Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-06-18 - City Commission Workshop Meeting MinutesMAIL REPLY TO: P.O. BOX 25010 TAMA RAC, F LOR I OA 33320 5811 NIORYI.IWE=ST 88TH AVENUE" [,�11/1At?� _: r=l_UMDA 33321 'TELEPHONE (:3015) 72 -5900 June 15, 1984 NOTICE OF WORKSHOP MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA There will be a City Council Workshop Meeting on Monday, June 18, 1984, at 9:30 a.m., in the West Conference Room of City Hall, 5811 NW 88 Avenue, Tamarac. The purpose of this workshop meeting is to discuss committees. The public is invited to attend. Carol A. Evans Assistant City Clerk Pursuant toSection 286-0105, Florida Statutes If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. "An Equal Opportunity Employer" FMICY OF Irk]-DISCRIMIIIMM ON BASIS OF HANDICAPM STATUS CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING June. 18, 1984 Tape CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Kravitz called the meeting to order at 9:.30 A.M., I on Monday, June 18, 1984, in the West Conference Room of City Hall. Mayor Kravitz read the official notice of the workshop meeting which was called to discuss committees. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Philip B. Kravitz Councilman Jack Stelzer Councilman Raymond J. Munitz Councilman John J. Dunne ABSENT AND EXCUSED, Vice Mayor Sydney M. Stein ALSO PRESENT: Jon Henning, City Attorney Carol Thrasher, Secretary City Attorney Henning advised that most of the discussion today will concern legislative or philosophical questions where it is not a question of what is right or wrong. Mr. Henning provided Council members with copies of his Memo #5652 dated June 28, 1.983, and a more simplified method in his memo #6014 dated June 18, 1984. IIe advised that ways of establishing committes include: (1) by State Statute such as the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment; (2) by the Charter, such as Public Informa- tion Committee, Consumer Affairs Board, Board of Social Services, and. Redistricting Committee; (3) by Ordinance, which is the general way of providing for Committees and the Charter states that the Council can create committees by Ordinance; and (4) by Resolution, on rare occasions; however the City Attorney advised that Council should avoid using Resolu- tions to establish Committees. Mr. Henning advised that the chart with the 1983 memo needs to be revised but it can be used as reference throughout the discussion. He stated that the issues that have come up in recent months are included on page 2 of the June 18th memo and more can be added during the discussion. These issues are: (1) Qualifications of Committee Members - should members be residents; should they be registered voters; should they own a business in Tamarac. Ile stated that the subject should be refined as Council desires, and added that an attempt should be made to have the same rules apply to all Committees if possible; however, when there are exceptions, they should be included in the Ordinance. He referred to exceptions with the Beautification Committee and the Social Services Board, which have specific functions. (2) Excluded from Membership - should this exclusion be for elected officials of Tamarac or those in other Cities also; should city employees be on the committee or would it be distracting to the business of the committees and their jobs; should the number of committees a person can serve on be limited. (3) Term of Office - one year has been customary or terms could be staggered with two year memberships so there would not be a complete change of membership. Mr. Henning added that frequently in Tamarac, there has not been a complete change of membership anyway, so this may not be a problem. -1- 6/18/84 /cmt (4) City Council Involvement - Whether they should be members; whether they should have voting rights; whether they should have the right to hold office. Mr. Henning advised that at this point it should be assumed that this is legal, if it is included in the Ordinance and added that he is continuing work toward establishing a well -worded and tightly sealed opinion on the legality of City Council or elected official involvement in committees to satisfy all concerned. He stated another point to consider is whether there should be an annual report to Council so that there is a record of committee progress. He added that if time allowed in today's meeting, Council could discuss expenses. Mayor Kravitz suggested that items be discussed as outlined by the City Attorney and if any items could not be resolved, he would call another Workshop after Council had evaluated the results of this Workshop. The Mayor stated that the Council could give their opinions on each item and the City Attorney could be guided by that as to how to draw the Ordinance. Regarding Item 1, Qualifications, the Mayor stated that in the past,members had to be residents and in some cases they had to be registered voters. He added that it was then amended to include business owners who did business in Tamarac; however, business managers were never considered. C/M Munitz stated that he believed the wording was business owners and/or managers. Mayor Kravitz stated that as he recalled from the last administration, it was worded that if individuals were in business,or residents, then they were eligible for appointment to committees; and asked the City Attorney if that was correct. Mr. Henning advised that there was a recent Ordinance stating that. Mayor Kravitz continued that it was C/M Munitz's idea that members should be registered voters and added that any number of changes to the qualifications of committee members could be added during this discussion. C/M Munitz stated that his objection was with the term "resident" and he feels that it should be registered voters. He stated that he did not want to see a carte blanche inclusion of business owners and/or managers; but there would be certain committees where such members would be to the benefit of the committee and their expertise would be of a positive nature. Therefore the wording of the Ordinance should be just registered voters and that business owners and/or managers would be included only for those committees where it is beneficial for such appointment. Mayor Kravitz asked whether C/M Munitz was saying, in effect, that anybody could be a member, at the discretion of Council. C/M Munitz said the nature of the committee may be such that a business owner and/or manager would not be of any positive impact. Mr. Henning advised that this should be