TO GO DOWN AGAIN TONIGHT. BUT I WANT TO BE THE FIRST ONE TO SIGN YOUR PETITION AS YOU START A CITIZENS PETITION TO GET THIS ON THE BALLOT. AND I WILL EVEN SIGN IT AT 7-0, EVEN THOUGH I TECHNICALLY DON'T SUPPORT IT. I KNOW TONIGHT, NOW, HOW EACH OF US WILL VOTE WHEN THAT COMES TO WHATEVER REFERENDUM. IT'S TOO BAD YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LET YOUR NEIGHBORS TAKE A VOTE BECAUSE YOU COULD DO THAT TONIGHT. AND THEN WE ALL COULD HAVE A REALLY NICE DEBATE FOR THE NEXT 75 TWO YEARS. AND I'M SORRY THAT WE CAN'T GET THREE PEOPLE TO ALLOW THE VOTERS TO DO THAT. >>JAN SMITH: MS. TUTTLE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. TINKLER. I KNOW YOU JUST ARE DYING FOR THIS QUESTION BECAUSE WE'VE ALL BEEN SITTING HERE SAYING THINGS ABOUT IT. CAN WE AMEND OUR MOTION FOR 7-0 INSTEAD OF 6-1, PARTICULARLY BASED ON THE PUBLIC THAT CAME BEFORE US ON TWO OCCASIONS SAYING THEY DON'T LIKE PARTICULARLY -- THEY ARE SCARED OF A COUNTY MAYOR AND THEY WOULD LIKE A 7-0. IS THERE -- I KNOW, IT'S NOT A COUNTY MAYOR, BUT THIS IS THEIR CONCERN. CAN WE AMEND THAT AND VOTE ON IT TONIGHT? OR ARE WE ABSOLUTELY THROUGH? I JUST WANT TO MAKE REAL SURE I HAVE A LEGAL ANSWER. >>KENNETH TINKLER: AGAIN, KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. WHEN THE BOARD TOOK THE ACTION TO TAKE THE STRUCTURE ISSUES TO PUBLIC HEARING. IT TOOK THREE SPECIFIC FORMS OF STRUCTURE TO PUBLIC HEARING. THERE IS NOT TIME TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TO ADVERTISE A NEW FORM OF STRUCTURE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: THANK YOU. >>KENNETH TINKLER: YOU'RE WELCOME. >>JAN SMITH: MR. -- >>ARLENE WALDRON: I HAVE A QUESTION. 76 IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY ANYWAY TO HAVE TWO ISSUES, THE SINGLE DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY-ELECTED CHAIR SEPARATE? >>KENNETH TINKLER: AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE THAN WHAT YOU ADVERTISED TO PUBLIC HEARING. >>ARLENE WALDRON: EVEN THOUGH WE INCLUDED THOSE TWO ISSUES BUT WE'RE SEPARATING THEM SOMEHOW? THAT WOULDN'T WORK? >>KENNETH TINKLER: FOR THE 6-1, NO WAY OF SEPARATING THAT ADDITIONAL ONE COMMISSIONER WITHOUT MAKING THEM REPRESENT THE SAME DISTRICT AS ONE OF THE OTHER SIX. IT WOULD STILL BE A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO WHAT YOU HAVE ADVERTISED. >>JAN SMITH: MR. -- MS. TUTTLE AND THEN MR. WHITE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: MS. TUTTLE IS THROUGH. >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY TOO. BECAUSE APPARENTLY WE HAVE THE VOTE -- WE HAVE TEN VOTES FOR SEVEN DISTRICTS, SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. NOW WE HAVE THE 6-1 PLAN, BUT WE CAN MAKE -- WE CAN TINKER WITH THE 6-1 PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT? >>KENNETH TINKLER: THE LANGUAGE CAN BE AMENDED TO REFLECT MINOR CHANGES. NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL THAT WAS -- THAT WOULD COUNTER WHAT WAS ADVERTISED FOR PUBLIC HEARING. YOU STILL WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE PROPOSAL FIT UNDER THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT YOU HAD THE LAST FEW WEEKS. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, TO GAIN A COMPROMISE TO GET THOSE THREE VOTES, I WOULD ASK THAT THE SEVEN PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR THE 77 6-1 DROP THE POWERS OF THAT AT-LARGE SEAT AND JUST ALLOW THAT AT-LARGE SEAT TO BE AT-LARGE. AND I WOULD LIKE -- I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DO THAT. >>KENNETH TINKLER: IF I COULD COMMENT BEFORE YOU DO THAT. I BELIEVE THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THIS INCLUDED SIX -- I WILL VERIFY IT WHEN I LOOK AT THE ADVERTISEMENT, BUT I BELIEVE THE ADVERTISEMENT SAID 6-1 WITH THE ONE BEING THE COUNTY CHAIR. THAT IS WHAT YOU ADVERTISED. THAT IS WHAT YOU TOOK TO PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU CHANGE SOMETHING THAT WAS A SPECIFICALLY IN THE ANNOUNCEMENT, IT WOULD NOT HAVE HAD THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS. >>GERALD WHITE: YOU'RE SAYING WE -- WE CAN MAKE A CHANGE, BUT -- WHO IS THE DETERMINING FACTOR THAT THE CHANGE, IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE? >>KENNETH TINKLER: THE FIRST THING TO LOOK AT IS WHAT EXACTLY YOU ADVERTISED. ANYTHING THAT COUNTERS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ADVERTISED IS A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE. >>GERALD WHITE: SO IF WE -- YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE CAN'T TAKE THE TITLE "CHAIR" AND JUST ALLOW THIS AT-LARGE SEAT TO BE LIKE WE HAVE NOW, AN AT-LARGE SEAT. WE CAN'T DO THAT. >>KENNETH TINKLER: YOU HAVE ADVERTISED A CHAIR. IF THE -- THE MOTION YOU VOTE ON DOES NOT INCLUDE A "CHAIR" IT IS NOT WHAT YOU ADVERTISED AND CONDUCTED TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON. >>GERALD WHITE: IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHANGE, WHAT 78 WOULD HAPPEN? >>KENNETH TINKLER: IF YOU MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT HAVING TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS? >>GERALD WHITE: WITH SIX SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND A COUNTY COMMISSIONER ELECTED AT-LARGE. >>KENNETH TINKLER: OBVIOUSLY IF WE PROCEED FORWARD -- FORWARD AND NOT FOLLOWING SECTION 8.02 OF THE CHARTER, IT IS SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE. >>GERALD WHITE: BY WHOM? >>KENNETH TINKLER: BY ANYONE WHO WISHES TO. >>GERALD WHITE: THEY WILL HAVE TO PREVAIL. >>KENNETH TINKLER: OBVIOUSLY WE WILL NOT RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD NOT FOLLOW WHAT THE SECTION -- THE SECTION THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD COMES FROM, WHICH IS 8.02. >>GERALD WHITE: I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. >>JAN SMITH: I'M GOING TO SAY JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS SINCE I'VE PROBABLY SAID IT BEFORE. BUT I BELIEVE IT IS EACH INDIVIDUAL'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STUDY GOVERNMENT, TO STUDY EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN OUR CHARTER AND TO REACH YOUR CONCLUSIONS BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD HERE, AND WHAT YOU REALLY AND TRULY BELIEVE IS BEST FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AND I DON'T THINK, MY OPINION, I DON'T HAVE TO VOTE TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY THINKS THAT I SHOULD ALLOW SOMEONE ELSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON IT. AND THE REASON I FEEL THAT IS BECAUSE IF I'M THE ONE OF -- ONE OF 14 WHO WAS ASKED TO DO THIS, TO REALLY STUDY IT, TO GO 79 THROUGH THIS DEBATE AND DISCUSSION AND COME UP WITH A POSITION, I THINK TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING THAT I DON'T BELIEVE SOLVES A PROBLEM OR FIXES SOMETHING OR MAKES SOMETHING BETTER SENDS THE WRONG MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAY SAY, WELL, LOOK HOW JAN VOTED. SHE VOTED FOR IT, SO IT MUST BE OKAY. OR, SHE VOTED AGAINST IT. MAYBE THAT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND THEY MAY TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH MY POSITION ALL THE WAY AROUND. BUT I -- I DO BELIEVE THAT THE TWO STRUCTURES OF GOVERNMENT THAT ARE THE MOST CLEARLY DEFINED THAT HAVE THE SEPARATION OF POWER THAT WILL ALLOW GOVERNMENT TO FUNCTION BEST IN A COUNTY THAT HAS DIFFICULTIES FUNCTIONING SOMETIMES. JUST BECAUSE THE BOARD EXTENDS DEBATES, SOMETIMES SEEMS TO LANGUISH IN THE MINUTIA, BUT THAT'S REALLY WHAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS ALL ABOUT, IT ALLOWS EVERYBODY TO PARTICIPATE. AND IT ALLOWS THE OPINIONS TO BE EXPRESSED SO THAT THEY ULTIMATELY CAN REACH PERHAPS THE BEST DECISION THAT THEY COULD MAKE. AND IN MY OPINION, THE TWO STRUCTURES OF GOVERNMENT THAT COULD BEST SUIT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ARE THE STRUCTURES WE HAVE NOW, OR THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE AND SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. BUT WE ARE NOT DISCUSSING THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE AND THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT. DOESN'T MEAN I THINK IT IS THE BEST STRUCTURE, BUT I THINK IT IS CLEAR, NOT MUDDIED, DEFINED STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT THAT 80 COULD SERVE THIS COUNTY. I HAVE GREAT CONCERN WE CAN GET INTO THE MIDDLE OF SOMETHING HERE THINKING THAT PERHAPS IT IS A FIRST STEP TO SOMETHING ELSE. BUT WE'VE SEEN HOW HARD IT IS TO GET TEN VOTES TO PASS SOMETHING. AND SO I WOULD HATE FOR US TO TAKE A STEP THAT COULD LEAVE THIS COUNTY FLOUNDERING FOR YEARS AND YEARS BEFORE WE COULD FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS, IN MY OPINION, UNCLEAR STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT. SO I HAVE NOT CHANGED MY MIND. I STILL BELIEVE, AND I TOLD YOU AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT I WISHED WE HAD HAD A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE AND THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. WE DID NOT HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. I BELIEVE THAT'S A CLEAR STRUCTURE. