Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 10-14-08 regular agenda — reading text

form of government for the Mayor to be able to break a tie; it also says the Mayor has the same rights, responsibilities and duties as all the other Council. She said to her that puts the Mayor at the same level as an elected official as all seven of the Council members. She said by looking at the two provisions, the provision regarding the Mayor breaking a tie was adopted after the provision reflecting the vote of the whole body and the vote of the whole body is a restraint on Council' s power; that is why she believed they can change that by ordinance. She said that does not mean they have to change it to say anything different than what it says now but she could not imagine why they would continue with an inconsistency. She said if someone felt the Mayor should not have the right to break a tie then it needs to be put to referendum. She said if someone felt that is a reasonable interpretation of the Charter, then they would change it by ordinance basically to follow Robert' s Rules, which are already in place through ordinance as well as statutory law where they do have some of the requirements for either a vote of the entire governing body or a super majority. She said it is up to Council how they want to handle it and suggested it be addressed sooner than later, one way or the other.  28.5 Council Workshop 9 -16 -08 Section 6 and Section 8 coat. The City Attorney suggested the sentence in Section 8 " The affirmative vote of a majority of the members elected to the council shall be necessary to adopt any ordinance, resolution, order or vote, except that a vote to adjourn or regarding the attendance of absent members may be adopted by a majority of the members present" be deleted because they have adopted Robert' s Rules which sets out voting criteria, and some of the statutes have specific requirements under certain conditions. She said, 23rd as a legal opinion, she would like to present to Council on September a very simple ordinance for first reading that repeals that one line. Lee Bobo, 38 Memorial, referenced Section 4 of the Charter which states " Except as otherwise provided in this charter, all powers of the city shall be vested in a council of seven members, who shall be designated by a specific seat number and each of whom shall be elected by..." He referenced Section 6 which states the Mayor can break a tie and agreed there seems to be a conflict with Section 8 that says only Council can vote. He expressed his belief that Council should be the only people to vote and the Mayor should never vote because he was not an elected official who has the power to run the City, the Mayor is a functionary to meet and greet. The City Attorney pointed out Section 4 was adopted in 1981 after Section 6 in 1979, and Section 4 states " except as otherwise stated in this charter ". She said it does make room for the Mayor to break d tie. She did not believe that is an uncommon charter provision and disagreed that the Mayor is not an elected official of the same elected manner as the other Council because the Mayor does, by Charter, have the same rights, duties and responsibilities as the other Council. Mr. Bobo commented that the Mayor does not participate in the discussion on any item then if the Mayor votes in a tie the audience does not have any idea on how the Mayor thinks. It was noted the Chair can take part in discussion but is encouraged not to, and if he breaks a tie he speaks to why he voted the way he did; that the Mayor still has the responsibility to be informed on all issues that come before Council in the event he has to vote to break a tie. Mr. Bobo stated he did not think that the Mayor should have the opportunity to decide an issue when that power is vested in the City Council. Discussion included comments that the informed citizen knows they are voting for a Mayor and not for a Mayor who has a vote; that the Charter says the powers are vested in the seven Council members; and it was suggested something be added that if there is a tie vote that it automatically comes back to Council as undecided rather than failed. Further comments included the real issue is conducting the City business in a timely manner; that the City business needs to move on and not to delay action; that the seven members of Council have the responsibility for the financial aspects of the City and the Mayor has his own role and mission in serving as Mayor; that some things are critical and need to be voted on in a timely fashion but everything is not critical; that it has been brought up in the past about absent members being able to vote long distance; that the seven members of Council are responsible for the fiscal function of the City; having the capability of casting a ballot via telephone and use of pass codes when individuals are absent for medical reasons or reasons beyond their control; that Robert' s Rules provides for debate following a motion to persuade others on the vote and the Chair does not know there is going to be a tie vote so the Chair does not lobby. It was questioned whether the Mayor is compelled to sign ordinances that are passed. The City Attorney said if the Mayor chose not to sign an ordinance it would still be effective. It was questioned whether the Mayor would be part of any litigation if he signed an ordinance but did not vote. The City Attorney replied yes, they act as a body and all eight are responsible for their actions. Council Workshop 9 -16 -08 Section 6 and Section 8 cont. The City Attorney referenced the commentary in the Model City Charter which states " While the mayor