Charter Review Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

Um, what was our opening prayer?  Jonathan or Sure. Jonathan. Heavenly Father, we just thank you for your  many blessings. We thank you for this food   that you have provided a further evidence of your  goodness and grace in our lives. Bless it to the   healthiness of our bodies. Father, we pray for our  discussion and time today. Uh we pray for the work   of the uh charter review advisory board. Father,  we thank you for their willingness to serve our   city and and her citizens and businesses. We pray  that all that we uh deliberate today and discuss   would bring honor and glory to you. Give us wisdom  and give us discernment and give us courage.   Continue to uplift our men and women in uniform  as well as all of our first responders that work   every day to keep us safe. We ask all this in the  name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Amen. Amen. To the flag of the United States of America  and to the republic for which it stands.   One nation under God, indivisible,  with liberty and justice for all. I guess that was Jan. You mind doing the  roll call? Chairman Berg here. Mr. Danzy   will be late. Mr. Ferrer. Yes. Mr. Anderson  Jansenius. Yeah. Miss Goon here. Mr. Chairman,   you have um you guys had an opportunity to  consider the minutes from the last meeting. I have there's no revisions on a motion to approve. All in favor? Favor there. Um audience or Zoom comments  or anything like that. Is anybody on Zoom  

this cloud other than us? us. Thank you.  There's no one online. So there chairman,   we are streaming live though or recording  it. Sorry for sure. Um All right. Well,   let's do our staff reports. I think we have a few.  You do? Yes. Just uh from myself uh Zimmerman's   team has some additional stuff as well, but um  as requested, we uh get some information from   around the state. roughly 35 or so examples of how  elected officials have paid in other cities and   towns around the state of Florida as well as the  current active boards uh that we have and their   calendars where they meet, who's on them, all  the information. I did email that out to you guys   uh in advance of today's meetings. And as you'll  see on the salary front, I mean, you really got   a little bit of everything here. Uh you've got  some um uh you know some smaller cities uh and   some mediumsized cities and some very large cities  in here. Um you know a few of them have it kind of   baked into uh into their charter. Some of it it's  set by ordinance which is how we do it here at the   city of Panama City. Uh some of them are which  I found to be very interesting. They uh kind of   tie it to the county commissioners and then it's  just a percentage of it. Uh and so that's how both   uh Leon Leyon County does it like that. Uh  and actually theirs is set 100%. Uh and then   uh in Valuchia County, which is Daytona Beach,  that's a percentage. It's 75% of the county   commission salary. And then there's another  one that I think's like um uh Venice Beach,   which I think is CER County, it's 20%. So  in in America, it's a little bit more. So,   um, you've got all these options here just to  kind of, uh, kind of show, uh, how it is, um,   throughout here. Um, seems like most folks do  kind of have it baked in in a very in a very   formal fashion and it's not really just simply  left up to, you know, to the elected officials  

to kind of change it if they see fit. So, happy to  entertain any questions about this. If there's any   more detailed questions on the board uh meeting,  you know, uh Miss Smith uh can can address some of   that. But I think this hopefully this gave  you guys some of the information that you   wanted in order to uh think about how to bring the  salary for the elected officials moving forward. Question I know we're going to discuss  this, but I would just add one thing,   Mr. Chairman. I think if you look at um for  example Valuchia County which is Daytona Beach   uh mayor receives kind of right in the middle  mayor receives 75% of the county commissioner   salary and then count yeah you have through email  and it's also item number seven in today's agenda.   Oh yeah, I emailed this out. Uh but then  you've also got it printed by uh Miss I saw   this. Yes. I did not see the the second.  Yeah, I think one more place back there. the discussion. I really just I'm sure my goal is to get into a  pattern of we'll ask questions. I mean, as far as   substantive stuff, it I mean, it definitely like  flows together at times, but Brandon, what am I   missing? Uh, yeah. So, just as a quick aside, like  so Daytona Beach, which is right in the middle,   it's Valuchia County, um, you know, the mayor  receives 75% of what the county commissioners get.   And of course that's set, you know, by the state.  There's a formula. It's based on population. I   think that makes a lot of sense. Then you see the  council gets 75% of the mayor's salary. That's   because I think in in that situation, the mayor,  you know, probably does a lot more than your  

commissioners here in Panama City. And you'll see  this kind of very a little bit more similar maybe   to how um uh you know kind of how uh Miss Venice  does it where it's a percentage of the county   commissioner salary for all of them and then the  mayor gets like an extra $1,200 or an extra you   know extra 10 grand or something. Uh that's if you  do a little bit more. That's kind of how we are   right now. You kind of have that base salary here  for our elected officials, which I did compare us   to Panama City Week Haven, and then Bay County at  the bottom. Basically, here our lowest full-time   paid employee is the entry salary for an elected  for our commissioners. And then the mayor gets   an extra, I think, $1,800 top of that. So, that's  kind of similar where the mayor just does a little   bit more. So, you know, if you wanted to do if  you wanted to kind of follow that route and do   it like a percentage of the county, um you know,  I think giving a little bit extra to the mayor,   um would be would be appropriate. I don't know  that I would necessarily do like, you know,   75% for the mayor and then of that 75% for  the commissioners because they do do a lot,   you know, having board specific representation. So  um but again as a reminder that all of our county   uh commissioner salaries um in the state of  Florida and the six constitutional officers all   those are really set by the legislature. There  is a formula and it's driven by population in   that respective county. So and that information  provided uh earlier by um by Mr. Zimmerman and   his team. So as a as a reminder it looks like this  right here if you probably still have it in your   files. Okay. The county commissioner salaries  are set by state. Yeah, correct. Oh, I didn't   see Mike down there. See you, too. Um, I guess I'm  being aspirational here. Any other questions about   the data that we've provided? We'll go into the  substance of it shortly here, but any questions  

or other information we want from Jonathan? Good  job. Yeah, thank you. Well, Miss Smith miss team   gets most of the credit. There just happened to be  a survey uh with the uh we still thank them though associative of city clerks or something for the  association of city clerks just happened to be   doing a survey and I was like oh I'm just send  all these I just put it in a spreadsheet that's   all I may I just add that we I I happen to have  this information already um regarding whether   salaries in certain cities was in their charter or  by ordinance by resolution. So I just pulled that   together and added that today. It just gives you  a kind of a concept of how many you know whether   it's by charter, whether it's by or it's a mixed  bag. And just just make sure I understand is is   there is there an effective difference between  ordinance and resolution? No. Okay. To me, it's   still it's still a commission decision. Ordinance  requires two readings and resolution is just one.   All right. I I know my concern was more so at what  at what layer is the decision made? Charter is   obviously a citizen vote, ordinance, resolution,  policy, whatever else is a commission level vote,   even though there may be a little to it. Correct.  What what are the step increases here for Panama   cities? I mean, basically every step I think  it's like 3.3%. So, how would a commissioner   be eligible for a second after after one year,  two year, three year? seven or eight and then 10   I think. So we basically have we have grades one  through 26 positions although we don't have any   grades one two or three that are actively working  for the city. So the lowest full-time employee   right now is a grade four position and then there  are one through 16 different steps and to miss   point it's it's based on seniority and how many  years you and the commissioners are part of they  

are part of that. What is the status quo as far as  other benefits for the commissioners and the mayor   in Panama City? So, they have same options as the  city uh if the only difference is is they get the   um they get a $500 a month car allowance that's  automatic and I think that's probably I don't know   if that's ordinance or not. I'm not sure. Yeah,  but they then it's got to be by ordinance because   it's not by charter. Yeah. Okay. Then then it's  by ordinance and they get that and uh the only   difference is some of the directors and and senior  managers would get either $300 or $400 depending   on how much they drive but they get access to  health insurance. They have you know same options   to the general employment pension fund uh as well  as the executive management. When you say access   to health insurance that's something they don't  have to take it if they don't want it. If they   if they choose to take it they can. Okay. But if  they don't take it they don't get anything else.   That's just a Okay. All right. And they do have to  do the same contributions an employee would have   to do for the insurance them and dental as well.  Okay. And short and long-term disability. And how   does the pension system work? Uh so it's a there's  general employees and the city contributes 10% of   the annual salary on behalf of the employee at no  with no match and that goes into like an invest   goes into an investment fund. It's like a 401k  but not a K. It's another letter. um they have   option to do a pre-tax tax deferral like a 457b  if they want um but there's no contribution on   the city's behalf. Uh and then they've got um  the supplemental pension has three different   vesting classes that is a defined benefit. So they  contribute four and a half but it's whatever the   actuary dictates that year. Then the city matches  that in contribution and then that pension plan   other sorry city contributes. Go ahead Jim.  Employee contributes four and a half. The city   contributes whatever the actuary says that they  um is there a vesting period? There is. So there's   three classes. Uh the the elected officials are  in class one. I believe it's a six-year vest to  