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS ONE IS, AND I WON'T SUPPORT IT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THIS BOARD IF YOU'RE PREPARED TO VOTE ON THIS AT THIS TIME. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RENEW OUR POSITION FROM THE LAST MEETING RECORDING THE STRUCTURE, SPECIFICALLY 1-C. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: MADAM CHAIR, EXACTLY WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >>DENISE LASHER: IF YOU VOTE FOR IT, YOU ARE SUPPORTING IT. >>JAN SMITH: IF YOU VOTE FOR IT, THEN YOU WANT TO HAVE THE SIX SINGLE MEMBERS AND THE ELECTED CHAIR. WOULD YOU DO ROLL CALL, PLEASE. 81 >>KEVIN AMBLER: NO. >>JOHN BALES: YES. >>TERRY BALLARD: NO. >>MIKE BEDKE: YES. >>HENRY BELTRAN: NO. >>DAVID HURLEY: YES. >>STEVE LaBOUR: PROUDLY YES. >>DENISE LASHER: NO. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: YES. >>ARLENE WALDRON: YES. >>GERALD WHITE: YES. >>DANNY WILKES: NO. >>DEE WILLIAMS: NO. >>JAN SMITH: NO. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION FAILS 7-7. >>JAN SMITH: OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK FOR A FEW MINUTES? OKAY. THIS BOARD IS IN RECESS UNTIL 27 AFTER. [ RECESS TAKEN ] >>JAN SMITH: WE HAVE JUST A COUPLE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO CLEAR UP HERE BEFORE WE GET INTO WHAT WE KNOW WILL BE THE NEXT DEBATE. WE HAVE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 25th THAT WERE SENT OUT IN YOUR 82 PACKET, I BELIEVE. >>GERALD WHITE: MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE. >>DAVID HURLEY: SECOND. >>JAN SMITH: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 25th. ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. AND THEN REMEMBER, PLEASE, TO READ THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1st AND THE 8th, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS FOR ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS, PLEASE NOTIFY MS. MERRITT, AND WE WILL GIVE EVERYONE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THEM BEFORE I SIGN THEM AS BEING ACCEPTED. I DID WANT TO THANK A COUPLE MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY STAFF THAT WORKED WITH ONE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES, PARTICULARLY ERIC JOHNSON, FOR HIS WORK WITH THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING CAP. I KNOW THAT HE SPENT EXTRA TIME WITH YOU-ALL ON THAT AND HAS ATTENDED OUR BOARD MEETINGS, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK HIM FOR COMING AND HELPING US. NOW, WE HAVE A FEW ISSUES TO -- I THINK WE'LL BEGIN THIS NEXT PART OF THE MEETING WITH SOME COMMENTS FROM OUR ATTORNEY. WE HAVE SOME CLEANUP ITEMS AND THEN THE ISSUE OF THE OPINION. MS. CAMPBELL. >>MARY HELEN CAMPBELL: FOR THE RECORD, MARY HELEN CAMPBELL. GOOD EVENING, BOARD. I HAD MENTIONED -- I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A FEW BRIEF INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS ABOUT PRECLEARANCE AND SOME OF THE 83 OTHER STEPS THAT OUR OFFICE WILL BE TAKING WITH THE PROPOSALS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT. I KNOW I WALKED YOU KIND OF THROUGH THE PRECLEARANCE REQUEST. BASICALLY THERE'S A SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT HAS A RESOLUTION. WE HAVE THE -- THE NOTICES THAT WERE PLACED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND SOME THINGS OF THAT NATURE. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PRECLEARS THINGS ON TWO LEVELS. ONE IS PROCEDURAL. WE WILL BE PRECLEARING THE FACT THAT THIS WILL BE ON A GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT. BECAUSE IT'S ON AN OTHERWISE REGULARLY HELD ELECTION, THAT WON'T BE AN ISSUE. AND THEY ALSO LOOK AT CHANGES AFFECTING VOTING. WE WILL GET PRECLEARANCE ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDITOR, BUT SINCE THE AUDITOR IS AN APPOINTED POSITION, I DON'T FATHOM THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT. THEIR GENERAL TIME FRAME IS 60 DAYS. WE WILL GET THE SUBMITTAL TOGETHER WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO, AND WE'LL SEND OUT A COPY OF IT -- IT WON'T BE A REAL LONG DOCUMENT -- TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. THE OTHER THING WE NEED TO DO PROCEDURALLY IS BEFORE THE 2002 -- IN NOVEMBER WHEN IT WILL APPEAR ON THE BALLOT, THERE ARE SOME NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED. ONE'S FIVE WEEKS BEFORE, AND ONE'S THREE WEEKS BEFORE. MY OFFICE WILL MAKE SURE THAT OCCURS. AND ALSO WE WILL BE SENDING THE FORMAL RESOLUTION THAT IS ADOPTED AND EXECUTED BY THE CHAIR TO PAM IORIO SO THAT SHE CAN 84 GET THE BALLOTS MADE. I JUST WANTED THE BOARD TO BE AWARE OF THESE OTHER STEPS THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN, AND WE WILL BE HAPPY TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THAT GETS DONE FOR YOU. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. I DID HAVE -- I HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK AND EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT WE HAD HAD THE PUBLIC COMMENT EARLIER, AND I BELIEVE THEY HAVE GONE, BUT WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT YET AT THE END OF THE MEETING. WOULD THERE BE ANY REASON YOU-ALL WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE THAT HAD SIGNED IN BEFORE WE GET BACK INTO DISCUSSION MODE? OKAY. >>DAVID HURLEY: I THINK IF THEY'RE GOING TO SPEAK TO THE ONLY THING WE HAVE LEFT TO VOTE ON, I THINK IT WOULD BE FINE, BUT IF THEY ARE GOING TO SPEAK TO SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY GONE, I REALLY -- >>JAN SMITH: THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE LEFT TO DECIDE IS THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING CAP. OTHER THAN THAT, THEY CAN COME BEFORE US AT THE END OF THE MEETING AND SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT HAS NOT SPOKE TON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING CAP, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO HEAR FROM YOU NOW. I HAD GORDON COMME SIGN IN, ADAM SMITH, AND RON WEAVER. 85 >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. ADAM SMITH WITH THE GREATER TAMPA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO EVERYONE'S PRAISE FOR YOUR WORK THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. AND I ALSO WANT TO ADD ONE THANK YOU TO THE LIST THAT'S BEEN ADDED TONIGHT. RICK ECKERD FROM HOLLAND & KNIGHT HAS BEEN OUR CHAIR OF THE CHAMBER'S CHARTER REVIEW TASK FORCE WHO HAS BEEN MONITORING AND REPORTING AND REPRESENTING THE CHAMBER ON A -- WHAT WE FEEL VERY ADMIRABLE BASIS. AND I JUST WANT TO, IN THE RECORD, HAVE -- TO THANK HIM FOR ALL HIS WORK. UNFORTUNATELY, HE COULDN'T BE HERE ON THE LAST NIGHT, AND IT WAS KIND OF BITTERSWEET AFTER BEEN HERE SO LONG, AS YOU ALL. ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER, WE REALLY WANT TO YOU CONSIDER THE TRUE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF A CAP ON THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT IN THEIR SPENDING OR REVENUE GENERATING. THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN THOUGHT THROUGH, WHETHER THAT MEANS FEDERAL GRANTS ARE INCLUDED, STATE MATCHING GRANTS INCLUDED IN THAT, HOW WOULD ANY SEED MONEY BE USED. THERE ARE TOO MANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN A CAP OF THIS NATURE THAT HAVE TO BE THOUGHT OUT, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE'VE HAD THE CHANCE TO DO THAT, SO ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER, WE DO OPPOSE THAT -- THAT PROCESS IN THE COUNTY CHARTER. THANK YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO HELP. 86 >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU, AND WE DO APPRECIATE THE CHAMBER'S PARTICIPATION. MR. ECKERD HAS BEEN AT MOST OF OUR MEETINGS, AND HE DID SPEAK TO US ON MANY OCCASIONS, SO WE THANK HIM TOO. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. OKAY. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY MORE DETAILS TO WORK OUT HERE, SO LET'S GET ON TO THE DISCUSSION. >> [ INAUDIBLE ] . >>JAN SMITH: YES, YOU MAY. MR. TINKLER -- WAIT JUST A MOMENT. IS IT TO THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING CAP? SO MR. TINKLER, I THINK WE'LL LET YOU FIELD THIS ONE. >>ARLENE WALDRON: JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, WE HAVE THE SIGNED LETTER FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. >>KEN TINKLER: THAT'S CORRECT. >>ARLENE WALDRON: WHICH INDICATES THE COUNTY MAY NOT AMEND ITS CHARTER TO PLACE A CAP ON THE COUNTY ANNUAL INCREASE -- CAP ON THE COUNTY'S BUDGET. >>KEN TINKLER: WE CERTAINLY RECOMMEND THE BOARD FOLLOW THE OPINION REQUESTED. >>ARLENE WALDRON: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. MR. AMBLER. 