Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-06-21 - City Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes7525 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE 0 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321-2401 TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900 June 14, 1989 NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL AND CHARTER BOARD JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING There will be a Joint Workshop Meeting of the City Council and Charter Board on Wednesday, June 21, 1989 at 9:30 a.m, in the Council Conference Room, Tamarac City Hall, 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida. . The purpose of this meeting is to discuss procedures for Charter Amendments. All meetings are open to the public. CAE/nr Carol A. Evans City Clerk AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS CALL TO ORDER: Wednesday, June Room. PRPRENT: CHARTER BOARD 1 CITY OF TAMARAC CITY COUNCIL AND CHARTER BOARD JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 1989 Mayor Abramowitz called this meeting to Order on 21, 1989 at 9:30 A.M. in the City Council Conference ABSENT AND EXCUSED: ALSO PRESENT: l Mayor Norman Abramowitz Vice Mayor Dr. H. Larry Bender Councilman Bruce Hoffman Councilman Henry Rohr Councilman Jack Stelzer Isaac "Zeke" Feldman, Chairman Dr. Alfred Wald, Vice Chairman Stan Bernard Ron Catronio Muriel Davis John P. Kelly, City Manager Richard Doody, City Attorney Alan Gabriel, Charter Board Attorney Pauline Walaszek, Special Services Secretary The purpose of this meeting was to discuss procedures for Charter Amendments. Mayor Abramowitz said this meeting was a discussion of information between the Charter Board and the City Council. He said there would be no voting and he hoped that the Charter Board and City Council could come to a decision after this meeting. He said there was a difference of opinion between the City Council and Charter Board regarding the Attorney General's Opinion. Mayor Abramowitz said he wanted the meeting to be informal providing it remained in the proper decorum. Mayor Abramowitz said there were statements concerning the Charter Board's recommendations for Amendments which were submitted to the City Council. He said the City Council never received six items from the Charter Board; however, there were four items submitted. He said three of the items were approved immediately and the fourth item was discussed because of one word. Mayor Abramowitz said he felt that if the City Council and Charter Board were able to meet and discuss the word the matter could have been resolved whereby the item could have been placed on the Ballot. Page 1 6/21/89 Alfred Wald, Vice Chairman of the.Charter Board, said the Charter Board and City Council were the only elected officials in the City of Tamarac and it was commendable that the Bodies could meet at a Workshop to try to resolve their differences; however, he felt it was not being done correctly. Vice Chairman Wald said when the Charter Board and City Councilmembers were elected, they swore to uphold the City Charter, which was the Charter in its present form. He said the matter of concern between the two Bodies was spelled out under no uncertain terms in the existing Charter, Section 8.02(b). Vice Chairman Wald said the Mayor, City Council, City Attorney and City Manager have prevented the Charter Board from carrying out the Charter Board duties, which was a violation of the Charter. He said they claimed their rights due to an interpretation of the Charter by the State Attorney General's Office. He said the interpretation and opinion did not change the Charter and he felt that the Mayor, City Council, City Attorney and City Manager have acted illegally. He said that is why the Charter Board instituted the lawsuit now pending. Vice Chairman Wald said the Charter Board was not a legislative body and could not create an Ordinance or a Resolution; however, the Charter allowed the Charter Board to place Charter Amendments on the Ballot for consideration by the residents without prior approval by the City Council as stated in Section 8.02(b). Vice Chairman Wald said he believed that the only way the dilemma could be solved was by having a Judge render a decision. He said most of the money was already spent and the Charter Board Attorney indicated that if the City Council would instruct the City Attorney to allow the suit to continue without interference a decision could be reached in a short time with very little additional expense. Vice Chairman Wald said the Workshops were not feasible because the City Council was trying to change the City Charter without going to the people with an Amendment. He said the problem between the City Council and Charter Board has been on -going for several years. Vice Chairman Wald said in 1976, the Charter Board could over -ride the City Council by a vote of four Charter Board members. He said in 1984, Ordinance 0-83-53 allowed the Charter Board to directly place Charter Amendments on the Ballot. He said the existing City Council wanted to revert back and eliminate the