Loading...
Minutes 05-25-11 MINUTES OF THE BOYNTON BEACH CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2011 AT 6:30 P.M. IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS BOYNTON BEACH CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: James Brake Brian Edwards David Katz Paula Melley Jeannie Taylor ALSO PRESENT: James Cherof, City Attorney Janet Prainito, City Clerk Attorney Cherof opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. and explained this was an organizational meeting. The first order of business was to select a Chair and Vice Chair. Mr. Edwards nominated Ms. Taylor as Chair. Ms. Melley nominated Mr. Brake as Chair. Mr. Katz seconded the nomination for Ms. Taylor. A vote was taken and Ms. Taylor was elected Chair. Ms. Melley and Mr. Edwards nominated Mr. Brake as Vice Chair. There were no other nominations and Mr. Brake was elected Vice Chair. Attorney Cherof commented it was up to the Committee which process to follow when conducting the meetings and he explained the Sunshine Law as follows: Members cannot have private discussions about issues that will come before the  Committee; Documents prepared and exchanged between the members are public records  and the members should maintain them and keep them; and Individual personal notations on documents are not public records if done to  assist in refreshing what a member may want to do, say, or remember and as long as the notes are not made to develop the document itself. 1 Meetings Minutes Charter Review Committee Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2011 Attorney Cherof explained the City Charter is available online, and if the members do not have it, the City Clerk can provide it. American Legal Publishing and the Municipal Code Corporation publish nearly every city charter in Florida and they can be viewed online through their websites. If other charters are wanted, the members should let staff know and they can obtain a copy for them. There was discussion one of the items on the agenda notes the members should give special attention to the timeline and methodology to establish City Commission district boundaries. The current Charter requires this to be done every four years using a university. Because Census block data is available once every 10 years, the four-year requirement may be unrealistic. A request was made to define “unrealistic”. Attorney Cherof explained the concept came from the City Manager and it pertained to the delay in the selection of the university and the data used, which would be the Census data. He noted there is other data available for the task and the information can be updated in other manners. The special attention was because the City was behind schedule in its boundary study and the members would need to bring it current and determine if the cycle was realistic, too short, too long, or just right. Recently, there was much attention paid to state representation and federal and state boundaries being redrawn. Because of the 2010 Census data and the increases over the last 10 years, Mr. Edwards wanted to be sure when it was said “unrealistic”, that it pertained to using a university. Breaking out the data for districting can be complex. Attorney Cherof was aware of one company doing the study and pointed out the most significant driving factor with the population was foreclosures, which are on a street-by- street and citywide basis. Florida Atlantic University did the study the last time and a great deal of data was used such as communities of interest, population and other factors. The members discussed the meeting schedule. Janet Prainito, City Clerk, explained the only place to meet around a table was at the Library and it was only available on the second Monday of the month, otherwise the meetings would have to be held on the third Wednesday or the first and third Thursday of the month. If once a month was not enough, Ms. Prainito suggested contacting the City Clerk’s office to secure a secretary and meeting location. If needed, the Committee could meet at another location. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has met at the Senior Center in the past. The meetings have to be accessible to the public. The members agreed to meet on the second Monday of the month at the Library and set the next meeting for June 13, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. The meetings would conclude at 8:30 p.m. when the Library closed. Ms. Prainito advised Ms. Melley, Mr. Katz and Mr. Edwards have to take Ethics Training and noted Mr. Brake and Ms. Taylor had already taken it. The training can be done at 2 Meetings Minutes Charter Review Committee Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2011 home. Ms. Prainito had a DVD and paperwork prepared and explained the members were to watch it and return the DVD with the sheet signed within two weeks. Discussion returned to the Charter. Attorney Cherof explained modern day charters are written in very plain language and the provisions of the Charter are consistent with Florida Law but some provisions were archaic. If there were items that may not be in the Charter but should be, the members could bring forward a recommendation and Attorney Cherof could advise them as needed. As to the methodology to use, discussion ensued that each member should prioritize the top five items to take precedence. Then the Committee could identify the key pieces, reach consensus with the top three, and address them. Chair Taylor agreed and requested members bring their top five priorities to the next meeting. In this fashion, it could help determine how long the Committee would need to review the entire Charter and if they would need more meetings. At some point, the members had to review the Charter from front to back. It was also unknown how much public input would be received and if some items should be in the Charter as opposed to in Ordinance form. The members recognized they may run across items they may want to add to and some items were connected to other items. It was thought the redistricting was more time sensitive. The Visions 2010 process had mentioned the Charter and addressed some of the items in it. It was unknown if it would be helpful to review, but Ms. Melley commented she may have some data from that workshop to bring to the meeting. Mr. Katz also recalled at one time the City was trying to avoid a federal civil rights lawsuit and that was why the districts were created the way they were. District II was not necessarily a “Black District”, but it was where the majority of the Black registered voters were and it may be difficult to deviate from the configuration they have. While the Districts were created within the statute guidelines, the actual quadrant concept may be difficult to change. Discussion followed the quadrant concept could be tweaked and it has worked for a couple of years. A few areas where the districts ended could be changed. Additionally, the police district map was not the same. It was thought if the members could conform the voting and policing districts, it could be beneficial. Mr. Katz thought it may not be the case and the chance to change them were slim. As to the demographics and the data used four years ago, there were definite percentage increases in minority populations. Conversation followed the members needed to adhere to the guidelines. The members would need to review the map and a suggestion was made for the members to obtain the demographics, the maps, and be more specific about how much they are willing to tackle at each meeting. The voting districts would be more complex. 3 Meetings Minutes Charter Review Committee Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2011 Mr. Katz recalled the last time the districts were reviewed, there were three possibilities to bring them into the guidelines. Mr. Edwards offered to bring a large map from the Supervisor of Elections office but he did not know how current it was. Ms. Prainito had precinct information, a precinct map and registered voter information within those districts. The Supervisor of Elections may have the demographic breakout and a suggestion was made to request that data. In the meanwhile, members would gather what information they had and bring back their priorities to the next meeting. In response to a question about emails and the Sunshine Law, Attorney Cherof explained emails sent to all are an impermissible means of communication with the exception of the first individual into the email exchange. Everyone else from that point forward is prohibited from responding to it. Generic information can be disseminated through the City Clerk's office. There were no further questions and the meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m. C!()JJuu,{~ {lluillf Catherine Cherry Recording Secretary 052611 4