Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 01-22-08 regular agenda — reading text

meetings she would attend, such as the Beautification, Waterfront, Historic Sites, which use u pher time -and are outside those that mayY be mandated such as the Council meetings,- Code Enforcement, CRA, and Municipal Planning Board. The City Attorney replied she has not gone to quite a few of the third -level board meetings in quite some time, that she allots a certain amount of time for City work and a certain amount for private clients, and she has not attended a lot of those meetings because of the expenditure of time. She said the only reason she would go to one of those meetings is if there was an issue that she needed to see or be present for, and that would be at her discretion. The City Attorney was questioned whether Council is reducing the responsibilities and increasing the amount of money. The City Attorney replied no, that her billing has been very frugal for the City and has tended to make sure she did not over bill the City for work being done. She did not expect the change to be a significant increase or significant decrease for the City. The City Attorney was questioned whether the Scope of Services had changed at all. The City Attorney replied it did not change at all. The City Attorney was questioned why the contract was" being considered in January rather than in May. The City Attorney replied that January is a new fiscal year for her and previously it was an issue of her anniversary month when changes were made in May to take effect July. The City Attorney was questioned on how she perceives it will affect the City if they have an annual budget for her services, and whether it is being done for her benefit. The City Attorney replied it does not affect the City at all, it affects her and she believed she deserved to be fairly paid for the work she does for the City. The City Attorney wa s q questioned whether her Mission Statement was 9 generated . b Y the City or by her. The City Attorney believed she generated it in 2004. The City Attorney was questioned about her objection to an annual performance review. The City Attorney replied she did not object, and believed at any point in time any one on Council can call her and tell her what she is doing wrong or right. She did not object if Council wants to do a performance evaluation but she believed that it waters down the agency of an independent contractor and the City. She said if she were an employee, there would not be an issue of agency between them; she would be an employee not an independent contractor. The City Attorney was asked if she were interested in having the collective opinion of how they think she is doing for the City. The City Attorney replied they did not give collective performance evaluations, they give individual performance evaluations. The City Attorney said she thought that individually she could receive the same advice, but it is up to the Council. The City Attorney was questioned if a Councilmember called her and disagreed with her performance whether she would share that with the rest of Council. The City Attorney replied she would not do that as it would violate the Sunshine Law because it could come before Council for a decision. She said if one of Council were to call her and ask for advice or a performance review or disagreed with her opinion, she would not tell that to the other Council members. The City Attorney was questioned if a Councilmember were to call to ask a question if she is going to bill for each phone call. The City Attorney replied she generally did because a lawyer's trade is their time, so she generally bills for those. She said the billing she has done has been true, it is 10th there because of the discussions she has had and she will continue to bill on 1 / of an hour increments. She said if she initiates a phone call with the City Council, she has not generally billed for that, but she does list a certain amount of time and preparation for the meetings. The Mayor opened the floor for questions from the public. No one wished to speak.  Regular Council 1 - 8 -08 282 AMENDMENT TO CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACT cont. Mr. Minich moved to approve amendment to the City Attorney contract (compensated at the hourly fee of $125. 00 billed in one -tenth of an hour increments, $ 7, 000 monthly retainer to be applied toward the total monthly fee ( based on 60 -65 hours), enlargement of notice of termination to 60 days, expansion of scope of services to include Charter Officers meetings and staff meetings as necessary, provision for back -up attorney, removal of charges for long distance, faxes, and file opening fees, and authorization to use City logo). Mr. Holmes seconded motion. An exchange of views included that the contract is to align it with what it-was originally intended; that it is going to be incumbent upon the City not to waste the attorney's time because it will go above the 60 or 65 hours that was the intent of the original contract; that the City Attorney should be paid fairly for her services but the amount of money should be decided; that the City Manager will have the latitude to watch it and if she sees staff getting out of line, she will bring it to their attention; that the legal advice the City Attorney provides on legal affairs of the City has been good but repeating an opinion over and over again starts bordering on enforcement; that the City Attorney