100%. Class two is and I think the I'm in class  one as well. you're you're in class one and Jan   is as well. Uh then there's class two which is  um the assistant city managers is a six-year   vest and then class three is our department heads  directors and that's a um uh 20% vest at six years   with fully vested at 10. Okay. So commissioners  are class one correct? So if you're a commissioner   for six years you get your commission salary for  the rest of your life. So you get a varies. It's   one it's once you vest it's 1% of your um your  earnings um and then that compounds every year   an additional 1% of length of service. So we have  like Commissioner Mike Nichols for example he's   he I think he served 12 years 16 16 10 okay so  10 years just 10 number he's around $400 a month   is what he's receiving so in and that pension  kind oh I see so it's it's much you'd have to   do a very very long time to receive your 106 years  yeah it's minimum $50 a month and the pension plan   is very healthy. It's it's it's funded to a a good  degree. So it's not and it's very small membership   as you Yeah. And the supplement, Mr. Chair, I mean  that's it's administered by the Florida cities. Any other just general questions about the  expanding code at this point? Thank you guys.   Um what's the next report? The I have a report  just real quick. Did you have anything else? No,   sir. I'm good. Thank you. The board the board  requested information board is attached. Go ahead.   Directly after his um we just provided a copy  of the board schedule and then all the makeup of  

all the boards and then the definition of what the  boards do behind each board. So that was requested   at the last meeting. I know one of the things we  specifically asked was do any of these boards have   any um spending authority? No. I mean I know  DIIB and airport those are different animals.   Um but the rest of them don't they don't have  a budget or anything that no and they don't get   paid none of the direct none of those petties or  allowances travel allowance or anything like that. We have questions about our our fourth fourth. Right. Thank you. The paperwork that we emailed  some this morning have added to us. The first   this is a two-pager. These are just the change  pages in your black red line of the charter   dealing with police services and fire services.  And the sentence says the same which is the city   commission shall maintain police services  and then fire services with the lead person   designated by the city manager. Period. And then  everything else that was in the charter, this is   this one page of the word has been uh stricken.  So that that we believe that is reflective of   what y'all talked about at the last meeting. A  question came up on municipal boards if there  

was any provision for removal of a committee of a  committee or advisory board or whatever. And the   answer is that under state law there is standards  on how you remove a member that you've appointed.   So it and and what we have is a copy of section  112.501. 501 and highlighted in yellow deals with   grounds for suspending or removing. So the main  point is that we don't have to put anything in   the charter concerning removing individuals from  a board because there's state law that deals with   it. So that's that is provided there. The chart  that Caroline's already mentioned, it's a chart of   sample cities with salaries. It just talks about  where the salary came from. Charter, ordinance,   and resolution. Another chart that Caroline did,  chairman, you had asked how how do we use the   word regulation? And so we just did a word search  and there's a little chart that shows first the   word regulation and every time it's used in the  existing charter trying to you know trying to get   things uniform. So as you go through it, that's  how it's used here. And uh then we also looked at   the word ordinance. Really just just trying to we  might want to if we use a different word, I agree   with you. Let's let's do it on purpose. Okay. So  one more thing, can I interrupt you on the on the   uh regulation thing? So yeah, like when I looked  at this, it it just kind of seems like the charter   just kind of uses the words interchangeably.  Yeah, but if you go back up to Florida statutes,   it's not like they define the terms differently  either way. So, if I'm understanding this right,  

it's just basically we need to clean up the  terminology and try to be consistent about   what we're calling it. Correct. Understood. Okay.  And um in 1963, I didn't know any better when I   wrote the charter. That's the relatively young  attorney at the time. I mean in your defense   uh in uh there's a memo u about does Florida law  require charter to have a provision for urban   services and this was a question that came up  and the answer short answer is no you don't have   you're not required to bake it into the charter  because once again there's Florida statutes that   deal with it. I won't go through all of it, but  just look at it and if you have any questions,   but there are even provisions in Florida statutes  how you provide water and sewer services outside   your municipal boundaries. So, you know, right  now our charter talks about it's odd terminology,   but it talks about without Yeah. How you provide  water and sewer without the city or but it it's   trying to say outside the boundaries. doesn't  have to say that in the charter. I think you   we already have that authority on the floor of  staff. And then um Mike Burke, I believe Mike has   met everybody, but he's my partner also. And Mike  uh handles everything that related to the planning   agency and and question came up, well, what do we  have to put in our charter about uh our planning   commission and how that works? And so Mike is here  to talk about um we have a copy of the statute on   local planning and seems like I have one other  I guess that were what was it attached also just  

to so he's he's when you want to he can talk about  uh you know what the charter says now and does the   charter really need to say that to have authority  to have a planning commission things like that.   Yeah, that that question came up and maybe haven't  already told you. When I read it, I don't have an   intimate familiarity with planning board, but a  decent one. It just seemed like what the planning   board does reflect what's in the charter. Not  that it's wrong, but obviously we want consistency   there. So, what we were asking for is just without  even any regard to the charter, what what is the   planning board actually doing? What level of  authority do they have? And then we can kind of   say, is that sufficient? Is it dictated? Because  one of the things we're learning a lot about is   obviously home will rule power and a lot of this  stuff is already governed by state statutes so we   don't even need it. Some of the stuff you know so  basically if you can kind of give us a primer on   what the Panama City Planning Board does and then  we can kind of pull on the threads from there. So   you've got two two our things there. First  is the Florida State statute which obligates   mandates that you have that the city have a local  planning agency and that you designate one which   we have designated you do it by ordinance  according to the statute. So you don't need   to have it in the charter. You can you can take  it out. It's super be there. Um and then I just   just as proof of that we're following the law.  I've provided you the ordinance in Panama City   that designates the planning board as the local  planning agency. And so the the planning board's   um probably one of the more active boards that you  have uh within the city and it it is obligated to   u plan for the future growth of the city through  adoption of a comprehensive plan or amendments   there too oversee the evaluation appraisal report  which is part of the comprehensive plan that we   have to do every five years or so to update our  our future growth. Um and then it also hears   um and considers uh zoning requests or  reszoning requests um within the city.  

Um annexations. If you want to annex it within  the city, you go to the planning board first. Um   uh the other other items it would be would  be text amendments to any of those documents   I just just talked about. Um and so those uh  something else would be development agreements.   Sometimes commission I mean um developers come and  have a long-term plan about developing something   and they want to enter into an agreement so they  know that the rules that they're developing under   today are going to be the same ones that they  develop under because that's the way they've   planned their project. Right. So the the planning  board here's development agreements. um trying to   think of any other all of those um items are items  that they only recommend they make recommendations   to the city commission over. So those items that I  just told you you come to the planning board first   you go through a staff renewal or an evaluation um  staff presents their recommendations. the planning   board hears it and determines whether or not they  want to recommend approval, denial, or some other   kind of form to the uh to the city commission. And  then there's a another set of hearings. Typically,   another two hearings are held at the city  commission to uh consider the applicant's   request and the planning board's recommendation  and also the staff's recommendations regarding   those matters. So all those items I just told  you about um are ultimately determined by the   city commission. Other things that the planning  board hears that stays within their purview   uh with a one or two exceptions are um variances  um abandonments actually abandonments are are   recommendations. Abandonments of rightway or or  easements end up in the uh the city commission   with a recommendation from the planning board. But  all that works, variances, some conditional uses,  

and um certain things like major development  orders, um anything that's over four or three   stories that's going to be built or over a certain  acreage that's going to be built that um already a   would meet this the criteria of the the planning  the zoning code or the building code. Um those   are think of developments that are of significant  enough impact that you want at least one body to   one uh public hearing body of the city commission  or the city to hear. Um those go to the planning   board for review. The most recent one we've had  was um there's a proposal for a marina right   behind um the courthouse uh where the Masonic  Lodge is over there. Uh we had a major development   order hearing on that. Um, in order to get to that  stage, you have to have met all the requirements,   checked all the boxes um, within the within  the code, but the planning board ultimately   has the the decision of whether or not that major  development order can be issued. So, variances,   major development orders, um, and some conditional  uses, the planning board hears those and they're   the final decision maker on those matters. And if  you don't like their their decision um then you   may appeal that to the circuit court and it's on  a an appellet route denovo review um under certain   criteria um that the appellet courts dictate as  to what that state what those standards are. Um   there are not we do not have any um appeals of the  planning board that go to the city commission. So,   if you don't like a decision of the planning  board on a variance or uh major development order  

um or a conditional use, then you get the  opportunity to go to a circuit court saying why is   that processed in an ordinance or is that in the  statute? Ordinance. By ordinance, we decided what   jurisdiction they have on that. Uh we're obligated  to pro for due process reasons, we're obligated to   provide them a an appellet an automatic appeal  revision, right? For your appeal. uh but we get   to decide who is going to be the body that hears  that. So uh city commission typically just has   determined that those kind of issues need to go  to the circuit court to be reviewed. So no city   commission uh approval on that. We go straight  planning board and whatever they decide to sit. No   commission involvement. That's right. Variances.  You come to the planning board and if you don't   like the decision at the planning board, you go to  the uh court as sir. on an appellet review. It's   not a full-blown trial or anything like that.  You've got to present your record and you argue   it, you know, on paper to a to a circuit judge  who is bound by the by the appellet rules to give   great difference to what the planning board has  determined. Yeah, this is way outside the charter.   It's denovo review or discretion review. No,  it's denovo review, but only only for substantial   competent evidence and due process. And those  are the only two things you do. And you know,   I caution folks all the time when they want to go  challenge those decisions of the of the planning   board that u you know the judge is going to give  us great deference over that provision. And so   it's got to be really really bad, really egregious  before a court's going to over it. 90% of what the   planning board does is recommendations. Yeah.  zoning, um, land use changes, comprehensive   plan changes, all go as recommendations to the  city commission. And the city commission has  

another public hearing a little bit of typically  by ordinance or resolution depending on public.   Usually it's usually it's ordinance. So you end  up if you're an applicant for a comprehensive   plan or resoning or something, you need to  change the classification of your property.   You've you've gone through three different  appearances before a a collegial body. One   at the planning board and then a first reading at  the city commission and then a second reading and   adoption at the city commission. Um Mike, you're  going to be here the whole time. If you need me   to. Certainly. Good. Um any other clarification  questions for any staff at this point? Okay. Um, I know we'll get back to this. I'm  trying to have like just these and then like   the debate, the discussions, whatever. We'll  probably end up revisiting. We will end up   revisiting this. Um, all right. What else do  we have for staff? Was that's all I had. Um,   one of the things that and it's in the meeting  minutes. We were going to hopefully and maybe   we just don't have it. Uh, perhaps some of  the stuff that's not in our charter that   should be considered. Has anyone had  an opportunity to look at that stuff? If the answer does not be deal like other like other examples of the cities  that yeah it says research model charter and   sample charters for things that are not in the  city's charter. That's I mean I'm not calling   somebody out but okay. So let's roll that over  the next time. One of the things at least I had   talked about was it's not that hard to review the  stuff that's already there, but it's hard to know   that if there's something that could be there  that's not there to begin with. That's where   you have to draw on the experience of you guys  to say, "Hey, you know, Tallahassee actually has   a provision that's this and it's not even in here,  so there's nothing to compare it to." So, if y'all  