established by committee, as an exception. He stated that any committee member is assumed to be an asset to the committee; however there are some committees that should include specific exceptions. He referred to the Beautification Committee, stating that its involvement with signs in business would frankly be more pertinent to the business community than to individual residents. C/M Munitz stated that in that particular committee,the input of the business owner and/or manager has been of a positive nature. C/M Stelzer suggested that a business owner and/or manager should not be on a committee in cases where there may be a conflict of interest; for example, a banker should not be on the Investment Committee, or a Real Estate person on the Planning Commission,even if the individual is a registered voter and owns his own business in Tamarac. C/M Munitz agreed with the City Attorney that each specific qualification should be listed by committees C/M Stelzer stated that the Ordinance on committees could specify that if a member is in business, it should not be in conflict with any committee on which he is serving. -2- 6/18/84 /cmt Mayor Kravitz asked whether or not the ordinances already spell these things out and pointed out that the Ordinance on the Investment Committee states that a member should not be in the brokerage business. Mr. Henning advised that is a disclaimer of residence and those specific exceptions should be addressed by committee. He stated that the question now is whether or not a person other than a registered voter could be on a committee. C/M Munitz stated that on certain committees, the answer would be yes. Mr. Henning suggested that Council review the Table of Contents listing the Committees and discuss those exceptions. C/M Stelzer suggested that a person in the retail or consumer oriented business should not be a member of the Consumer Affairs Committee, even though he could be of benefit, because of a possible conflict in interest. Mayor Kravitz asked if this must be covered by individual committees or if a general rule would apply and Mr. Henning replied that where a general rule does not apply, the individual Ordinance would have to specify the exception. C/M Stelzer discussed the Burglar Alarm Committee as one of the committees needing members with specific qualifications of business people. Mayor Kravitz stated that the important thing on Item 1 is whether or not the wording should be the general qualifications of resident, voter, business owner, or manager and asked .for Council's feelings on these in order to give the City Attorney some guidelines. He added that the qualifications for each committee could then be determined. C/M Munitz stated that if Council sets up general guidelines to apply to all committees, they could be open to exceptions for specific committees. He suggested the general guidelines of registered voter and business owner and/or manager if beneficial to the nature of the committee. He stated that if the City Attorney would be more comfortable with specific qualifi- cations for specific committees without drawing on general conclusions, then Council should keep in mind that these two general_ categories are the general rule. He agreed with C/M Stelzer that the Burglar Alarm Committee needed specific qualifications and added the Beautification Committee also. C/M Dunne stated that he feels Council is passing up some very qualified people when they pass up residents just because they don't vote here. City Attorney Henning advised that on some committees, residents would be sufficient; for example Beautification, Welcoming, Social Services, and Veterans' Committees where help is needed at specific times of the year. C/M Munitz reminded Council that there is an absentee ordinance and it is up to the Chairman of each committee to report to Council any deviation to that ordinance. He added that generally speaking anyone who is not a registered voter has a second home someplace else and is absent for a minimum of four or five months, which is detrimental to the ongoing effective- ness of the committee on which they would serve. He stated that he is not uncomfortable with using the expression registered voters rather than residents. C/M Stelzer asked whether or not residents could be used as alternates rather than losing them and C/M Dunne agreed. Mr. Henning advised that that could be done. C/M Munitz asked for clarification that permanent membership would be limited to registered voters and alternate membership to residents. C/M Stelzer stated that it couldn't be done that way because there are alternates who are registered voters and they are also needed on some committees. He clarified that residents could be considered only as alternates. -3- 6/18/84 /cmt -A W M C/M Munitz stated that he does not feel that Council is going to be able to set up carte blanche qualifications generally for all committees; and that each committee should be discussed individually, keeping in mind the basic preference for: (1) registered voters; (2) business owners and/or managers where their input would be beneficial to the committee; and (3) residents as alternates only if their expertise would be a benefit to the committee. He stated that these general qualifications should be kept in mind at the time that the ordinance for each committee is written. Mayor Kravitz advised that Council would still have the privilege of voting on any of these. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 2, Excluded from Membership, with three listed exclusions: (a) elected officials (of Tamarac only); (b) City Employees; (c) Number of committees on which one person may serve. C/M Munitz stated that City employees should not be considered for any Committee. He asked for clarification that there is no statutory regula- tion on the number of committees a person may serve on. Shirley Blumfield reminded C/M Munitz that City Employees are serving on the Pension Board and C/M Munitz stated that that should not be considered as a Committee. Mr. Henning advised that the only reason it is included on the listing is because it was established by Ordinance and agreed that it is an exception. Mayor Kravitz stated that the question is whether or not Council feels that a member should serve on more than one committee and C/M Munitz replied yes, provided that their qualifications would be of benefit to the committees. C/M Stelzer disagreed and stated that it must depend on the individual committees, for example a member should not be on