Charter Board's rights. Vice Chairman Wald said the simplest and only solution was to get a ruling from the Courts on this matter. He said if the ruling made it necessary to change the Charter, the City Council could place an Amendment on the Ballot and have the City Charter legally amended. Mayor Abramowitz said Vice Chairman Wald stated that most of the money was spent and he asked how much money was spent on legal fees. 1 to Page 2 6/21/89 Vice Chairman Wald said he did not know and Mayor Abramowitz asked how much was spent on the litigation so far. Alan Gabriel, Attorney for the Charter Board, said he did not know the exact amount; however, he had the information at this office. Mayor Abramowitz asked Attorney Gabriel if he felt that most of the money was spent for litigation and Attorney Gabriel replied, no. Attorney Gabriel said he informed Vice Chairman Wald that most of the research necessary was completed and, if there was an issue taken to a Judge, it would probably only require one Hearing. He said if the procedural issues were continued then the costs could pile up. Mayor Abramowitz. said Vice Chairman Wald stated that Attorney Gabriel indicated that most of the money was spent in the litigation. He said Attorney Gabriel was indicating that if the City Council agreed with the Charter Board most of the money would have been spent. He asked what would happen if the City Council and City Attorney did not agree with the Charter Board. Attorney Gabriel said he was assuming that there would be a Hearing before a Judge with the City Attorney and someone from his office present to argue the two sides. He said this would pertain to only certain issues, such as if the Charter stood as it was based on the Attorney General's opinion as opposed to procedural issues, such as the complaint being framed properly, should there be a Hearing at all, etc. Mayor Abramowitz asked if Attorney Gabriel would act differently than the City Attorney if he were the City Attorney. City Attorney Doody said he did not feel that Attorney Gabriel could answer this question and Attorney Gabriel said he did not intend to answer. Mayor Abramowitz said he did not approve of remarks that were misguided and not factual. He said there were remarks that the City Council was not concerned about the expenditure in this case. Stan Bernard, Charter Board member, said it seemed that costs were now becoming a concern. He said this matter had to be settled one way or the other and, if it was going to require funds, then the funds had to spent. He said everyone was sitting at this meeting hoping that a resolution could be found to avoid spending the funds. C/M Rohr said he entered the meeting with the draft of the procedures for Charter Amendments because, at the last Workshop meeting, the Charter Board and City Council agreed that procedure 4. was not appropriate. He said he would like to review the revision of the procedures to see if the City Council and Charter Board agreed with them. He said discussing past events of the Charter Board and City Council would not assist the Bodies in making a decision. Zeke Feldman, Chairman of the Charter Board, said the issue at hand did not pertain to money. He said the issue was whether the Charter Board had the right to Page 3 6/21/89 place Amendments of the Charter on the Ballot. He said the Charter indicated that all Amendments were to be submitted to the City Council for drafting of an Ordinance; however, he felt that the matter should be placed on Referendum to allow the residents to decide if the City Council and Charter Board could not find a resolution at this meeting. Chairman Feldman said because he did not agree with the Charter Board members did not mean that he was not upholding the Charter. Mayor Abramowitz said in the revised draft of the Amendment procedures, Item 4., stated, "The Mayor will call a joint session."; however, the previous draft stated, "The Mayor shall call a joint session.". He said he recently stated that no one was out to destroy or usurp the powers of the Charter Board and the recent procedures indicated that the City Council was mandated to hold a Joint meeting with the Charter Board if there was a difference of opinion regarding the Charter Amendments. Mayor Abramowitz said he wanted to save the City money and, most importantly, he wanted to save the City from the embarrassment. He said he did not see anything wrong with the two Bodies meeting and trying to come to an agreement. Ron Catronio, Charter Board member, said he received a draft of the Amendment procedures and he found no problems with the draft. He said he would vote to approve the existing procedures; however, he felt that some people wanted to do nothing but waste everyone's time. He said he was elected to serve as a Charter Board member; however, as a result of the problems in the last year, he lost.friends, accomplished nothing as a Charter Board member and he felt that he has wasted his, the taxpayers, and the City's time. He said he wanted to see a resolution and he was tired of taking time off from work to be productive on this matter