Charter Review Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. It is 04:00. We're going to call to order the City of Edgewater Charter Review Committee. Roll call, please.

Chairman Conroy?

Yes.

Vice Chair Fischer?

Here.

Board Member McDavid?

Here.

Board Member Bullard? Here. Board Member Mosier? Here. City Manager Mahoney? Here. City Attorney Wolfe?

Here.

City Clerk Geiger present.

Thank you. Next on our agenda number two is the approval of minutes for our regular meeting for 12/10/2025. I hope everybody had a chance to review over over be

to Mr.

Sure

Member Bullard? Yes. Board Member Mosier?

Yes.

Moving right on to the charter review, I just have a comment before we do that. You came in right on time, I think going forward we should have on our agenda always have a location for citizen comments. So people want to come in, they have we'll give them opportunity to get up there and give us their viewpoint or input. So if everybody is okay with that, we have any direction to the city clerk to add that on our future agenda for some comments.

I also have some other questions about input. If we can go you wanna go over that now? Absolutely. Go ahead. Alright. So well, there's several other entities in the city that we should probably consider, one being council, the other would be staff. So I don't know if there's a plan or a process or a way we can gain input. Maybe that would be something mister city manager would take on, query department heads or something like that. But is there any input from anybody else within the city that might wanna provide something? You know, somebody may be encountering something that they just think in the back of their mind would be something for us to consider.

I It'd be beneficial.

I just wanna pipe in on that. I did have a comment made to me about staff, about about staff talking to us directly, that maybe they don't want to come and speak. So, I mean

Well, that would be where mister city manager could come in, even if it's just an anonymous note, you know, allow staff to bring information to you anonymously however they want to, just so they can avoid that Right. You know, if that's an issue for anybody. But I think at least if you would be willing to put that out there, solicit some information from them, if there's anything that they would like to have us consider, I think it would be helpful. This would be the time to do it. I'm not suggesting that there is.

I just think we as a committee should make that make it available to them and

So I think we just need to be proactive about trying to solicit that information rather than Exactly. Ask waiting for someone to step forward. Right.

Yeah. I have no problem with requesting that all push If

they have any issues, bring it forward, however they're the most

comfortable. Yeah. Of course. Cool. Go ahead, Patrick. Continue.

And then on to the citizens' comment thing. So the meeting we have scheduled for the seventeenth, right, January 17, that's that's specifically for residents, right, community type? Is is that the only other single meeting that we wanna plan for that, or should we do a second one down the road or try to plan for a second option for residents to get in? I I agree with totally wholeheartedly anybody who walks in the door that wants to speak, we give them a chance to do that. Mhmm. But I didn't know I mean, one's fine, but I would just say maybe we should consider a

Maybe adding, like, a thirty minute before a normal council meeting so people if people are already kinda planning on coming, maybe we just open it up, like, thirty minutes before for people to come in.

I'm not opposed to that. The more participation, the more people, the better.

Yeah. Make it like a That would a good idea. Yeah.

What you basically just spoke about. Okay.

And then my last comment on ideas and stuff. So I know with SB one eighty, that restricts a lot of the things that we can do. I would just ask that if we could consider any item or any suggestion regardless of what we what we're allowed to do. I I wouldn't I would hope that we don't sit here and say, well, we can't consider that. That's s b one a. Okay? Because

It does have an end date.

So

Yeah. Yeah. Well, there is an end date, there's a potential change. And we may you know, something may happen with the lawsuit. And this committee only convenes, you know, every five years. So if we skip this chance to even just consider some suggestions, just make observations, Make suggestions to counsel for when that may clear up. So I just hope that we don't just say, yeah. That's it. You know, SB one a ties our hands. Let's just move on.

Maybe we don't jump into that right away. Maybe we get through what we can do and what what we can affect now and do that first. But at least before all is said and done, like, when we're done, I think it'd be helpful for us to at least consider some of those other ideas and options because it's gonna be five more years before Mhmm. Any of us or anybody else can get together and do this. So that's all I have, sir.

Thank you. Anybody else have any comments along the lines of this gentleman?

I agree with what he's saying.

Mr. Wolf, I have a question for you. Are we held to the same standard as two council people being outside the channel? Could I meet with Mr. Rasier?

Could I meet with Ms. Mosher? No. No. You are governed by the Sunshine And I'll Board. And

boards, of Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Start If nobody has anything else, okay, let's jump in. We'll go right to Page number one. I know this is a 20 page document.

So Section 1.01, General Powers. It's got to do with back thirty years ago, if everybody lived here then about building East Of U. S. 1, right? There was the big condo thing, not building over, I think it's 35 feet Mahoney, I believe, something, yes, 35 feet.

And then, yes, it says it right in there. So does anybody have any comments, input? I mean, I just like to go section by section. I know it might get a little boring, but if nobody has any comments, we can check it off and move on. We can always come back to it. If something comes up, I just want to cover everything. Does anybody have anything in that section, A1 right now?

I don't.

I just have a question.

That's what we're here for.

Jones Fish Camp, that development that's being done down there, what is the height on it? And does this apply because it's East Of 1?

What is that? What is being built there? Okay, because I don't know, does hotel apply? It has other

Yeah, this does not apply to the hotel that they're planning to build.

It's commercial and

boat storage.

And I think that's something maybe we should talk about. I understand why we have this specific one, but I don't know why it doesn't incorporate businesses. Why do we have it? I understand a residential big condo is ugly, but businesses are ugly too, if they're that big. So I I don't think the amount of exemptions is appropriate. I kinda think we should

I thought there was a I thought they were they were on the agenda at some point in time to get a variance to raise the height to

They did. I I remember That's what I'm thinking too, and that's why we're

getting I that don't think it came I don't remember if it I don't know if it came to a vote, but it did not go in they didn't change it. So if it it didn't go to a vote or if they I'm not sure, but I know it didn't change.

And that was one of the reasons why

I brought that project up specifically. Yeah. It's something that I guess they should have can't change.

And it was something to do about fire suppression system

Right.

Needing the extra footage footage at the peak. But I agree it should have

I think hospitals are Okay. Fire departments, I think emergency things are fine. But I don't think businesses have any business being that tall.

Well, if they are, do we have the equipment, lot of trucks to go take care of So, what we I mean, let's not ourselves as a city liable.

90 feet. Schools, sure. Yeah.

Well, if you want to have some ideas, maybe come back to the next meeting with that, ma'am.

Yes. Okay.

Great. So in the rest of that section, it just goes on to what it doesn't apply to flagpoles and tenants, water tanks, things like that, cooling towers. And the rest of that whole section has got to do with the heights, the height limits. What it not intended to do, restrict or otherwise affect the property owner's investment rights. Under Section same page here, Page two, Section 102, construction.

