Charter Review Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2000

The following members were present:
Jan Smith, Chairman (arrived at 6:47 p.m.)
Kevin Ambler (arrived at 7:03 p.m.)
John Bales (arrived at 6:13 p.m.)
Terry Ballard
Mike Bedke
Henry C. Beltran (arrived at 6:12 p.m.)
David Hurley Steve LaBour
Mary Lou Tuttle
Arlene Waldron
Gerald White
Danny L. Wilkes
Dee Williams

The following members were absent:
Denise Lasher (prior commitment)

Vice Chairman Hurley called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. Mr. White led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. The Deputy Clerk called the roll and noted a quorum was present.

PUBLIC COMMENT
Ms. Denise Layne, president, Lutz Civic Association, requested CRB members adjourn no later than 10:00 p.m.; interested citizens found it difficult to participate after that time.

Mr. Jim Hosler, Planning Commission (PC) staff, explained the PC and Supervisor of Elections were concerned about Section 4.06, County Charter, which stated: "Within 120 days after certification of the federal decennial census, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) shall reapportion Districts 1 through 4." The census would be certified by December 31, 2000; however, the data needed for redistricting would not be available until April 1, 2001. Mr. Hosler suggested the language be changed to read: "Within 120 days of the receipt by County government of redistricting data from the federal government, under the provisions of Public Law 94-171, the BOCC shall reapportion Districts 1 through 4." He verified the four single-member districts would be reapportioned; backup material incorrectly stated at-large districts. Mr. Ballard suggested deleting the reference to Public Law 94-171; if that law changed, Charter language would have to be amended. Mr. Hosler explained that was the federal law that governed release of the data, but he thought the reference could be deleted. Vice Chairman Hurley suggested the County Attorney's Office review the wording.

CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE (CITY) MAYOR FRAN BARFORD
Mayor Barford reviewed the City's government structure. City Council members and the mayor were elected in a nonpartisan format, at-large, in regular election cycles, and they received no salary. The mayor was recognized as head of City government, presided at City Council meetings, but did not vote except to break a tie vote. City Council hired a City attorney, auditor, and clerk.

Mayor Barford made the following recommendations: (1) Make no change to the current elected BOCC structure that included a nonpartisan, appointed administrative officer. An elected County mayor would eventually lead to consolidation, which the City did not want. (2) The role of the BOCC chairman could be specifically defined and expanded in the charter to include preparing and delivering the state of the government report, outlining the vision for the future of the government and the BOCC, being the primary spokesperson for government, and appointing members of the BOCC to various boards and authorities. (3) The BOCC should serve in a nonpartisan arena. (4) The establishment of an independent auditor was not needed. The BOCC already had the power to hire independent auditors. Mayor Barford responded to questions from CRB members regarding the recommendations and City government.

PINELLAS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FRED MARQUIS
Mr. Marquis reviewed the government structure of Pinellas County, whose districts were being changed to four single-member and three at-large districts. At-large commissioners were required to live in a geographical area with no opportunity for more than one commissioner to live in the same area. The county had unified personnel and data processing systems, which were governed by boards with members from offices of the clerk, sheriff, tax collector, property appraiser, et cetera. The personnel system eliminated competition between departments and agencies. Most functions in the Pinellas County Charter were similar to those of Hillsborough County; however, Pinellas County did not have many independent agencies such as airport, sports, and expressway authorities. Those functions were under county government. Countywide functions such as emergency medical and solid waste services were clearly stated in the Pinellas County Charter as well as the responsibilities of the county's 24 cities.

Chairman Smith assumed the chair. Responding to queries from CRB members, Mr. Marquis commented on how county districts were determined, auditor and budget functions, consolidation of services, term limits, county administrator qualifications, et cetera. Pinellas County commissioners were considered full-time positions and were responsible for hiring the administrator, whose qualifications were not specified. The unified systems, which saved millions of taxpayer dollars, had been set up through State acts before the county charter was approved. Concerning auditors, Mr. Marquis said it was imperative to hire experts in whatever field was being reviewed, which would not always be a certified public accountant (CPA).

COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Assistant County Attorney Kenneth A. Tinkler said the County Attorney's Office had nothing to report. Mr. White thanked Attorney Tinkler for the report on gubernatorial power of appointment that had been given to CRB members.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Ms. Barbara Merritt, CRB Executive Director, reviewed the CRB budget; approximately $12,000 had been spent to date. The scheduled speakers for August 10, 2000, were Senator James Hargrett, Jr., and Representatives Rudolf Bradley and Lesley Miller, Jr., with the advertised public hearing immediately following at 8:00 p.m. The travel policy was included in backup materials. County Center parking tickets should be given to Ms. Merritt when the parking attendant was not on duty. Referring to the memorandum from Mr. Eric Johnson, Director, Management and Budget Department, regarding the CRB budget, Ms. Merritt said $50,000 was the historical funding level. If additional funds were needed, the CRB could request that the BOCC approve a budget amendment. The cost for advertising both public hearings for the proposed auditor was $1,145.