and get absolutely no where. Mr. Catronio said the City Council and Charter Board consistently discuss this matter but did not come to an agreement. He suggested that the Charter Board and the City Council discuss the Amendment procedures and vote to approve it. He said he felt that a resolution could be found; however, he did not feel that the other members of the Charter Board wanted to come up with a solution. C/M Hoffman said the City Council and Charter Board did take an oath to uphold the City Charter; however, the Bodies also took an oath to uphold the laws of the State of Florida. He said in order of precedence the laws of the United States came first, laws of the State came second and, the Charter and laws of the City came third. He said if the Charter was in conflict with the laws of the State of Florida, the Bodies had to uphold the laws of the State. C/M Hoffman said he agreed with Mr. Catronio regarding the need for a resolution. He said there was too much time trying to determine whose power was being changed. He said the Bodies should be spending more time determining what was best for the residents of the City 1 V-� Page 4 6/21/89 as opposed to the ego of individuals who felt that their powers were being taken away from them because they could not do what they felt they were entitled to do. C/M Hoffman said if the Charter Board and City Council tried to resolve this matter they would be serving the City. He said if an agreement could not be reached, then the Charter Board had to do what they felt was best. Mr. Catronio said former President Reagan stated, "It was amazing how much would be accomplished if nobody cared who got the credit". Vice Chairman Wald said Chairman Feldman indicated that the Charter required the Charter Board to submit the Amendments to the City Council for the Ballot. He said according to the Charter this was not so. He said according to the Charter the Charter Board had the explicit right to place Amendments on the Ballot without the City Council's approval. Vice Chairman Wald said he has stated several times that he would like to resolve this matter; however, if the Bodies did not agree with the Amendment procedures, then the Charter Board and City Council had to do what had to be done. He asked why the Bodies should wait and worry about the future when the matter could be settled immediately with one Hearing in front of a Judge. Vice Chairman Wald asked why they were so afraid to have the matter settled once and for all. He said when this issue first began he submitted.a letter which read as follows: "If our Charter was legally incorrect, let the City Council place an Amendment on the Ballot for the voters to decide." Vice Chairman Wald said just because he made a statement that the City Council could abolish the Charter Board, he did not mean that he agreed with it. He said the City Council had the right to abolish the Charter Board as well as having the right to change the Charter. He said if the City Council felt that there was something wrong with an item in the Charter, they should change the Charter. He asked what would be wrong if the City Council and Charter Board allowed a Judge to make a decision. City Attorney Doody said the City Council and Charter Board should be cautious in assuming that there would only be one Hearing. He said if one Body lost there was a possibility that there would be an Appeal in the Fourth District. Mayor Abramowitz said he objected to Vice Chairman Wald making legal statements for the Charter Board. C/M Hoffman said he did not know how Vice Chairman Wald knew that one Judge would make the decision and there would not be any further actions taken by the Bodies. Vice Chairman Wald suggested that the City Council and Charter Board agree that the Judge's ruling would be the final decision and Attorney Gabriel said this agreement could not be :made because the Judge may make a ruling that was detrimental to the City. Page 5 6/21/89 C/M Rohr said it appeared that there were members of the Charter Board anticipating great problems. He said the Charter Board has not had great problems with the City Council and the Amendments submitted by the Charter Board were approved by the City Council with the exception of one. He said if the Charter Board and City Council had time to meet regarding the concern about the one Amendment, it probably would have been included on the Ballot. C/M Rohr said he felt that the City Council and Charter Board would be able to accomplish more by making an agreement than they would receive from the Courts. He said it was foolish to take a matter to Court under the assumption that there may be problems in the future. Mr. Bernard said everyone stated that they were meeting to serve the City by resolving this matter. He said Chairman Feldman, Vice Chairman Wald, Ron Catronio and he spoke recently for themselves and Attorney Gabriel spoke for the Charter Board. He said he disagreed with Mr. Catronio; however, the Charter Board members could discuss their concerns during the meeting. Mr. Bernard said C/M Rohr made a suggestion that the Amendment procedures