The power of the city shall be construed liberally and favor by the city, limited only by the constitution, general law, specific limitations, continue therein. Pretty S. Limits of The U. City. And If they are now what is that? Aerial Road, right Mr. Bahoni? Aerial Road is our southern and then west is we know 10th Street is to the North and to the West is yes, Dering Park,

the There end of Dering Park is a map on the city website that has the city limits of Edgewater and it's updated periodically.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be slow but on can we run back to construction? I was curious, what is the definition, Mr. Wolf, of shall? Like what does that mean? Does that mean mean should? Does that mean must?

No. Shall is a mandatory language. So that means shall means shall. May is discretionary, but shall is mandatory language.

Great. Thank you. Okay.

Article three down at the bottom, City Council under Section 3.01, Composition. It just says who, how many mayor and how many council people. That's probably something down the road when Darren Parks starts putting residential people moving in. I think that's going to be looked at maybe in another five years, wherever that project is at, we might have another district.

My question was when was the last time was that done?

Right. And definitely Deering Park should affect something. And I know and if I'm not mistaken, try to keep the same amount of voters or population in each district.

That's right. Yes, Yes, It was possible. So

I think maybe not this time, but maybe the next charter review is gonna be half to maybe be withdrawn with those districts.

But this this dictates when it's re redrawn. So every ten years, is there is there a way to input a a date? Like, I mean, we who's keeping track of that?

Where do you see the ten years?

Population. That's the decennial.

Where do I see the ten years? That's what decennial is. Yes.

Three zero two districts.

Three zero two districts. Four duties numbered one through four shall be And

maybe that could be a question. So when it says it's the decennial census. I question, is that adequate? Is that the is that the way to go? Is that the number? You know, what what where's this data coming from? I I think a lot of this this in here is vague. But, again, I would question, when was it done last? When is it scheduled to be done next?

Should it be on an annual basis? Should it be January 1? Should it be by

Not annual, but maybe every four years.

Well, how about every election Yeah. Prior to? I I don't

Yeah. Before, yeah, everyone puts their name in.

But the problem with that is is, you know, you say you got an election coming up, and if there's no date or time, I mean, you decision may need to be made as to, hey, we have to add a district. And if you've missed that election, now you're gonna

go four more years without I mean, not add a district, but make sure everything's equal. Right. Well, at least that What we got now. Correct. When when was that last done?

Yeah. I don't Yeah. When did

the city look at it and the districts are all equal and they moved them around? And how do they move them? And who does that in the city? What's how do they determine that?

Yes. There's in the past, there's been a committee formed, after the decennial census data comes out. And then it after that committee meets, I think it then went to counsel for a vote.

But a census is a fairly major undertaking. So that's why they only do it every ten years. So trying to say casually, let's do another census every now and again. That might be a little more of a heavy lifting we need to consider. Okay. Can I go back just one second? Actually, back a page. And this is kind of for Erin. So I was looking at page two, item D. So buildings in existence, we were talking about And I just had a quick question.

Could you just give me an example idea of what a property owner's vested rights might be?

Right. And it kind of touches on that. If they have a approved construction permit or there's been a plan unit development agreement entered into with the developer, that would certainly vested rights.

Nothing by way of like a heritage or inheritance of a certain property use that goes with their ownership not or is that are we talking about the same thing?

Vested rights could also involve, based on the current zoning and regulations, a substantial investment in the property that could also create vested rights.

Most of it is tied though to land development code, right? Right. Land use. Right. Whatever.

Okay. We can move on to section 3.03 of these qualifications. Both the mayor and the council people must have resided with the city for not less than one year.

And I think some of this might just be coming up on the course of discussion. So it's not anything that we thought about ahead

of time.

And I don't expect you to have all the answers, believe me. Thank

you. Does anybody have anything on the qualifications? You think one year is enough?

Right. And there's some case law on that and one year has been approved as being constitutional. I would not go beyond one year on the residency requirement.

Thank you. Moving down to three point zero board.

Isn't that usually the mayor and then designee?

Yes. It normally is. Yeah. Normally, the mayor and the city clerk, I think, has been in the past.

Is that a bad job?

I think you got to spend a lot of time at the supervisor of elections office. Okay. And you're there when they count the votes Is for the city of that something we want to continue, the mayor, or suggest to them? You can appoint somebody, council action. It can be a citizen too. Can be, Mr. Wolf?

I believe it could be, yes.

Yeah. This doesn't say who it should be though, does it?

Right. There's no

designation. Doesn't say how many or

Is that something you want to work up? How many? It's usually two, I believe. It's always been the but it's nice to clarify those things. That's why we're here for it. It shall be the mayor and some someone appointed by the rest of the council.

Is that something that the supervisor of elections knows better than us at this point?

And then I think in the mayor's absence was vice mayor.

Anybody else have anything under that section?

We just just leave that as an open question right

now.

We just want to clarify that. Is that something we would have to change like a ballot question, Mr. Wolff? Or could that be an internal by the council? It states in there what the canvassing board is and what it should do, but it doesn't give a clarification.

I think there could be an ordinance to do that.

Right. Okay. All right. Let's see if anybody has anything else, report the page to 305.

Oh boy.

That's always a subject discussion at each charter review.

Yes. Well, I can tell you from my personal experience, it's not enough. If you go out there, and I'm not tooting my own horn, but I went to every meeting. I went to the V card. I went to TPO. I was on Team Volusia. I went to every meeting they could. And it gets expensive, not just your time, but also money, gas, traveling, expenses. And it really if you're a council person, you've got to represent the city. Like we had never been on Team Volusia before.

We need if you're not there at the meetings, you're going be on the menu. You've got to be there and have sharp elbows, but you've got to be in the meetings. It's a cost to the city to join, but it's a cost to the council person to go. And I think it tells you right there what it is annually. But if you break it down per month, it's less it's just only a little over 500 a month.

So and I know from watching like what happened in New Smyrna, voters are never going to give politician praise. They're just not going to do it. But I have an alternative I'd like to just present to you guys. So if you didn't know, mayor and the council get free medical benefit. And that cost the city about $7,000 a year.

Now, what if we allowed the council person or the mayor, like I didn't need the medical. I already had good medical when I became a councilman and the vice mayor. I didn't need it, but they gave it to me. I think it's a waste of taxpayer money. But given that, why would we give the option to a council person or mayor to take that money in kind instead of paying it for medical that's not going to be used because it's a secondary insurance, let the mayor or council decide, I don't need it. I can waive it like Mr. Thomas has. He didn't need it. He has he's probably on Medicaid now. Well, Medicare, I'm sorry, because he's that age.