could we'll we'll look. Thank you. There there was  one other thing and I don't have a handout on it,   but you some a question came up about length  of contracts and is that something a charter   could even do. Um, we don't really have an answer  specifically because we don't we didn't see any   charters that attempted to do it. I just wanted  to give you a little more feedback on the on the   general question real quick. one is it's it's hard  to to uh think ahead as far as how long a contract   ought to be. For example, uh there is a contract  you can sell property and there's no restriction   in our charter about selling property. You can  also lease property and we had a 60-year lease   with St. Joe for them to entice them to build  the Hotel Indigo and Harrison's restaurant. So   that's a s we talked about a 75 year lease.  So that's a contract that's long term. Also   after the hurricane uh the city was eligible and  received $120ome million dollars of money from   through the department of environmental protection  for what is called state revolving fund loan.   But it is 0% interest. It is 25% forgiven once  the projects are all built and it's through our   utility fund, water, sewer, roads. But I  believe it's defeased over 40 years. So,   that's just an example of a long-term contract  that you you you want your future boards to have   the ability to take advantage of 0% interest, 25%  forgiven, and get $120 million worth of water,   sewer, and road stuff. So, there's there's just  some and I had and then of course we have the  

um the franchise agreements that are  typically 30 years long. But I just   wanted to give you that background. We didn't  find any that had that restriction on it,   but probably because people thought about it,  they couldn't think of something that might   happen in the future where you would regret  having a restriction. So that that's it. Just   a little bit of feedback there. This the city  of St. Augustine just signed an agreement with   an operator for their amphitheater and um final  performing arts center for for a 30-year term as   well. So there's operational agreements out there  at the state level. So state statutes regulate the   terms of the audit agreements that they can be  no longer than five years. Oh yeah, that's true. Another thing on your my report  I told you I was appreciate. Any   other questions about that?  Um any other staff reports for health and utilities planning boards  fire protection list of boards advisory   boards you're going to get back to us on the  model charter thing implementation I think   that's everything that was requested awesome  thank you cool um all Right. We can probably   talk about police and fire together. So you  guys have that language, right? Yes. So we've   already presented that. You guys have copies  of it proposed changes. Um thoughts, concerns on the 22nd page of articles 20.

This one there is there's a one page one.  Yeah, there's a one pager too. It's page 22   and 23. I mean if I if I recall correctly, we  wanted three things. We wanted the existence   of police. We wanted to wanted it to be uh  have a lead person and that lead person is   appointed by the commission. And I think they've  done that pretty effectively. Mr. Chairman,   and I may be remembering incorrectly. I don't  I don't I thought the board landed on shall   designate a chief of police, right? Chief of fire  regardless if that's a third party entity just   like we designated a chief building official and  that was EPCI for a period of time that fulfilled   that or and now it's a city employee. So I just  didn't know if that were city employee. No, no,   it says just as a lead person. So it doesn't say  shall designate a fire chief or Yeah. I think we   should use the traditional language that everybody  knows. Um, chief police. I'll comment on that.   There were several different terms that were used  and then ultimately the one that was done in the   motion was a point person. Then we were asked to  to provide the language and but leave was used,   chief was used. There were different choices that  I had. I just I chose this one. But if whatever   you want I think for the public to understand what  that is if you mean so would the suggestion be   that the language say the city commission shall  maintain police services with a chief of police   designated by the city manager? Yes. Absolutely.  And I understand why you did it that way just for   the common understanding of people who might  pick up the choice. Yes. Mr. Mr. Chairman,   my only question that would that ever prevent us  from doing something similar to what does where   they don't have a chief of police? You know,  that sheriff Harvard provides law enforcement  

over there and there's basically I don't know if  it's a lieutenant or a captain. It's basically   the point of contact, but he is not considered a  chief of police. he's considered either a captain   or lieutenant with the sheriff's department over a  certain team and a certain specific region within   the county. That might handcuff future staff and  commissions from ever being able to consider that   as an option. So I I can tell you what my spirit  is is that there is a breathing body that the   commission can poke that's accountable for the  obligation of the police services. If we call   them chief of police, we call them at whatever  chief guy in charge, I don't that doesn't make   a big difference to me. So, however you guys  want to do it. Well, then this language that's   highlighted is more flexible or do you have I'm  open to any sort of suggestions as long I mean   not that it's sub that's what I thought we were  trying to do. I think it's pretty significant   for a city as big as Panama City to push off the  responsibility of police and to absorb or take,   you know, the sheriff's uh forces to to do that  internal job. I don't mind it being a little bit   difficult to make a change. I mean, I think  the city not advocating either way. I like we   can we can I'm responding to what you're saying.  If it takes a little bit of work to change that,   I think it should be changed. I I think  citizens expect that their city this size   is going to have a chief of police and a chief  of fire. So you can kind of do it both ways from   a drafting exercise. You could also say the city  commission shall maintain a police service with   a chief of police, or lead person, designated  by the city lead manager or other lead person. Okay, that that sounds either way the charter  items we still maintain a police presence.   Yes. Whether we sub contract out or keep  it in house. I definitely like that better

with that. Do we need a new motion? Yeah, we  can do that. Okay. New motion for police and   fire for the same language. Is there a  second? I'll second. Any other debate on   that? All right. All in favor? I I'm  abating for this requirement. I not   discuss with police if he abstains. Okay.  For anybody who seems to apply anyway. All right. Okay. Uh public utilities. So Nevin gave us the memorandum on  the public utility situation. Um you guys mind if I provided a suggestion?  Not at all. Uh in the memo that Nevin has,   I particularly liked the Pensacola language  that's at the very bottom of the first page.   That language simply says shall have all  governmental, corporate and proprietary   powers to enable it to conduct municipal  government, perform municipal functions,   th municipal services, and may exercise any  power for municipal purposes except when   expressly prohibited by law. I think that covers  everything that we're intending to accomplish.   It's probably not even necessary at all, but I  think it just makes it clearer. And unless we're   trying to otherwise limit that, which I'm not  saying we're not, I don't know, but otherwise   I think that incorporates what we were trying to  accomplish at least what I'm trying to accomplish. I agree. Yeah, I think that's right. and you get  that back to the state and search. I know we're  

kind of wrestling with what municipal services  means and I appreciate the the definitions here   and or urban services, excuse me, and I don't  think the intention of the board here is to put   any sort of limitations on what the city can do  as far as the provision of municipal services as   long as it's obviously not contrary to the law.  But charge, don't charge. upcharge, go north,   gopoint. I mean, I think the idea in the charter  is that do as the commission sees it further. And what do you think? I So would the suggestion be to That was where I was going. I think  is that paragraph or something like   that enough to cover that whole article  on public insurance because now we've got no sections covered under that. Now under under  216 it has provisions for warehouses and ship   channels and breakwaters and boulevards and on and  on and on. Is that necessary or would those types   of things be incorporated in the Pensacola  language where it says do yeah municipal   functions, municipal services, municipal purposes  or is there a value in enumerating these things?

I think that I have never looked at the charter  for authority of statutes didn't already provide   it. In other words, if Philadelphia statutes  didn't allow the city to do these things,   I would be very nervous about relying  on just the charter today today. So,   probably there's nothing this does not  give us any additional authority. So,   I think one question is if you're inclined  to just scratch it out. I think that will be   useful for us to know and then we'll go back and  we'll confirm if that we've looked at it and we   don't think you got rid of any authority  that you already that you didn't already   have. Does that make sense? Yeah. I mean, big  picture is that the charter for all practical   purposes is a limiting document. It's not an  expanding document. It can't be, right? I don't   think so. But I think that the charter when it was  written was intended to be an expanding document. Power. Well, it it deals with how you have  authority to go outside the municipal limits   to condemn property and how you can go outside  limits to provide water and things like that. It   sounded to me that there was a concern that they  didn't have that authority unless they put it in   the charter at the time. Now they would. Right.  Right. That's that's what I'm now. I don't think   there's anything. That's what I'm saying. That's I  agree. Okay. We're on the same The My only comment   to that is I mean the legislators have been pretty  aggressive with taking away authority and things   of that nature and limiting home rule and limiting  the ability of local governments to do business as   they see fit. So, I kind of like having it in our  part of, you know, even if it's repeated because  

they may change things. Yeah, I'm I'm fully with  you. I think we've we've just reemphasized that   they have all the powers unless they unless  prohibited by law, unless they don't. So,   you're right. If the legislature claws  it back, it's gonna happen anyways, but on one hand, it feels kind of awkward  to roll up what 215 through. We don't   need it. We don't need any of it. Yeah.  Section 219 is the only one that doesn't   have that editor's note, but I believe  that that's still covered by the um yes, I don't think uni codes made the edit yet. So, do we in a position to make a motion on that? Let me try. Thank you. I think you could  just limit it to say that you wanted the   paragraph that the chairman referenced.  I make a motion that the paragraph that   the chairman mentioned would um replace all  the information under article what 17 public   utilities and we would end up with  just that one paragraph. I second. All in favor? I Mr. Chairman, I know this is an organic  document and you have the ability to go   back. We will look at this with  your and and make sure that it's   my impression is correct that there's  you didn't give up any authority using All right, we're done. No time here. Okay. Um,

boards and commissions. So the charter is states planning board other   boards that are listed have  been added by commissions. So any board is necessary by ordinance right my understanding.   Yeah, right. The state law says by  ordinance. Other question why is it planning part? You saying that the statute  says has to be by ordinance. Oh, it does.   That was my understanding. Maybe I've got it  wrong. Mike, what was that? We We A planning   board is established as a matter of law or the  commission is required to establish a planning   board by ordinance. They've already done that.  Yes, I know they have. So, it doesn't have to   be in the charter. Correct. Yes. Take it out  of the charter. Take it out of the charter. Are there well we put I think this is where  we're going to put in that there's going to   be an citizen advisory board that aligns with  the census would probably be underneath of this   it's true to completely agree that that's a  good point good recollection the I did have  