87 >>KEVIN AMBLER: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I GUESS I SHOULD SAY, MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THIS -- THIS IS WHAT WE DO IN COURT. THE ISSUE OF THE SPENDING LIMITATION -- AND I AM GOING TO REFER TO IT THROUGHOUT AS A SPENDING LIMITATION BECAUSE THAT MOST ACCURATELY CHARACTERIZES WHAT IT IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT -- IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON THE TABLE FOR OUR DISCUSSION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO LEAD THAT DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR PURPOSES OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE IF I STARTED THAT DISCUSSION BY A MOTION, MADAM CHAIR, AND THE MOTION WOULD READ THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD PROPOSE TO THE ELECTORATE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BY MEANS OF A REFERENDUM THE QUESTION OF AMENDING THE HOME RULE CHARTER FOR THE GOVERNANCE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BY PROVIDING A LIMITATION ON THE INCREASE IN THE CHARTER GOVERNMENT OPERATING BUDGET OF THE ANNUAL INFLATION RATE PERCENTAGE ADDED TO THE ANNUAL POPULATION GROWTH RATE PERCENTAGE, PROVIDING FOR THE ABILITY OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EXCEED THIS LIMIT BY AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF FIVE COMMISSIONERS AND PROVIDING A DEFINITION SECTION AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROPOSED DRAFT THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN OUR PACKET OF RESOLUTIONS. >>JAN SMITH: THAT IS IN THE FORM OF A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? >>DEE WILLIAMS: I'LL SECOND IT. >>JAN SMITH: SECOND BY MS. WILLIAMS. OKAY. 88 IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAD THE DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD. BEFORE GETTING INTO THE LEGALITIES OF THIS -- AND I CAME TONIGHT, AND I ASSUME YOU ALL ARE GOING TO BE VOTING YOUR CONSCIENCE. I WANTED IT TO BE BASED ON COMPLETE INFORMATION. I FELT IT INCUMBENT UPON MYSELF, AS A LAWYER, TO LOOK BEHIND THE OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. BEFORE PRESENTING TO YOU THAT INFORMATION, I WANTED TO JUST SHARE A QUICK, TRUE STORY WITH YOU, AND I THINK IT ILLUSTRATES A POINT OF WHY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION. AND I BROUGHT THE CASES AND THE STATUTES AND MADE THEM AVAILABLE FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD THAT WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THEM TONIGHT. I HAD THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO TO BE SERVING ON THREE WEEKS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY SERVICE WITH THE AIR FORCE AS A JUDGE ADVOCATE OFFICER AT MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE. ONE OF THE TASKS THAT I WAS ASKED TO DO WAS TO INTERVIEW A YOUNG LAW STUDENT WHO WAS APPLYING FOR A DIRECT APPOINTEE POSITION WITH THE AIR FORCE AS A JUDGE ADVOCATE. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THESE CANDIDATES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY EVERY YEAR THAT APPLY, AND THEY ARE VERY, VERY QUALIFIED, USUALLY IN THE TOP PERCENTAGES OF THEIR LAW SCHOOLS AND THE LIKE. IN THE COURSE OF THAT INTERVIEW, WE WERE REVIEWING SOME OF THE 89 VARIOUS EXPERIENCES THAT THIS GENTLEMAN HAD HAD, AND ONE OF THE EXPERIENCES THAT HE HAD HAD WAS THAT OF BEING A LAW CLERK FOR THE HONORABLE JUDGE KAVOKOVITCH, OUR U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE WHO SITS HERE IN THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, A WELL-RESPECTED DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AT THAT. AND WHAT WAS INTERESTING ABOUT THE CONVERSATION, AND I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO ILLUSTRATE AS A PREFACE TO MY REMARKS ABOUT THIS ATTORNEY GENERAL UPON, IS THIS: HE SHARED WITH ME WITH DELIGHT, QUITE HONESTLY, THE FACT THAT HE HAD HAD THE PRIVILEGE AND EXPERIENCE OF WRITING DRAFT OPINIONS FOR FEDERAL COURT JUDGE. AND HE HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN SOME VERY COMPLICATED CASES. AND HE WAS GIVEN A FILE AND SAID WRITE THE ORDER. NOW, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DOESN'T REVIEW THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN CONFORMANCE WITH WHAT THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS IS AND ULTIMATELY SIGN IT, BUT I THINK FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE NOT LAWYERS, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT AT THAT LEVEL, EVEN AT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT LEVEL, IT'S CLERKS WRITING THESE THINGS. AND IN THIS CASE, WHAT'S VERY INTRIGUING TO ME IS THAT YOU HAVE A THIRD-YEAR LAW STUDENT WHO HASN'T EVEN PASSED THE BAR EXAM, HASN'T HAD THE EXPERIENCE AND BENEFIT OF BEING A PRACTICING LAWYER, WHO IS CONFRONTED WITH THIS CLERKSHIP AND GIVEN A FOLDER AND ASKED TO WRITE AN OPINION, AND THEY CAN BE THE MOST INTELLECTUAL PERSON IN THE WORLD, BUT SOMETIMES SOME THINGS ARE MISSING THAT -- THAT BALANCE OF EXPERIENCE THAT YOU GET ONLY BY BEING OUT IN THE TRENCHES FOR A WHILE. 90 NEVERTHELESS, THAT'S THE WAY OUR SYSTEM WORKS. I INQUIRED OF OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY SEVERAL WEEKS AGO AS TO THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON WRITING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION. BOB BUTTERWORTH DID NOT WRITE THIS OPINION. I COULD NOT GET A NAME OF THAT ATTORNEY. IT'S JUST REFERRED TO THE OFFICE UP THERE. AND THAT CONCERNED ME BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW THE CALIBER OR THE CHARACTER, EXPERIENCE OR BACKGROUND OF THE PERSON WRITING THIS OPINION. SO RATHER THAN ACCEPTING IT ON ITS FACE VALUE, I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THIS BOARD'S SAKE, AT LEAST IN TERMS OF FAIR CONSIDERATION OF THE SPENDING LIMITATION, TO HAVE A BALANCE IN PRESENTATION BY HAVING SOMEBODY LOOK AT THE REMAINDER OF THE CASES THAT WERE CITED AND THE STATUTES. AND BEFORE I GO THROUGH THAT -- AND FINISH ON THAT NOTE -- I WANTED TO DIGRESS JUST FOR ONE MINUTE AND COME BACK TO ONE OTHER CRITICISM THAT'S BEEN MADE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. I THINK WE HEARD MIMI OSIASON AND SEVERAL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC GET UP AND JUST IN A MATTER-OF-FACT KIND OF CATEGORICAL CONCLUSORY MATTER STATE THAT THEY DIDN'T FAVOR THIS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T THINK THIS WAS THE RIGHT KIND OF THING TO BE IN OUR CHARTER. I THINK YOU ALL REMEMBER HEARING THOSE KIND OF COMMENTS. SO I PULLED OUT A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT WE ALL WERE PROVIDED AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF OUR TENURE ON THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. THE FIRST WAS THE FIFTH EDITION GUIDE FOR CHARTER COMMISSIONS BY THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE. 91 THAT'S THIS LITTLE BOOK HERE. AND THE OTHER WAS THE MODEL COUNTY CHARTER REVISED EDITION BY THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISPUTED THAT THOSE WERE AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES FOR US TO USE AS A GUIDE AS WE WENT THROUGH OUR PROCESS, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THE REST OF YOU ACTUALLY READ THROUGH THIS. I DID, BUT I HAD FORGOTTEN MANY OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD READ BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING SERVED -- ARE YOU OKAY THERE? I DIDN'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING SERVED ON CHARTER -- SO I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT I WAS GETTING INTO. YOU KIND OF READ ALL THESE THINGS, AGAIN, AS AN INTELLECTUAL BUT WITH THE BENEFIT OF YOUR EXPERIENCE TO GUIDE YOUR THOUGHTS AND NOT HAVE EXPERIENCE THINGS TO APPLY IT TO. IF YOU LOOK IN THE FIRST DOCUMENT, THE GUIDE FOR CHARTER COMMISSIONS, THERE IS A SECTION ENTITLED "WHAT ARE THE ESSENTIAL CONTENTS OF THE CHARTER DOCUMENT?" AND IN PERTINENT PART, THERE IS A PROVISION HERE THAT READS, RECOGNIZING THAT THE AMOUNT OF DETAIL INCLUDED IN CHARTERS WILL VARY GREATLY AND ALL LOCAL PECULIARITIES ASIDE, THE ESSENTIAL PROVISIONS OF MOST CHARTERS MAY BE DIVIDED INTO FIVE MAJOR GROUPS. NUMBER ONE, THE POWERS OF THE CITY. NUMBER TWO, ORGANIZATIONAL PROVISIONS COVERING THE LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIAL, MAYOR OR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING THE MANAGER, HEADS OF 92 DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, ESSENTIAL PRINCIPALS OF ORGANIZATION WITHIN A DEPARTMENT, ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONS AMONG ALL. NUMBER THREE, CERTAIN BASIC PROCEDURES OR SAFEGUARDS FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AS COUNCIL AND BOARD PROCEEDINGS, ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES, PROTECTION AGAINST CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND IN SOME CASES GRANTING A FRANCHISE, TAX ASSESSMENT, AND COLLECTION, LICENSING, EMINENT DOMAIN AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. NUMBER FOUR, MODERN ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES, INCLUDING BUDGETING, ESSENTIAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING, AN