But can we give the option to a council person, say, you know what, I have good insurance. I don't need it. Can take I that in time? I asked that question. And I was told no. But I just want to open up for discussion. That's something we can increase because if you're a busy person, you really come up here to work, like our mayor is a busy person, he's out there everywhere. They're all working hard. I think they need more compensation. Think it's really sad. I'm putting together a little package to show you what other cities, surrounding counties pay their council, like size cities. That's something I'm compare it to. And I'll bring that later on in meetings, but does anybody have any comment on that?

Well, I think that they should receive an amount that allows them to spend more time to do their their job for the city. I mean, I know it's nobody's it's almost impossible to make money enough money to live off of in that position. You pretty much have to have another job. But if you can supplement that to a level where they could spend more time, maybe work less personally or privately and more work civically in their job as council person or mayor. Plus, yeah, I mean, I guess that's about it.

I don't disagree.

I definitely like the health care option. So I support that, certainly.

And also just remember this too. You have to try to recoup what money you spend on your campaign. You're out there, money is tight, you're trying to your own money is in there, and you're trying to get people to contribute. But you're trying to recoup some of the money you spent. I've spent up to $7,000 of my own money on campaign. It would be nice if you can recoup that a little bit, too. So Mr. Wolf, I have a question. Could that be a council action? Or would that have to be on a change of charter? It's not increase of the compensation of the council person, but just given them an option.

Well, says the city council was authorized to adjust the annual salary for the mayor and council members by ordinance. So I don't think what you're discussing would be the adjustment of the annual salary. So I think it would need to be in the charter.

Well, the other thing is they're not going to do that on their own, right? We've seen that. They're not they just get blasted for voting yourself a raise, right? Nobody's going to do that.

Well, in the way that it's written, they're really not getting blasted for giving themselves a raise because it doesn't take effect until Correct.

They're going to run for that position next time, too. Right? So they can be construed as, hey, I'm going vote myself a raise because I'm going to run again.

They haven't done it since Well, this was

and this also says it should be adjusted every five years. So when was the last time that was done?

Shouldn't be on an annual basis.

Well, this says consumer price index issued in October of the adjustment year, But there's no schedule of when that is here. You know? I I think there should be a at least a a point, a date, line in the sand or something, a a marker that says, you know, this is the starting point. Every five years from this date, 2025, every five years from 2025, it'll be looked at again. Or is

it every two years or every year or whatever? Or by the cost of adjustment?

Yes. So just to clarify, Mr. Wolf, did you say that it could be a council action or have to be a charter?

Charter, I think.

To give them the option to take the

benefit or the money? Yes. Because it speaks to annual salary adjustments and what you're talking about I think is different than that.

Right. It's not a salary adjustment. You're just taking an option that's given to you if you don't.

But that could be written in as an and or situation too, right? So it's not, I don't have to do this. I can choose to do it if I want to. And if I don't choose to do that, what do I where am I at? So we kind of have to outline that too.

Right. Mr. Wolfe, is there another marker other than the consumer price index that would allow that to those numbers to inch up a bit?

I can look into that. So it changed the wording from the consumer price index to some other index.

Federal cost of living index? Would you increase?

I have a question while we're on this topic. As someone that was a council member before, what do you do? Like what like outside of meetings, what is the work that you go do?

So one of the things I do, was able to have the time to do it, that I went to river to seed transportation planning organization. That organization, all the cities send a representative, which we never had before, I don't know why. But our road projects infrastructure. So you go up there and you have to politic. We had a road winding or intersection and we needed help from the county or from that organization that had funds and grants, I would go up there and I would fight for Edgewater.

Would represent Edgewater and say, hey, this is why we need it. City like it was the trails at the time, right? The trails was the big thing that we went up there and I fought for the trails to start here. And then we had to we continued all the way to the main tower was Gobbler's Lodge. I'll never forget Gobbler's Lodge to extend it all the way there, so it would connect up all the way to Deltona. So that was one organization. Team Volusia, do you know what Team Volusia is? So Team Volusia is a private and public entities who try to bring in businesses, big businesses to Volusia County. We didn't have a representative at the time. So I asked the council to spend the money for a year, put me on the Executive Board.

And you get to know me, I'm not a wallflower and I sharpen my elbows and I sat right on the Executive Board and I told Keith Nordham, who's still there, Edgewater needs your project. He was really happy that we were there. I think we're the only community Lake Helen wasn't there. But I went there and that's why we had the Lyman Training College because I tell them, I need something, need something, give me something. And I wouldn't shut up. That's what you've got to do. You've to be thoughtful in those meetings. And then V Card, V Card is the county organization for development, went to those meetings at the airport monthly. So it takes your time, money out of your pocket to go. I mean, the city would reimburse if it would cost anything to go for breakfast or anything.

But you can keep busy as councilor as much as you want. What are these meetings represent? If you go, that's even better. So those are some of the things I remember going to represent your city. Sometimes we never had anybody go there. We're so happy that Edgewater is there because Edgewater is a growing community. We needed somebody there. We helped New Smyrna, our sister city, I think it is. If they had a project, so you would go up there and help them, support them.

Thank you.

Did I miss it somewhere, but where did these base numbers come from? So this $76.31 and the $95.12 for those salary, those base rates. How are those determined?

Yes.

I think these were numbers that were this was the salary that I think that they were already receiving at the time?

It's not based on a percentage of the budget or

No, nothing like that.

Stray numbers. So, yes, and so this is ten years they've been at that salary?

It's been it's adjusted since this change was made five years ago, it's been adjusted annually based on the CPI. So I'm not sure what the current numbers are.

So you're saying their salaries were changed at the last charter review?

Every October, they shall

adjust. They're adjusted Yes,

but no more than 3%.

The numbers we're looking at were ones that were set five years ago. Since then, every year, there's been an adjustment. They are receiving more than this now.

Yes.

But what I was asking is how did we determine those numbers to begin with and shouldn't those be the numbers that we're talking about setting right now? And it should be equal to or more than what they're getting right now, those adjusted amounts.

So just to let you know, the clerk says that is not the correct, hasn't been updated in the charter. So she's looking up the correct salary as they are today.

But Mr. Wolf, this says that additionally changes to compensation shall only be adjusted every five years.

Right. Was referring to the ordinance that the city council has the option of passing. So they can pass an ordinance increasing salary, but they can only do that every five years.

That's via ordinance?

Via ordinance. Correct.