some approach by some citizens and I thought  might bring this to the table for discussion They requested and I I haven't  done any other research into this,   but they requested that any advisory  boards not have city employees reports. Now, we've got some boards like the supplemental  retirement pension fund board that has city   employees. All the pension boards. Yeah. All  the pension boards. So the the conversation   was citizen engagement and citizen advisory  is obviously they don't they get to collect   feedback and then it goes to the commission based  off of a true and genuine means of collecting   information from citizens conflict of interest  and what how genuine that information is if it's   being collected by a city employee. How many of  them do have city employees on them now? Look,   I think just pension boards and the civil  service board. Civil service board has some   former employees. Um but there's no there's  no active I don't no active employees on   the board. Um the the pension boards, those  employees are have to be members of the plan.   Uh they're they're considered trustees of that  of those funds. uh but they're managed I want   throw get the wrong impression they meet once a  quarter they get a their investment advisor from   the Florida League of Cities gets on the horn and  they talk they they talk about the performance of   those funds and then he offers us options but  there's no no real citizen interaction. There   is there are two commissionapp appointed seats  on each of those boards as well and those are  

non they they could be employees or they could be  non-emp employees. Um but as far as the advisory   boards go I I mean from a staff perspective  all we do is we get assigned tasks like like   in this board and then we go do the research and  provide that to the board. There's not that's   I don't think there's any intent from staff  standpoint to influence any board's decision. What the other comments about whether or not  this charter necessary to have language about   the report? Well, I think that section 259  is kind of all-incclusive. If the commission   wants to appoint an advisor report, they can.  That's probably helpful to be in the charter. Yeah, I think so too. Mr. Chairman, there is one point of clarification.  I think the only the only thing that the cities   are or cities are uh um procluded on advisory  boards is citizen oversight boards of police,   but that's in state statute. I think that's  recent in the last two years. Is the what now?   Uh the the uh cities can't establish citizen  oversight committees for police. They cannot. Okay. But again, it's a state statute,  so it shouldn't have to be addressed. I actually think the language might be important.  If you look at the supplemental retirement the   pension fund board that is totally different to  me than an advisory board right so the language  

specifically says advisory boards and there's a  distinct difference between advisory boards and   I don't know what you would pension fund board  still a board but advisory boards could be those   created by the commission or by ordinance or  statute somewhere. I believe it's by ordinance, but I mean I think it might be stat might could  be statuto probably for the I would say for the um   fire and police it is probably statutory that they  have a board of trustees for the management and   general employees. I'm not so sure. certainly best  practice, but I'm not certain that it's statuto. So, we have we have planning board that's dictated  by ordinance, which I think our intention is we   can remove division two except for maybe Cecil's  point would be just having something in there to   make it clear that there would be a planning  board as required by law or something. I mean,   a little bit more in depth than that. Just to put  a pin in the uh finish up on the planning board,   would the would the feeling be to just  remove it entirely or just have some kind   of provision that acknowledges  the existence of it law? Okay. I think we all need a matter of is it  is it better? Yeah. And then they'll   know what they'll have questions. I myself big  pretty big responsibility. 10 years from now,   the next board's going to be looking at this  and being like, why did they leave here a state  

statute? Is there a reason they left it here like  we did with the clerks? There's a lot of stuff   under the statue. Like we're like, well, what  happened? We try to piece together this story. So,   I'm an advocate that less is more. If it's  already structured, there's no reason to   add it into a secondary document for anybody to  question later. Was there an different purpose?   There there's a couple little things in here as  I'm reading this again with the context that Mike   gave us is like I mean I just I just glanced at  the statute just via Google search and looked at   what some of their powers are. It's kind of hard  to read on my phone and on the fly here, but like   says they shall serve without compensation. So I  don't know if some planning boards get paid. Um,   and then I don't know if we want to even and I  don't want to just add things just for the fun   of it, but like is there any limitation on who's  eligible to serve on a planning board? They have   to live in the municipality or award by by  the ordinance. So that you can by ordinance,   but not by statute, but not by statute. There are  requirements that um that we include a schoolboard   member exeicio or a schoolboard appointee exeicio.  um military, a few of those. Um none of those   folks ever attend and I' I've served more than  just the plan the city plan city planning board   and I've never one exception. Walton County had a  guy that would show up every once in a while for   the school board. Uh but other than that, those  are the only ones that are required by statute,   but they're all exeicio members. They don't get  to vote. They're just supposed to kind of keep   a tab on what's what's going on. Um so no, I  mean I I think removing it is obvious I said   earlier you remove it and you're required by  state statute to have it. They tell you what   the what the status is. And then the other the  other question was I don't know of any board

that I've represented um that's advisory that  receives compensation at all. Um they're all I   mean the thing that we constantly debate though  is is that good policy or does that need to be   baked into the charter? right? The the the without  compensation. I mean, right now it says without   compensation expressly, so they couldn't pay  me if they wanted to, right? But if you've got   these broad powers where the planning board exists  and who's going to be on and on and on on and on,   I like I said, I don't want to just do something  for the fun of it. But is it like, do we want   to put something in there that says they either  they can't be paid or they must be in the wards   or they must be in the city or any of that type  of stuff or just leave it by the statuto default? Leave it by statuto default. I think  if we're going to put anything in here,   it's going to be do we want  any additional restrictions   like a term limit, right? Having a  term limit on the planning board,   right? That could be a charter item. Not that I'm  saying we do that. I don't think that we should. I mean, I'm leaning towards I I I I don't have  strong feelings. Oh jeez. whether we take it out   entirely or we leave some kind of provision in  there that just makes it clearer that it does   exist and that we're going to follow the laws.  But I go back to I do think these are sort of   and I'm I'm the one introducing them. These are uh  solutions looking for problems and if we haven't   had a problem with planning board members  being there for 50 years or you know people   jerrymandering or people drawing from Walton  County to be on our planning then what are we   doing like that? You don't just leave it. Uh, as  far as the the long-term existence of a planning   board, that's typically good to have at least  somebody who's been there for a long time because   they remember, you'all were discussing a minute  ago, you know, about why did they put all this   stuff in with the clerk? And by having someone  who's been there a long time, um, Ray Deuke,  

yeah, served 20 years, 22 years, I think, on our  planning board. And uh we were disappointed when   he left because he did he could recall so many  times why we did X Y or Z that there's a real   benefit to that too and and they they turn over  frequently enough. So let me ask this question.   Does anybody want to entertain some sort of  restriction on the planning board? Well, only   as we were talking it it occurred to me and um I  haven't studied it that is there any requirement   that the planning board members be made up of  the different wards by ordinance. What does the   ordinance say? Yeah, but that you pick from the  ward and each commissioner now assign picks their   There is a requirement for it to be represent.  Is that the where the ordinance? I thought the   ordinance just says that be from the city and  then there's kind of a handshake agreement right   now. It had been updated in the beauty code yet.  So yeah, we adopted that recent months. That is   very recent. Well, that was effect in January,  didn't that's when it went into effect. I just   know because Chris Damps was on there. He's  a friend of mine and he was talking a little   bit about how they changed it. Yes. But they beat  me do it. So, we we changed it in about November   of this past year um to be that each commissioner  appoints from their ward and um at large and then   the mayor was at large. Yep. And um and it didn't  go into effect until the end of January. We gave   them time to go pick there. So, that's why I think  you haven't seen it in the uni code stuff. I just   heard that. Okay. All right. Um I think there are  a lot of reasons to be critical of planning board.   However, we are stuck with the default Florida  statute as it is. Yeah. So, the question is going   back to is there anything that you think you're  suggesting belongs in the charter regarding the  

planning board? It would limit their authority. I  think that's better left of the orange figure it   out. Supersede anyway. Ordinance would supersede  anyway. State law would trump charter. The ch the   charter could ever find it down. I don't think the  state law says you have any limitation on who you   pick for your planning board. No. I mean, if you  were going to if you were going to do something   to limit in the charter, if you were worried about  the planning board, you would say that the uh the   city commission shall be the local planning agency  or you know the in other words, if you didn't want   the city commission to be the the local planning  agency, that first level review or or something   like that, you might do that. But that would be  the only But you could have a situation where   if if the mayor picked his buddy from Tallahassee,  he could serve on the planning board or she could.   But except by ordinance, it requires that you be I  know. But I'm saying if we struck everything out,   then absent an ordinance, Yeah. the charter  wouldn't restrict that. Correct. And so,   but I think that's a solution for the problem.  All right. My only concern sounds like it has   been addressed. Making sure there's representation  across all communities. Should we create that as   a standard of the charter that all advisory  boards that need boards need chosen? This has   been a question I've been asked in the past.  Hey, right now us we weren't board chosen. We   were commissioner chosen. Same way with the parks  and rec board that was just that might have been   commissioner chose a a citizen from their board  for the parks and recourse. That's correct. So,   I don't think it was restricted, though. They  they just they all five got to pick. I'm I'm going   to suggest no. And the reason why is because  some of these boards are very technical. So,   I'm just going to pick on the board of architects.  So, if you're like, I got to find I got to find   five people with architectural knowledge  within the city limits of Panama City. I  