be reviewed and discussed to see if there was a solution. Vice Chairman Wald said his disagreement did not pertain to finding a solution; however, he was concerned that the City Council and Charter Board were not acting legally by living up to the existing Charter. He said if the Charter was changed, he would approve everything stated. Vice Chairman Wald said the City Council received an opinion from the Attorney General and decided that the opinion was a legal one. He said the City Council was going to follow the Attorney General's opinion; however, legally, the Charter stated something different. He said if the Charter was changed, everything would be legal. Chairman Feldman said there could be a lot of time and arguments could be saved by either taking the matter to Court or to the people. He suggested that the draft of the Amendment procedures, dated May 25, 1989, be placed on the Ballot for the residents to decide. C/M Rohr said he felt that the City Council and Charter Board could find a resolution by reviewing and agreeing to the Amendment procedures as opposed to submitting the Amendments to a Ballot. He said if the Bodies agreed to all of the Amendment procedures then there was no need to place them on the Ballot; however, if the Bodies disagreed on one, then it could be placed on the Ballot for a decision. C/M Rohr said Vice Chairman Wald's comment regarding the legality of the City Council's decision about the Attorney General's opinion was his comment. He said the other Charter Board members may feel differently. Vice Chairman Wald asked Attorney Gabriel to give his tj legal opinion about whether or not the Charter was legal. Attorney Gabriel said this was why the matter was being litigated. He said the concern was whether or not the Charter was legal as it stood. Rage 6 6/21/89 City Attorney Doody said he did not feel that the matter was illegal; however, this was why the matter was being litigated. He said this meeting was not called for the Attorneys but it was called to find a political solution to a problem. He said the Attorneys would work at the direction of their specific clients; however, the meeting should not pertain to the legal opinions. Attorney Gabriel said he would take the part of the Charter Board and City Attorney Doody would take the part of the City Council; therefore, nothing would be accomplished. V/M Bender said after listening to everyone, priorities should be established. He said the priority was what was good for the City. He said the Charter was approximately 25 years old and there was an understanding that the Charter would be completely reviewed and revised; however, a workable solution had to be found for the existing problem. He said a solution should be instituted that would benefit the City by working harmoniously with the City Council and Charter Board. V/M Bender said the Bodies should come to an agreement about their concerns; meanwhile, the Charter would be revised and brought up-to-date. He said the Workshop was called to find a workable agreement and the Bodies should be doing this. Mayor Abramowitz said Vice Chairman Wald made a statement regarding the matter being taken to Court for a resolution. He said he asked if Vice Chairman Wald was talking for the entire Charter Board and, if the Charter Board would agree to drop the matter if they lost. Mayor Abramowitz said he only wanted an agreement made and he saw two existing priorities. He said he did not want the City embarrassed and, recently, there were people teasing him about the City giving money to the Charter Board so that the Charter Board could sue the City. He asked why people were anticipating major problems when there was a possibility that there were no problems. Mayor Abramowitz said Mr. Catronio indicated that he could not afford to continue coming to the meetings that did not resolve anything. He said this should apply to everyone sitting in the room. He said he was not equipped to discuss the legality of the issue; however, he wanted the Bodies to try and resolve the matter. Mayor Abramowitz said the City Council agreed to change the wording in the Amendment procedures from "shall" to ""will" so there could be a step forward. He said there was a possibility that, when and if there was a disagreement, the two Bodies could meet and come to an agreement. He said he was willing to give this procedure a chance. Mayor Abramowitz said he would like to have the two Bodies work together in finding resolutions as opposed to %6 having turf wars. He said he did not know anyone on the City Council who wanted to take the Charter Board's powers. C/M Rohr asked if there were any Amendments that the Charter Board intended to place on the upcoming Ballot. He said there has been a lot of commotion; however, not Page 7 6/21/89 TAPE 2 one Charter Amendment was submitted to the City Council for review. He said all of the discussion was nonsense because there were no plans for an Amendment on the Ballot. He said this was what he meant by stating that there was anticipation of problems. He said the Charter Board would not be receiving problems