Then I want to come back because comment back when you first started talking about the amount of money, you made a comment about making the trips and going to this meeting and that meeting. They are entitled to travel for those. They are entitled to their hotel. They're entitled to per diem. So that is not part of what is coming out of the salary.

All given with the form of government that we have, I mean, it's a figurehead. Yes, it's not meant to be a full time job.

But they're already compensated, is what you're saying? I didn't know that.

Get their travel reimbursement. They get their hotel paid for. They get their dinners. They're entitled to a spouse or a guest, I believe, at

No, different That's something I stopped. I paid for my wife. The taxpayers should be paying for my wife to go to a dinner. That was I don't know if it's still done, but it should be stopped.

So that's something that I was given wrong information. Everybody was bringing

their spouse, department heads, heads and I put the kibosh on it. Taxpayers shouldn't pay for my wife's roast beef dinner. I paid for my own and people were like, what are you doing? I paid for my wife. But I never really traveled outside outside of Volusia County overnight. I'm just saying going to a guy would have three meetings a week, go to DCAR, go to the TPO, go to the never asked for any gas money.

Right, but they're entitled to that. Correct. So I mean

Well, think it should be added Flagler, Seminole, and Surrounded Counties. We should be able to obtain the information fairly easily. But like size cities, we're not going to compare ourselves, Deltona, 70,000, 80,000 people. I think it should be like cities, because if you're going to talk about it, it should be between 20,025 people. I think some of them like size cities.

I'm not talking like Palm Bay has over 100,000, Melbourne, like same size cities.

And I agree, Aaron. I understand why there's so much discussion around that, that you don't want the salary to be so that you really want to get it. Don't want to make it so attractive that people really want to get the job, because it's not supposed to be full time. It's not supposed to be it can be. I understand there's a lot to it. And at the same time, you don't want it to be so low that anyone cannot afford to do the job and still keep another job. So it's kind of which job is the side gig.

But you want your councilman out there representing the city. Yes. You want them out there fighting for every dollar they can, the grant money, all those things that they find out at these meetings. And it's all about relationships. So I can pick up the phone Holly Hill, counsel them and talk to him about his project. That's all about networking. That's what they really are. It's finding out what they're doing. Like I said to you before we started the meeting, somebody somewhere is doing it right, we don't have to reinvent the wheel. We can just find somebody that's already been doing something we want to do and just plagiarize. Nothing wrong with that.

So they're making like about 86, well 8,545 the council and the mayor is making $10.63 annually. I think that the switch out, like being able to switch between additional income or health care, is great, but I don't I personally don't see much of a need for raise. I think it's a figurehead position. Don't think that honestly, don't like me personally, I don't like the politicking aspect of it. I don't think we should grant money is great, but I don't like big businesses in Edgewater.

I don't want to be getting bigger businesses here. Small businesses, sure. But yeah, that's my opinion. But I do think that being

ir care. And then, about a if they decline that if we set this up? Or can we word it to where if we did go that option that they would have to prove that they have other health coverage?

Sure. You can word it that way. It would be an option if they have other coverage and don't need it, basically.

And just a curiosity, this is kind of off kilter, but it's for you, Joe. So I know this had been kind of talked about with FD because a lot of the firemen or EMTs are prior military. And they have their military coverage through TRICARE or whatnot. And it had kind of been talked about. And I heard that HR kind of was like, can't do that.

Because they kind of wanted to give them a little bit more in their check since they already had their coverage and they could decline. But is that going to be something that would come into play here on this, would be the same Or is it going to be different because it's an employee versus counsel?

An elected official versus an employee. That's what I would think. That would be definitely different.

Just playing in my head.

Okay. Was quite the topic. Under three zero six, just saying what the mayor is, what his duties are, and just clarification, definition. If nobody has anything on that, we'll move on to 3.07. General powers and duties, municipal government training.

So this was added at the last

Yes. The the training, additional Additional training?

I'll I'll jump out there and say that I I feel that two year two years to wait for training or having two years to wait to get my training is a little excessive. I don't understand why I get if it's not available soon enough to get within a year or six months to a year, but funds availability, I don't think any of that should get in the way. I don't know who puts it on, where you got to go to get it.

My understanding, there's a couple options. There's one that's online that they can do at any time. And then there's one where they can wait and do in person, such as through Florida League of Cities. And I personally pardon me?

Okay.

So there would be travel. And

would travel be covered by the city? Yes. So I don't know. I just think that's a little too much leeway to wait. That was

I think it should be mandated within six months.

There's also a yearly health extreme at the

hold. Right.

The hold, You've had it here a couple of times. Everybody shows up. Think do you think we should add that in there too, that it's mandatory for the ethics stream?

They're both in here. Oh, they are? Yeah. Elected municipal officials, which is what Sarah was talking about, and then the Institute for Elected one's basic and the other's in advanced.

Aaron, is the ethics training in statute

I believe it is. Yeah.

Anyway, two years of being elected, I think, should be shortened. I'm good with a year. Yeah. Think anything, I don't know, just two two years.

It takes you about two years to get up to speed, to tell you the truth. Everything that goes on, it comes at you so quick. You're not prepared for it when you get elected. There's a lot to learn, a lot to learn. That's why you have the city manager and you have the city attorney. Met with Mr. Wolf in his office when I first got elected because you know what to do. You show up and they bang the gavel and there you go, you're off. So under if you go to Page five, Section three zero eight, just the prohibitions. We can't hold another office. Appointments.

Hold on. Can we are we Yeah. What do we decide on that?

Oh, you said a year?

I think we should look at minimum at least a year.

How long does it take, like, to do the training?

It's a week long training.

So if you took it online, it cannot.

The email you cannot. Ethics you can. Where is it? Different places.

Wow. Okay. Okay. I think two years is reasonable. Like if you have to go on a trip and you're gone for a week, that's a big commitment. I don't think

I would be able to do that ever.

Well, that's part of what they need to take into consideration when they run for office

too. Yeah.

I mean, I still lean towards six months, but yet I understand where Joe's coming from. That might be a little rough. I mean,

Can we I just keep it for consideration? We can talk about it. I mean, we don't have to make a decision now.

Yes. Can we stipulate first available, but within one year?

Well, I also think we should bounce it off the mayor and the council.

Yes, people that have already been doing it.

How's it worked out for them? Do they feel as though it's too long, two years? Or they wish they could have gone within the first year? I'm sure when you first elected, if you can, family obligations, work obligations, you want to get it over as soon as possible, get it behind you. But I think maybe you should reach out to your respective council people selected to be on here and what their thoughts are too.