I just think you're limiting your talent pool.  And so, and then to start picking and choosing,   well, the parks people probably should all live  here, but it's also like we also share parks,   too. Now that I'm kind of thinking this through  out loud, so I hear what you're saying. I mean,   I I certainly would prefer that commissioners  pick people to live in the city, but I just as   far as like hard and fast, I don't think it's  ever happened. I don't think they would do it.   Yeah. Okay. Just get destroyed. All right.  So then somebody make a motion one way or   the other to either strike the entire provision  on the planning board issue or make a motion to   put some limited language in there that says  that we will have a planning board. Yeah,   I make a motion to strike the entire provision on  the planning board. Second. All right. Any debate? All in favor? I oppose. No more planning work. Um, and then what  about advisory boards? Any changes on 259?   That's I do think we should add in the start  review. Yeah. works the mandation read that is and I know we had language on that  many meetings ago but I don't know before we get to that do we want to leave in  259 or do we want to get rid of that as well   I think we need to we need 259 yeah I think  we need to you need 259 okay I don't see a   problem with Mr. Mr. Zimmerman this the  appointenior senior so much older than me the uh obviously the city commission without  the charter has the authority to appoint the   advisory committees and and set up any standard or  membership or anything and appoint and give them  

any duty that they would like to do. So, you don't  need 259 for purposes of giving that authority to   the city commission. Or does nor does 259 limit  them. I think it was written I'll share this.   I like 259. I don't know why. I know it's kind  of hypocritical because we just got rid of 260,   but I just like it and I'd like to keep it. I  don't know. You're not going to leave it, too. So,   but is it doing anything? Legally, I don't  think it is. But, but that's not the only test.   It may be you just want it there. I think what  it does do is it brings clarity to you can do   citizen advisory 20 years 50 years from now and  they looks at the charter. The charter is like   your guide. If it's not in here it's like is there  anything that should have been added or could we   have done something differently? It just gives you  clarity on yeah you can do if I'm going to make an   argument for why we have advisory boards but we  don't have language on a planning board is that   we're going to have a planning board by statute.  Whereas if a citizen is reading the charter,   then if they don't know that there's  the authority to have an advisory board,   it's going to be very challenging them to find  that. And so I think if they saw that and they go,   "Oh, there's an advisory board. Maybe I want to  be involved with it in some shape or fashion or   whatever." So like I'm not going to die on this  hill. I'd like to keep it. But I I agree with   you. You know, my perspective is even though  things may exist in other documents and other,   you know, legal creations, a person knows to look  at the charter and just to have that little flag   there is a good thing. So, do you want to make a  motion to keep 259? I make a motion that we keep   for second. Second. All right. Any debate? All in  favor? I Any opposed? Yeah. But now going back to   Brandon's point, I think we do need to add a new  section 260 or for the charter review in x amount   of years. Yep. I think that should has to be in  the chart. Do you remember where we left off on  

that? It was going to be like a year after the  census or something something along those lines.   Correct. Right. For the reortion. Yeah. After the  census. So every 10 years they got to look. Yeah.   Starting with whatever the next census is going to  be. Right. Yeah. 23. And there was language. Yeah,   we've seen that language in the Should it be  tied to the census? It shouldn't be tied to   redistricting because we have we're going  to have the legislators are going to some   of them want to do redistricting midterm mid  cycle. So if if you we are trying to track   when there are changes political changes  of you know who can vote for who but just   because they're redistring doesn't mean that the  city would have to redistrict. Am I right? No,   I don't think we would have to. But it's true. I  don't think they're doing a census now. I think   you're just doing they're just redrawing lines  running last estimates. So that's different I   think because remember the concern is that as the  population grows and we have to redraw the wards   if the creation of an additional ward or anything  like that should come up every 10 years. That's   the idea behind because you know when we had  this discussion about creating a new ward it's   we're not quite there yet but we may be there  the next census but we don't want to wait 25 30   years before they add a new ward or do anything  like that. That's the idea. I think we could put   language in there, too. Like the the standard  is we review once every 10 years of the census,   but we don't limit ourselves to that. The board  could after we do ours, they could assign another   citizen advisory board if they want to. So,  we don't limit it to just every 10 years. Minimum. Yeah. Yeah.

So, do you want to make a motion?  Yeah. I make a motion for all. So motion all that. So we'll review that on the video despite  the Robert's rules issues. So, I I'll make   the motion that council draft language that says  that the there shall be expressed provision for a   charter review board and that that charter review  board be assembled as needed by the as determined   necessary by the commission. But in any event, no  less frequently than within what 12 months after   the census, however you need to define census.  Nice. Yeah, there's a statutory definition because when do you receive the information about  the census? I guess that's part of it because   I know the census takes place every 10 years,  but the data doesn't come till the year after,   right? It's effective the whatever the two  is of that decade. So 2032 is when the new   like congressional and state house and state  senate districts go into play. So 2022, 2032,   2042. So the so the this next advisory board would  have to meet in 2031 and able to make changes to   the board to 20 2032 is fine. So well you you'd  have to redistrict it based on the population   that you gain by 2032 in in order for the 2032  elections. Correct. So that's that's my my the   timing question is so because the the advisory  board have to meet create a new ward for example   to then give time for the mission to redistrict  as an example. That's why in the even years, but   even so in a census year, that's why you have the  legislature meets in January and February um in   order to of an election year in order to address  anything that needs to happen for qualifying all  

that kind of stuff. So should we should we say  that every minimum of 10 years uh not 12 months   afterwards when it's going to be whatever whatever  the sausage making makes it work is the the timing   question. immediately after the data you I would  say is as soon as the data is posted. Okay. Yeah.   Well, let's do it a little bit differently  because it to probably doesn't even require   a motion. This let's just call this a staff  request to clear language according to that and   then when we have the language in front of us we  can adopt it next. We'll do um great recollection. Um any other things about art  20 boards and commissions? Then let's go to we want to keep on the list. City  Clark collector. Okay. Discussions of job titles. start with this one. We've talked about  this before. Um, since I'm the one that   circulated language, sometimes it helps me when  I actually put pen to paper on things. And so my my feeling is and I know we have differing  feelings on this is is that I like the idea of a   controller that serves as an independent financial  integrity function. If they're an officer of the   city and they just like legal counsel checks all  the legal boxes, this position checks all the   financial boxes. And that's what I attempted to  draft with this language where it basically says  

they they deal with all of the integral processes  of financial expenditures. So the eyes are dotted,   te's are crossed, they maintain the books,  they also provide a a forward-looking   um financial perspective for the commission. The  the budget function still rests with the city   manager or city manager makes that recommendation  to the commission. The commission then the fruits   of it that hasn't changed at all based on my  language. Um, but that the the clerk controller   would be involved with that as well. And that  they would also kind of be the oversight on   some of the different budgets that are happening  throughout the different departments and just feel   independent to raise those concerns with the  commission that hey, parks and rex is 50% over   budget this year and they'll fear any sort of  like blowback from anybody else because they're   an independent financial advisory group. And so  that's that's that was the intention here. Um,   I know Ron, not to go straight at you, thank  I I do totally understand the idea that a a   a traditional CFO function rules under a CEO  function. I think that's the reason why that   works very well in private enterprise because  there's a huge degree of fiscal accountability.   Not that there's no fiscal accountability with  the city, but there's a there's a profit motive   with a private enterprise. And in a city, the  tendency is not. There's there's a there's a   tendency to spend and I think our city's  been fiscally responsible. There's just a   a general nature government is to spend and to  to dole out and I think having an independent   financial oversight that doesn't answer to the  city manager is just better policy and so um I would agree with you. Um my my comment was um I  think your first line is it's uh at the pleasure  

of the city commission but I would like them to be  able to sign have a contract also to be clarified.   What do you mean? Well like the city lawyer they  sign a contract city manifest signs a contract.   Oh, yeah. I guess I if you answered directly to  the elected body you're going to be hired by a   contract. What would the alternative be? Well,  I wasn't sure by your language. It said at the   pleasure of which sounds like you the king. You're  out of here, you know. Well, they can still do   that. You could check. Yeah. I mean, I I was just  being literal. Oh, I see. At the, you know, at the   pleasure of is very royal. Oh, I didn't mean Oh,  that that more so just means it's a commission.   But if they but if but just like I mean I don't  know I guess Jonathan you you do you have an   agreement but you could be terminated at any point  right? I could. Yeah. But you have a contract. I   do. Okay. But you can but other managers can  contract around even though you served as   the pleasure of the commission. If you have a  year-to-year contract that is a legally valid   thing to do. Okay. That's what the Yeah. I just  didn't know if it needed needed to be mentioned.   And how what is how is it dealt with with the  lawyers? Right now the clerk and the city manager   and the city attorney all have contracts directly  with the city commission and they all say that   uh we can be terminated. So I don't know if  that uses the word of pleasure but it can be   terminated without cause. Now there are different  severance provisions like if there's termination   without cause with the clerk or the manager then  there's um there's severance pay. Uh this the it's   different with the city attorney. It's more of a  workout. You know you get notice and then we hang  

around until somebody else is appointed things  like that. So that's the way it's done now. I   I don't we can look at the language but I this  doesn't exclude having a contract just because it   says at the pleasure. It's more of a buzz word  Mr. Bird said that it is the city commission   making the decision. So I may have got out ahead  by actually drafting the language because at   some point we have to come up with just an overall  framework for what we want to do here. So Brandon,   like where where are you at after thinking about  this for months? You was pretty strongly on the   other side of the fence. Yeah, I'm still still  very strongly on the other side of the fence. Um,   using my professional career like I managed $200  million worth of companies and the autonomy being   from COO to CEO to CFO. It's a partnership,  right, across all three. but somebody's got   to take the lead and then that person answers  solely to the board of directors. And I understand   what you're saying from a private perspective,  right? Um private, personal, private equity,   all of it that comes together. Like everybody  does business a little bit differently,   but we're in business to be in business and we  make sure we stay in business. We don't want   to bank. Um the as we grow accountability  I mean Jonathan's ultimately accountable   to financial plan reduction. He has to draft  the financial plan. He has to make sure his   department's reform to that. I could see the  auditor or the controller, not the clerk. The   clerk can roll up the city manager for sure of  a reporting perspective. But the board having   autonomy to have another set of eyes outside of  the city manager. I agree with that. I totally   agree with that. It's just we have it's still too  blurred. It's going to take us to the next level  

on who's accountable for the city finances.  So the accountability for the city finances   should fall where the city manager. So are you  suggesting that we have two charter officers manager and attorney? No, I think you we  should divide the two. The city clerk,   recordke keeper clerk could easily fall under the  city manager. That's just I think we're all in   agreement on that. That and that is not in here.  What I suggested is that just by just by the name   of the job there we can we can recordeping the  meeting whatever reason for the city manager.   Yeah. Job titles. Okay. So So I think we're all  in agreement with that. So then we're just back   to the finance part of Miss Smith's current  job. Yes. Are you all in agreement on that   now? Remove the clerk. Yeah. Have it something  else. Great. Now we're back to the the controller   part. The controller part. Yeah. Yeah. Um you  mind if I ask a question? The chair is sir.   Is there is is there from either just a a a  subjective or objective standpoint any any   concerns from staff that having that recordkeeping  function under the city management? Not for me   largely statutory anyway. I mean there there  certain requirements that are that need to be   met for the civ for the city clerk portion of  the job. So I don't have any concern separating   the two at all. Well, my understanding  is the statute mandates that that stuff   occur. It doesn't mandate who does it or what  entitles his job, right? Nobody suggested we   stop doing official records. That's what I mean.  The the clerk's duties are largely statutory. So,  