of a council- manager city is not an executive as in the mayor -council form, he or she is uniquely positioned to be the political and policy leader of the city. As the presiding officer of the council and ceremonial head of the city, the mayor is the most conspicuous official of the city. Freedom from executive responsibilities for the day -to -day municipal operations allows the mayor to focus attention on major policy issues and important facilitative activities." She said that is where the issue of the tie comes in because the Mayor is supposed to be a policy head under a council/manager form of government which is why it will require a referendum if they want to change it. It was noted the deletion of the sentence will also resolve the issue of motions failing when there is a 4 to 1 or 3 to 2 vote. Dean Covey, 270 Brooks Street, expressed resolutions or the Land Development Code should have a majority of Council vote on it and disagreed with having an issue, such as a resolution on fees or taxes or the Land Development Code which will affect everyone, decided on a 4 to 1 or 3 to 2 vote. The City Attorney explained that those issues will still be addressed because at any time the entire Council can compel the attendance of the members and likewise anyone of them can table an issue until someone else comes in and is present. She said Council has complete control over the deliberations within the body which is by Robert' s Rules and not necessarily set out in the Charter. The City Attorney will bring forward an ordinance for Council consideration. Meetings start time The City Manager recalled with regard to the starting time of the Council meetings the question on the floor was whether or not it was a Charter provision. She said it is not a Charter provision so if Council wished to address a start time she believed that would be an ordinance to modify the start time and an action item from Council would be needed if that is what they desire. Mr. Minich stated he would like an ordinance brought forward for debate and believed the meetings should start earlier at 6: 00 p.m. The City Attorney suggested the ordinance also address the cancellation of meetings. Ray. Seip, 121 Nebraska Avenue, commented the old ordinance said no meetings will start before 5: 30 and the new ordinance of the Land Development Code says they will not start any meetings before 5: 30 p.m. Section 4A Limit on number of terms for city council It was noted the Charter has term limits for City Council but not for the Mayor. The City Attorney advised any change to this Section would require a referendum. No further action on this section. Section 5 Regular and special meetings of Council The only action to be taken on Section 5 will be an ordinance regarding the meetings times and cancellation of meetings.  287 Council Workshop 9 -16 -08 Section 15 Removal of officers and employees, civil service employees, procedure The City Manager recalled previous discussion was about the reference to civil service since the City does not have a civil service board and has a grievance procedure. The City Attorney stated the second sentence " In case the employee is a member of civil service by reason of the provisions of any ordinance providing therefore, the procedure for removal shall be as provided in such ordinance" can be deleted by ordinance. The Mayor questioned whether the changes can be done in one ordinance or whether it will be individual ordinances. The City Attorney suggested Council address Section 8 now and then give her a couple of weeks to put the rest in one ordinance. Section 16 Council not to interfere in appointments or removals, violation a misdemeanor, forfeiture of office The City Attorney advised a referendum would be required for any change to this Section as it would be a change of the governmental form because the City has a City Manager /City Council form of government. She mentioned another issue throughout the Charter is reference to officers. She said the only people called officers, the rest are the elected officials the Council and Mayor, the employees and department directors. She said the bottom line is the City Manager has control over any of the people who are not the four Charter Officers and the elected officials. She noted there is also an issue in the Charter about the fact that the Department Heads may not have any recourse because the person they would address any grievance regarding the City Manager would be the Human Resources Director, one of the Department Directors. She said if Council wished to change this Section it would require a referendum. It was commented that the Charter Officers' employees do not work for them and they do not have control over their employees; that the Charter Officers should have control over the employees that work under them. The City Attorney stated in her interpretation of the Charter they would rely on Section 53 along with the issues regarding the City Manager. She noted Section 53 discusses the City Council shall appoint the City Clerk, the City Attorney, the Finance Director and the recorder, all other appointed officers and employees shall be appointed by the City Manager. She said that is where there is the directive that the City Manager appoints them. She said if Council wants to change that she believed Section 53 can be changed by ordinance, but the issue is there is a question whether or not that would, in some way, change the form of government. It was commented that Council tries to give autonomy to the Charter Officers but if their employees do not work for them they have no authority; that the Council should hire one person, the City