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