I have Mr. Rainberg, what his thoughts are and put on the charter. I think that's one of the things you should be doing too. So we're going to put down one year and we'll come back and talk to people about it and see what we think, see how it worked out for them. 03/2008 under prohibitions. You can't hold another office and compensate at a point of the city office or employment with the city until after expiration expiration of the terms. You can come back and work with the city within a year. Appointments and removals?

On holding another office, there's just been a thing with South Daytona Beach that came out. Daytona Beach Shores. Thank you. This is not real clear whether it means just within our city or if it means other cities as well. And I think that needs to be clear here because of what's going on there. I mean, it could be a loophole.

For employment with the city.

But don't tell

one. Yep. There's a thing in South Dakota Shores that they have an elected official that took a job in another city. Okay. So, and that is, they're arguing about it right now. So, what I'm saying is, but this says with for employment with the city. And that's what I'm saying. I think we need some clarification there. We don't fall into that same loophole.

Mr. Wolf, do you have any insight on that? Right.

This applies to just the city of after leaving Edgewater.

That's what I'm saying.

Guess what it says.

Are you talking about

South Texas.

Either way, though, right? I mean, you wouldn't want to employ somebody that held an office in another city or

It send depends somebody on where the statute is because they I brought it up because they are having an issue right now. So if they're having an issue, do we not want to protect ourselves right now and get clarification in here if this is where it needs to go.

Either way,

dual office. Yeah, that's in the state constitution. Once

they're gone.

But it does say with the city.

Any position. Any employment.

They can be employed by the city after a year.

Has to be three sixty six.

But they can go any place. They can go to any other city. Correct. Is

the Directors Directors of of of fully and freely, of discuss with the city manager. Of I think that's okay with me. Yes, that's

a city manager form of government. So it's just in line with that.

And so under C, same kind of thing where you can't interference with administration. Everything has to go through the city manager. You can't ask the department head, why is he doing this, why aren't they doing that, things of that nature. Why is the you can't stop on the side of road, ask a guy to do something because you're a city council person. That's pretty self explanatory.

Nothing on that. Limitations on borrowing. The City of Edgewater shall not incur additional debt of more than 0.75% of the net taxable value during any forward moving five year period unless such debt is approved by a referendum of the eligible voters in the general or special election.

That was up for change on the last charter And review as well,

I would think that's always a moving number because the next taxable value is always changing every fiscal year. And hopefully, it's going up. The trend anyway should be going with development, appreciation of people's property. Anybody have any comment on that? I think today we're just going over things. If you do have comments, bring them forth. But it's just for digestion.

Let's ask Bridget, shall we?

She would be important to consult if there's going to be any change to limitations on borrowing.

So this next one under E, this one came up a couple of years ago, I remember. Any city employer who is a city officer as defined by the resigned to run state statute 99.012 Florida statute, desires to run as a candidate for elected city officer, resign their employment in accordance with resigned to run law. I think that's been on the books, but that's the state statute. Hasn't been on the very long. But I remember when that was all in the news.

I just wonder who would that apply to?

Any police officer is considered an officer a candidate, then they would need to follow that statute and resign.

But only resign before they're sworn to office, right? So somebody could effectively run a campaign, still work for the city, be an officer, go through the process of that and just the day before they get sworn in.

Is that correct? Is that right?

I think this was designed to prohibit a current city officer from running for office while they're still employed with the city.

But they can't run. Right.

Well, they would need to right. They would need to resign and then run.

Right. But just before they're sworn.

No, this would require them to resign.

It's literal, to run. I'm

just looking at the last

The last sentence says all other Right. City

Under F, the city is required to maintain reserves at a minimum of 15% of all operating funds.

Is that sufficient?

If we've been going for just about an hour now, does anybody want to take a five, ten minute break? All right. Let's come back at 05:10. If you want to, we'll just take a quick break. Right.

We left off on go to Page six, the very top, Section 3.09. Vacancies, what they do when they vacant city council person, forfeiture of office, three consecutive council meetings without being excused, code of ethics, standard of conduct.

Can I ask again an example of the standard of conduct? What's our code of ethics is used for us for this?

Well, think there's state statute that covers ethics, isn't it? Yes. There's a

112, I think.

What is it?

Under 112, state statute 112, there's a code of ethics, which will define things. Okay. And I think the city has a code of conduct. Correct? So the city also has a code of conduct.

See that big war at the end of number two?

Yes. It's important. Or or and is usually very important. Victim of felony, first degree misdemeanor, arising on official conduct or duties. He can be recalled under state statute. It's 100.361. It also goes on to how they fill vacancies.

I think I'm just a little concerned about that. Ethics is becoming a moving target. So I like as much specificity as we can get.

Do you think we should just add 112 right into our chart?

That's the governing

incorporate it right into the chart, 112, so it's not open for interpretation.

Well, down on C, for recall provisions, says of Section 100.361. So all she's saying is maybe up there, it should say one Yes. 100

I think that's an easy fix. Yes. There's some verbiage in there. Yes. Why is any city of Edgewater standard of conduct or code? Code of ethics as prescribed by Florida State Statute 112, some kind of language like Yes.

Something a little more specific right there on two Yes. Would be Okay. All right.

We're down at D filling vacancies. I don't have anything on there. Special elections if nobody has anything else under that we can go to page a look next to next next And to next less than a quorum. Question.

Deal that.

That's the key. If there's less than a quorum, the governor would come in. So you would have to lose

Right. But what if he's the one that requires it to be less than a quorum? Is he allowed to remove council members?

Absolutely. Is that correct, Mr.

Wolff? Yes. Absolutely.

If they're not I'm not going to change if it out law.

They're not

going get killed

off if they're

not going to be killed off or disabled Right. They're forfeiture of office. That is something that is governed by the governor, correct?

Right.

So it

kind of seems a closed loop that doesn't help the city. Right.

Do you have any suggestions for that? Or you just want to think about it, come

back? Yes.

Good question. Okay. Let's go down to 310, judge of qualifications. First to

do

able that. Do And we're during the state of emergency, the city council is authorized to meet in accordance with any executive order issued by the governor. Turning over to page eight, rules and journal. How the council will determine its own rules and order of business except that the agenda for the council shall include Right.

So I know the mayor has commented on we're the only city in Volusia that has two public comment times and whether that's something that should be looked at.

In the beginning and the end?

Yeah. And it's right here in the charter that requires it.

I think I understood from the last meeting when he made those comments. And wasn't he also talking about trying to get people to sign up ahead of time so we would have more of an idea of what the time commitment was?