should pay attention to the legal affairs and stay out of personal affairs of the City; that the contract is a departure from the original contract; that having an hourly charge will restrict people from calling to ask questions; that the City Attorney lost $ 14, 000 last year so the fees will go up $ 14, 000 if she continues the same level of service; that the City Attorney is an advisor to Council and lengthy discussion is not something they need to do; that maybe Council should address which things they feel are important in the Boards that she should be actively involved in and the ones they think she does not need to be involved in unless direction comes from Council; that when the City changed attorneys the original contract was not about the dollar amount, that the reason for the change was about personal opinions and not about the dollar amount, and it is unfair to insinuate the City is headed in that direction again. The Mayor called for the vote on the motion and it carried by a vote of 6, to 1 with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Hartwell, and Minich in favor and Pullen opposed. CRA BOARD APPOINTMENT Consideration of appointment to the CRA Board of Commissioners. The City Clerk announced that Bill Walter has withdrawn his application for consideration. Mr. Minich nominated Jason Legg, 82 Laurie Drive, Fort Walton Beach, to serve on the CRA Board of Commissioners for an unexpired term until April 10, 2010. There were no further nominations. The Mayor called for the vote on the nomination of Jason Legg to the CRA Board of Commissioners for an unexpired term until April 10, 2010 and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor. Dean Covey, 270 Brooks Street, received clarification that Mr. Legg is an architect. FIREFIGHTERS PENSION TRUST FUND BOARD APPOINTMENTS Consideration of appointment to the Firefighters Pension Trust Fund Board. Mr. Holmes moved to reappoint Gene Large, 17 Lake Circle NW, Mary Esther to the Pension Trust Fund Board of Trustees for a two -year term from January 1, Firefighters' 2008 to December 31, 2009. Also, to reappoint, as a ministerial duty, Ervin Kempf to serve on the Firefighters' Pension Trust Fund Board of Trustees, as the fifth member, for a two - year term from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2009. Mr. Minich seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Pullen, Hartwell, and Minich in favor.  Regular Council 1 - 8 -08 283 MAYORICOUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Miller discussed the Emergency Meeting that was held on December 20, 2007, concerning the SBA, and wanted to ensure it was legal and valid. The City Manager advised an item can be placed on the January 22 consent agenda to ratify the minutes of that meeting. Mr. Miller also discussed the issue of the poor condition of some of the traffic poles in the City, and noted the poles in other cities are worse and that it is a problem state wide due to poor work by the contractor. Mr. Garvie discussed the water supply planning workshop he attended in Niceville, and advised he will continue to attend these workshops to become educated on the subject. Dr. Pullen questioned wherein the Charter it states that the City Manager has the authority to deny a councilmember's request to put an item on the agenda. The City Manager advised that if his question refers to a specific agenda request he had, she advised that from past Council discussions and Roberts Rules of Order, the request has to be an actionable item, and that his request, ' Discussion and Possible Action of Charter Officers,' contained no specificity and requested that he provide some specificity so Council could take affirmative action, but no specifics were provided by Dr. Pullen. The City Manager stated she was following prior direction from Council regarding required backup for agenda items. The Mayor advised. he discussed the issue with the City Manager and concurred with her decision to not place the request on the agenda. Mr. Hartwell discussed the possibility of offering Cinco Bayou the opportunity to annex into the City. The City Manager advised the process of annexation is lengthy and it was suggested to wait until Cinco Bayou has their new mayor and commissioner to determine their level of interest, as well as the interest of Council. Mr. Hartwell also discussed the issue of armed burglaries in the area and -the right for citizens to protect themselves in their homes. The Police Chief explained that many home invasions are drug related so the average citizen should stay alert but does not have a need to be greatly concerned. Mr. Minich advised he supported the City Manager's decision not to place Dr. Pullen' s item on the agenda without sufficient backup; and that as much information as possible should be provided so Council can make an informed decision. Mr. Minich stressed the need for Council to follow Roberts Rules of Orders and to ask questions during that time and to discuss and debate issues only after a motion is made. Mr. Minich praised the efforts of City Staff for their hard work in creating wonderful baskets for the Relay for Life Raffle, and that $ 1, 520. 00 was raised for the Cancer Society. The Mayor announced the Chamber Government Division has created a local issues committee, whereby the Chamber and City will work together on local issues. He reminded that he will be speaking to the league of Women Voters on January 12 from 10 -12 on the property tax