the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment because the same subject could be considered by both committees and if a member voted no in one meeting, he already has a no vote before the other committee meets on that subject. Mr. Henning stated that Council must consider all these restrictions and these things could be used to eliminate an applicant when appointing members; but he pointed out that the Planning Commission is advisory to Council and the Board of Adjustment is a final opinion and it is not illegal to appoint a member to both committees. C/M Munitz suggested that Council should be able to determine such potential conflicts of interest but he does not feel that Council should limit the number of committees on which one person may .serve. C/M Dunne suggested that it be limited to two because from the list of applicants available, some may be shortchanged if one person is appointed to more than one committee. Mayor Kravitz advised that any person can apply to as many committees as they wish, but Council still makes the appointments and the only question is whether or not the guidelines should include whether one person can serve on more than one committee. C/M Stelzer discussed the possibility of a member being on the Planning Commission and the Beautification Committee for example; .and he turns __ set of plans but is outvoted by the others in a Planning Commission meeting; then that set of plans comes to the Beautification Committee where his vote is automatically a no vote. C/M Munitz stated that having a member on both of these Committees is only possible if Council lets it happen.. Mr. Henning advised that these are exceptions that can be written into the ordinance. C/M Stelzer advised that Lynn Redfield is currently on both of these committees. Mayor Kravitz pointed out that Mr. Redfield is an alternate on the Planning Commission and C/M Stelzer stated that even as an alternate, he could have the chance to vote and the possibility for conflict is there. Mr. Henning advised that the committees established by statute should state that members could not be on any other committee. C/M Stelzer asked for clarification that any member on the Board of Adjustment or the Planning Commission could not serve on any other committee. C/M Munitz agreed. -4- 6/18/84 /cmt I M Mayor Kravitz asked if Council was satisfied that members can serve on more than one committee and C/M Dunne stated that it should be limited to two. Mayor Kravitz advised the City Attorney that the wording should be that a member can serve on no more than two committees. Mayor Kravitz advised that the charter states that a Council person should be elected to certain committees and the question is whether or not Council feels this is correct or should be changed. C/M Stelzer agreed, as long as it is ex officio, and the Mayor advised that the requirement is for a voting member. C/M Munitz advised that in discussions with the City Attorney, he suggested an amendment to the charter. Mayor Kravitz stated that that would require going to a referendum. Mr. Henning advised that a referendum must be created by Ordinance. C/M Stelzer asked if this could not be clarified as ex officio members, without going to a referendum. Mr. Henning stated that Council must first decide what is wanted and then appropriate action could be taken. C/M Munitz continued that he would like a referendum eliminating from the Charter all references where a member of the City Council or the Charter Board is automatically a member of any committee. He stated that ex officio member- ship could not be discussed without discussing Item 4 for City Council involvement and the question of liaison with committees. Mayor Kravitz stated that this will be discussed with Item #4. Mr. Henning advised that it would be easier to remove council reference to committees by referendum and added that it would not preclude Council from including them by Ordinance in the future by specific committees. He referred to the Public Information Committee and the Pension Board and C/M Stelzer mentioned the Consumer Board. Mayor Kravitz asked if there were a Budget Committee and C/M Munitz stated that Council sits as a budget committee. Mr. Henning advised that the Charter Board has an involvement in the Council review on the budget by sending a representa- tive but there is no committee established. C/M Stelzer asked if the Charter Board has any input to the formation of the budget and C/M Munitz replied no and neither does the Council; it is only for review. He stated that this would not require any change to the Charter. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 3, Terms of Office, as one year unless other- wise specified; or staggered 2 years; and asked if it was not required to stagger the term for some committees. Mr. Henning advised that committees established by Statute are always going to be an exception. Mayor Kravitz stated that the one-year term is working out very well and suggested that they stay with that. C/11 Munitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 4, City Council Involvement. C/M Munitz stated that this subject will be presented at the Pre -Agenda Meeting for the first meeting in July. He stated that he would like to see a complete revision to that portion of the Ordinance that created liaison, going in the direction that the Mayor shall appoint the liaison with the approval of the person appointed and with the majority consent of the Council. He added that the same procedure should be used for removals rather than the current wording that the Mayor may remove without cause. He stated that this is unjustified and not productive to good relationships with committee members, the Council, or the people. He requested that whatever amendment to the Ordinance is required, be placed on the agenda for the first meeting in July for Council input. He stated in reference to Item 2(a), that liaison should be sufficient and would avoid the potential of having two Council members on a committee. He referred to the Public Information Committee and the Golf Feasibility Committee. Mayor Kravitz advised that he withdrew as liaison to the Public Information Committee. C/M Munitz stated that rather than having to withdraw, he would like to see that it never happens. He advised that, by Ordinance, a liaison is ex officio and asked for clarification on this. City Attorney Henning and Mayor Kravitz agreed. C/M Munitz asked if the Ordinance stated such and Mr. Henning explained that Council is not using the pure definition of ex