you can separate those out easily from Yeah.  Okay. And they still are required to be done.   It doesn't have to be under the comproller, city  clerk, comproller, whatever. I don't have any   concerns with that. No real financial to the  clerk's duties. And so if you remember a lot   of the cities, a large number of cities around  the state have the clerk the clerk duties under   the city manager but not the either comproller or  CFO whatever you want to call it. Okay. So for SAS Neon, yes, and tell me if I'm wrong here, guys.  The consensus is that the recordkeeping note   takingaking function that would traditionally  be associated with a clerk roll up under the   city manager. Yeah, no issue. So I'm just from a  drafting exercise, can y'all have that prepared   for the next meeting? Yes, that's I was asking  Caroline to we've tentatively identified the   sections that do that. Yeah. And uh the answer  is yes. But let me ask a question. If everything   that the clerk function is that's already in the  charter is something that's already governed by   Florida statutes. Do you need do you want to see  it again in the charter or do you want to take   the approach that we've taken you've taken on some  other functions which is it really doesn't need to   be in the charter. In other words, keeping minutes  that's in the spores statutes. Uh, you know, but   we can look if there is something that we need to  mention. How about this? That when we look at it,   if there's something that needs to be mentioned  because we feel like the statute doesn't cover it,   we'll mention it and explain why. So, I I would  say the the fact the meeting minutes happened,  

that's going to happen as a matter of law,  right? where I think the value of putting it   in the charter is where that function rolls up to  because at a certain point we have to define the   roles of whatever the officers are going to be.  So by having a mention in there that there shall   be a manager and that the manager what that's one  of the manager's obligations just it defines the   role rather than defines the obligation. Does  that make sense? Yep. So that that might be an   addition under the city manager. Yeah. Yeah.  I think that's the idea. Okay. Okay. We Yes.   It certainly can. All right. Caroline's on it.  I think it's alligator for what it's worth too   is this I mean it's it'll be a change and I think  demonstrating that change at least in this version   of the charter the first time would be good and  then that that next charter review committee   could do whatever you guys are doing just simplify  they may scan the whole thing. I don't know. Yeah,   I think add it all back in. Let's see. Mr.  Mr. Chairman, the only thing I think that you   guys might want to consider is do you want to  provide any specificity that the clerk reports   directly to the city manager or leave flexibility  where the city manager may put that particular   position. That's something I would consider.  It is a pretty important position. So, just   something to consider. I think it could be under  an assistant city manager. It could. So, that's   just something y'all should consider. That's all.  Yeah. city manager commer or his design or their   designate can take care of it. Yeah, I'm with  Ron. I think you you title it whatever you want   as long as that function is getting accomplished  just like all the other city services call it. So then now what are we doing with this  financial function? While you're here,   if I may have to ch while you're here, may not see  you at the next meeting, but how do you feel about   um maintaining the financial portion of the city  present city clerk job as an independent? I think  

it's a good idea, just a separate set of eyes  like you said. I think, but would that change   if you reported solely to the city manager other  than commission? Yes. You think it would? Yes.   because I I know would no longer that person  would no longer have the authority to go to the   commission with their data information reports.  They go to the city manager, not to the onto   the commission. I mean, people's self-interest  usually impacts what they do. If they're afraid,   if they have a difference of opinion, you know, a  legitimate difference of opinion and the boss says   they want it this way and they're under that boss,  the chances of them bringing that out various, what does the partnership, are we talking about  clerk or CFO here? CFO. What does the partnership   come true right now? Look like when you create the  budget, I'm sure Jan has a lot of there's a big   partnership between two of y'all on building this.  And from a finance side, just for her particular   department, she does. Okay. Yeah. And like  audit fees and transfers, debt service payments,   you know, the overall big picture stuff.  But as far as the day-to-day operational,   I just give them my departments. That's the  only thing that's the only input I have. Mr.   vice chair, once the budget is adopted and we go  to execute it, if we submit things that, you know,   that aren't in the budget or modifications  in the budget, then, you know, there has   to be a budget amendment and all that kind of  stuff. And, you know, she's involved in that. Does consult Jan's office a lot during  budget just for revenues and hey,   how should we code these things for like  the mechanics? Um, it's really helpful.

What does the education to the board look like  right now financial? Because I've seen a lot of   board meetings where they have a ton of questions  and the questions don't get answered. Um,   we'll come back to you, but then I don't know  what coming back looks like from a citizen   perspective. Um, they can't answer the questions  in the moment either to you or to Jan from a   financial perspective. So, what does reporting up  to, if finances are going to be reported directly   to the city commission, what does that process  look like currently? It's a memo that the clerk   treasurer puts on uh the financial statement.  Yeah. The first meeting of every month has one,   meaning they get an email and it's up to them.  It's actually on the agenda. Yeah. It's under   consent, but it's the last item under consent.  So, they just vote to acknowledge it and if they   have any questions, they can pull it off  if they want and discuss it individually,   but it's a formal memo that's pretty got some  specific numbers and percentages on there.   Anything that gets asked at a meeting  that we can't answer becomes a public   records request and it gets responded  to through the public records process. Say that again. Any any questions from the  audience that we can't answer from the dis. Okay,   that was key. That was a key thing I missed.  Okay, I wasn't referencing from the audience. I   was referencing from the dis. I've seen the dis  ask tons of finance questions that didn't get   answered. Yeah. So, I mean, I'll speak frankly  in the past that was mostly political. Jan's   memos answer the question very specific now.  I don't think you get as many questions from   this commission because it's all there in her  memo every every month. Yeah. We remove that   opportunity for them to connect with the CFO or  finance officer. You mean the public? The dis the  

commission then they would have to go through you  actually no Mr. Chairman Mr. Vice Chair, because   it is an agenda item on the first meeting of every  month, a member of the audience could come up   to the podium during audience participation  and ask a specific question about the clerk   treasures memo for that month at that particular  meeting because it is considered an agenda item. So, let me ask the board a question here. I think  everybody agrees there's going to be a financial   function whether it's a bookkeeping function a a  finance function which I think of more of like a   forward-looking function that's that that needs  to happen right so then I guess the question is   going to be is is that a third and we have there's  going to be some details in like where the line is   between third officer and and and city manager  is there is there an officer on that position   or does that entire function roll up to the  manager I'm officer yeah I think it should   be a third Yeah. To what the CFO function,  CFO controller, whatever. Separate officer,   separate independent officer. Were you operating?  I say it rolled up to the city manager. And I think you're getting split on that. This is why you get paid the big  bucks all over. Yeah. to go. You   take the rest with yourself. Um,  I got an office full,000 I'm sure. So, Brennon, what's here's my difficulty and  it's it's just a opinion really at this point   is the city manager is in charge. He's the head  administrative person of the city. Period. In   the charge. But yet, if they got wrinkled up or  whoever is going to um come after Miss Smith,  

if they get wrinkled up, the new controller can  go around the city manager to the commission and   get something done. And I I have difficulty with  that if he's the head of the city administrative   duties. So, uh, three members of the commission  could go to the CFO controller and do something   the city manager might not even know about. So,  I have a difficulty with that. I'm actually very   much aligned with you in that. That's not  what you can't know about it because it has   to be done in public. If there's more than one,  you'd be surprised in that board meeting. No,   when the agenda comes out, Ron will talk here.  The way I drafted this, and we're not going to   vote on this today by any stretch, although maybe  we have like the framework done. I envision the   comproller being a pure ball and strike caller,  an umpire. They don't get to play the game. They   get to review the budget that's approved by the  commission, measure it against what's happening.   They get to review the invoices that are put on  their desk. They get to cut the checks. And they   could, I guess, if for some reason they're being  obstinate, the manager could go to the commission   and be like, "Hey, the clerk's not or the the comp  is not doing their job. like I'm submitting the   stuff that I need to submit. They don't have  any subjectivity to make expenses that the   manager hasn't seen. Again, they're they're almost  entirely a reactive position other than providing   some forward-looking insight for the commission  if they're looking at a bond deal or whatever   and and the the affordability of that type of  thing. But otherwise, I don't see I I don't   want a world where the the comproller is making  any decisions that that that move things forward.   That that does that make sense? Yes, it does. So  then it should fall under the city manager. No,   it's a it's an independent eyes and ears where  the city manager and some department are blowing   the budget out. I want somebody to be able  to go to commission and not fear retribution  

from the city manager. They're like, listen,  just almost like the city attorney, they go,   I'm I'm looking at your document. This is  not a fair agreement. The manager may say,   "But it's critically important and the team wants  it and and on and on and on and the lawyer's like,   "I'm telling you, I don't answer to you. I answer  to the commission and I'm telling you this is not   sound legal principles." Would be the same  thing. This is not sound fiscal principles   or that's not hold on, that's not true because  there's a degree of subjectivity with the law,   but it would be more so that they're not following  the process with submitting invoices or or the   ability to go to the commission and say, "Listen,  I've reviewed this budget and we're wildly off on   some category. Anyways, that's where I'm at. But  I don't I don't want I don't want a world where   commission and controller CFO are making decisions  that go around the manager. Absolutely not. To me,   the way it's set up now, that could happen. Not  that it will happen, it could happen. But the   way that Brandon wrote it, he specifically said,  "You're just calling balls and strikes." you know,   you're just letting them know there there's a  difference in the analysis and it's up to the   commission to decide to to me and that that's  no different than any other department head to   me. Right. Yeah. My experience has been when  people are under their employment is under   someone they're much less likely to speak up. I  mean that was the way it was when I was active   duty. That's why they pulled the area defense  council, the defense, which I had that job. Um,   I would defend people with their article 15s and  court marshals and things like that. And they   learned that when at the beginning I was under  the commander's authority, I was only going to   push so far when that commander wanted to make  example of that whole airman because that guy  