from the City Council. C/M Stelzer said the Minutes of the last meeting could be duplicated for this meeting. He said one of his statements at the last meeting was that there was no urgency in solving this problem because nothing was presented to the City Council and the City Council had not denied anything. C/M Stelzer said he did not know why this meeting was called because everything from the last meeting was being rehashed. He said when the Charter Board members were elected, they seemed to take the title of "Attorney at Law". C/M Stelzer said it seemed that each Charter Board member has given a legal opinion as to what was happening. He said the City received an opinion from the Attorney General stating that it was his opinion that the Charter did not conform with the Florida Statutes. C/M Stelzer said there were statements regarding the matter being placed on the Ballot; however, if the Ballot asked the residents to vote, there would be several people voting on their legal opinion. He said regardless of whether the matter was placed on the Ballot, the City had an Attorney General's opinion that stated the Charter was superseded by the Florida Statutes. C/M Stelzer said he has been trying to get this matter settled for six years and, if the matter was taken to Court, it could continue forever. He said there should be an item 5 on the Amendment procedure which provided that if the City Council and the Charter Board could not agree, the matter should be taken to Court. He said the existing draft did not change the way the issue was at this time. He said the draft indicated that the City Council and Charter Board would meet and try to resolve their differences. C/M Stelzer asked what would happen if the Charter Board and City Council could not agree with a proposed Amendment. He said this was why he suggested that the Charter Board and City Council have an incident of concern before them before trying to find a solution. C/M Stelzer said the Charter Board wanted to take this matter to Court; therefore, the City should spend the money to go to Court to see whether the Attorney General's opinion was the law. He said if the Charter Board continued insisting that the matter be taken to Court, then the matter should go to Court. He said this matter was getting absolutely nowhere. Mayor Abramowitz said he did not feel that this meeting was the same as the last meeting because the Amendment procedures indicated that the City Council had to discuss the disagreement with the Charter Board. C/M Stelzer said there should be an Item 5 providing that the matter would be taken to Court if the City Council and Charter Board could not agree on an Amendment. Page 8 6/21/89 Mayor Abramowitz said he should not bind any future City Council or Charter Board members to a course of action. C/M Hoffman said he did not want to tell the Charter Board if they should or should not go to Court. He said the Charter Board was capable of making their own decisions; however, he felt that there was only one way to place an Amendment on Ballot, which was by Ordinance. C/M Hoffman said when the Charter Board was authorized to write Ordinances, then they could place Charter Amendments on the Ballot. He said until the Charter Board was authorized to write Ordinances, they must go to the City Council because they were the only Body in the City authorized to write an Ordinance. He said if the Charter Board wanted to tear the City apart with unnecessary litigation, then they should proceed at their own will. C/M Stelzer said by giving the Charter Board the right to write Ordinances did not give them the right to place Amendments on the Ballot. He said the Attorney General's opinion specifically stated that the Governing Body was the only authorized Body to place Charter Amendments on the Ballot. C/M Hoffman said he did not recommend that the Charter Board be given the power to write Ordinances; however, the Legislator could granted the Charter Board the power to write Ordinances. Mr. Bernard said the City Council should not be placing the blame for this matter on the Charter Board. He said he did not feel that it was necessarily true that Charter Board wanted to pursue the matter. Vice Chairman Wald said he agreed with C/M Stelzer's comments. He said regardless of what language was used, the meeting between the Bodies would not be binding by either party. He said if there was no agreement reached, there should be a provision that the matter would be taken to Court. Attorney Gabriel asked City Attorney Doody how they would institute the Amendment procedures. He said he was assuming that this would be done by modifying the existing Charter by Amendment, which meant that the Amendment procedures would have to be placed on the Ballot. City Attorney Doody said if both Bodies could come to an agreement of the Amendment procedures and present it to the residents by Ballot, it was likely that the procedures would be approved. Attorney Gabriel said once the procedures were approved the Charter provision would change. He said the recommendation regarding an Item 5 would not give a basis to