BOARD DISCUSSION
Mr. LaBour asked how the CRB should address Mr. Hosler's concern about Section 4.06, County Charter, regarding the reapportion of Districts 1 through 4. Senior Assistant County Attorney Mary Helen Campbell said the current language could reasonably be interpreted as to when the County received the data; however, there was no harm in clarifying the language. Mr. LaBour moved for the County Attorney's Office to look at the language Mr. Hosler had supplied and bring recommendations to the CRB in one month, seconded by Mr. Hurley, and carried thirteen to zero.

Chairman Smith initiated the page-by-page review of the charter. After discussing the Preamble, CRB members made no changes. Discussion followed on
Section 1. Mr. Ambler asked how annexations fit into the charter. Chairman Smith and Attorney Campbell explained annexations did not change the outer boundaries of the County, although they reduced unincorporated areas for which the County was responsible for providing services. Mr. Ambler observed Section 1.02 would need revision if CRB members wanted to give the proposed performance auditor the ability to audit constitutional officers. Attorney Campbell stated the proposed performance auditor language did not affect constitutional officers; however, the language could be clarified. Florida Statutes were specific regarding how constitutional officer budgets could be amended and what power the County had to affect them. She would submit additional information regarding those issues.

Chairman Smith said Section 2 was well stated and needed no changes. Following discussion of Section 3, Mr. LaBour pointed out the section tied in with the sections regarding the legislative and executive branches, which should be discussed first. He recommended scheduling that discussion to include issues such as the size and amount of districts and partisan versus nonpartisan. Chairman Smith said the following two CRB meetings could be set aside for that discussion. After CRB members talked about the process that would be used in the discussion, setting up review committees, meeting dates, and issues that would be included in the discussion, Chairman Smith directed Ms. Merritt to provide CRB members with information regarding existing charters with an elected executive form and minutes from 1984 CRB meetings when government structure was discussed.

Mr. LaBour moved to use the August 24 meeting and the two meetings in September to talk about structure. He hoped the public would participate in those meetings. Ms. Merritt reviewed the agendas for those meetings, noting County Commissioners Chris Hart, Jim Norman, and Thomas Scott had not committed to speaking to the CRB. Mr. Ambler seconded the motion. Mr. White informed CRB members he would be presenting a proposal for polling citizens from the Florida Institute of Government, University of South Florida. Chairman Smith was trying to get information on issues regarding partisan, nonpartisan, and term limits from an agency in Washington, D.C. Mr. Ambler explained Commissioner Norman had declined to address the CRB, because he did not want to influence the independent process. The motion carried thirteen to zero. Responding to Ms. Waldron's question regarding the number of government structures that could be considered, Attorney Campbell agreed to provide copies of legal opinions on that issue.

Chairman Smith called a recess at 7:51 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:03 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING FOR BOCC INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR/BUDGET ANALYST - 8:00 P.M. TIME CERTAIN

Chairman Smith reviewed procedural rules for the public hearing and noted the next public hearing on the auditor proposal was scheduled for August 10, 2000. Mr. Bedke reviewed the proposed auditor recommendation. The position would be appointed by a supermajority BOCC vote and reporting directly to the BOCC. Compensation would be fixed by the BOCC through a contract. The qualifications were a CPA or specified experience. With BOCC approval, outside expertise could be hired to help the auditor. The auditor could not hold or participate in a political office. Attorney Tinkler noted the County Attorney's Office would research the issue of broadening the proposal to include constitutional officers.

PUBLIC COMMENT
Ms. Betty Crislip, 4405 West Platt Street, Independent Review Committee, submitted a copy of her presentation and reported performance audits were supported by Florida TaxWatch, a governmental watchdog organization. For every budget item, there must be specific, measurable outcomes. With so much on the November 2000 ballot, Ms. Crislip was concerned there was not enough time for the public to learn about the auditor position. The position might not accomplish its desired effect if government structure was changed. Ms. Crislip urged that the auditor be fired only for cause and should be able to freely report information the BOCC might not want to hear. All audits should be done in compliance with generally accepted government auditing and yellow book standards.

Ms. Janet Wilson, 1926 Wolf Laurel Drive, supported the proposal, noting the BOCC needed tools and the auditor position would help. Mr. Gordon Commee, Florida Tax Cap, a political action nonpartisan group, supported the proposal; however, he thought the amount spent on part-time auditors should be limited, and he did not agree that the auditor could not engage in any other business or occupation. Ms. Kelly Clem, Riverview, spoke in support of the proposal. The greatest issue was the adoption of fiscally responsible budgets. It was important not to have a County administration that dominated elected officials. Ms. Marilyn Smith, County resident, said a budget analyst was needed, and she commented on biased information from staff.

Mr. Michael Carducci, 1427 Clarion Drive, management consultant, supported an independent auditor on the November 2000 ballot. That position would be the final link with controls, procedures, and structures that were in place under the Clerk of the Circuit Court. The public needed a complete audit to understand where and how assets were being used along with an implementation plan for areas that needed improvement. Mr. Joseph Caetano, 5304 Cannery Court, supported putting the proposal on the November 2000 ballot. Taxpayers would benefit; citizens should have the opportunity to decide. Counties that had adopted such a position had shown dramatic results. Mr. Roy Davis, 3224 McIntosh Road, Tampa Wholesale Nursery, thought performance audits would find waste in government. The public should have the right to vote on the issue.

