Loading...
Charter09-24-13Min City of Longwood 2013 Charter Advisory Committee Longwood City Commission Chambers 175 West Warren Avenue Longwood, Florida MINUTES September 24, 2013 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Ben Paris Member Becky Huse Member Alesia Carringer Member Andrea Elukovich Dan Langley, City Attorney Michelle Longo, Recording Secretary Absent: Vice Chair Logan Cody 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chair Paris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES- August 27, 2013. Chair Paris moved to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously. 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. None. 4. REVIEW OF CHARTER. A. ARTICLE VI. Financial Procedures. Chair Paris called for any further discussion on Article VI. Member Carringer said she has noticed that Casselberry now has an Appleby's, Chick- Fil -a, Bojangles, and a new Waffle House, and she is wondering how Longwood keeps getting overlooked. She asked what were their incentives to come in to a small city. Mr. Langley said that is difficult to answer. There are a lot of market -driven factors that may not have anything to do with the City government. He is not sure that Casselberry and Lake Mary are throwing out incentives for fast food restaurants. He said these corridors and state roads drive a lot of traffic, and the traffic on the roads will drive the development of fast food restaurants. Charter 09 -24 -13/1 Member Carringer said in November, her family will be here eleven (11) years, and when they moved to Longwood there were businesses everywhere. She said all they have is vacant buildings and construction, and there is nothing appealing about their little City anymore. She said she would like to know what they could do or how they could get that in front of somebody to market the City better. Member Huse said she also shared the same question and asked if there was anybody who is assigned to attract businesses, or approach them to ask if they would consider Longwood. Chair Paris said that is a planning situation and a lot of it has to do with taxes, waivers, fees, and variances to come in to start businesses. He said what they are talking about is a fine- tuning issue, which is something that would go before the Commission. He said many Commissioners have run on the State Road 434 corridor platform and fixing it, and he said he thinks that is something to bring up on an Agenda for Public Participation with the Commission. He said if they would like to start doing something like that and make it a citizen -driven base where the citizens could gather and ask these companies why, that might be something to look into. He did not see anything in their Charter that they could affect. It could affect taxes, which is the only thing that maybe their tax rate is higher than other cities, but that is not within their power of the Charter to even recommend an amendment to taxes. Mr. Langley said they do have a person on staff that is a designated Economic Development person. He said the Community Development Department has been getting kudos from the development and business community about working with them through the permitting process to get some redevelopment. He said he has heard a lot of positive things at Commission Meetings. He said he knows there is some interest in residential development for the City, which is a positive sign. He said the Chair is correct. The Charter is not the place to deal with those things because you need a lot of flexibility. The Charter is there to restrict the authority of the City, and not to grant those new powers. He said the one thing that is helpful in dealing with those situations is the provision that you reviewed and addressed at the last meeting about the ability to borrow and spend money. He said it is safe to say that Mr. Williams would also agree and has stated that provision handcuffs the City in many ways, so the provision that they recommended would be helpful. Charter 09 -24 -13/2 Chair Paris asked if there was any more discussion on Article VI. He said they had some extra reading material sent to them from Mr. Williams. He asked Ms. Barclay to talk about the reading material. Ms. Barclay said Mr. Williams asked her to discuss the Charter versus the State Statute. She said basically, the Statute is the umbrella, and they try to do everything to be in compliance with them. The Statute is very vague and not stringent. She said they would need to stay consistent with the state law because their Charter is redundant with that. Mr. Langley said Mr. Williams mentioned at the last meeting he wanted to bring this to their attention because there may be a way of just referencing adopting the budget in the manner required by state law instead of deleting a lot of these provisions in the Charter itself. He thinks that is what he had in mind as a proposal for them to consider. He said the entire article would not be deleted, but some of the sections that go into the budget adoption process, they may consider just simply saying adopt the budget in accordance with state law. A lot of cities do that and it is simple to bring state law in. He said sometimes redundancies and inconsistencies can occur, and it causes confusion. He said if it were in the Charter to follow the state law on the adoption of the budget, it would be a lot simpler. He said they are talking about the process by which the City adopts its fiscal year budget. Member Carringer said that all makes