officio. -5- 6/18/84 /cmt \J He advised that it is being used to mean a non -voting liaison type of member and added that legally or technically, an ex officio member is a person who, by the nature of their office, is appointed to a committee. He continued that in making a member of Council an ex officio member, it is not truly ex officio because Council must determine who that member is. He explained that a true ex officio member would be the Mayor or his appointee; the Vice Mayor; the Police Chief; the City Manager; a Department Head; one person by the nature of his office. Mr. Henning stated that in the past few months, Council has been, using this term to mean an elected official who does not vote but serves on the committee. C/M Munitz asked if it could not be defined that Council members would have no vote or serve as Chairman and Mr. Henning agreed that that could be done. Mayor Kravitz advised that a liaison is not a member of the committee and automatically cannot serve as chairman. C/M Munitz asked the Mayor for clarification that the liaison has no voting rights and the Mayor confirmed. C/M Stelzer stated that the Pension Board is not in line with this and Mr. Henning advised that the Pension Board must be dealt with individually. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 5, Committee Enrollment with specific number of members, maximum/minimum, and odd number for tie breaking vote. He stated that at this time, committees are a mixture of all three. Mr. Henning suggested that the first two items.._. should be addressed by specific committee ....... ... when the ordinance is written. C/M Stelzer agreed that with any committee there should be no maximum number and also that there is no voting of any kind with many committees. C/M Munitz suggested that another guideline might be for each Council member to appoint a committee member from his district, if possible. Referring to Items 2a and 4, C/M Munitz suggested that a workshop be held at the beginning of each year to discuss committee appointments and possibly have all of the applicants appear for interview. He asked the City Attorney if this could be legally added and Mr. Henning advised that workshops can be called by the majority consent of Council, or by option of the Mayor; and he questioned whether or not Council wanted an iron -clad rule for an annual workshop. Mayor Kravitz stated that it should not be mandatory because the Charter already gives Council the authority to call workshops with majority consent. Mayor Kravitz referred. to Item 6, Procedures, as to quorum; number of affirmative votes for action; frequency of meetings; annual report to Council; expenses; and special meetings. He stated that the question that comes up many times is where there is a committee of five and three show up, a quorum is present but is two enough to pass a vote or do you need all three. C/M Munitz stated that the number necessary to take positive action should be at least a. quorum. Mr. Henning advised that a quorum should be a majority of the membership. C/M Munitz stated that a quorum is half plus one for positive action, so out of a membership of five, you must have three for positive action. Mayor Kravitz stated that most committees meet once a month. C/M Munitz suggested that the wording be that frequency of meetings should be as requested by Council. Mayor Kravitz stated that things are working well as they are going now. Mayor Kravitz stated that reports to council are adequate and he does not see any need to change this. C/M Stelzer asked if Council gets copy of the minutes, why shouldn't that be sufficient without getting any annual report. Mayor Kravitz stated that each committee will stand on its own with its reporting procedures. QS 6/18/84 /cmt Mayor Kravitz stated that with regard to Expenses, there are two items to consider: one is the mileage and the other is lunches, which one committee is getting now; and suggested that a policy be established which should be the standard form. He added that Council should consider whether or not committee members are entitled to mileage and, if a meeting extends through lunch, are the members entitled to lunch. C/M Munitz stated his opinion that at no time should a luncheon allowance be given to any member of any committee, including the City Council. Mayor Kravitz asked for opinions on mileage, and C/M Munitz stated that he is opposed to commuter mileage whether it is the Council or a committee. Mayor Kravitz asked C/M Munitz if he was opposed to both types of expenses and C/M Munitz confirmed that he was. C/M Stelzer stated that he does not feel that members should be reimbursed for any expenses. Mr. Henning advised that there were other points to consider; for example, inspection or seminar mileage. C/M Munitz stated that there should be no question regarding reimbursement for mileage in the line of performing the responsibility of a committee. Mayor Kravitz asked that the Council give the City Attorney some guidelines for wording on this subject. C/M Munitz replied that lunches should not be reimbursed and mileage in general. should not be reimbursed, but there are certain times when it is permissible. C/M Stelzer stated that there should be no reason why a member should not be compensated for mileage when they go out to look over building sites. Mr. Henning stated that if they were not compensated, it could discourage them from going out for inspections. Mayor Kravitz asked whether it would be up to the City Manager to approve reimbursement, as long as Council provides the guidelines. Mayor Kravitz referred to Special Meetings and Mr. Henning stated that he could include that the Chairman or three members can call a special meeting with a minimum of 48 hours notice. He advised that in this way, if the three members can't get a quorum, they can't have the meeting anyway. Mayor Kravitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz stated that all issues suggested by the City Attorney have been covered and each Council member could keep in touch with the City Attorney with any additional ideas. Mr. Henning agreed that he could start with this information and the Mayor advised him that when he was ready, it could be presented. Mr. Henning requested that discussion on the Pension Board be held for further research and Mayor Kravitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz closed the meeting at 10:30 A.M. Carol A. Evans Assistant City Clerk This public document was promulgated at a cost of $150.60 or $4.19 per copy, to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the City Council of the City of Tamarac. -7- 6/18/84 /cmt p� w ► wrwwp �p " p p w ' pw�pwpw� ��N���ii�M-�N�w���■ice w w h �iNiNi�i7a�N■�. - ���iriw�■wwww�r■pw=.