was right in my OE. So they said on every base  the area defense council was separate and I had   a chain of command that left the base and went  straight to to the headquarters and the Pentagon   and I was all of our training was that that was  the reason and it really does work like that. I see I think I love the checks and balances of  the finance side, right? Having an independent   auditor, maybe not just a finance auditor,  but a process auditor too to say, "Hey,   here's these opportunities in these different  departments that maybe the city manager is not   seeing the we have a city manager structure.  We don't have a city manager CFO structure,   right? We don't have a commission  structure. It's a city manager structure."   Somewhere along the lines, it's gotten blurred  over the years and it's here in the charter,   right? That's what we're trying to close the gap  on is are we going to continue to have a city   manager structure and finance rolls up underneath  of the city manager in every structure. I mean,   all of the departments have finance component.  They write checks, they have purchasing,   every department has that. But do we have I think  what we're looking for is the checks and balances.   Is it working? How do we improve it? not just  from a finance perspective but like operations   as a whole Mr. chairman and I can I ask a question  of Miss Smith through you, but uh I know that when   we have that we do have independent auditors and  and they brief me and Jan after their audit, but   I believe they brief all five elected officials.  They work for the commission. They don't work for   me and Jan. So, and I think Jen said at one point  that they get paid an awful lot of money. Yeah,   it's very expensive. It's very superficial.  They're really not doing the daily deep dive,  

which her job is. Yeah. I mean, you know, it's  crazy how much they're paid. Wow. How necessary   is a deep dive all the time. Well, that's why we  want the physician to be independent. They think   it's critical take that it would take that role.  We wouldn't have to pay the auditor for the deep   dive. I mean, I very much may have blinders  on because obviously I I come with my context   and I come with my attorney context and I I can't  imagine I mean, if you follow your logic further,   then there should be one officer and  everybody should roll to the city manager,   including the city attorney, which  that seems insane to me. Yeah. And so, like to me, legal integrity and  financial integrity and operational   integrity are three separate branches. I  completely agree. But I mean, honestly,   we may have to we have a couple more things  to go over today or we can we can continue to   work on this one until we get somewhere  or we may just have a split vote. Um, we made progress on the clerk. We did we we did  re narrowed it down to what we're really concerned   um put you on the spot because I know I sent  this to you guys or I think you guys got it   yesterday around new has been a lot of time. Um  would you guys digest this so we can come back   in the next meeting and see if it works or not?  as as a suggestion, you might want us to um look   at this and not worry about whether it's going  to end up under city manager or a separate CFO,   but just look at your language and the different  duties and what needs to be in the charter   regardless of which side. Is that something you'd  like us to look at for the next I would and I  

would like to ask Jen to look at it. Well, sure.  from your perspective and see if what additional   tools or tweaks you think are needed because we  have someone with all these years of experience.   Who knows? Yeah. So, I'm glad you're here. And  that's something that I I know that I'm sure   Caroline's looked at if I hadn't really looked at  the description of the clerk job and and bonds and   finance and what needs to be in the charter that's  not already governed by state law. But we'll we'll   look at that. and then where you decide to put  it. You can All right, let's do this. Let's Can   we table this one? I think we've all said what  we're going to say today and then we'll come back   another time. See if we can get taken care of.  This will also give us an opportunity. Um we have   not had an opportunity to discuss taxation bonds  at all. We had 15 minutes for each one. I'm sorry   to keep it to 10. I've got a couple other things  I've thought about that I just want to present   um float ideas at the very very end here. And  so have you guys looked at the taxation stuff? Um so the the the high level question  is going to be article 15. Yeah. Sorry. Yes. This may be something we need st either staff to  help us with now or at the next meeting. Um home   rule power is there's certain taxes that the  the city can levy. I know they don't directly   levy adalorum taxes. Correct. Correct. That goes  through the county but even the the adalorm tax   rates those are also established via the those are  established by the city. Okay. And so the way we  

and then so and then you have but there's limits  statuto limit statuto limits right okay um on   homesteaded property on all property stamp on the  millage rate increase on all I thought I thought   that was just on homesteaded my understanding  is you've kind of got three tranches of taxation   you've got the property tax adorum tax as one  tranch you've got like a special assessment tax   like the fire district as a good recent example  of that and then you have the excise taxes   Are there any other taxing levers that this a  city has? Tax the merchant license fee. Yeah,   that would fall under the excise taxes. It Yeah,  it would kind of Okay. It's I was just reading   the charter. It It talks about excise taxes, but  then it also talks about gross receipts taxes,   which is what you mentioned, right? Gross  receipts. I mean, one one thing that I saw in   here was it this could be interpreted to actually  limit the types of excise taxes that the city can   do. If you wanted to read it that way, what what  would be helpful, I think, for this convention is   to we could do a memo that talks about the  merchant license fee or the merchants tax.   It's 1% on gross receipts and it is a significant  amount of income to the city. I believe it's what   13 million a year. I think it's 14 this year.  14. Yeah. So it's kind of equal to the abil   taxes. So it's so it's really significant and it's  a grandfather tax. There's only Panama City Beach,   Panama City in the state of Florida that have  that tax. and it's a occupational license tax.   It was grandfathered because in the early 1970s  the tax was in existence when they prohibited  

all taxes except for those that were already  there. So we've been very protective as Panama   City Beach has also Panama City Beach doesn't  even have an abil tax. Uh Panama City has always   had both to even things out. So it might be  useful for you that we've obviously have done   a lot of work in this area to get a little bit  of the history of it. Uh there's there's we're   very jealous and protective about changing things  because it's a grandfathered tax. Um so you just   want to be cautious. So so I I'd be cautious  too obviously on on the charter as well. But   uh but you don't you we need to give you some more  background on that particular tax. So the question   for the board members to think about before the  next meeting and maybe staff can help with this   too is like the home rule power will allow the  city to adopt all these taxes with the exception   of a sales tax that the city's grandfathered into  through the merchant fee. Okay. Would there be any   other limitations on either the types of tax or  the amount of the tax or anything that would say   be an express prohibition or anything that would  require something to go back to the citizenship to   get approved? Is that something that even wants to  be included in the charter or just leave it open?   they can do any taxation as allowed by law at the  excuse me for interrupting but yeah the state law   as Miss Goon has pointed out the state legislature  has become very active in in regulating what   cities and counties do when it comes to abort  taxes so it's every year it's a new ratcheting   down I think from for from for from the from the  aggression of the state getting involved in every   little thing. And if they even have provisions  if the commissioners do anything different,  

you can be sued. You know, I mean, they're  like nasty. I think we need to be really,   really careful tinkering with anything that  we're grandfathered in. Because if they could   pull it back away from us, I'm sure they would.  But as far as further limiting, I'm with the   chairman. We don't need any further limits in our  charter. We need to have all the flexibility that   we can have under general law. Since you have  a special session coming about property tax,   you need all the li all the open doors you can  find. The school seems to have a better lobby,   Rob. Yeah, we we uh No, I'm not going to say  that because they're not doing but you know,   we'll see. I mean, I I would agree with you from  the sitting in your chair. I just I would wonder   if the citizens would agree with that too. If  the citizens would like to say, "Hey, listen.   We don't want to handcuff the city to do what we  want, you know, what they need to do." But on the   other hand, I mean, there's been some other things  that have been adopted from a taxation standpoint   that have not been super popular. And I know the  recourse is elected representatives, right? Um   I'm just I'm just saying there might be something  worth, but but again, is section 148 necessary? Well, I think that's what the warning is.  Maybe it's part of the grandfather. I think one   paragraph there again like we did on those other  ones, one paragraph to say you have the power to   tax because everything else in this section is  there again handled by ordinance or statute. I   mean if we want to let leave it in to make someone  feel better about reading this later, that's fine.   until it right but only with regards to the the  jealously protected grandfather portion I think   but I don't think that's even in here the merchant  fee yeah it is it's it's called it's the grocery  

s okay I just think we need to be careful and not  take the foundation out from under our protection I don't know that it's offering protection,  but I I I see I understand. Well,   we're going to give legal. Yeah. Is there is  there anything that we want staff's help with   for consideration of the taxation section?  Well, I think that what he offered to make   sure yes that we don't pull out a tooth that  we need. Any All right. um bond section. I   looked at that one as well. That's even  sparer than the uh taxation section. Um, you know what? The only thing  that that would be the next There's nothing there. Nothing. No, yeah, it's  it's eventually gone. Okay. So, just just stuff   to just chew on. I'm getting a little slightly  dangerous. on municipal law at this point, but   my understanding is you've got general obligation  bonds that are very highly regulated by the state.   You've got revenue bonds that are also regulated  by the state that are secured by the revenue that   the project is going to generate. So, we don't  really need to pull with that. Then you've got   other just general short-term borrowing that the  city can do and there may be some consideration   to any sort of limitations on that. Other than  that, I don't know what else you put in here. I don't think we should or shouldn't. I'm I keep  going back to like what levers can we even pull   here. We can't pull a general obligation one,  I don't think, because it's just not worth it.   We're not going to pull a special revenue lever  to restrict that because it's all secured by the   revenue it generates. It just be, hey, are we just  going to go mortgage something for the fun of it?  

