Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 11-13-2007 regular agenda — reading text

CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The CDS Director advised this ordinance was initiated in order to be in compliance with the Certified Local Government application. Changes are required to be made to Section 12. 100. 012, Approval of Application for Designation of a Historic Site or Structure, and and Structures amending Section 2. 09. 03 regarding the Composition of the Historic Sites c Advisory Board. The Mayor opened the public hearing. There was none. 188' 10/ 23/ 07 Regular Council ORC. 1746 ( CONT) c. Mr. Garvie moved to adopt Ord. 1746 on first reading. Dr. Pullen seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. INTRODUCTION OF SENIOR PLANNER The City Manager introduced Samantha Abell, the City' s new Senior Planner. REGULAR AGENDA- FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Hartwell requested a series of workshops be designated for discussion of the Charter due to the complexity of the Charter, since the goal is to have any changes ready for the 2009 election. Consensus was for Staff to bring back a schedule to begin in February of 2008, possibly on the o third Tuesday of each month. RES. 07- 25. YOUTHBIZ2015 The Mayor read the r~ solution by title only. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS OF YOUTHBIZ2015. The City Manager advised the City will offer in- kind services for assistance in teaching and to identify funding opportunities for the YouthBiz2015 initiative. Funding opportunities were identified as applying for funds through the OCDC, the CRA, and CDBG. The City Manager also mentioned this resolution is a plain- language format initiated by the City c' Attorney. Mr. Hartwell moved to adopt Res. 07 -25~ Mr. Minich seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. REMOVAL OF CRA MEMBER Consideration of removal of CRA Board Member. Mr. Hartwell advised that on August 3, 2007, he e- mailed Mr. Robert Rettie, a member of the City' s CRA Board of Commissioners, admonishing him and warning Mr. Rettie that he needed to cease his comments in reference to the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, and City Staff as being " corrupt." Mr. Hartwell forwarded this e- mail to the City Clerk, who forwarded it to the Mayor and Council. Mr. Hartwell continued that on September 4, 2007, Mr. Rettie e- mailed the Landmark Development in response to their invitation to recognize the City, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Historic Downtown District in their efforts to bring the Landmark Center Development to Fort Walton Beach. Mr. Rettie' s e- mail response was ' Does this mean we get a snack with entertainment in return for nearly 4 million tax dollars? Is this an ethics consideration?' Mr. Hartwell further referenced two telephone calls from Mr. Rettie the end of September whereby Mr. Hartwell again expressed concern about Mr. Rettie' s continual reference of the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, and City Staff as being corrupt, and unless he o had something verifiable he needed to cease referring to them as corrupt. c Mr. Hartwell noted that at the CRA meeting of October 3, 2007, the CRA Chairman reiterated proper protocol and procedure to all the CRA members. Mr. Hartwell mentioned additional e- mails from Mr. Rettie were sent after the CRA meeting that were similar in nature, and that also referenced the County Commissioners as being corrupt.  189 Regular Council 10/ 23/ 07 REMOVAL OF CRA MEMBER ( CONT) c Mr. Hartwell referenced his October 12, 2007 e- mail to Mr. Rettie, which was part of the agenda backup, which stated, among others, that all members of committees and boards of the City serve at the pleasure of the City Council and they are not guaranteed membership until their term is expired. Mr. Hartwell continued from the e- mail, stating it is the absolute responsibility of the Council to ensure that appointed emissaries of the City are representing the City in a good light, and that once an individual is appointed to a City board or committee they have a responsibility to the City. Mr. Hartwell than read the definition of ' corrupt' according to the Webster Collegiate Dictionary. Mr. Hartwell stated the issue at hand is that the behavior of Mr. Rettie is unprofessional, uncalled for, and cannot be tolerated when an individual refers to the entire City and County government as being corrupt. It was noted that Mr. Rettie is not in attendance, and it was questioned whether he should be in order to defend his actions. Mr. Miller moved to continue this discussion until the time Mr. Robert Rettie can be in attendance. Mr. Garvie