Mr. Gene Wells, 6205 Sanders Drive, supported putting the proposal on the November 2000 ballot. External audits were used in Mr. Wells' business, from which he benefitted. It was the CRB's job to get the issue to the people. Mr. John Thibodeau, 3637 Little Road, supported the proposal, which would bring accountability to government. Mr. Jason Mims, 2421 Bucknell Drive, supported putting the proposal on the November ballot. Referring to the May 26, 2000, audit of departments under Human Services, of which he submitted a copy, Mr. Mims claimed staff had misled the BOCC, whereas the audit stated accurate information. Mr. Tom Jones, 4508 Viewridge Way, retired military, commented on performance audits in the military, stating the oversight process of the military and government should be the same. Supporting the proposal, Mr. Jones suggested the auditor should report to the BOCC, be a CPA, and not qualify by experience. Audits should follow accepted yellow book standards and be scheduled to review each office in an established time frame. The supervisor should be held responsible for implementation of the findings.

Mr. Tim Curtis, 3308 Fox Squirrel Lane, offered comments in support of putting the proposal on the November 2000 ballot. Performance audits would give real, tangible results and allow the BOCC to be a better steward. Ms. Denise Layne, Lutz, asked if there would be safeguards so the position would not be used improperly. Accountability was needed; however, another department and more bureaucracy would be created with the position. Ms. Layne asked if the audits could be accomplished with external, independent auditing firms without hiring County staff. Mr. Francis Cape, chairman, transportation committee, Silver-Haired Legislature, supported putting the proposal on the November 2000 ballot. Mr. Neil Cosentino, president, Bay World Public Trust, 708 South Davis Boulevard, supported putting the proposal on the November ballot. Citizens needed an independent way to be assured tax dollars were well spent. He agreed with the letter dated July 26, 2000, from Commissioner Pat Frank, BOCC Chairman.

Mr. Les Seright, Brandon, former management controller, Trans World Airlines, commented the administration provided only one source of information, and a second viewpoint was needed to help the BOCC make decisions. Although the position could cause friction, it would be beneficial. Mr. Carl Warren, Tampa, commented on the positive input from citizens supporting the proposal. He implored the CRB to listen to the public and put the proposal on the ballot. Citizens understood performance auditor functions. Mr. Cliff Denison, president, Love America, Seffner, talked about prior abuse regarding indigent sales tax in which millions of dollars were lost that could have been avoided had a performance auditor been in place. He asked for unanimous CRB endorsement for placing the proposal on the November 2000 ballot. Mr. Ralph Hughes, Tampa, pointed out no one had spoken in opposition to the proposal and asked for unanimous CRB approval.

Chairman Smith called for a motion to close public comment. Mr. White so moved, seconded by Mr. Hurley, and carried thirteen to zero. Responding to questions raised by Ms. Layne, Mr. Ambler said the BOCC could choose to contract the position if desired; the proposed language gave the BOCC some latitude; and the Sunshine Law provided accountability. Discussion followed on public comments; safeguards against abuse of the auditor position; CPA requirement; yellow book standards; procedures for the next public hearing; and performance audits of constitutional officers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the PC. Mr. White asked for a copy of the new State law regarding performance audits of independent agencies. Mr. Bedke asked if the section about the auditor not engaging in any other business or occupation should be changed. The intent was for the auditor to be a full-time position. Mr. Beltran said the intent was that the auditor would not be involved in government in another capacity. Following discussion, CRB members agreed not to change that language.

In answer to Ms. Williams, Attorney Campbell said constitutional officers had yearly fiscal audits. Mr. LaBour commented on differences between fiscal and performance audits and repeated that the charter language should be clear regarding constitutional officers. Mr. White cautioned CRB members against interfering with the powers of constitutional officers. Chairman Smith suggested the CRB take the position it would not consider bringing constitutional officers under County government; they would be left alone. Mr. LaBour so moved, seconded by Ms. Tuttle. Mr. Ambler moved to table the motion until receiving the report from the County Attorney's Office. Mr. LaBour withdrew the motion, stating it was out-of-order with the public hearing process on the proposed auditor.

In answer to Mr. White, Attorney Campbell restated the proposed language should be mailed to the Justice Department by August 28. Minor changes could be made at the next public hearing. She suggested a committee review the final draft before it was mailed.

Mr. LaBour asked for a copy of Ms. Crislip's presentation and that the information submitted by Mr. Mims be kept on file. Following further discussion of language concerning constitutional officers, Chairman Smith called for a motion to recess the public hearing. Mr. Ambler so moved, seconded by Mr. Hurley, and carried thirteen to zero.

Mr. Hurley moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Ambler. Mr. White called for public comment. Ms. Janet Wilson suggested, when in doubt, CRB members should ask questions of persons presenting information to avoid discussion of misinformations. The motion carried thirteen to zero.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.

READ AND APPROVED:
CHAIRMAN

ATTEST:
RICHARD AKE, CLERK

By:
Deputy Clerk

jp