��r�■i- w rpw �.�ww=w■r ��ww■�www■�ppnwrr��w'�. �w�� wpwwwww�■ ' wrwwwp■�wprrwrw�r■�w w=rrrrw�=pwwwp�r■p�rrw . wwwww wwwp�r�w�.wrr� �.wwwwr��■ w�ir�pr'� wow �i www ���?rpwwrr■p�■�ipw� k ' . w ��iwww�wwwwww�� � ww�wwwww w w ww ww■wp ww _ rZiwwr*.� www ww = �w=wwp �� p�wwwww�■ww wrpwwpwwwwpwir ww pw�pw��w�w�ww�pp� ■�.�x�r.nr�w - i ,• • rows r_- � * w�■■ra�w �, � iw . ■at.��r� wii ri�iwwi���r�wrr.�wrr■��� ,. � _-■iiHiHil��i�iY�7.--� L pwwpw� 'r��y�'��•J � T ZNHHHOVIIV CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING June 18, 1984 Tape CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Kravitz called the meeting to order at 9:30 A.M., 1 on Monday, June 18, 1984, in the West Conference Room of City Hall. Mayor Kravitz read the official notice of the workshop meeting which was called to discuss committees. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Philip B. Kravitz Councilman Jack Stelzer Councilman Raymond J. Munitz Councilman John J. Dunne ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Vice Mayor Sydney M. Stein ALSO PRESENT: Jon Henning, City Attorney Carol Thrasher, Secretary City Attorney Henning advised that most of the discussion today will concern legislative or philosophical questions where it is not a question of what is right or wrong. Mr. Henning provided Council members with copies of his Memo #5652 dated June 28, 1983, and a more simplified method in his memo #6014 dated June 18, 1984. He advised that ways of establishing committee include: (1) by State Statute such as the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment; (2) by the Charter, such as Public Informa- tion Committee, Consumer Affairs Board, Board of Social Services, and Redistricting Committee; (3) by Ordinance, which is the general way of providing for Committees and the Charter states that the Council can create committees by Ordinance; and (4) by Resolution, on rare occasions; however the City Attorney advised that Council should avoid using Resolu- tions to establish Committees. Mr. Henning advised that the chart with the 1983 memo needs to be revised but it can be used as reference throughout the discussion. He stated that the issues that have come up in recent months are included on page 2 of the June 18th memo and more can be added during the discussion. These issues are: (1) Qualifications of Committee Members - should members be residents; should they be registered voters; should they own a business in Tamarac. He stated that the subject should be refined as Council desires, and added that an attempt should be made to have the same rules apply to all Committees if possible; however, when there are exceptions, they should be included in the Ordinance. He referred to exceptions with the Beautification Committee and the Social Services Board, which have specific functions. (2) Excluded from Membership - should this exclusion be for elected officials of Tamarac or those in other Cities also; should city employees be on the committee or would it be distracting to the business of the committees and their jobs; should the number of committees a person can serve on be limited. (3) Term of Office - one year has been customary or terms could be staggered with two year memberships so there would not be a complete change of membership. Mr. Henning added that frequently in Tamarac, there has not been a complete change of membership anyway, so this may not be a problem. -1- 6/18/84 /cmt J (4) City Council Involvement - Whether they should be members; whether they should have voting rights; whether they should have the right to hold office. Mr. Henning advised that at this point it should be assumed that this is legal if it is included in the Ordinance and added that he is continuing work toward establishing a well -worded and tightly sealed opinion on the legality of City Council or elected official involvement in committees to satisfy all concerned. He stated another point to consider is whether there should be an annual report to Council so that there is a record of committee progress. He added that if time allowed in today's meeting, Council could discuss expenses. Mayor Kravitz suggested that items be discussed as outlined by the City Attorney and if any items could not be resolved, he would call another Workshop after Council had evaluated the results of this Workshop. The Mayor stated that the Council could give their opinions on each item and the City Attorney could be guided by that as to how to draw the Ordinance. Regarding Item 1, Qualifications, the Mayor stated that in the past,members had to be residents and in some cases they had to be registered voters. He added that it was then amended to include business owners who did business in Tamarac; however, business managers were never considered. C/M Munitz stated that he believed the wording was business owners and/or managers. Mayor Kravitz stated that as he recalled from the last administration, it was worded that if individuals were in business,or residents, then they were eligible for appointment to committees; and asked the City Attorney if that was correct. Mr. Henning advised that there was a recent Ordinance stating that. Mayor Kravitz continued that it was C/M Munitz's idea that members should be registered voters and added that any number of changes to the qualifications of committee members could be added during this discussion. C/M Munitz stated that his objection was with the term "resident" and he feels that it should be registered voters. He stated that he did not want to see a carte blanche inclusion of business owners and/or managers; but there would be certain committees where such members would be to the benefit of the committee and their expertise would be of a positive nature. Therefore the wording of the Ordinance should be just registered voters and that business owners and/or managers would be included only for those committees where it is beneficial for such appointment. Mayor Kravitz asked whether C/M Munitz was saying, in effect, that anybody could be a member, at the discretion of Council. C/M Munitz said the nature of the committee may be such that a business owner and/or manager would not be of any positive impact. Mr. Henning advised that this h should be establised by committee, as an exception. He stated that any committee member is assumed to be an asset to the