Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 06-27-2006 ‎(regular)‎ — reading text

one is not to delve into the City staffs business, that Council is to give guidance and pass ordinances, and if there are problems they should trust the City Manager, work with her and continue to make the City better. The Mayor made the observation that Council is condoning the situation by not supporting the motion. Dr. Pullen stated he would be happy to share with Mr. Minich the Attorney General's Opinion about attendance at meetings and discussion of Council members at meetings where Council members, even if more than one Council member attends a meeting, have a complete right to discuss what is on with the Chair as longas they do not talk to each other. He said that is State law. going Mr. Holmes expressed it is a tough subject and thought censure is a little tough. He suggested a motion to reprimand with the same conditions because it has been talked about three times and something a little sterner would have to be done. Mr. Holmes moved to reprimand Dr. Pullen and direct him to cease any unauthorized investigations into city business, refer all investigations he deems appropriate to the City Manager as per the Council Rules of Conduct & Protocol manual, adopted June 8, 2004, and for a period of 180 days clearly state the purpose of any requests for information he may submit to the City Manager or City Clerk. Further, the City Council directs the City Manager to refer back to the City Council any requests for information from Dr. Pullen that she believes is overly tedious, does not completely understand, or she believes is to support an unauthorized investigation into city matters. Mr. Campbell seconded motion. In response to the question on the difference between censure and reprimand and whether it was defined in the Code, the City Attorney replied it is not defined in the Code and agreed reprimand is a lesser form of punishment. Mr. Patterson expressed his belief that some of the statements are assumptions, not facts, such as the unauthorized investigation, and there is no proof. is During some discussion on the repercussions of a reprimand, Mr. Holmes clarified that his motion to reprimand with the conditions imposed because Council has discussed in the past the amount of time it takes for the Council requests and they have seen that 800/0 of time has been spent for a to be single individual Council. He said if it is for a good use, he will support it 1000/0 but he needs shown what the requests are for and where they are headed and let Council help because if there is then something going wrong in the City that Dr. Pullen knows about, he has a duty to tell them, in handed to investigate complaint a as that Council will make the decision. He said not to go single is what staff is for. Regular Meeting 06/13/ 06 239 COUNCIL CONDUCT ( CONTI Dr. Pullen replied everything he requested is public record and he has been advised that he has not lost his rights as a citizen and can walk in to any section and ask for any file he wants, read any file he wants because they are public records. He stated he has never requested anything other than public records. He said the citizens elected him to represent them and he plans on representing them, and a person cannot represent someone if they do not know what is going on, information is a key to doing the job. He said the Charter says that the City is the responsibility of the Council and until they meet here, as an individual responsibility he will try to fulfill his responsibility to the citizens of the City. He said he would agree with this and acknowledged he knew what was referred to, a personnel matter he referred, and acknowledged when someone tells him they heard something about certain people he had no authority to investigate and to turn it over to the City Manager to investigate. He acknowledged he did not have the right to investigate the personnel of the City because they work for the City Manager. Mr. Minich referenced the Procedures Manual that states an inquiry of a City Official on city business must not require the expenditure of an unreasonable amount of time on the part of staff, and Council has a responsibility to police and correct any problem among the members of Council. He commented some see it as a problem and expressed his opinion it needs to stop. Mr. Hartwell expressed concern putting constraints and it is too vague on what is expected of any Councilman. He wished to know at what point his rights stop to go ask the City Manager a request for information, what is unreasonable. Mr. Minich pointed out that Council's rights do not stop, that Dr. Pullen only has to state the purpose for his request, and if the City Manager believes it is too tedious she refers it to Council. He noted it only refers to Dr. Pullen because of the past history. Mr. Holmes interjected it stepped over the line when there was an issue of employee personnel and thought the City Manager has never denied a request of any Council member, but it seems the requests they see is astronomical in the amount of paper work. He asked that Council be told what it is for so they do not have to second guess what is going on. He asked if the people are going to Dr. Pullen, why they are not going to the other six Council members. Dr. Pullen replied he did not know why people go to him. The Mayor commented there is a perception out there about why Dr. Pullen is doing this, which is why they go to Dr.' Pullen because they think they have an ally in undermining the City and the City Manager's authority. Mr. Minich commented all Council members have people who go to them; which is what they are there for, but Council has to establish a trust with the City Manager and they refer them to her. He said the City Manager has never denied him and he goes to her to get the straight story. He said Council is supposed to represent the people and be their ombudsman to the City and then go to the City Manager and have her investigate and give them a satisfactory answer. Mr. Tucker expressed his discomfort with the action of the motion. Mr. Campbell acknowledged it is a tough situation but Council reprimands or says something to Dr. Pullen and he continues. He expressed that his biggest problem is that Dr. Pullen is running off the staff. Mr. Tucker wished to know jf Dr. Pullen had done anything that is in violation of the rules, or what he had done wrong with the employees of the City, and asked for a specific instance. Mr. Minich stated that all complaints, all investigations, are supposed to be referred to the City Manager.  06/ 13/ 06 Regular Meeting 40 COUNCIL CONDUCT ( CONTI Mr. Patterson expressed reluctance taking an action that will limit the Council's power in the future. The Mayor noted it is up to Council to police themselves, and at this time Council is policing Dr. Pullen, not anyone else. Mr. Holmes stated Council is here to set policy, not to administer the every day operations of staff, and repeated if Dr. Pullen is not happy with someone Council has the authority to appoint, then make a motion to fire and if there is support, then it will happen. The Mayor called for the vote on the motion and it failed by a vote of 3 to 4 with Holmes, Campbell, and Minich in favor and Patterson, Tucker, Pullen, and Hartwell opposed. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD APPOINTMENT Consideration of appointment to the Code Enforcement Board. Mr. Campbell moved to re- appoint Henry Faccini, 120 Destin Drive, to the Code Enforcement Board for a 3 year term until 6- 12-09. Dr. Pullen seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Patterson, Campbell, Tucker, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. BEAUTIFICATIONITREE BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO VISION PLAN Vision Consideration of appointment of a Beautification CommitteefTree Board representative to the Plan Stewardship Committee. Board Mr. Tucker moved to appoint Susan Clark as the Beautification CommitteelTree 5- 26-07. Mr. Patterson representative to the Vision Plan Stewardship Committee until seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Patterson, Campbell, Tucker, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. MAYOR/COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Holmes expressed appreciation on the efforts of the Police Chief, the City Manager and staff on the clean up efforts of crime on Carson drive; thanked the City Attomey, staff and Council for support of the wrecker ordinances. Mr. Holmes received confirmation that a date will be set regarding a workshop on the bridge as soon as possible. The Mayor commented it is important to advertise it as a meeting to prepare a City on the bridge. He asked individuals not to offer response to the Transportation Corridor Authority should alternatives for Council to consider as it will be more of a discussion on a position the City to consider the Brooks Bridge and the take. Mr. Tucker questioned whether the City has only Hollywood Bridge. The Mayor noted that is what they asked the City but the City can provide any want because they asked for City input to their planning. The City Manager offered response they the community. She that Council can provide a response on what Council feels is appropriate for mentioned that staff will develop what they would like to see. issue. He Mr. Patterson thanked the City Manager for taking quick action on a Carson drive mentioned his comfort in the meetings with a prayer asking for guidance. opening and that the Mr. Campbell echoed the appreciation expressed