Is there any sort of limitation on that? Just real  quick background on general obligation bonds. You   can only issue those if they're approved by the  elected. Um so so that's it's highly regulated.   Uh city has none as far as general obligation  bonds. The revenue bonds every other bond is you   cannot pledge abil taxes. That's what a general  obligation bond is. You're pledging abil taxes   and you're agreeing to have a tax millage  that's high enough to pay the bond holders.   Every other bond is uh used you pledge nonappore  revenues such as water and sewer revenues or   um merchant tax fee revenues or things in  your budget that are nonappalor and there   you go through a process and the financial  advisor says you have sufficient funds to to   make that pledge and the bond holders you know  are comfortable. So those are but every other   issue this this might be academic but is the are  all those triggers in the pledging of collateral   and not the actual borrowing of the funds.  I know there's probably not many instances   where they are going to lend the funds without the  collateral. But I'm going back to my association   experience. Very few of my associations have  any limitations on borrowing. A lot of them   have limitations on pledging collateral. And I  don't know if if it's similar with municipal law.   We our our limitation is is really driven by the  market. Yeah. You pledge nonavalorm revenues. So   is it a thing for municipalities  to get unsecured loans? No. Well, yeah. No, we don't have a I mean,  

we always happen. We always pledge somehow.  Yeah. The banks regulate really what we're up I mean, do we want to pay with Do we  need a section in the charter that   even talks about lending? Do we need it? A  broken record. Um, unless you want to put   some kind of limit on debt service. If you  want to think about doing some debt limits   would be the only thing that I could think  of. None of those none of those are. Yeah,   I'm all about fiscal accountability and it  was one of the things I actually talked with   uh Josh Street about and um but municipalities  are just not the same animal when it comes to   borrowing and defaults and bankruptcies and things  like that. It's just not it's not akin to like   private enterprise. And so I'm not opposed I'm  not inherently opposed to something. I just also   don't know hurricane there was discussion held  three four years ago recent discussions about   the percentage of x amount of money that should  be in the bank after a national disaster right   and it was like we're six years post emergency and  we're just now talking about lowering we should   have some debt we're going to have some debt but  what's a healthy percentage of debt so whether or   not we put in I don't think it's be a charter  item I think it was operationally a weakness   in our structure at the time we should have had  okay we're going to save 15% in into this account   when there's a national disaster we understand  we're going to go we're going to lower that to   5%. We're going to exhaust some of that but  like that was an operations thing. I don't   think it should be in the charter. I would say  remove bonds all in general but operationally   it is communication's the weakness. We don't need  it's exactly right. So the the just for for some  

context we had we had a reserve policy that was  assigned reserves for uh and for disasters. So it   was like for our enterprise fund is three months  of operating capital. Um and then for our general   fund it was uh I think it was 30% of of our um of  our budget and then 10% for unassigned reserves.   So like for those one-time purchases, capital  items or projects. Um, and then a commission at   at a point prior to Hurricane Michael lowered  that 10% to 5%. Uh, unassigned reserves. Um,   but those are always reserve target balances.  So, it's a policy, but there's targets. Um,   and right now we don't we don't meet those targets  and haven't since hurricane Mike. That helps.   If we were to have anything in here, I would  have something about you were to have an X amount   of not an X amount, but to know your reserve  percentage, but I don't think they need that's a   process. I mean, that's in your report every month  percentage on hand of what only because we're   below target. If I if we weren't below target, I  wouldn't include that section of the report. It's   just a budget to actual report except for we are  below our target policy limits. Thanks. All right,   I'll give some more thought to the finance  and the bond sorry the taxation and the bond   section. We can vote on that next meeting. Um I  float just purely just want to float these ideas   because as I was sitting here um do we have do we  need some kind of conflict of interest policy at   all? Like is there an obligation commissioner to  disclose if they've got some statute. Um I know we   don't have a recall procedure. Is that something  even worth? State statute. Statute has one. Oh,  

you're preempted by that. Um not to pick on  something that recently. Is there a a code of   conduct type thing? I mean, I just didn't know if  there's any sort of just kick that around. There's   something that you I don't know how you enforce  it. I don't know how you vote on it. whatever   else. But at a certain point, is there some sort  of expectation of conduct of commissioners um and   recourse there attendance requirement? Probably  not that big a deal. That's one. Yeah, Jerry was   asked about ethics ethics commission would be one,  but I I don't think you're talking about something   as formal as that. Maybe you're talking about  something that the city commission might take its   own action on a censure. talking about it. Yeah,  something like that where if if if somebody's   conduct on the commission is so extraordinary  to potentially expose the city to liability,   there could be something there to to do. Um,  and I actually had a conversation with Mean   about like one of my board members who actually  like was harassing the manager. I was just like,   I don't can't get him off the board. Like I it's  not not a tool that I have. And so, you know,   it was just it was a very awkward position. So, I  was just kind of floating that for you guys. Like   I said, I don't know what we can do about it. If  there's anything to do about it in the charter,   just share that. Yeah, for sure. I may be wrong,  but I don't think you can put in the charter to   remove a commissioner. No, it would be you have to  have a recall to do by the municipal recall. That   that's that's it. Yeah, that is that's correct.  No, but still then the governor would remove him   at that point. Um, that's why I was asking if what  you're talking about was a like a censure process   where hey, we've, you know, we and I I I think  that's inherent in their authority anyway. So,   the only path to remove a commissioner is recall  or governor governor and what's the path to the  

governor? Um, malesence, misfeasance, crime. I  know, but who reports that or who who delivers   those results or whatever? How does it even get  on the governor's desk? Ethics Commission. Yeah.   Ethics Commission or front page of the paper  kind of a notice, right? Yes. You get charged. I'm sorry. If you get charged with a crime  and the governor reads it in the paper, then   the governor can remove you. I mean, that's one  way it gets on his death. The ethics commission,   that's like a stateapp appointed thing or that's  a state. You can file a complaint with the ethics   commission and then it goes through a process  which is fairly long. Is there a process now   to suspend commissioners? Maybe not remove them  ethics violation or complaint. The governor can   do that and the governor can at any time pick up  something and suspend or remove and the ethics at   the end of an ethics complaint. There's nothing  automatic, but presumably then it could they   could refer it to the governor's office for the  commission have autonomy if it's a majority vote   to suspend a current commissioner pending the  results of an ethics complaint if I I don't   know. I mean, you can I I don't know. I mean we  can look at that but I I don't tend to think we   and then someone else would have to take the spot  too. Bigger problem might create a vacancy on the   board. What happens? The comm now the commission  leftover members of the commission appoint a new   commissioner within a certain amount of time.  Yeah. Or then there's a special election. In fact,   I think Miss Ward sent that to us last time. I  will circle that to the board. I can't remember  

if she just mentioned it to me. Um or she actually  emailed it. She watched some of the conversation. There has been a mayor removed in  Bay County before and they weren't   they didn't go to they used the  the vice mayor until because she   was so far through her term. So they  didn't go to special election meet.   come Mexico Beach probably. Yeah, that's that's  the most Happens every three years. Yeah, it does. Mr. Chairman, did we skip on purpose  item number 13 about compensation of   mayors and commissioner or you  intended to speak that? Uh,   no and yes. We did not skip it intentionally  and we'll pick it up next time. Okay. Okay. So, let's J or I mean I have notes what  I think is for next time. Do you have notes   for next time? Let's make sure we're on the same  page here. Have um research the model charter and   small sample of charters that have items that are  not in the city charter. The attorneys to review   Okay. Change to article 17 to ensure no  authority has been forgone. Um we're going   to add the charter review advisory  board. Um language that they'll meet   whenever however the sausage gets made.  Um attorney draft language to roll up city   clerk duties to uh not city clerk just  the clerk duties to the city manager.   um the attorney and clerk to review chairman  suggested language and what should and shouldn't  

be in the charter as far as the CFO um comproller  language and the attorney is going to provide   background on these to ensure no revenues  are jeopardized by removing the tax language that everything yeah so we can get the version.  Sorry. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I think you're right. Um the new versions we'll have we'll discuss bonds  and tax and hopefully vote on those next time.   Then we can remove the pling board language. We're  going to leave the advisory board language. Y'all   are going to provide suggested language on  the charter charter the charter board and the   charter trying to say charter twice. Um let's  make sure we get back. Let's put the the mayor   compensation mayor and commissioner compensation  at the top of the agenda last time. Sure. Thanks. And then when's our next meeting? What day? Yeah.   When's the next? April 23rd.  It's an entire month from now. We haven't have the the schedule  thing that we had for a while. I   did not. I miss the other Miss Smith  does. She's got a whole package. Tell   me your question about what would be what  would be the next provisions if we can get   to them. Okay. That I don't have in front  of me. I have everything from the back. We were out. If anyone wants an updated red line,   here's these are you can have. Okay.  Yeah, I've got plenty of copies,

but it's got today's date in March that  shows you that's the most. Mr. Chairman,   is your thought should we try to squeeze in an  extra to meet our benchmark? I I mean, yeah,   I don't know. Possibly. I was just trying  to see what was coming up next. Yeah, I can   tell you which articles you have not covered yet.  That is the question. Yeah. Um so there article 4   inquiring general that's one sponsored exhibition  today public utilities commissions and we had   talked a little bit about whether it would be good  to have plan another public meeting join in with   city commission and I think as we're getting  closer to the end we can project time. Yeah,   I think when we have a um pretty much rough  draft that would be the when we're kind of   through start the education because they're going  to have to vote on it. Well, once the commission   adopts or throws it all away, whatever they  choose to do. So you think we should have our our educational outreach so to speak  before the commission so that the   citizens can debate or that might influence  the commissioners to vote one way or the other. I don't know yet. I'm thinking the next meeting if  we can get through I think bonds and tax will go   very quick. Utilities should just be an approval.  Charter board should just be an approval,   planning for advisory board, all that stuff. If we  can get through clerk and commission compensation,   those are going to be the bigger  ones. If we can get through those,  

I think we'll be in really good  shape. We have article 14 scheduled that kind of rolled into some stuff. Yeah.  Um it had been scheduled for meeting number   eight gone had we gone by. things like this  is a lot of what we're talking about with   the are we on meeting seven now finance in  general all of them have been superseded is   that more hopefully on on finance we'll also  look at that in contemplation of is it already   covered by state law we can give you that  feedback it seemed like that's what we're   arguing about is the city manager going to  make an estimate who does it who audits It's also make sure we have on  the agenda for next time. Um, thank you guys on the board. I  appreciate the professionalism and   uh staff for being you guys. We'll see you  guys what you say April 20th. Uh, April 23rd. It be determined that we're we are  truly either ahead or on schedule. Well,   I think we're on schedule.  We're back on schedule again. April 9th could work for the city  if you felt it was necessary. Just   stick with our schedule that we  Yeah, we'll see where we are. So,   is there a motion to adjourn? So, I move on  favor motion. Second. dance. Thank you. Mr.