With cards, yeah. A lot of cities, the school

board does that. I don't like that. I don't like that at all. The people have to come in there and put their name on a piece of paper, and they should walk in that door and go to that podium and have a right to speak. I think that's a constitutional right now. I've never liked that. I see that the county council do it. The school board does it. I don't like it. But I got to put my name up.

I don't know that that's exclusive though, is it necessarily?

It is, county council?

You can't get up and speak if you have not filled out your card.

You have to fill out a card and submit it.

If I want to, it should be my option. But I go up there, I state my name, where I live. I don't even have to live in the city.

And I understand the idea behind trying to shorten to trim the meetings. But having them at the beginning and at the end does allow you to take part. And then at the end, if something comes up over the course of the meeting, you still have another opportunity to speak. So even though

But for non agenda items, because anything's on the agenda, there's always citizen comments. So the citizen comments

But they only got three minutes.

Well, they get to the That's probably it.

But you may still be able to come up with something that you're compelled to say by the end of the meeting

I without

that second opportunity, then you get out on your will tell you this. When I was in the council, I didn't think three minutes was enough. Even citizens get up there, they're not polished speakers, they're nervous as heck, they get dry mouth and they forget. So I did talk to the mayor, we did it for a year to give them two more minutes, five minutes. I think it worked out pretty good. I don't think it was a problem, but they went right back to the three minutes. I just as a person to get up there before, you know, unless you write it down, you're a Polish speaker, you have to get up there as a citizen. And you want to get your point across and your full thought, three minutes is not enough to me.

We could do like an option to add like, could I request two extra minutes? Because I mean we do that or they do that with Jeff if he calls Jeff Brower, right. So you should be able to request it.

They don't wanna hear it. It's negative.

Right. I also think that it we should put in here somewhere that if we're running short on time or something, we still can't cut your three minutes because I know they do that at county. They'll cut it. If they don't wanna be there, they will cut cut, take your time, and say, we're only going to allow this amount of time, or and they used some of them used to push back, but now none of them are

pushing back on the

basis of how many there were to try and contain the time?

Perhaps, but I don't like, you just you can't contain the time. This is their time to speak.

That's the

point. Don't they have the citizen comments where the consuls not even see you?

They mean, like, go get up and go get coffee and back later.

They're not all seated at

all. They don't have to be I guess they have a quorum. There and listen to their sessions.

Maybe they play it in I the don't know.

Part of that sounds like it might be processed on just on the citizens' comments itself. So you could still do cards that say sign up. You can. And then you get to go first. And then when all those are exhausted, if there's still someone that

wants to speak,

make it an option.

You might be sitting in the audience going, oh, something just popped in my head at once.

Exactly, and you would have that same three minutes. So then they at least get a feel for how much time they need to allot for this. If they've got a room full and everybody wants their three minutes, get to know they're going to be here for a while. And otherwise, then people know that they don't necessarily have to commit up front. But if something does come up and they feel compelled to get up and speak, they can.

It kind of defeats the purpose, though. If know I don't have to fill out a card, I'm not going to fill out a card because I know I can come in and speak whenever I want to. Right.

That's fine.

And it just gives

Both options.

Well, it's yeah, it's a courtesy.

Somebody else more work to do to collect the cars, to make sure they get in in the right order, and make sure they fill out completely. And

if you eliminate the second citizen comments, you're going to have a much longer one the front end of the meeting, right? Because people say, sometimes council meetings go three, four hours. Well, I'm not waiting until the end. I'm going to get up everybody's going to get up there in the front end, which they do, but maybe more so.

It seems organizational more than necessarily the Charter.

I will say reading off the cards does take longer, because usually you just have a line with people and it's right after, but if you call someone, they gotta scoot through their

you know?

But Alright.

But as a courtesy, I think it's a good idea.

I hate to I hate to do this to you, and I know this is not gonna be popular, but we skipped I skipped over. I wasn't paying attention or I missed it. But the meetings, the the once monthly meeting, I I'm a firm believer that it they should have kept it at two when they had to. There's plenty of stuff. There's plenty of topics. Even this open discussion with citizens' comments and everything.

I would revisit their pay. Well,

that would that would also tie into at least once a month. You know, I don't know. It could tie into another reason for additional there's two meetings I think.

If you need a second meeting, call a special meeting. Mayor or the majority of the council say, hey, we want to meet with a special meeting, a second meeting. If you keep it to two meetings a month, it will be much shorter meetings. Each meeting will be much shorter, right? There won't be drawn out.

When they're doing a bunch of items, ordinance reading, all those ordinances, he's the guy that's reading everything. Because it says at least once a month. So if you have something that's long, long, you can always adjourn and let's meet next week as long as you can do the And the Mayor public And

you say that it is common in the fall to do that during the budget period anyway. So they're doing two for several months, right?

You got to set the millage by September 30, right? Have to set the millage. Okay. Well, thank you for your comments. Rules and journal on top of page eight.

That's the citizen comments. I don't like to see a change in that. That's just my personal thing. I want to listen to every citizen that comes up there. That's my job. That's my responsibility, whether I agree with it or not, negative or positive.

The voting under C? Right. So this requires three votes to pass an ordinance or resolution. It doesn't come up that much. It would only come when two members are absent, then the vote would need to be unanimous to pass an ordinance or resolution. But this is somewhat unusual to Edgewater to require three votes to pass an ordinance or resolution as opposed to just the majority vote. Just pointing that out.

Some background on that?

Yeah, was there any background?

There was a background what's the backstory on that?

I think they must have thought a resolution and ordinance was important enough that it should not be passed by just two to one vote. So

that

This has been in the charter since I started as city attorney. So it's been in there

a long time. So that verbiage about compelling the attendance of absent members doesn't really mean anything? That just Right. That I don't think

that would be applicable here.

It's not referring to anything in particular.

All right.

Let's move down to 3.12, ordinances and resolutions. Under 3.13, initiative and referendum of the initiative, voters shall have the power to the council. I

mean,

confusing.

I mean, to to to me, me, I I don't don't see see how how I don't really understand it. How's you know? How does how does one petition for a charter amendment? I I can't make heads or tails of the legal charter amendment or

proposed ordinance. The ordinance is you propose it, you have an idea for an ordinance, you propose it to the council, you come up, you get your three minutes or longer. Just kind of delineates in here, they failed to adopt it. That shall not extend to the budget or capital program or appropriation of money or levy your taxes or so. So if you have an idea about an ordinance to help the city, you're more than welcome as a qualified voter to come up to the council, give them all the information and propose it to them. I think that's all it does, really.