seconded motion. Discussion ensued as to whether a specific date should be set to continue this item, and the fact that Mr. Rettie did respond to the City Clerk via e- mail requesting this be continued to the ..' November 13 meeting, stating he would not have time to prepare an appropriate response upon his return from out of town after October 21. c Mr. Hartwell advised he would be out of town for the November 13, 2007 meeting. Mr. Miller amended his motion to continue discussion until the Council meeting of November 27, 2007. Mr. Garvie seconded motion. Mr. Hartwell questioned if there was a need for Mr. Rettie to be present this evening. The City Attorney noted Mr. Rettie' s e- mail that states he would return after October 21, which could be construed he could be in town, or not. She also advised it could be construed ~ s a request for a continuance. The Mayor called for the vote on the amendment to continue until the meeting of November 27, 2007, and it failed by a vote of 3 to 4 with Miller, Garvie, and. Pullen in favor and Holmes, Reeves, Hartwell, and Minich opposed. The Mayor called for the vote to continue until the time Mr. Rettie can be in attendance and it failed by a vote of 3 to 4 with Miller, Garvie, and Pullen in favor and Holmes, Reeves, Hartwell, and Minich opposed. The Mayor advised the item will be continued as presented. Mr. Hartwell moved to remove Mr. Robert Rettie as a member of the CRA Board of Commissioners for behavior unbecoming a member of the CRA Board of Commissioners~ Mr. Minich seconded motion. r w- i  190 Regular Council 10/ 23/ 07 1\", REMOVAL OF CRA MEMBER ( CONT) Some members of Council expressed concern that this type of action could send the wrong signal to volunteers and potential volunteers; that one of the e- mails written by Mr. Rettie was not intended for public view; that the Chairman of the CRA had taken care of the situation at the CRA meeting; and that what is being discussed cannot be verified since Mr. Rettie is not present to explain. J Further discussion ensued that the behavior of Mr. Rettie had not changed after the CRA meeting and that negative e- mails continued to be sent; that the behavior of Mr. Rettie is totally unacceptable behavior of an emissary of the City; and that this action would send the correct message to volunteers that professionalism on City boards is what is expected. Mr. Hartwell received clarification from the City Attorney that while e- mails sent over the Internet may not be public domain, they are public record when conducted in the venue of the business of the City. The Mayor asked if there was any public input. Lee Bobo, 38 Memorial Parkway and member of the CRA, explained that at the October 3 CRA meeting, one of the CRA members made a motion to remove Mr. Rettie from the Board with no warning, no preamble, nothing, and that the motion did not receive a second. Mr. Bobo then advised that the Chairman of the CRA took about five minutes and adequately explained what was expected from members of the CRA and any City board or committee. Mr. Bobo stated that when he learned that Council was going to discuss Mr. Rettie' s removal from the Board, he questioned to himself whether the Board member that asked for his resignation at the CRA f meeting was asked to make the motion by a member of Council, or did the member ask a member of Council to make that motion. Mr. Bobo offered his personal feeling that Mr. Rettie is a very intelligent individual who speaks his mind, but his comments and questions during CRA meetings are relevant to the always issue before the Board, and he has never heard any negative remarks directed at the City government or staff from Mr. Rettie. Doug Reed, 842 Santa Rosa, advised he is the CRA member who asked for Mr. Rettie' s removal from the Board. He advised that the removal was requested not because of Mr. Rettie' s actions during the CRA meetings, but because of blanket e- mails sent and the being way he conducts himself outside of the meetings. Mr. Reed stated he feels Mr. Rettie can do good on the Board, but his actions can be construed as speaking for the Board, and that is not the truth. There was no more public input. The City Attorney clarified the procedures for Council removal of a member of a' board is set forth in Chapter 163, and it does not state there has to be five to the individual time to days give prepare. She stated the individual is entitled to ten days notice that there will be a hearing on their removal, and that the a- mail that went back and forth between Mr. Hartwell and Mr. Rettie was ten days in advance. The City Attorney further noted the e- mail was after the motion made at the last meeting two