have a lawsuit at this time because the Charter Board would not have the authority to do this. C/M Stelzer asked what happened if the Bodies could not agree and City Attorney Doody said if the Charter was amended to include Item 5, it would be similar to a Bill that was denied by Congress. City Attorney Doody said if an Amendment could not be passed by both Bodies it would die for lack of approval. Page 9 6/21/89 Mayor Abramowitz said C/M Stelzer had concerns with the Bodies disagreeing. He said he did not see anything wrong with meeting as many times as needed to come to an agreement. He said he just wanted the City Council and Charter Board to try their best to address the matter in a sensible manner. He said the City felt that the legal interpretation given by the Attorney General's office was that if the City did not stand fast by the opinion, the City could be open to several lawsuits because the City would have violated the State law. Mayor Abramowitz said if the concerns were for power, the City would be the only one suffering. He said if the Bodies could not agree than everyone would have to do what needed to be done. He said he did not consider the meeting a waste because it was an exercise of concerns in an attempt to find a solution. He said he felt that the change in language in the Amendment procedures made a big difference. Mayor Abramowitz said the Bodies had to meet separately and make a final decision as to what they wanted to do. Chairman Feldman said C/M Rohr stated that there were no Amendments intended by the Charter Board at this time. He said he mandated that the Charter Board begin reviewing the Charter at their next meeting. He said he would be reviewing the Charter without the help of C/M Stelzer. C/M Rohr said he was glad that the Charter was going to be reviewed; however, he was referring to recent Amendments that the Charter Board may have. C/M Rohr said he was still trying to get individual consensus as to the Amendment procedures. He said if the City Council and Charter Board agreed on the procedures something would have been accomplished. He said the Amendment procedures would provide a solution to the concerns until the Charter review was completed. He said something should be accomplished at this meeting. Mayor Abramowitz said he did not object to getting a consensus; however, he suggested that the Charter Board meet separately and send their comments to the City Council regarding the matter. Attorney Gabriel suggested that the City Council and Charter Board discuss their consensus at this meeting. He said he would like to understand the concerns of both Bodies. Mayor Abramowitz said he agreed; however, he did not want anyone to feel that they were being placed on the spot. Mayor Abramowitz asked everyone to comment on the Amendment procedures. He said there was a statement made that the Amendment procedures were sent to Attorney Gabriel at a wrong address. Attorney Gabriel said he received the procedures on Monday. He said the procedures were sent to his old firm and City Attorney Doody said the document was never sent 1 1 Page 10 6/21/89 back. Attorney Gabriel said his old firm held the mail until they had time to deliver it. He said City Attorney Doody's office mailed the documents to him in another envelope. Vice Chairman Wald said the only reason Attorney Gabriel received the documents was because he pursued the matter. He said he called City Attorney Doody's Secretary regarding the matter who did not seem to know what happened; however, when he explained that the document was sent to the wrong address, the Secretary indicated that the document was sent to the indicated address and there should be no further discussions. Vice Chairman Wald said he called Attorney Gabriel's office regarding the matter and no one was aware of the documents. City Attorney Doody said if the documents were sent to the wrong address, he apologized. He suggested that this matter not be blown out of proportion by making enuendos that things were being hid from people. C/M Hoffman asked how Mr. Catronio felt about the Amendment procedures and Mr. Catronio said he approved of the procedures. Mr. Catronio said he was in agreement to getting something accomplished; however, nothing was being accomplished at this meeting. At this time, Ron Catronio WITHDREW from the meeting. Mayor Abramowitz said the City went along a course that has been steady, quiet and tranquil; however, he was going to ask everyone not to begin personality clashes. He said everyone was here to get something accomplished and, if they were not, they should withdraw from the meeting. He said he would do anything he could to find a resolution that would benefit the City. Mayor Abramowitz suggested that everyone give their opinion of the Amendment procedures. Mr. Bernard said he agreed that the Bodies should review the procedures. He said he found Item 3, "The City Council may return the proposed Amendment to the Charter Board with the City Council's recommendation for revision." He asked what happened if the City Council decided not to return the Amendment. Mr. Bernard