Isn't this correct me if I'm wrong. So the initiative process is for a new ordinance that is not to bring something forward by a petition and try and get it the council to approve it or undertake it. But a referendum is to go against something that is already established. It's the same thing, petition process, say, we don't like that particular ordinance. We want you to rescind that or repeal that. So it's either new or old is my basic basic understanding of that, correct?

Yes. This

gives you the right to try to get one or get rid of one. B, commencement of proceedings. How many qualified voters it would take to commence the initiative referendum? File it just tells you how the process is.

Why is it five?

Do you

all know why it's five? Like five people versus three or

I don't my I would have been with the city since 1990. I can't remember ever anybody doing this ever. Now people get up there for their three minutes and tell you they're not happy with something, but nobody took the time, five voters to ever do this ever. I'm sure that's in there for some reason though, right?

Yes.

It's not in the charter for nothing. Is that something you've seen before Mr. Wolff?

No, never seen it.

It's just people are right. People to get together. Going to she's going to be, Sarah's going be the first test subject on this. I kind of like it.

Yeah, it seems I like like it, yeah.

Yeah. If there's something that won't be budgetary or emergency situation, you have an idea for the city. Can't always

doesn't seem

open. Is there any way we can go back and see when this thing was put in the charter? Curious of the year. Sure, there's a backstory on it. Why?

Okay, page nine, petitions.

Oh, sorry, can I back up a bit?

Up Go

here on voting.

Can you tell it on c? Yeah. Okay.

Okay. So I was wondering if there was a way or if it would be a good idea to make certain or ordinances be super majority, like if it is a residential development or zoning changes, something that impacts the environment in a negative way since we deal so much with flooding? Is that something that we could make a super majority for? If it's something just I don't know. I don't know exactly what we would put, but I kind of feel like, yeah, you're changing something from into a residential development if you're changing zoning or something that negatively impacts.

It's a big change to the city, huge change to the city. Going to be a big change.

Deering Park.

It's going to change the whole look, operations of the city. And you're proposing a super majority of that.

Yes, something like Deering Park, or any big development of a certain number, say over 40 houses, or over 30 acres. Something I don't know. I would probably need to look into more specifics, but something that would make big change.

We'll ask Mr. Wolf.

Yeah, I'd have to look at it to see the legalities of that. But that's something I can look at, research.

Also,

like on that same kind of vein, where we have this is all the way at the beginning so in general powers, where we're holding in order to further protect public health safety, general welfare, and aesthetics, no new building height, right? So we talk about that. But could we add it's not just a building height things like developing on wetlands, things that in order to further protect public health, safety and general welfare and aesthetics, I think we should limit it. And I don't know where exactly that could be put or where.

Do you know what land mitigation is? So a developer, he wants to go on this building this plot. It's a wetlands, it's a recharge area. You've got some other land. So I'll tell you what, let me build on that. That other land, never build on it. So he promises never to build on this piece of property, but you're letting me on that. That's land mitigation, right? I don't like that.

Well, yes, because what's a promise? You come back and

In ten years down the road, hey, want to build on that.

Right. Yeah, I think we need to find a way to put in the charter somewhere that we have to stop developing wetlands. We have to stop bringing in fill dirt. And I don't know where to put this. I don't think this could all be zoning. I mean, this is the rules. So I think we need to find some way to put this in. And I don't think it's impossible or out of the realm of possibility considering we have height how high you can build a load. That's important. But I think more important than our aesthetics are in general safety.

If they're talking about a ladder, we have that. But I do think that we're having a lot of flooding issues, as we know. It's not just flooding, it's our sewage is coming up in the street when we flood, which is a safety thing. I don't know, I think that we just need to figure out a way to slow it down and not optionally. Like not if we've got the right people sitting up here, like it needs to be a constant.

This isn't about development or over development or making money it's about everyone's flooding and it's bad for the environment to fill in wetlands and bring in all this fill dirt and I think we need to find some way to stop it like that it is not just dependent on who's in these chairs?

Well, lot of things I think work into it where the states got involved, where they're helping developers, their rights, So we can never supersede state law. It's always been in the news about home rule, how they're taking it away. So that's why Mr. Wolf sits there and advises us, is that already a state law? Can you do that? Has it

already been done? Probably. Yes. With SB 180, those types of changes are going to be difficult because you can't do anything that's more burdensome or restrictive to development based on that. Of course, we're trying to overturn it

And in that's where we came in earlier talking about we're here now trying to do changes for the next five years regardless. And that does

have an expiration date of I mean 2026, correct, SD-one hundred '80?

Parts of it, yes.

Yes.

Because So we have to protect you say wetlands, that's a recharge area where the water goes back into the aquifer, funnels down back into the limestone of Florida, goes into aquifer. The news if you've seen a toilet to tank thing.

Oh, yeah.

And even that, the toilet to tap is

Oh, toilet to tap, I'm sorry, yeah.

I don't think in an emergency situation that would be I wouldn't want a ban for an emergency situation, but I don't think that is how it would be used. I think it would be used to continue to allow more development to where we're pushed into having to use that. It will become an emergency situation. Yeah, so I agree to recharge you.

So back to that 101, your General Powers A1, in order to further protect the public and environmental health, can we add just that type of disclaimer about what our concerns are, even if we don't add the specifics of what that entails about filter or wet lands fill in. We're not going to go so far as to say height. Height is there, but at least state that we have the city charter includes environmental health as well as public health. Well, mental health is public

Volusia County has minimum standards, environmental protection standards, and I think what Mandy's talking about is really It just expressed durable voter approval approved commitment. It's harder to reverse than a regular ordinance, but we're just putting it in the charter to it's the city's commitment to environmental concerns.

And if you put that So

that can be broad.

On the ballot, people at Edgewater will vote for it. They want Yeah. We've already

inquired will vote for it.

Right. And I think that's why it's being kept out of things because if you gave us a choice, I mean, as we see with Volusia Forever and Echo Funds, we will vote and pay to protect our environment. And I think that's why we're not given the option.

Of

year. Right petitions, the number of signatures. Right now, we have to have at least 10% of total number of qualified voters.

What are our qualified voter numbers?

I think that maybe I'll reach out to the supervisor of election.

All She

could tell us. Do you think 10% Good.

As far as 10% Too Good. High,

too low. Should it be 5%?

Think that's pretty standard.

Is it?

I think so. Okay.

All

right. Forming content, affidavit of procedure for filing. I don't have anything under that. Going to Page 10, we're halfway through the document. Council review of the petition.

Under E, referendum petition that. 20 be able to And the slide. Slide. And nobody has anything on that. Go go to to Page 11.

And then It continues about that petition and results of the election. And it ends with number two on the referendum. And we can go right into Article IV administration under Section 4.01, appointment and termination of the city manager.