ADEQUATE REPORTING, AND IN SOME CASES, PERSONNEL AND PLANNING PROCEDURES. AND NUMBER FIVE, POPULAR CONTROLS OVER THE GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING ELECTIONS, CHARTER AMENDMENTS, AND IN SOME CASES, DIRECTING PROCEDURES AND THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM. IF YOU DISSECT EACH ONE OF THOSE FIVE, YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF SUPPORT FOR THE IDEA THAT FINANCIAL OR FISCAL CONTROLS ARE VERY MUCH A PART OF OUR CHARTER PROCESS, AS WELL AS POPULAR CONTROLS OVER THE GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS THE FIFTH ITEM ENUMERATED, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT OUR SPENDING LIMITATION PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE FOR DISCUSSION IS ALL ABOUT. NOW, TAKING THOSE FIVE PRECEPTS IN THE GUIDE FOR CHARTER COMMISSIONS, I THEN LOOKED AT THE SPECIFIC MODEL THAT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE MODEL COUNTY CHARTER, AND I MARKED A COUPLE PAGES HERE, AND ON PAGE 39, THERE IS AN ENTIRE ARTICLE PROPOSED IN THE MODEL CHARTER CALLED "FINANCIAL PROCEDURES." AND IN THAT ARTICLE FIVE ON FINANCIAL PROCEDURES, IT DISCUSSES SUCH THINGS AS THE BUDGET, HOW IT IS PLANNED, AND WHAT IS A 93 BUDGET AND HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SET UP, THE COUNTY COUNCIL ACTION ON THE BUDGET, THE NOTICE PROCEDURES, THE AMENDMENT BEFORE ADOPTION, THE ADOPTION PROCESS, SECTION 5.06 TALKS ABOUT APPROPRIATION AND REVENUE ORDINANCES. SECTION 5.07 TALKS ABOUT AMENDMENTS AFTER ADOPTION. IT TALKS ABOUT TRANSFERS OF APPROPRIATIONS, LIMITATIONS ON APPROPRIATIONS, LAPSES OF APPROPRIATIONS. QUOTE, THE COUNTY COUNCIL SHALL PROVIDE BY ORDINANCE THE PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTERING THE BUDGET. THAT'S THE BROAD STROKE IN THIS MODEL. OVERSPENDING OF APPROPRIATIONS BEING PROHIBITED. AND ON AND ON. I AM NOT GOING TO READ ALL THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS, BUT I WANT TO ILLUSTRATE TO YOU THAT WHEN WE HEAR COMMENTS SUCH THAT FISCAL CONSTRAINTS OR FISCAL MEASURES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR A CHARTER, I ASK, WHAT IS YOUR AUTHORITY? WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE FOR THAT STATEMENT OTHER THAN YOUR OWN OPINION? I AM NOT AN EXPERT ON THIS, BUT SUPPOSEDLY, THE PEOPLE THAT PUT TOGETHER THESE GUIDES ARE EXPERTS, AND THEY SAY THIS IS ABSOLUTELY GERMANE TO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE OF WHAT CAN GO IN A COUNTY CHARTER. SO I HOPE THAT AT LEAST THAT PROVIDES A BALANCE OF -- OF INFORMATION AND INPUT TO THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT YOU MAY BE AGAINST THIS PROCEDURE BECAUSE YOU JUST FEEL IN A CONCLUSORY WAY THAT IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE CHARTER, THAT THE INFORMATION WE'VE BEEN GIVEN BY THOSE WHO 94 ARE CONSIDERED EXPERTS IN THE COUNTRY AT DOING THIS SAY THAT IT IS. NOW, ON THE LEGAL THING. THIS IS A BIGGER PROBLEM BECAUSE I CAN SEE SOME OF YOU SITTING THERE AND SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS IS A DEAD ISSUE FOR ME BECAUSE BOB BUTTERWORTH SIGNED AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION, SO THAT MEANS IT MUST BE NO GOOD. AND I WANT TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT RIGHT NOW THAT IF YOU HADN'T PICKED UP ON THE CLARIFICATIONS WE GOT AT THE LAST TWO MEETINGS, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THIS IS AN ADVISORY OPINION ONLY. IT IS NOT BINDING ON THIS BOARD. AND IN POINT OF FACT, IF YOU READ THROUGH THE CASES THAT ARE CITED IN THE VERY OPINION THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED TO US, YOU WILL SEE THAT IN THOSE CASES, THERE'S DISCUSSIONS BY THE COURT WHERE THE ELECTORATE IN THE VARIOUS COUNTIES -- AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MARION COUNTY, CHARLOTTE, AND DADE, WHERE THEY CONSIDERED MEASURES AND THE ELECTORATE PASSED BALLOT MEASURES IMPOSING TAX CAPS, REVENUE CAPS, IN CONTRADICTION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS THAT WERE GIVEN. SO THAT DOES NOT HAMSTRING US IF WE SO CHOOSE TO BE BOLD AND GO FORWARD TONIGHT WITH THIS MEASURE. THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU FEEL THAT IT'S RIGHT AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY? NOT WHAT BOB BUTTERWORTH SAYS WHEN HE SIGNED THIS. I KNOW HE DIDN'T WRITE IT, BUT HE OBVIOUSLY, THROUGH A SIGNATURE, ENDORSES IT. 95 WHAT CONCERNS ME, IS THAT THIS OPINION, FRANKLY, IS MISLEADING. THE OPINION IS MISLEADING AS TO WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS AND WHAT THE CASES ACTUALLY HOLD AS THE FINDINGS OF THE COURT. SO I AM GOING TO BRIEFLY SHARE WITH YOU WHAT I THINK IS APPLICABLE. THE FIRST THING IS, THERE ARE THREE MAJOR CASES THAT ARE CITED IN THE OPINION. IT'S THE McKEAVER CASE OUT OF MARION COUNTY, THE CHARLOTTE COUNTY BOCC VERSUS TAYLOR OPINION, AND BOTH OF THOSE HAVE REFERENCE BACK TO THE DADE COUNTY BOCC VERSUS WILSON OPINION, WHICH IS A FLORIDA SUPREME COURT DECISION. IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION KIND OF MENTIONS IN PASSING PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PRECEPT THAT EXISTS. IT IS -- IT IS BY VIRTUE OF THIS PROVISION IN OUR CONSTITUTION THAT WE SIT HERE TONIGHT, AND THAT'S THE RIGHT OF HOME RULE THAT GOVERNANCE BY THE PEOPLE BEGIN WITH THE PEOPLE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, AND THAT'S THE WHOLE REASON WE HAVE A CHARTER. AND THAT'S A BASIC TENANT OF ARTICLE VIII, SECTION 1 OF OUR FLORIDA CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS CONTAINED IN FLORIDA STATUTE SECTION 125.01. AND SO WE LOOK AT THAT AS THE OVERRIDING PRECEPT, AND YOU KNOW, THERE WAS AN EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT QUOTE, AND I THINK FAR MORE ARTICULATE THAN I COULD EVER STATE. IN THE CHARLOTTE COUNTY CASE. I'D LIKE TO READ YOU A QUOTE FROM THE COURT BECAUSE I THINK 96 THIS NEEDS TO REMIND ALL OF US OF WHAT WE ARE ALL ABOUT AND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE FOR THE LAST YEAR. THE COURT STATES THAT THE BOARD FIRST REMINDS US -- THIS WAS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THEIR COUNTY ATTORNEY ARGUING IN FAVOR OF THIS REVENUE CAP. THE BOARD FIRST REMINDS US THAT ALL POLITICAL POWER IS INHERENT IN THE PEOPLE AND THAT WE MUST, IF POSSIBLE, INTERPRET THE AMENDMENT AS CONSTITUTIONAL, CITING THE CASE OF MIAMI DOLPHINS, LIMITED, VERSUS METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY. WE REALIZE AND APPRECIATE THAT AS PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID IN HIS ADDRESS AT GETTYSBURG, THAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS ONE OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE. WE ALSO APPRECIATE THAT A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED ON THE AMENDMENT WANTED THIS TAX CAP. THE BOARD CONTENDS THAT THE AMENDMENT IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND THAT THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DECLARING THAT IT WAS. ALTHOUGH THE BOARD AGREES THAT ARTICLE VIII, SECTION 1-G OF THE CONSTITUTION GRANTS TO THE CHARTER COUNTIES ONLY THOSE POWERS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH GENERAL LAW, IT CONTENDS THAT THE TAX CAP AMENDMENT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH GENERAL LAW. AND THEN THE COURT GOES ON TO STATE WHY IT DISAGREES. THE IMPORTANCE OF WHY THIS COURT DISAGREES IS AT THE HEART OF WHY OUR PROPOSAL DIFFERS AND IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON WHAT THEY TRIED TO DO IN CHARLOTTE COUNTY. THE GRAVAMEN OF ALL THESE DECISIONS, WHICH RESTS ON THAT FLORIDA SUPREME COURT DECISION OF WILSON, IS THE ATTEMPT TO ELIMINATE -- NOT ELIMINATE -- TO TRY TO RESTRICT THE BUDGET BY 97 THE REVENUE SIDE, BY LIMITING THE REVENUE-GENERATING ABILITY OF A COUNTY COMMISSION, BY PUTTING A CAP ON THAT ABILITY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IN WILSON, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THAT SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT EVERYONE RELIES ON, WHAT THEY WERE ATTEMPTING TO DO WAS TO SET THE MILLAGE RATE THROUGH THE INITIATIVE PETITION PROCESS. IN OTHER WORDS, COMPLETELY REMOVE THE ABILITY OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO SET THE MILLAGE RATE, BUT DO IT THROUGH THE VOTER INITIATIVE PROCESS. AND THE SUPREME COURT SAID, CHAPTER 200 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES SAYS THAT YOU CAN'T DO THIS. THE BUDGET PROCESS IS -- AND PARTICULARLY THE SETTING OF MILLAGE RATES -- IS EXCLUSIVELY THE FUNCTION OF YOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND WHERE YOU TRY TO TAKE AHOLD OF THAT, YOU CAN'T DO IT. NOW, THESE CASES GO ON TO SAY THAT IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT, IF YOU DON'T WANT THAT LIMITATION IN YOUR STATUTES, LOBBY YOUR LEGISLATURE AND GET THE STATUTES CHANGED, AND MAYBE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. BUT THAT HASN'T HAPPENED, AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CAN'T BE BOLD IN GOING ABOUT THIS A DIFFERENT WAY. A SPENDING LIMITATION BECOMES A BENCHMARK FOR OUR COMMISSIONERS TO MEASURE THEIR SUCCESSES -- THEIR SUCCESS AT SPENDING OUR MONEY. IF THEY SPEND IT MORE WISELY, THEN PERHAPS THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT RAISING TAXES FOR US BECAUSE THEY CAN SPEND WITHIN THEIR MEANS. 