committee; however there are some committees that should include specific exceptions. He referred to the Beautification Committee, stating that its: involvement with signs in business would frankly be more pertinent to the business community than to individual residents. C/M Munitz stated that in that particular committee,the input of the business owner and/or manager has been of a positive nature. C/M Stelzer suggested that a business owner and/or manager should not be on a committee in cases where there may be a conflict of interest; for example, a banker should not be on the Investment Committee, or a Real Estate person on the Planning Commission,even if the individual is a registered voter and owns his own business in Tamarac. C/M Munitz agreed with the City Attorney that each specific qualification should be listed by committees C/M Stelzer stated that the Ordinance on committees could specify that if a member is in business, it should not be in conflict with any committee on which he is serving. -2- 6/18/84 /cmt Mayor Kravitz asked whether or not the ordinances already spell these things out and pointed out that the Ordinance on the Investment Committee states that a member should not be in the brokerage business. Mr. Henning advised that is a disclaimer of residence and those specific exceptions should be addressed by committee. He stated that the question now is whether or not a person other than a registered voter could be on a committee. C/M Munitz stated that on certain committees, the answer would be yes. Mr. Henning suggested that Council review the Table of Contents listing the Committees and discuss those exceptions. C/M Stelzer suggested that a person in the retail or consumer oriented business should not be a member of the Consumer Affairs Committee, even though he could be of benefit, because of a possible conflict in interest. Mayor Kravitz asked if this must be covered by individual committees or if a general rule would apply and Mr. Henning replied that where a general rule does not apply, the individual Ordinance would have to specify the exception. C/M Stelzer discussed the Burglar Alarm Committee as one of the committees needing members with specific qualifications of business people. Mayor Kravitz stated that the important thing on Item 1 is whether or not the wording should be the general qualifications of resident, voter, business owner, or manager and asked for Council's feelings on these in order to give the City Attorney some guidelines. He added that the qualifications for each committee could then be determined. C/M Munitz stated that if Council sets up general guidelines to apply to all committees, they could be open to exceptions for specific committees. He suggested the general guidelines of registered voter and business owner and/or manager if beneficial to the nature of the committee. He stated that if the City Attorney would be more comfortable with specific qualifi- cations for specific committees without drawing on general conclusions, then Council should keep in mind that these two general categories are the general rule. H'e agreed with C/M Stelzer that the Burglar Alarm Committee needed specific qualifications and added the Beautification Committee also. C/M Dunne stated that he feels Council is passing up some very qualified people when they pass up residents just because they don't vote here. City Attorney Henning advised that on some committees, residents would be sufficient; for example Beautification, Welcoming, Social Services, and Veterans' Committees where help is needed at specific times of the year. C/M Munitz reminded Council that there is an absentee ordinance and it is up to the Chairman of each committee to report to Council any deviation to that ordinance. He added that generally speaking anyone who is not a registered voter has a second home someplace else and is absent for a minimum of four or five months, which is detrimental to the ongoing effective- ness of the committee on which they would serve. He stated that he is not uncomfortable with using the expression registered voters rather than residents. C/M Stelzer asked whether or not residents could be used as alternates rather than losing them and C/M Dunne agreed. Mr. Henning advised that that could be done. C/M Munitz asked for clarification that permanent membership would be limited to registered voters and alternate membership to residents. C/M Stelzer stated that it couldn't be done that way because there are alternates who are registered voters and they are also needed on some committees. He clarified that residents could be considered only as alternates. -3- 6/18/84 /cmt V L C/M Munitz stated that he does not feel that Council is going to be able to set up carte blanche qualifications generally for all committees; and that each committee should be discussed individually, keeping ---- ---- - - -. ....... __..... _.. _ _._ _ . . in mind the basic preference for: (1) registered voters; (2) business owners and/or managers where their input would be beneficial to the committee; and (3) residents as alternates only if their expertise would be a benefit to the committee. He stated that these general qualifications should be kept in mind at the time that the ordinance for each committee is written. Mayor Kravitz advised that -Council would still have the privilege of voting on any of these. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 2, Excluded from Membership, with three listed exclusions: (a) elected officials (of Tamarac only); (b) City Employees; (c) Number of committees on which one person may serve. C/M Munitz stated that City employees should not be considered for any Committee. He asked for clarification that there is no statutory regula- tion on the number of committees a person may serve on. Shirley Blumfield reminded C/M Munitz that City Employees are serving on the Pension Board and C/M Munitz stated that that should not be considered as a Committee. Mr. Henning advised that the only reason it is included on the listing is because it was established by Ordinance and agreed that it is an exception. Mayor Kravitz stated that the question is whether or not Council feels that a member should serve on more than one committee and C/M Munitz replied yes, provided that their qualifications would be of benefit to the committees. C/M Stelzer disagreed and stated that it must depend on the individual committees, for example a member should not be on the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment because the same subject could be considered by both committees and if a member voted no in one meeting, he already has a no vote before the other committee meets on that subject. Mr. Henning stated that Council must consider all these restrictions and these things could be used to eliminate an applicant when appointing members; but he pointed out that the Planning Commission is advisory to Council and the Board of Adjustment is a final opinion and it is not illegal to appoint a member to both committees. C/M Munitz suggested that Council should be able to determine such potential conflicts of interest but he does not feel that Council should limit the number of committees on which one person ma�__serye.