You run off the slide, can you run back for just On one page 10, E, the top half there on the I just wanted clarification, if I could, about how exactly that works. So you file a referendum, it's insufficient in some way. However, there is no action on it. The ordinance sought to be reconsidered shall be suspended from taking effect.

And

then that suspension will end the ordinance will retake effect when those four other items are met. If it just remains insufficient, then what happens? Nothing?

What's your question?

That was it.

So they kind

of made a mistake. If it's

fine through the clerk's office that it was insufficient, and I think that's registered voters, it's less than 10% insufficient, So

that is the next part. So the final determination of insufficiency.

That's

one. So once they find out it's a mistake or it's not right, it doesn't go forward, there doesn't have to be an additional action. It can just fail at that point. I think that answers my question. All right, thank you.

Let's go back to Audit Administration, Section 4.01.

Last time around, the change was made to require a vote of three or more members to appoint a city manager or terminate. Again, they didn't question. The I

is

restriction on employing relatives.

Can we go back for a second?

Can we just go back to that?

Which one?

What Aaron just mentioned about it going from Should a two to one to a that be a super majority? Should that be should it be unanimous?

I mean, it's I don't think, yes. Yes, but no.

No, I understand that the last few times, it's been costly and just very very complicated and difficult to recover from. So I just wonder if it should be even more difficult for that to necessarily happen. I don't know. Yes, no, ma'am?

And shouldn't that number increase if the number of districts

It should be the majority of council that if and when we do increase districts.

But majority plus one fixes that. Corrects that.

That's the lawyer.

Okay, right? Majority plus one.

Well, no. That would require four votes if everyone was all five present. That would be a change.

Should there ever be six districts, Yes.

If districts are increased, then these clauses like this would need to be changed accordingly. So if there's seven districts, this might say requires four votes or five votes.

There anything like that? Just talk about districts real quick. Is there like a standard where a city of this size, so many people in the district, and they say, hey, got too many people in the district. So let's cut it up a little bit more in your experience.

I don't know. I know Deltona has seven districts.

They got 90,000 people.

Right. But they're so much bigger.

Do we want to go back into General Powers and make note that if the districts increase then certain portions of the charter need to be updated within the next number of times? I think they

should be tied to how many people live in the city or qualified voters, right? So maybe we can get that from the supervisor election, like we're 24 now. Is the breaking point at 30,000 or qualified voters? Then do we add another district? I think she can give us direction. Like, when do we add another district? You know what I'm saying? Early? Or maybe she can give us some direction. These cities did this, like Deltona as they grew. When did they add districts? Was it 30,000, 40,000, 50,000? What did they what was their break not breaking point, but where would they say, hey, we need more districts?

What was their gotcha number?

Yes.

And I think it looks like from what I've seen just looking at the maps being redistrict, it looked like they just redrew them. Not that they even considered adding another council.

Because four forty two went West of I-ninety 5? Yes.

Yes. But isn't it just straight one or two goes off. 442 to like 2200 block, To me, that's kind of like a dog leg. Should we redraw them?

Well, and then we have go for on Eaton High Aqua Park, to

of districts, how many qualified. For them too, how will they manage it, how many people in the district, they'll give us some direction.

Because maybe we want to make a note of just the different sections that would apply to that. And then if we find out it's 30,000 for population of qualified voters then we need to make note in under general powers that if and when we reach that.

Qualified voters. Yes. Should be another.

These items need to be updated at that time within a certain period,

ninety days.

Okay, we're back on city manager. And we're on four zero two, powers and duties. It tells you what he can do, appoint, suspend, remove, direct, supervise. He needs to attend all council meetings. He doesn't have to vote.

He's the one that is responsible to all the laws and revisionist charter, acts of the city council. We're on Page 12

we're

do the city council on that. Just about everything, And making recommendations. And you can sign the contracts, agreements and leases on behalf of the city to the extent authorized by ordinance. Joe, off the top of your head, you know what that figure is? Is it like $15,000 or something?

Thousand dollars yes. 50. In the purchasing policy. I

guess that's the increase as the time frame. Goes on to Ken Buenaevi's relative and it delineates who they are. Acting city manager. Gives the right to the council to revoke under four zero three that designation if they don't like it and appoint another one until the city manager returns. Section four zero four, creation.

I'm sorry, say that again.

Written communication.

Written communication?

Yes.

Which could be include e mail, electronic, conveyance? You want it changed like that?

So you just don't like the term?

It should

have It means something specific.

It's so AI. Have

to type memorandum at the top

of your email. Yeah. Like, means something specific.

Like, it still says memo at the top of your email.

Under four 04, creation of departments.

Subject line.

The counsel the right to include one of our partners relating to public safety. Discontinued unless this charter specifically provides a fine tuning. Let's go. Do you guys want to we're almost going out for two hours. Do you want to continue for a little bit more or we want to come back on January 6 and continue this?

I think we did a lot more than halfway through the document. You want to anybody want to continue or would you like to

Could we just do this one more page?

What's that?

Could we just do this one more page?

One more page.

Page 13.

The city attorney and clerk. And that'll give us all something to think about.

Very good. Okay. So on the top of 13, section four of our city attorney, It gives the right of the city council by a majority, three or more, to appoint a city attorney, establish the terms of appointing, and fix the level of compensation. The city attorney must be admitted to the practice of law in the state of Florida. The city attorney should be the chief legal adviser to the attorney for the city council, the city manager, the city clerk and all city departments, officers and agencies and shall perform any other duties prescribed by this charter or as being required by the city council.

The city attorney shall report directly to the city council and shall not be under the supervision or direction of the city manager. The city council shall, by a vote of three or more of its members, terminate the city attorney. That's it. Anybody have of

city manager, 401, the city attorney, 405, and the city clerk, 406. I'm a I'm a firm believer that some sort of evaluation, annual review, some sort of discussion needs to take place. I think it protects both parties. I mean, if if I know what my I know what I'm expected to perform, what level you know, in the forty years I worked at Coca Cola, if if I have ten years of good performance evaluations, I'm not getting let go. I know I'm not.

Right? If I if I'm not cutting the mustard, if I'm not meeting the responsibilities or I'm not achieving the goals, I should know about it. Right? How can I fix what I don't know? Or maybe I do know and maybe I chose not to. I don't know. We've I've done them. I've done them on it's it's difficult. I've done them for 25, 30 employees at a at a time, and they're tough conversations, it's hard to, you know, subjectively I don't know how you guys work for five different bosses without something that says, hey. Look. You did you know?

They do have written evaluations. Counsel does provide written And