asked if "may" should be changed to "will" or "shall" and the City Council agreed. Mr. Bernard said an Amendment had to be made to the Charter to include the Amendment procedures. He read Item 4 as follows: "If the Charter Board disagreed with the City Council's recommended provisions, upon written notification from the Charter Board, the Mayor will call a joint session of both the City Council and Charter Board, the purpose of which shall be to adopt a proposed Amendment in a form acceptable to both Boards." Mr. Bernard asked what happened if the Bodies did not agree and Attorney Gabriel said the Amendment would die. Page 11 6/21/89 C/M Hoffman said if the Senate and the House did not agree there was no law. Mr. Bernard said the Senate and the House were bicameral Bodies and the Charter Board was not a bicameral Body. He said the Charter Board could not make a law in the City and the City Council was the only Body that could. He said the City Council was then holding a veto power over the Charter Board. Mayor Abramowitz said assuming that there was no agreement and the Charter Board wanted the Amendment to die. He said it could not be done differently because either the Charter Board had to state that it died or the City Council would agree to put it on. He asked if this prevented the Charter Board from taking the matter to Court. Attorney Gabriel said the argument of the Charter Board at this time was the existing Charter provisions. He said if the Amendment provisions were adopted, the existing Charter provisions would be removed and replaced with the Amendment procedures. He said the basis for the Charter Board's litigation would be removed. Mayor Abramowitz said he wanted the Amendment procedures to be a vehicle to allow both Bodies to meet and come to an agreement. He said he never intended the Amendment procedures to be voted on by the residents. C/M Rohr suggested that the Amendment procedures be called "Procedure For Formation Of Charter Board Amendments". He said this type of heading would not require a vote of the people because it was a procedural method between the two Bodies. Attorney Gabriel said there would still be a question regarding the -lawsuit because the issue would still remain. C/M Rohr said he felt that it was better if matters were settled without involving Lawyers and Judges. C/M Stelzer asked if his suggested Item 5 would be implemented and Attorney Gabriel replied, no. C/M Hoffman said regardless of what was done and what was placed in the Charter, if it did not conform with the State Statutes it would be illegal. Attorney Gabriel said based upon this outlook the question would not be resolved. He said the City felt that they had to follow the Attorney General's opinion; however, the Charter Board felt that they had to follow the Charter. C/M Hoffman said he felt that the City had to conform with the State Law and Attorney Gabriel said the Attorney General's opinion was only an opinion. Attorney Gabriel said the opinion did not mean it was law and the Charter Board took the matter to Court to make the opinion a law. C/M Rohr suggested that the Bodies not concern themselves about the legal aspects but be more concerned about finding a solution. Page 12 6/21/89 Mr. Bernard asked if the Amendment procedures had to be made an Amendment of the Charter and Attorney Gabriel said there were no provisions in the Charter regarding procedures except for the method in which Amendments were created. Mayor Abramowitz, asked if the Charter Board would be in violation of the law by following the Amendment procedures without the Amendment to the Charter. Attorney Gabriel said there may not be a provision in the Charter that allowed the creation of this type of procedure. He said there was a set procedure for the Charter Board to create an Amendment. He said he indicated that he would need the time to review the Charter to see if there was a way to create an informal procedure. City Attorney Doody said the Amendment procedure was consistent with the Charter provision that allowed the City Council place items on the Ballot. He said the Bodies would have to agree to agree. Mayor Abramowitz asked if the Charter Board would be doing anything illegal by agreeing to agree and Attorney Gabriel said this would depend on how the procedures were implemented. He said he needed the time to review the Charter to see if there was any prohibition in having a procedure that was not implemented in the Charter. Attorney Gabriel said the City Council indicated that there was a problem with one of the Amendments submitted by the Charter Board at the last election. He asked why the City Council did not call a Joint Workshop with the Charter Board regarding the Amendment. Mayor Abramowitz said when the four items were submitted to the City Council and the City Council did not inform the Charter Board that they disagreed with the Amendment. He said the City Council only informed the Charter Board that the City Council voted against the Amendment. He said this may have been wrong; however, the Charter Board did not consult the City Council regarding