sense and she has no problem with it at all. Chair Paris said he said read his packet, and he thinks it would be much simpler to go back to state law and stay with that. He said there are only two issues with it. He said they are adding something else they are going to ask the Commission for and it is going on referendum, and they are also taking up another set of rules, so they are letting go on what the Commission can do with putting together a budget. Member Huse said the Florida Statute seems much easier to understand. Chair Paris said he agreed. Chair Paris made a motion to adopt and follow the state law for setting a budget. Seconded by Member Huse. Charter 09 -24 -13/3 Mr. Langley said he would draft it for the next meeting. In the interim, he will go through Article VI and do a line through and draft it. He said the Charter Provision would read: The budget of the City shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of general law of the Florida Statutes. Mr. Langley said there are some sections that would be affected with strike - through and others that would not be changed at all. He said for instance in section 6.01, where it defines fiscal year, that is also established by state law, so that is redundant, but they may leave that in. He said regarding the budget message, they may want to keep that too because that is not establishing the budget adoption procedure. Member Huse asked about section 6.04. Mr. Langley said section 6.04, 6.06, and 6.08 will probably be deleted or consolidated into a simple statement. Ms. Barclay said it does not address the Capital Program section 6.05 or 6.07, so she said to keep those intact. Chair Paris said they moved to change the wording so next month they will be able to have an actual written version of it and make their final decision on it. Mr. Langley ,said there is a motion and second on the floor. He said the motion is essentially to amend Article VI to provide that the budget and its amendment shall be as provided in state law and to make other changes that are inconsistent with that or redundant with that. Motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. Member Elukovich asked if in section 6.09 is she correct in assuming that basically that is a use or lose section. Mr. Langley said yes, it means that every fiscal year stands alone, so the next adoption cycle for the next fiscal year budget, the Commission has to reallocate that money in the next budget in order for that money to carry over. He said if they don't, the money evaporates from the budget and does not roll over. B. ARTICLE VIII. Nominations and Elections. Charter 09 -24 -13/4 Chair Paris said these two (2) sections do not have a whole lot that needs to be done, but they are here to discuss. Chair Paris asked if there was any discussion on Article VIII Nominations and Elections. Member Elukovich asked when they talk about qualifying voters, that is an issue in Florida as far as ID is concerned. She said Longwood is going to go with the State across the board. She said what happens if they do not agree with all of the required ID necessary. She asked are they going to go with whatever the state says. Mr. Langley said the state has a very comprehensive election code that governs ID, and they cannot regulate that. He said they only have some flexibility in the conducting of some City elections as they pertain to qualifications to run for offices in the City, but when it comes down to conducting and accepting the voters and giving them their ballots, there is a very strict guideline they have to follow and cannot deviate from it. Chair Paris made a motion to leave Article VIII alone. Seconded by Member Carringer and carried by a unanimous voice vote. C. ARTICLE IX. Initiation and Referendum. Chair Paris said regarding Article IX, he thinks they should look at the procedures for removing Commissioners through a petition. Mr. Langley said it is Section 9. 10, which adopts state law. He said that law pre -empts all Charters. Chair Paris said he was not aware of that, so he withdrew his suggestion. Chari Paris made a motion to leave Article IX alone. Seconded by Member Huse and carried by a unanimous voice vote. 5. OLD BUSINESS. Review of Florida State Statute 166.241 dealing with Fiscal years, budgets and budget amendments. 6. AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING. Charter 09 -24 -13/5 Chair Paris said he read ahead on it, and the one is a miscellaneous article and the other one is for Ordinances, etc. He suggested they do both articles, hopefully with little or no changes, and also work on their presentation for the Commission and setting a time and date for that, and do their final review of everything they are going to present. He asked Mr. Langley for everything they have written up and changed and sent to us so they can look at it. He also said if they could also get potential dates to present to the Commission. He said at their next meeting they wipe out the rest of the articles and go over their final presentation. Mr. Langley said in your packet is language from their last meeting and asked if they were okay with it. Chair Paris said it all looked good to him. He thought they would do a final vote on it at their next meeting. Chair Paris said their next meeting is set for October 29, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. 7. ADJOURN. Chair Paris adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. aris, Chair*" ATTEST: Mic e e ongo, ary Charter 09 -24 -13/6