- C/M Dunne suggested that it be :limited to two because from the list of.. applicants available, some may be shortchanged if one person is appointed to more than one committee. Mayor Kravitz advised that any person can apply to as many committees as they wish, but Council still makes the appointments and the only question is whether or not the guidelines should include whether one person can serve on more than one committee. C/M Stelzer discussed the possibility of a member being on the Planning Commission and the Beautification Committee for example; and he turns set of plans but is outvoted by the others in a Planning Commission meeting; then that set of plans comes to the Beautification Committee where his vote is automatically a no vote. C/M Munitz stated that having a member on both of these Committees is only possible if Council lets it happen. Mr. Henning advised that these are exceptions that can be written into the ordinance. C/M Stelzer advised that Lynn Redfield is currently on both of these committees. Mayor Kravitz pointed out that Mr. Redfield is an alternate on the Planning Commission and C/M Stelzer stated that even as an alternate, he could have the chance to vote and the possibility for conflict is there. Mr. Henning advised that the committees established by statute should state that members could not be on any other committee. C/M Stelzer asked for clarification that any member on the Board of Adjustment or the Planning Commission could not serve on any other committee. C/M Munitz agreed. W.49 6/18/84 /cmt Mayor Kravitz asked if Council was satisfied that members can serve on more than one committee and C/M Dunne stated that it should be limited to two. Mayor Kravitz advised the City Attorney that the wording should be that a member can serve on no more than two committees. Mayor Kravitz advised that the charter states that a Council person should be elected to certain committees and the question is whether or not Council feels this is correct or should be changed. C/M Stelzer agreed, as long as it is ex officio, and the Mayor advised that the requirement is for a voting member. C/M Munitz advised that in discussions with the City__ _ Attorney, he suggested an amendment to the charter. Mayor Kravitz stated that that would require going to a referendum. Mr. Henning advised that a referendum must be created by Ordinance. C/M Stelzer asked if this could not be clarified as ex officio members, without going to a referendum. Mr. Henning stated that Council must first decide what is wanted and then appropriate action could be taken. C/M Munitz continued that he would like a referendum eliminating from the Charter all references where a member of the City Council or the Charter Board is automatically a member of any committee. He stated that ex officio member- ship could not be discussed without discussing Item,.4 for City Council involvement and the question of liaison with committees. Mayor Kravitz stated that this will be discussed with Item #4. Mr. Henning advised that it would be easier to remove council reference to committees by referendum and added that it would not preclude Council from including them by Ordinance in the future by specific committees. He referred to the Public Information Committee and the Pension Board and C/M Stelzer mentioned the Consumer Board. Mayor Kravitz asked if there were a Budget Committee and C/M Munitz stated that Council sits as a budget committee. Mr. Henning advised that the Charter Board has an involvement in the Council review on the budget by sending a representa- tive but there is no committee established. C/M Stelzer asked if the Charter Board has any input to the formation of the budget and C/M Munitz replied no and neither does the Council; it is only for review. He stated that this would not require any change to. -the Charter. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 3, Terms of Office, as one year unless other- wise specified; or staggered 2 years; and asked if it was not required to stagger the term for some committees. Mr. Henning advised that committees established by Statute are always going to be an exception. Mayor Kravitz stated that the one-year term is working out very well and suggested that they stay with that. C/M Munitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 4, City Council Involvement. C/M Munitz stated that this subject will be presented at the Pre -Agenda Meeting for the first meeting in July. He stated that he would like to see a complete revision to that portion of the Ordinance that created liaison, going in the direction that the Mayor shall appoint the liaison with the approval of the person appointed and with the majority consent of the Council. He added that the same procedure should be used for removals rather than the current wording that the Mayor may remove without cause. He stated that this is unjustified and not productive to good relationships with committee members, the Council, or the people. He requested that whatever amendment to the Ordinance is required, be placed on the agenda for the first meeting in July for Council input. He stated in reference to Item 2(a), that liaison should be sufficient and would avoid the potential of having two Council members on a committee. He referred to the Public Information Committee and the Golf Feasibility Committee. Mayor Kravitz advised that he withdrew as liaison to the Public Information Committee. C/M Munitz stated that rather than having to withdraw, he would like to see that it never happens. He advised that, by Ordinance, a liaison is ex officio and asked for clarification on this. City Attorney Henning and Mayor Kravitz agreed. C/M Munitz asked if the Ordinance stated such and Mr. Henning explained that Council is not using the pure definition of ex officio. -5- 6/18/84 /cmt He advised that it is being used to mean a non -voting liaison type of member and added that legally or technically, an ex officio member is a person_who,_by the nature of their office, is appointed to a committee. He continued that in making a member of Council an ex officio member, it is not truly ex officio because Council must determine who that member is. He explained that a true ex officio member would be the Mayor or his appointee; the Vice Mayor; the Police Chief; the City Manager; a Department Head; one person by the nature of his office. Mr. Henning stated that in the past few months, Council has been using this term to mean an elected official who does not vote but serves on the committee. C/M Munitz asked if it could not be defined that Council members would have no vote or serve as Chairman and Mr. Henning agreed that that could be done. Mayor Kravitz advised that a liaison is not a member of the committee and automatically cannot serve as chairman. C/M Munitz asked the Mayor for clarification that the liaison has no voting rights and the Mayor confirmed. C/M Stelzer stated that the Pension Board is not in line with this and Mr. Henning advised that the Pension Board must be dealt with individually. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 5, Committee Enrollment with specific number of members,'maximum/minimum, and odd number for tie breaking vote. He stated that at this time, committees are a mixture of all three. Mr. Henning suggested that the first two items should.be-addressed by specific committee when the ordinance is written. C/M Stelzer agreed that with any committee there should be no maximum number and also that there is no voting of any kind with many committees. C/M Munitz suggested that another guideline might be for each Council member to appoint a committee member from his district, if possible. Referring to Items 2a and 4, C/M Munitz suggested that a workshop be held at the beginning of each year to discuss committee appointments and possibly have all of the applicants appear for interview. He asked the City Attorney if this could be legally added and Mr. Henning advised that workshops can be called by the majority consent of Council, or by option of the Mayor; and he questioned whether or not Council wanted an iron -clad rule for an annual workshop. Mayor Kravitz stated that it should not be mandatory because the Charter already gives Council the authority to call workshops with majority consent. Mayor Kravitz referred to Item 6, Procedures, as to quorum; number of affirmative votes for action; frequency of meetings; annual report to Council; expenses; and special meetings. He stated that the question that comes up many times is where there is a committee of five and three show up, a quorum is present but is two enough to pass a vote or do you need all three. C/M Munitz stated that the number necessary to take positive action should be at least a quorum. Mr. Henning advised that a quorum should be a majority of the membership. C/M Munitz stated that a quorum is half plus one for positive action, so out of a membership of five, you must have three for positive action. Mayor Kravitz stated that most committees meet once a month. C/M Munitz suggested that the wording be that frequency of meetings should be as requested by Council. Mayor Kravitz stated that things are working well as they are going now. Mayor Kravitz stated that reports to council are adequate and he does not see any need to change this. C/M Stelzer asked if Council gets copy of the minutes, why shouldn't that be sufficient without getting any annual report. Mayor Kravitz stated that each committee will stand on its own with its reporting procedures. MGM 6/18/84 /cmt 77 Mayor Kravitz stated that with regard to Expenses, there are two items to consider: one is the mileage and the other is lunches, which one committee is getting now; and suggested that a policy be established which should be the standard form. He added that Council should consider whether or not committee members are entitled to mileage and, if a meeting extends through lunch, are the members entitled to lunch. C/M Munitz stated his opinion that at no time should a luncheon allowance be given to any member of any committee, including the City Council. Mayor Kravitz asked for opinions on mileage and C/M Munitz stated that he is opposed to commuter mileage whether it is the Council or a committee. Mayor Kravitz asked C/M Munitz if he was opposed to both types of expenses and C/M Munitz confirmed that he was. C/M Stelzer stated that he does not feel that members should be reimbursed for any expenses. Mr. Henning advised that there were other points to consider; for example, inspection or seminar mileage. C/M Munitz stated that there should be no question regarding reimbursement for mileage in the line of performing the responsibility of a committee. Mayor Kravitz asked that the Council give the City Attorney some guidelines for wording on this subject. C/M Munitz replied that lunches should not be reimbursed and mileage in general should not be reimbursed, but there are certain times when it is permissible. C/M Stelzer stated that there should be no reason why a member should not be compensated for mileage when they go out to look over building sites. Mr. Henning stated that if they were not compensated, it could discourage them from going out for inspections. Mayor Kravitz asked whether it would be up to the City Manager to approve reimbursement, as long as Council provides the guidelines. Mayor Kravitz referred to Special Meetings and Mr. Henning stated that he could include that the Chairman or three members can call a special meeting with a minimum of 48 hours notice. He advised that in this way, if the three members can't get a quorum, they can't have the meeting anyway. Mayor Kravitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz stated that all issues suggested by the City Attorney have been covered and each Council member could keep in touch with the City Attorney with any additional ideas. Mr. Henning agreed that he could start with this information and the Mayor advised him that when he was ready, it could be presented. Mr. Henning requested that discussion on the Pension Board be held for further research and Mayor Kravitz agreed. Mayor Kravitz closed the meeting at 10:30 A.M. L /V �g� 602���� Carol A. Evans Assistant City Clerk This public document was promulgated at a cost of $150.60 or $4.19 per copy, to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the City Council of the City of Tamarac. -7- 6/18/84 /cmt No Text