98 IN THIS CASE, IN THE WILSON CASE, THE COURT MAKES CERTAIN FINDINGS IN RELIANCE ON CHAPTER 200 AND CHAPTER 129. AND WHAT'S VERY INTERESTING IS THAT THIS CASE, THE -- THE SUPREME COURT CASE, THE OPINION WAS RENDERED IN 1980. NOW, THAT'S SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GET TO THE SUPREME COURT THAT YEAR. IT WAS GOING THROUGH THE PIPELINE FOR MANY YEARS BEFORE IT GOT THERE. AND THE REASON THAT DATE BECOMES IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE LATER ON, IF YOU LOOK VERY CAREFULLY AT THE OPINION THAT WAS RENDERED IN 1983 IN THE MARION COUNTY CASE, THAT'S MARION COUNTY VERSUS McKEAVER, WHERE THEY ARE RELYING ON THE AUTHORITY OF THE WILSON CASE, AGAIN, THE McKEAVER CASE PRINCIPALLY FOCUSES ON CHAPTER 200 BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH MILLAGE RATES, AND YOU CAN'T -- I WOULD ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT THE WAY OUR LAW IS SET UP RIGHT NOW, I READ THE OPINIONS, THERE IS NOTHING TO CONTRADICT IT THAT IF YOU ARE TRYING TO IMPOSE A REVENUE CAP, YOU PROBABLY CAN'T DO IT, ALTHOUGH IT HASN'T BEEN TRIED WITH A DISCRETIONARY OUTCLAUSE LIKE WE'VE DESIGNED WITH A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. BUT I THINK YOU'D PROBABLY FAIL AT DOING THAT THE WAY THE PRESENT LAW IS WRITTEN UNDER CHAPTER 200. THAT'S NOT OUR CASE. FURTHERMORE, THOSE CASES DID CITE KIND OF CURSORY TO SECTION 129 -- AND I AM GOING TO READ THAT PROVISION IN A SECOND, BUT HERE'S WHAT'S INTERESTING IN THIS CASE. THEY TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT IN 1979 -- EXCUSE ME -- IN 1980, 99 A PROVISION IN SECTION 129.05 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES WAS REPEALED. NOW, LET ME PUT THIS IN LAYPERSONS' TERMS. THE PRINCIPLES TALKED ABOUT ARE STILL APPLICABLE TODAY. BUT THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE THE UNDERPINNINGS OF THE WILSON CASE IN 1980 WOULD NO LONGER BE THE UNDERPINNING OF A CASE TODAY UNDER CHAPTER 129 BECAUSE THAT PROVISION HAS BEEN REPEALED, AND THE PROVISION I AM TALKING ABOUT WAS A PROVISION IN 129.05 THAT PROVIDED THAT, QUOTE, AFTER THE FINAL ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET FOR EACH FUND, THE BOARD SHALL PROCEED TO FIX THE MILLAGE RATE FOR EACH FUND AS PROVIDED BY LAW. SO THERE WAS A PROVISION IN CHAPTER 129 THAT INTEGRALLY TIED IN WITH CHAPTER 200 THAT PUT THE RESPONSIBILITY ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO FIX THE MILLAGE RATE. IN BOTH THOSE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE. WITH THE REPEAL OF THIS PROVISION OF CHAPTER 129, THAT IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY THE DOMAIN OF CHAPTER 200. OUR MOTION IS NOT DEALING WITH THE MILLAGE RATE OR AD VALOREM TAXES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE SET BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS UNDER CHAPTER 200. >>JAN SMITH: MR. AMBLER, CAN YOU BRING YOUR COMMENTS TO A CONCLUSION, PLEASE? >>KEVIN AMBLER: YES, I SURE WILL. CHAPTER 129 AND THE SECTION THAT'S ALWAYS CITED BY THE COURT MERELY SAYS, VERY SIMPLY, THAT THERE IS HEREBY ESTABLISHED A BUDGET SYSTEM FOR THE CONTROL OF FINANCES OF BOARDS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE SEVERAL COUNTIES OF THE STATE AS FOLLOWS: 100 THERE SHALL BE PREPARED, APPROVED, ADOPTED, AND EXECUTED AS PRESCRIBED IN THIS CHAPTER FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1952, AND FOR EACH FISCAL YEAR THEREAFTER AN ANNUAL BUDGET FOR SUCH FUNDS AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY LAW OR BY SOUND FINANCIAL PRACTICES AND GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES. THE BUDGET SHALL CONTROL THE LEVY OF TAXES AND THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FOR ALL COUNTY PURPOSES DURING THE ENSUING FISCAL YEAR. THAT IS THE PROVISION THAT'S CITED THROUGHOUT ALL THESE CASES AS BEING THE AUTHORITY FOR NO CAP. THERE IS NO DISCUSSION OF THAT -- THE DISCUSSION GOES ON TO TALK ABOUT CHAPTER 200 ON MILLAGE RATE AND REVENUE CAPS. THIS PROVISION IS THE ONLY PROVISION THAT APPLIES TO OUR MEASURE, AND MAY I SUGGEST TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT THE ONLY LIMITATION HERE IS THAT THE ANNUAL BUDGET BE ADOPTED AS REQUIRED BY LAW OR BY SOUND FISCAL PRACTICES. AS REQUIRED BY LAW CAN MEAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER. SO IF THE CHARTER IMPOSES A SPENDING LIMITATION, THEY WOULD BE ADOPTED A BUDGET AS REQUIRED BY LAW. THE ONLY OTHER BARRIER THAT EXISTS IS WHETHER OUR LOCAL RULE, OUR HOME RULE UNDER OUR CHARTER, IS IN CONFLICT WITH GENERAL LAW. THAT IS THE ISSUE THAT THE COURTS HAVE TAKEN UP IN THESE CASES, VERY SIMPLY STATED THAT YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, BUT IT CAN'T CONFLICT WITH GENERAL LAW, AND I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT AN EXPENDITURE LIMITATION THAT HAS AN 101 OVERRIDE PROVISION FOR THE MAJORITY -- A SUPERMAJORITY OF COMMISSIONERS TO EXCEED THAT REVENUE LIMITATION IS WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF GENERAL LAW, AND THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A REPORTED CASE IN FLORIDA TO SAY OTHERWISE. MY CLOSING REMARK IS THIS: THESE COURTS ALL CITE TO THE BASIC PRECEPT THAT THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY WHEN READING AND INTERPRETING A CHARTER PROVISION THAT HAS BEEN CHALLENGED. A PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY. SO IF ANYONE SAW FIT, WE WERE BOLD, AND WE PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT AND THE ELECTORS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY VOTED THIS MEASURE AFTER TWO YEARS OF DEBATE AND FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR OUR COUNTY, THEN SOMEBODY CHALLENGING IT WOULD HAVE TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY BY SHOWING THAT IT CONFLICTS WITH GENERAL LAW. THEIR BASIS FOR SUPPORT WOULD BE THESE CASES AND STATUTE THAT IS I'VE CITED TO YOU. NONE OF THE CASES SUPPORT THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS MEASURE, AND I THINK THAT TONIGHT, WE SHOULD BE PREPARED TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, EVEN IF WE DISAGREE WITH THE ADVICE OF THE OPINION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED BASED ON THE COMPLETE INFORMATION WE'VE PRESENTED. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: EVERYBODY STILL AWAKE? MR. HURLEY, THEN MS. LASHER AND MR. WHITE. >>DAVID HURLEY: OKAY. I'D LIKE TO STATE RIGHT UP FRONT THAT I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS 102 AN APPROPRIATE MEASURE FOR THE CHARTER. THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM THAT I COULD SEE IF I FELT LIKE IT WAS NECESSARY OF PUTTING IT IN THE CHARTER. I DISAGREE WITH MS. OSIASON IT HAS NO POINT THERE IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE FELT NEEDED TO BE THERE. FURTHER I CONCUR WITH MR. AMBLER WITH REGARD TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION. ENGLISH IS MY MOTHER TONGUE, AND WHEN I READ WHAT WE PROPOSE AND WHAT THEY STATED AND THINGS THEY REFERENCED, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING. I ALSO KNOW THE PERSON I CALL MY ATTORNEY, WHICH WE ALL HAVE "MY ATTORNEY," YOU KNOW, WAS -- ALSO HAPPENED TO BE A LAW CLERK FOR A FEDERAL JUDGE IN JACKSONVILLE AT A TIME, SO I DO KNOW HOW THOSE WERE WRITTEN. HOWEVER, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS THAT I DON'T THINK I CAN GET OVER. NUMBER ONE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 9% OF THE BUDGET. IT'S A VERY SMALL PART OF IT. THE SECOND THING WAS THAT YOU SAID THAT YOU'D LOOKED AT WHAT THEY'D DONE THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND ON NO OCCASION WOULD THIS HAVE HELD THEM BACK BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T EVER GO OVER WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO LIMIT THEM TO. SO FROM THAT POINT, I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT WE HAVE A REAL PROBLEM TO FIX, AND I AM NOT SURE THAT IT MAKES IT BETTER BECAUSE VERY OFTEN IF WE CREATE A MAXIMUM, IT TURNS OUT TO BE A MINIMUM. AND I -- I AM IN THIS BUILDING QUITE OFTEN. 103 I HAVE BEEN HERE SEVERAL TIMES THIS WEEK. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUY A PARKING PLACE HERE, AND IT WOULD BE A LOT CHEAPER. IT'S CHEAPER THAN DOWN THE STREET. BUT ANYWAY, I KNOW -- BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE IN A LOT OF DEPARTMENTS HERE -- THAT THEY'VE BEEN TOLD BECAUSE IT'S BUDGET TIME, FIGURE OUT HOW TO CUT YOUR BUDGET BY 10% AND STILL PROVIDE THE SAME SERVICE. I LIKE THAT. LET'S CUT IT BY 10% AND STILL PROVIDE THE SAME SERVICE. NOW, IF THEY DON'T GET IT THAT FAR, MAYBE THEY CUT 2%, MAYBE THEY CUT 6%, MAYBE THEY ONLY CUT 1%, MAYBE THEY DON'T CUT ANYTHING BUT THEY CAN JUST STAY LEVEL. I LIKE THE FOCUS OF LET'S TRY TO SEE HOW WE CAN DO IT WITHOUT RAISING IT AT ALL. I AM AFRAID IF WE SAY ALL YOU CAN DO IS GO UP THE PERCENTAGE OF INFLATION PLUS THE PERCENTAGE OF THE GROWTH OF THE COUNTY, THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING -- LET'S JUST TAKE 1.5 ON EACH ONE OF THOSE, AND THAT MAKES IT 3% -- THAT THOSE PEOPLE WOULD SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE GOT TO DO OUR BUDGET. LET'S SEE. FROM LAST YEAR, WE WERE AT 20 MILLION, WE CAN GO UP 3%. WE NEED ANOTHER $60,000. I DON'T SEE WE ARE GOING TO CREATE SOMETHING GOOD, AND IF WE HAD A PROBLEM, WE'RE NOT -- LIKE IN CALIFORNIA WHEN THEY DID -- WHAT WAS IT? 119 AND 113 SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THEIR PROPOSITION LIMITING 104 TAXES. I DON'T THINK WE ARE IN THAT KIND OF A PROBLEM, AND I REALLY CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE AND I AM NOT REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S POSITION, BECAUSE I KNOW IF WE GET FIVE ATTORNEYS TO WRITE OPINIONS IN FIVE DIFFERENT ROOMS, WE'LL GET FIVE OPINIONS. SO I JUST CAN'T WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT THAT, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK WE HAVE A SPOT AT THIS POINT THAT WE REALLY NEED THIS AMENDMENT IN 2001. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MS. LASHER. >>DENISE LASHER: THANK YOU. A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR OUR ATTORNEY. SO -- AND I -- SOMEBODY WAS TELLING ME IN CALIFORNIA, WHILE THE ATTORNEY IS WALKING UP HERE, WHEN IT'S I THINK PROPOSITION 13 PASSED, WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THE FEES HAVE GONE UP IN CALIFORNIA. SO THE BUDGETS REALLY HAVEN'T BEEN CONTROLLED BECAUSE WHAT THEY DID WAS THEN STARTED CHARGING FOR SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT WERE BEING PAID FOR UNDER THEIR BUDGET. THEY JUST CHANGED IT AND STARTED CHARGING USER FEES, RIGHT, WHICH IS A TAX. YES. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IN THOSE COUNTIES WHERE -- HAVE BEEN CITED IN THE A.G. OPINION IN THE COURTS' RULINGS, WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THOSE COUNTIES? 105 IT WOULD BE -- IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING CORRECT THAT THE COURTS OVERRULED WHAT HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE VOTERS AND NOW THEY NO LONGER HAVE THESE CAPS IN PLACE? IS THAT CORRECT? >>KEN TINKLER: THE ONE THAT COMES INTO MIND IMMEDIATELY -- AGAIN, KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. THE ONE THAT COMES INTO MIND IS THE CHARLOTTE COUNTY CASE. THAT IS WITHIN OUR DISTRICT, THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS. THAT LIMITATION ON AD VALOREM TAXES WAS REMOVED FROM THEIR CHARTER. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS STILL HAD THE ABILITY TO PLACE A CAP ON THEIR BUDGET WITHIN THE NORMAL PROCESS. THE QUESTION IS NOT THE VALIDITY OF THE PROPOSAL ITSELF. IT'S WHERE IT'S BEING PLACED. >>DENISE LASHER: OKAY. YOU'VE HEARD THE DETAILED ARGUMENT THAT MR. AMBLER HAS GIVEN TO PRESENT HIS POINT OF VIEW. AND YOU HAD STATED EARLIER TONIGHT, AND THEN LAST WEEK YOU ALSO STATED, THAT YOU THOUGHT WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION ON THIS MATTER. WHAT KIND OF ARGUMENTS COULD YOU GIVE ME TO COUNTER SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT HE HAS MADE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THIS, AND IF YOU FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE DOING THAT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. >>KEN TINKLER: WELL, OBVIOUSLY I CERTAINLY RESPECT THE OPINIONS OF MR. AMBLER, WHO IS BOTH MY CLIENT AND MY OPPOSING COUNSEL THIS EVENING. 106 >>DENISE LASHER: AN AWKWARD POSITION. >>KEN TINKLER: RIGHT. THE FOCUS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION IS WHAT I WOULD COME BACK TO AT THIS POINT. THE CASES -- OBVIOUSLY, MR. AMBLER IS CORRECT. THERE IS NO CASE DIRECTLY ON POINT ON THIS ISSUE. IF THERE WAS, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD HAVE PRESENTED BACK WHEN WE BEGAN THIS DISCUSSION. SINCE THERE WERE CASES ON A DIFFERENT END OF THE SAME SUBJECT, INSTEAD OF THE BEGINNING IN THE BUDGET PROCESS, IT'S BEEN PLACED ON THE TAXES THEMSELVES, ALL OF THE COURTS SO FAR HAVE HELD THAT AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THE COURTS HAVE ALSO LOOKED AT 129 AND 200, AS MR. AMBLER POINTED OUT. THAT SETS OUT THE BUDGET PROCESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. SINCE THE LEGISLATURE CHOSE TO SET OUT THE BUDGET PROCESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR ALL OF THE COUNTIES, IT IS UP TO THE LEGISLATURE TO DECIDE WHAT WILL BE IN THAT BUDGET PROCESS. THEY HAVE GIVEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SPECIFIC DUTIES UNDER THAT STATUTE OF HOW TO LAY OUT THE BUDGET AND HOW TO SET AD VALOREM TAXES. THE QUESTION WAS, DOES THIS -- THAT WE POSE TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL -- DOES THIS LIMITATION TO THAT LANGUAGE ALSO INCLUDE THE PROPOSAL THIS BOARD HAS COME UP WITH? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS ANSWERED THAT QUESTION SAYING THAT THE LIMITATION IS TO THE BUDGET PROCESS IN 129 AND 200. 129 AND 200 DOES NOT ADDRESS THIS BUDGET LIMITATION, DOES NOT 107 ALLOW THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -- DOES NOT ALLOW THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER TO IMPOSE SUCH A LIMITATION. >>DENISE LASHER: OKAY. IN READING THIS OPINION, ON PAGE -- WELL, IT'S PAGE 4 OF THE FACTS. I GUESS IT'S PROBABLY PAGE 3 -- LET'S SEE. PAGE 3 OF THE DOCUMENT. IT STATES THAT IN CHAPTER 129 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTE, THAT ESTABLISHES THE BUDGET SYSTEM FOR COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND MANDATES THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PREPARE, ADOPT, AND EXECUTE AN ANNUAL BUDGET FOR SUCH FUNDS AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY LAW OR BY SOUND FINANCIAL PRACTICES AND GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES. THAT IS STILL IN PLACE, RIGHT, THAT PARTICULAR -- >>KEN TINKLER: ABSOLUTELY. >>DENISE LASHER: THOSE STATUTES ARE STILL IN PLACE, SO THEY ARE SAYING THAT ADDRESSES THE BUDGET PROCESS, AND PART OF THE PROCESS IS -- IN PREPARING YOUR BUDGET IS DETERMINING HOW MUCH MONEY YOU ARE GOING TO SPEND. RIGHT? >>KEN TINKLER: CORRECT. THOSE ARE STILL THE STATUTES IN EFFECT. OBVIOUSLY STATUTES ARE AMENDED EVERY YEAR, PARTS ARE TAKEN OUT AND PARTS ARE TAKEN IN. CHARLOTTE COUNTY'S CASE DATES TO 1995. THAT IS THE MOST RECENT CASE ON THIS SUBJECT AT THIS POINT. AGAIN, WITH THE MODEL CHARTERS AND OTHER THINGS PRESENTED, OUR 108 CHARTER DOES NOT EXIST IN THAT KIND OF A VACUUM. WE DO NOT HAVE AN INHERENT RIGHT TO THIS CHARTER. IT IS GIVEN TO US UNDER THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION AND MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL LAW. IT IS NOT HOME RULE TO THE FULL EXTENT THAT THERE IS NO IMPOSITIONS BY THE STATE ON THIS AUTHORITY. IT IS SOMETHING GIVEN TO US BY THE STATE. >>DENISE LASHER: IN CHARLOTTE COUNTY, WHO CHALLENGED THAT? >>KEN TINKLER: I DO NOT HAVE THE DETAIL OF THAT, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT. >>DENISE LASHER: I WAS WONDERING IF IT WAS THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR SOME CITIZENS. >>KEVIN AMBLER: IT WAS A TAXPAYER. >>DENISE LASHER: A TAXPAYER. IF PERCHANCE WE PASS THIS TONIGHT TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, IT COULD BE CHALLENGED BEFORE IT EVER GOES TO ELECTION, OR IT COULD BE CHALLENGED AFTERWARDS, AND IT WOULD BE A CITIZEN OF THE COUNTY THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY CHALLENGE THIS? >>KEN TINKLER: CORRECT. >>DENISE LASHER: AND WHO WOULD PAY FOR THE DEFENSE OF OUR ACTIONS? WOULD THAT COME OUT -- WOULD THAT THE -- THAT BE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? THE COUNTY WOULD PAY FOR THE DEFENSE OF THAT? >>KEN TINKLER: THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS REPRESENT THIS BOARD AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. IT WOULD DEPEND WHERE IN THE PROCESS, WHO WOULD CHALLENGE, AND 109 ON WHAT GROUNDS. ANY CITIZEN IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WOULD HAVE STANDING SINCE THIS IS THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CHARTER THAT AFFECTS ALL OF THEM. >> [ INAUDIBLE ] . >>DENISE LASHER: ULTIMATELY. I AGREE WITH SEVERAL OF THE COMMENTS THAT MR. HURLEY HAS MADE, AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY MORE PARTICULAR QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M SURE I'LL THINK OF SOMETHING LATER ON. >>KEN TINKLER: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >>DENISE LASHER: THE FACT THAT IT ONLY AFFECTS 9% OF THE BUDGET IS PRETTY -- THAT'S SIGNIFICANT, THAT IT'S A VERY SMALL PIECE OF THE BUDGET, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND THE AVERAGE, THE COUNTY HAS NOT GONE OVER WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IF THIS MEASURE HAD PASSED, WHAT THAT AMOUNT WOULD BE, THAT PERCENT INCREASE WOULD BE. AND I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHEN YOU SET A MAXIMUM, IT BECOMES A MINIMUM. IT BECOMES THEIR BUDGET. AND THAT -- YOU ALWAYS HAVE THAT POSSIBILITY. AND I GUESS ONE THING THAT REALLY STANDS OUT HERE IN THIS OPINION IS -- THEY GO ON TO STATE, QUOTING FROM THE CHARLOTTE COUNTY VERSUS TAYLOR CASE, IF THE VOTERS ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE COMMISSIONERS' ACTION IN THIS REGARD, THEY HAVE A REMEDY THROUGH THE BALLOT BOX AT THE NEXT POPULAR ELECTION. AND BASED ON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION AND CASE LAW THAT 110 THEY HAVE CITED AND THE FLORIDA STATUTES AS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO ME TONIGHT BY OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WHAT I'VE READ, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS LEGAL -- THIS IS LEGALLY POSSIBLE, AND MORE THAN LIKELY, IF IT PASSED AND WENT TO COURT, WE WOULD LOSE, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THE LEGAL CHALLENGE, AND IF WE'RE NOT HAPPY WITH HOW OUR COMMISSIONERS ARE SPENDING OUR MONEY, THEN WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT AT THE NEXT ELECTION. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YOU KNOW, THIS WHOLE YEAR I'VE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE STATUTES THAT TAKE AWAY THE ABILITY FOR THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO DO WHAT THEY WILL WITHIN THE CHARTER. AND IT'S A REAL CONCERN, YOU KNOW. WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A COUPLE OF STATUTES. IF THE DELEGATION -- IF THE LEGISLATORS CHANGE THE LAW, THEN WE CAN IMPLEMENT THIS. MR. TINKLER, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT? IF THE -- IF THE LAW WAS CHANGED, THEN WE CAN IMPLEMENT THIS. IS THAT CORRECT? >>KEN TINKLER: LET ME STEP BACK ON THAT. IF THE LEGISLATURE CHANGED THE LAW, COULD THIS CHARTER -- [ INAUDIBLE ] . IF THE LEGISLATURE DECIDES TO CHANGE THE 129 AND 200, THE NEXT CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WOULD HAVE AN ABILITY TO PLACE THIS ON 111 THE BALLOT. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE LEGISLATION IS AND WHAT THEY COME UP WITH. >>GERALD WHITE: I AM NOT A LAWYER, JUST A CITIZEN SERVING ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. I HAVE HEARD SO MUCH LEGAL STUFF. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, IT SAID THAT WE -- WE MOVE FORWARD, AND WE WAS WAITING ON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. NOW, WE HAVE THAT, AND HE SAID WE ARE OUT OF LINE. AND NOW TONIGHT WE'VE HEARD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY PUBLICLY SAY THAT THEY AGREE, YOU KNOW, WE ARE OUT OF LINE. WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING UP TO THIS POINT AWAY FROM THE ADVICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO GO AGAINST THE -- THE TOP MAN IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. SO, YOU KNOW -- AND A REAL CONCERN IS THE MONEY, YOU KNOW. ARE WE DOING THE CITIZENS A DISSERVICE BY MOVING FORWARD AND COSTING TAXPAYERS ALL THIS MONEY TO LITIGATE THIS? IF THERE WAS A WAY TO DO THIS, I WOULD LOVE TO DO IT BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OVERWHELMINGLY HAVE COME TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SAID THEY WANT TO DO IT. BUT THEY -- THEY HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO US AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT -- WE'VE READ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION. DO IT ANYWAY. AND, YOU KNOW, I AM NOT -- I JUST -- I JUST DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. 112 I -- I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE TO GO -- TO JUST -- CAUSE LITIGATION JUST TO CAUSE LITIGATION. I DON'T THINK IF IT'S 1%, 2%, 3%, IF IT'S GOING TO SAVE SOME MONEY, I'LL DO IT TO SAVE SOME MONEY. 9% IS SIGNIFICANT IF IT'S GOING TO SAVE SOME MONEY, BUT THE REALITY IS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SAID THAT IT WILL BE ILLEGAL FOR US TO DO IT. I THINK IF WE WANT TO DO ANYTHING, WE SHOULD SEND A LETTER OR PASS A RESOLUTION AND SEND IT TO OUR DELEGATION AND ASK THEM TO CHANGE THIS LAW. IF THIS LAW IS IN THE WAY OF US PUTTING SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER, THAT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE ACTION TO TAKE, NOT CAUSE LITIGATION AND SOMETHING THAT COULDN'T BE IMPLEMENTED BECAUSE A CITIZEN -- ONE CITIZEN OUT OF A MILLION CAN CHALLENGE THIS. SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT. >>JAN SMITH: MS. TUTTLE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: I'LL TRY TO BE AS BRIEF AS MR. -- AS HE WAS LENGTHY. ATTORNEYS GET PAID BY THE HOUR, YOU KNOW. >> BY THE MINUTE. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: BY THE MINUTE, YES. I OPPOSE THIS ON SEVERAL LEVELS, ONE OF WHICH IS WE REALLY -- SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE COME BEFORE US AND SAID SOMETHING'S WRONG, AND WE'VE TRIED TO FIX IT IN VARIOUS WAYS, AND WE HAVEN'T FIXED IT YET, AND THIS IS NOT GOING TO FIX IT. I THINK THE BALLOT BOX IS THE PLACE TO FIX SOMETHING. I THINK IT'S ALSO -- I'VE NEVER THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO 113 ELECT A BOARD TO DO THINGS AND THEN SAY, BUT BY THE WAY, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR PROBLEMS ARE OUT THERE. YOU ARE GOING TO NEED FIVE VOTES TO GO BEYOND THIS, AND YOU MAY HAVE A COUPLE RECALCITRANT MEMBERS WHO DON'T WANT TO DO IT, PERIOD, BECAUSE THEY ARE JUST VERY CONSERVATIVE AND DON'T WANT TO SPEND MONEY. I THINK -- I THINK TO HAMSTRING ANY GROUP THAT YOU ELECT IS VERY DIFFICULT, AND I'LL CLOSE BY SAYING, MR. HURLEY, I BELIEVE I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE SAID, AND YOU SAID IT VERY ELOQUENTLY. >>DAVID HURLEY: THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: MR. LaBOUR. >>STEVE LaBOUR: WHAT I LEARNED DEBATING THIS PROCESS ON THIS ISSUE IS, NUMBER ONE, THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE MR. AMBLER BE MY ATTORNEY IF I EVER SHOULD NEED ONE. TWO, IF I DO NEED ONE, I HOPE HE IS NOT REPRESENTING THE PERSON WHO IS OPPOSING ME. I ALSO HAVE LEARNED THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT CERTAINLY FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE AND THE AMOUNT OF HOURS I THINK THAT HE'S PUT IN IN LOOKING AT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION THAT PERHAPS THERE'S ENOUGH WIGGLE REASON IN THERE THAT MAYBE A GOOD CASE COULD BE MADE THAT THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT. UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT I HAVEN'T LEARNED IS WHAT FOR ME IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART, MR. AMBLER. I WISH THAT WE COULD HAVE SPENT THE AMOUNT OF TIME NOT FOCUSING ON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION, BUT REALLY AS TO 114 WHAT THIS PROVISION REALLY COULD DO OR CAN'T DO, WHAT WOULD BE IMPACTED OR NOT IMPACTED. REALLY, WHAT -- WHAT THE VOTERS COULD EXPECT OUT OF THIS, IF IT SHOULD PASS, AND I THINK WE REALLY HAVEN'T DONE THAT VERY WELL. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY I THINK THERE'S STILL TOO MANY QUESTIONS IN MY MIND ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE. THE LEGAL STUFF ASIDE, AND I AGREE WITH MANY OF THE THINGS THAT THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS HAVE SAID, BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE PROBABLY FIRST ON THE LIST OF THE NEXT CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. >>JAN SMITH: MR. BEDKE. >>MIKE BEDKE: I'LL PASS. >>JAN SMITH: MR. BALES. >>JOHN BALES: LET ME START BY SAYING THAT I TRULY BELIEVE IN FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHETHER IT'S IN A COMPANY, WHETHER IT'S YOUR OWN FAMILY SETTING, OR WHETHER IT'S THE GOVERNMENT. SO WHEN SOMEONE RAISES AN IDEA THAT IS MEANT TO ENCOURAGE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, THEN YOUR FIRST INCLINATION IS TO SUPPORT IT. BEFORE I GO INTO THAT IN MORE DETAIL, THOUGH, LET ME HAVE YOUR INDULGENCE FOR ONE MINUTE, AND LET ME RAMBLE TO YOU ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE JUDICIARY AND OPINIONS FROM PEOPLE SUCH AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. AND I KNOW NOBODY MEANT TO DO THAT TONIGHT, BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE COMMENTS TO SUPPORT THEIR POSITION BY INSINUATING THAT JUDGES DOESN'T DO THEIR JOB. 115 JUDGES DO DO THEIR JOB. AND QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW A JUDGE THAT DOESN'T DO HIS JOB. THERE MAY BE SOME OUT THERE, BUT THEY DO. AND YES, THEY HAVE YOUNG PERSONS HELP WRITE THEIR OPINIONS TO HELP THEM COVER ALL THE LAW, BUT MOST JUDGES, IN THE END, WHEN THEY SIGN AN ORDER, BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY ARE DOING. AND THEY BELIEVE THEY ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING. THEY ARE NOT DOING IT FOR MONEY. THEY ARE NOT DOING IT FOR SOME EGO. THEY ARE DOING IT FOR THE RIGHT THING. AND WE NEED TO BELIEVE IN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM FOR OUR COUNTRY TO CONTINUE AS IT IS. THE THREE BRANCHES OF OUR GOVERNMENT ARE ALL EQUALLY IMPORTANT. THEY ARE CHECKS AND BALANCES. JUDICIARY IS ONE OF THEM. AND THE REASON THIS COUNTRY IS GREAT BECAUSE OF THE CERTAINTY OF CONTRACT, THE CERTAINTY OF CONTRACT IS CREATED BY THE JUDICIARY AND THE BELIEF THAT WE, AS CITIZENS, HAVE IN THE JUDICIARY THAT, IN ESSENCE, TRIES TO DO RIGHT AND DUE PROCESS. SO LET ME PUT THE RECORD STRAIGHT THAT I BELIEVE IN OUR THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. I BELIEVE IN THE JUDICIARY, AND I BELIEVE OUR JUDGES TRY TO DO THE BEST THEY CAN, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM USING YOUNGER PEOPLE TO TRY TO FORM OPINIONS. IN FACT, MANY YOUNG PEOPLE ARE VERY BRIGHT. 