their concerns. He*said if the Charter Board would have done this a solution may have been found by both Bodies. C/M Hoffman said the City Council and Charter Board met regarding the Amendments and the Charter Board withdrew the Amendment. He said the City Council did not stop the Charter Board from continuing with the Amendment. City Attorney Doody said the Amendment procedures would only work if the two Bodies agreed to it. He said if the Charter was not amended there would always be the possibility that the procedures would not work. He said if the Amendment procedures were adopted as part of the Charter it would be a provision of the Charter. Mayor Abramowitz said the Charter Board intended to make revisions to the Charter and City Attorney Doody said the Amendment procedures could be considered with the revisions. Mayor Abramowitz said he never felt that the Amendment procedures should be placed as a provision in the Charter. He said he felt that the Amendment procedures would allow the Bodies to meet and settle their differences. Page 13 6/21/89 City Attorney Doody asked why the Amendment procedures should not be made a provision of the Charter and Mayor Abramowitz said he did not find this to create a problem. C/M Hoffman said the entire Charter had to be reviewed for Amendments and the Amendment procedures should be held in abeyance until the review was completed. C/M Stelzer asked if Carol Coleman was still interested in reviewing the Charter and Mayor Abramowitz said Ms. Coleman said she would do this for the City after the Legislative Session was completed. C/M Stelzer asked if Mf,. Coleman's revisions of the Charter would be fought by the Charter Board because they had different revisions. Mayor Abramowitz said the Charter Board had their rights to make Charter Amendments. V/M Bender said there were five members of the Charter Board; however, only three members were present. He said the Chairman of the Charter Board should call a separate meeting with the Board to review the items, make a decision and report back to the City Council with their decisions and comments. He said there were several different opinions by the Charter Board members. He said once the City Council was aware of the Charter Board's position, it could be addressed; however, at this time, the City Council was only addressing each individual. He said there had to be a consensus by the Charter Board before the City Council could address the matter. Mayor Abramowitz said he agreed with V/M Bender. He said the City Council could not address the Charter Board's individual concerns. He said this meeting indicated that it was not his intent to have the Amendment procedures implemented into the Charter. Mayor Abramowitz recommended that the Charter Board meet regarding the Amendment procedures and inform the City Council what the Charter Board wanted. He said there were concerns that this matter was time consuming; however, in order to get things done properly, it took time. He said he did not see anything wrong in doing something that was beneficial to the City. He said if the Charter Board and City Council could work together it would be a benefit to the City. Vice Chairman Wald said he always wanted to have peace with the City Council; however, he was concerned with the City being run legally. He said this was the only reason he kept bringing up the legality of the matter of changing the Charter without a Referendum. He said he would agree with whatever the Attorneys felt was a legal procedure. Mayor Abramowitz asked if Vice Chairman Wald did not agree with the Amendment procedures and wanted to take the matter to Court. TAPE 3 Vice Chairman Wald said he did not want to create problems; however, he felt that implementing the procedures without a Referendum may be illegal. He said Page 14 6/21/89 1 he did not see how the Charter provisions could be changed with a procedural agreement that was not a Charter provision. Mayor Abramowitz said Attorney Gabriel indicated that he wanted to review the matter before making any comments on the implementation of the procedures. C/M Hoffman suggested that V/M Bender's suggestion regarding the Charter. Board making a decision on the matter was very good. C/M Stelzer asked if the implementation of the Amendment procedures was contrary to the existing Charter and City Attorney Doody said the Charter indicated that the City Council and the Charter Board could place Charter Amendments on the Ballot. He said it was not correct in saying that the Amendment procedures were contrary to the Charter; however, the Bodies had to decide among themselves whether they could agree. Mr. Bernard said he would be proposing discussion and possible action on this matter at the next Charter Board meeting. With no further business, Mayor Abramowitz ADJOURNED this meeting at 11:30 A.M. CAROL A. EVANS, CITY CLERK "This public document was promulgated at copy to inform the general public, public recent opinions and considerations of the of the City of Tamarac." a cost of $144.00 or $9.60 officers and employees of City Council and Charter per Board Page 15