116 AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS DOING THE BEST JOB HE CAN. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T AGREE WITH SOMEBODY DOESN'T MAKE THEM NOT BE DOING THEIR JOB THE BEST THEY CAN, DOESN'T MAKE THEM A BAD PERSON. MANY TIMES WE HAVE DISAGREED AROUND THIS TABLE. DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T RESPECT YOU AND THINK WELL OF YOU. SO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PROBABLY DID HAVE SOMEBODY DO THE RESEARCH FOR HIM, BUT HE SIGNED IT AND BELIEVES IT. AND I RESPECT HIM FOR THAT, RESPECT HIS OPINION, AND I WON'T PUT IT DOWN BECAUSE HE MIGHT HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE RESEARCH IT FOR HIM. I DON'T BELIEVE IF YOU GET FIVE DIFFERENT LAWYERS, YOU GET FIVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS. I BELIEVE MOST LAWYERS DO THE BEST THEY CAN WITH WHAT THEY HAVE. I TRY TO DO THE BEST I CAN, AND I HOPE YOU BELIEVE THAT. NOW, I DID RAMBLE A LITTLE BIT, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, AND I'LL GET BACK TO THE POINT. WHAT WE ARE DEALING WITH HERE IS THE CONSTITUTION, AND A CONSTITUTION IS A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT. IT'S WHAT WE LIVE BY. A CONSTITUTION IS WHAT SETS THE PROCESS. THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT SETS A PRINCIPLE. THE BILL OF RIGHTS THAT WE ALL LIVE BY, DUE PROCESS, THE MANY THING THAT IS HAVE HELPED US GET BY, IT IS NOT MADE FOR SPECIFIC ITEMS. 117 QUITE FRANKLY, ONE OF THOSE ITEMS IS THE TRAIN. THE TRAIN MAY BE A GREAT IDEA I BELIEVE IN, BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE A PART OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION. A 3% CAP OR SOME KIND OF CAP OR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY BY OUR COMMISSIONERS IS A GREAT IDEA, BUT IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR A CONSTITUTION. AND I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION, WHETHER IT'S FOR THE UNITED STATES OR IT'S FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA OR IT'S FOR OUR COUNTY, AND IT'S FOR OUR COUNTY. THIS TYPE OF PROVISION SHOULD NOT BE IN THE CHARTER OF THE CONSTITUTION. THEREFORE, BASED ON THAT, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. >>JAN SMITH: ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS TO THIS ISSUE? IF NOT, SHALL WE CAST OUR VOTES? WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >>KEVIN AMBLER: YES. >>JOHN BALES: NO. >>TERRY BALLARD: YES. >>MIKE BEDKE: NO. >>HENRY BELTRAN: YES. >>DAVID HURLEY: NO. >>STEVE LaBOUR: NO. >>DENISE LASHER: NO. >>MARY LOU TUTTLE: NO. >>ARLENE WALDRON: NO. 118 >>GERALD WHITE: NO. >>DANNY WILKES: NO. >>DEE WILLIAMS: NO. >>JAN SMITH: NO. >> THE MOTION FAILS 3-11. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, IS THERE ANY ISSUE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECONSIDER THAT WENT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS? OKAY. THEN WE HAVE JUST A COUPLE THINGS TO FINISH HERE. I NEED TO SAY THAT WE -- WE STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAS NOT SPOKEN EARLIER WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS THAT CAME IN ON -- FOR PUBLIC COMMENT THAT I WILL JUST TELL YOU. MR. GARY STEBBENS CALLED IN FROM APOLLO BEACH. THEY WANT SOMEBODY WHO UNDERSTANDS US HERE IN THE PART OF THE COUNTY. OUR LIFESTYLE IS IMPORTANT TO US. SUPPORT F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS. SHIRLEY MAY CALLED. SHE SUPPORTS THE F.A.I.R. ORGANIZATION, ELIMINATE AT-LARGE. I THINK I ALREADY GAVE YOU THAT ONE. CONNIE LARKIN. AMEND THE CHARTER TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO REPRESENT SOUTH COUNTY. 119 BRANDON SERVICE LEAGUE HAD A MEETING THIS EVENING THAT ADJOURNED AT 8:00. THEY SUPPORT THE F.A.I.R. RECOMMENDATIONS. A CALL CAME IN FROM MAUREEN KRAZENOSKI. THEN BRUCE SHELLER CALLED IN. THEY SUPPORT F.A.I.R. THEY FEEL THEY HAVE NO REPRESENTATION SOUTH OF THE ALAFIA RIVER. I DO THINK THAT IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO LET THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE COPIES OF THIS KIND OF INFORMATION SO THAT ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER COMMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED -- AND I DO BELIEVE WE'VE BEEN SENDING IT TO THEM -- PERHAPS, MS. MERRITT, WHEN YOU DO THE FINAL REPORT, YOU CAN MAKE THIS INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE PEOPLE THAT CALLED IN AND CONTACTED, SO THAT THEIR COMMENTS ARE IN THERE ALSO. I HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO BRING BEFORE THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. IF NO ONE ELSE DOES -- >>GERALD WHITE: CAN WE HAVE -- I'D LIKE TO SAY ONE CLOSING COMMENT. >>JAN SMITH: I KNEW IT, MR. WHITE. NOT GOING TO LET ME OFF THE HOOK, ARE YOU? >>GERALD WHITE: FIRST OF ALL, MADAM CHAIR, IT'S REALLY BEEN AN HONOR AND TRUE PLEASURE TO SERVE WITH YOU. YOU'VE SHOWED TREMENDOUS WISDOM, AND I WILL CHERISH IT THE REST OF MY LIFE. IT HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS HONOR FOR THIS COMMUNITY TO HAVE ATTORNEYS SERVE ON THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. 120 I THINK THAT'S DEFINITELY ONE PLUS THAT HAS MADE THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD VERY, VERY STRONG, AND WE HEARD THAT TONIGHT FROM THE PUBLIC. SO I THINK WE WERE WELL SERVED BY HAVING ATTORNEYS SERVE ON THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. IT'S JUST BEEN REALLY A TREMENDOUS HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE AND A PLEASURE SERVING WITH ALL OF YOU, AND I DID NOT WANT TO CLOSE WITHOUT SAYING THAT, AND I WILL REMEMBER THIS FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. AND BEFORE I GO, TOO, YOU KNOW, I SIT AT THE KNEE OF SYLVIA RODRIGUEZ KIMBELL. SHE COUNSELED ME A GREAT DEAL. RUBIN PADGETT COUNSELED ME. MY PASTOR, WHO IS NOW REQUIRED, REVEREND M.C. JOHNSON, FIRST BAPTIST OF TAMPA. THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HELPED ME ALONG THE WAY TO GET TO THIS POINT TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY IN THIS CAPACITY. IN CLOSING, I WOULD LIKE TO PUBLICLY THANK HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMMISSIONER REVEREND THOMAS SCOTT FOR APPOINTING ME, A YOUNG MAN. I CAME ON THIS BOARD AT THE AGE OF 37. I AM -- I HAVE BEEN ON A YEAR NOW, AND I AM NOW 38. >> [ INAUDIBLE ] . [ LAUGHTER ] . >>JAN SMITH: I WAS 29 WHEN WE STARTED. 121 >>GERALD WHITE: THE YOUNGEST BOARD MEMBER OF THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, SO IT'S BEEN AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE, AND WILL I CHERISH IT FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>JAN SMITH: THANK YOU. MS. MERRITT, DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? >>BARBARA MERRITT: I FORGOT TO INCLUDE THIS IN MY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THIS IS FOR GERALD. WE WENT FROM NUMBER 13 TO NUMBER 5 PE GREATEST AMOUNT OF TOTAL GROUP HITS, BUT NOW THERE WAS ONE PERSON THAT DID 200 SESSIONS. NOW, DID YOU DO THAT? >>GERALD WHITE: PROBABLY SO. >>BARBARA MERRITT: ALTOGETHER, WE'VE HAD ALMOST 14,000 HITS SINCE WE STARTED TRACKING. >>GERALD WHITE: VERY GOOD. >>JAN SMITH THANK YOU. WELL, BOARD MEMBERS, I THINK THE RESIDENTS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAVE BEEN WELL SERVED BY EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS, FOR YOUR TIME, FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND I KNOW THEY WOULD ALL THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORT YOU HAVE MADE ON THEIR BEHALF. MR. BALLARD. >>TERRY BALLARD: LEGALLY WE COME FROM UNDER THE SUNSHINE LAW AT MIDNIGHT, RIGHT? THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT? 122 >>JAN SMITH: WHEN MY GAVEL CALLS, I THINK WE ARE DONE. >>TERRY BALLARD: I DON'T WANT TO VIOLATE ANYTHING. TINGE TING FOR PROBABLY THE LAST TIME, KEN TINKLER, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. AS SOON AS YOU ADJOURN SINE DIE, THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD WILL CEASE TO EXIST, AND YOU ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE SUNSHINE LAW. >>JAN SMITH: IF THERE IS NO OTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS ADJOURNED SINE DIE. [ APPLAUSE ]