CAPTIONING JULY 12, 2010 CHARTER REVIEW BOARD ***This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the ***following meeting. It should be used for informational ***purposes only. This document has not been edited; ***therefore, there may be additions, deletions, or words ***that did not translate. >>MITCHELL THROWER: GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO THE JULY 12th CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN BY HAVING MR. FRANK REDDICK LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEASE RISE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] THANK YOU, MR. REDDICK. NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. FIRST UP IS MARILYN SMITH. IS SHE HERE? LET ME -- AL DAVIS. MR. AL DAVIS FIRST. MR. AL DAVIS. >> THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. >> I'M AL DAVIS, 3717 EAST WILDER AVENUE, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33610. MR. CHAIRMAN AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, I EXTEND GREETINGS. I GOT A LITTLE BIT MIXED UP, BUT I'VE BEEN STRAIGHTENED OUT. I WAS THINKING TONIGHT AND TOMORROW NIGHT WAS THE -- WHAT YOU CALL THE PUBLIC HEARING ON YOUR PROPOSED RESOLUTION. NOW I UNDERSTAND IT IS TOMORROW NIGHT, AND ON THE 30th, THAT WILL BE A DAYTIME. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, SIR, YOU ARE CORRECT. >> [INAUDIBLE] THE SAME THING. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: THE 30th IS A REGULAR MEETING. >> BEG YOUR PARDON? >>MITCHELL THROWER: THE 30th IS A REGULAR BOARD MEETING. IT'S NOT THE PUBLIC HEARING. TOMORROW NIGHT IS OUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING. >> OH, WE'VE ALREADY HAD ONE PUBLIC HEARING? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING ON -- WHAT WAS THE DATE, JUNE -- >> WAS THAT JUNE 29th? >>MITCHELL THROWER: 29th, YES, SIR. >> OKAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THAT WAS OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. TOMORROW NIGHT IS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR AND THE VETO PROVISION FOR THE MAYOR, THE COUNTY MAYOR. >> THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE ISSUES THAT WOULD -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE COULD HAVE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ADDITIONAL ISSUES, YES, SIR. YEP. THOSE AREN'T THE ONLY TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE'VE ACTUALLY VOTED TO HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IN AUGUST FOR -- RIGHT NOW ON THOSE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IS THE ADDITIONAL COUNTY COMMISSIONER -- INCREASING THE COUNTY COMMISSION SIZE FROM SEVEN TO NINE. >> OKAY. SO IF YOU DECIDE NOT TO ADD ANY OTHER THING TO THE CHARTER, MAKING A PROPOSAL, THEN TONIGHT IS THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING THAT WOULD BE FOR -- TO THE -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: WELL, TONIGHT IS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TWO ISSUES, THE VETO PROVISION FOR THE COUNTY MAYOR AND THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. WE HAVE ALREADY VOTED TO HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IN AUGUST CONCERNING INCREASING THE COUNTY COMMISSION SIZE FROM SEVEN TO NINE, THAT RELATION, AND WE COULD ALWAYS HAVE -- WE COULD VOTE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THE FUTURE FOR ADDITIONAL ISSUES. SO WE -- BASICALLY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, TONIGHT IS NOT THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING, SO -- >> ALL RIGHT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, SIR. >> DO WE KNOW WHAT IS ANTICIPATED IN TERMS OF THE OTHER ISSUE THAT NECESSITATE THE PUBLIC HEARING YET? >>MITCHELL THROWER: IT COULD BE -- IT COULD BE ANY ISSUE. WE'VE STILL GOT QUITE A FEW BOARD -- WE'VE GOT -- WE'RE NOT EVEN HALFWAY THROUGH THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETINGS YET, SO A LOT OF ISSUES I'M SURE WILL STILL COME UP, SO -- >> OKAY. SO TONIGHT, PUBLIC HEARING? >>MITCHELL THROWER: NO, NO, NO, TOMORROW NIGHT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> OH, TOMORROW NIGHT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. TONIGHT'S JUST A REGULAR BOARD MEETING, YES, SIR. >> WHEN WILL WE KNOW IF INDEED THE BOARD; THAT IS, THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD HAS ADOPTED THE RESOLUTION FOR THESE TWO ITEMS, TOMORROW NIGHT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: TOMORROW NIGHT MOST LIKELY WE WOULD VOTE ON THOSE ITEMS. I GUESS -- WE COULD ALWAYS DECIDE TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING IF WE NEEDED TO IF WE MADE DRASTIC CHANGES TO THOSE TWO ITEMS, BUT MOST LIKELY TOMORROW NIGHT WOULD BE THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THOSE TWO ITEMS. >> AND YOU MAY EVEN DECIDE NOT TO PUT THEM FORTH ANYWAY? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH. I MEAN, IF IT DOESN'T GET TEN OF THE 14 VOTES, IT WON'T GO ON THE BALLOT. >> I SEE. VERY WELL. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, SIR. >> WELL, I GUESS I'VE USED MY TIME, OR DO I HAVE ANOTHER MINUTE OR TWO? >>MITCHELL THROWER: HOW MUCH TIME? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. >> BECAUSE THAT WAS -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, SIR. >> I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD IS DOING. YOU HAD A TREMENDOUS TASK IN THIS ERA AND IN THIS SO-CALLED POLITICAL CLIMATE, AND IT TAKES A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF, IF YOU WILL, STUDYING TO DO. YOU KNOW, THIS COUNTY IS KIND OF COMPLEX. I KNOW WE MAY BE SIMILAR TO OTHER COUNTIES, BUT WE -- THIS COUNTY IS UNIQUE IN ITS OWN RIGHT, AND ONE OF THE THINGS, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M -- I DON'T KNOW, IS IT THE PRINCIPLE OF GOVERNMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT? I THINK THAT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE THAT ALL GOVERNMENT FROM THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; THAT IS, THE NATIONAL LEVEL DOWN TO THE LOCAL LEVEL, AND WHAT IS STILL OF CONCERN OF MINE, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS THAT -- THE FACT THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS UNDER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH VERSUS THAT OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. I DO UNDERSTAND THAT RESEARCH SHOW THAT OTHER COUNTIES HAVE A SIMILAR STRUCTURE, BUT, MR. CHAIRMAN, WE'RE NOT OTHER COUNTIES. I'M STILL TRYING TO RESEARCH THE FUNDAMENTAL RATIONALE AS TO WHY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS SUBJECT TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH RATHER THAN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION OTHER THAN JUST THE FACT THAT OTHER COUNTIES HAVE IT, THEN THAT'S FINE. I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE RATIONALE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU, MR. DAVIS. NEXT UP IS MS. MARILYN SMITH. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS MARILYN SMITH, GRANDMOTHER-AT-LARGE, AND YOU DON'T GET MY ADDRESS. I DON'T HAVE TO AND YOU DON'T NEED IT, AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO I AM BY NOW, YOU'VE BEEN ASLEEP. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO ANSWER MR. AL DAVIS'S QUESTION. IT WAS PUT ON THE BALLOT. THE PEOPLE VOTED TO CHANGE IT. I'M NOT SAYING I AGREED WITH IT, BUT THEY VOTED TO TAKE IT FROM THE ADMINISTRATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S HOW THAT GOT DONE WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. VERY SIMPLE. IT WASN'T DONE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT WITH MAGIC BLOCKS. OKAY, YOU GUYS. YOU KNOW YOU'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME, AND YOU REALLY HAVEN'T ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING. I HATE TO TELL YOU THAT, BUT AS FAR AS YOU KEEPING INVITING PEOPLE BACK, THAT IS FOOLHARDY. THEY GET ONE SHOT. YOU NEED TO HEAR FROM OTHER PEOPLE, AND IF THE OTHER PEOPLE DON'T TURN UP, DON'T BE INVITING THESE PEOPLE BACK. MY GOD. AREN'T YOU TIRED OF SEEING THEM? YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T HAVE A REALLY GOOD FOCUS. YOU HAVE WHAT I CALL A BLUNDERBUSS APPROACH. YOU KNOW THAT BIG GUN THAT GOES PSTTT WHEN THE PILGRIMS USED TO SHOOT THE TURKEY SO THEY COULD HIT THE TURKEY WITH SOMETHING? THE REASON WHY YOU HAVE, I THINK, NOT THE GUIDANCE THAT YOU NEED IS BECAUSE YOU ARE UNDERSTAFFED, AND THAT IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, MR. HAGAN'S, FAULT BECAUSE HE ALLOWED PAT BEAN TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AND PAT BEAN NOT TO FUND THIS BOARD WITH A PROFESSIONAL STAFF LIKE THEY HAD IN THE YEAR 2000. THEN EVERYTHING WAS DONE PROPERLY. THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO FLOP IT ALL BACK ON THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. THAT IS NOT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S JOB TO KEEP THIS SUCKER RUNNING. THEY'RE ONLY THERE FOR LEGAL OVERSIGHT. YOU DON'T HAVE A VERY GOOD STAFF PRESENTATION, I'M SORRY. IT'S NOT PERSONAL, I'M JUST TELLING YOU IT'S NOT VERY GOOD. YOU HAVE TOO MANY IDEAS WITH TOO MANY AMENDMENTS. YOU KNOW, IF YOU PUT ENOUGH STUFF ON THERE, PEOPLE ARE JUST GOING TO VOTE NO ON EVERYTHING. THAT IS -- PEOPLE DO THAT. WHEN YOU GET TOO MANY THINGS, YOU GET TOO CONFUSING. PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THAT MUCH OF A CHANGE. WHY DON'T YOU JUST SETTLE FOR THREE OR FOUR AND MAKE THEM VERY WELL UNDERSTOOD BECAUSE IF YOU PUT TOO MUCH UP THERE, IT'S THE PIG'S BREAKFAST. WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE OF THAT. WE HAVE THAT WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EVERY TWO WEEKS. YOU NEED TO TAKE THE VETO POWER OF THE MAYOR OFF, THAT'S FOR SURE. THAT SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN OFF OF THERE. YOU NEED TERM LIMITS. WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE CLAIM JUMPERS, ANYMORE INCUMBENT RETREADS RUNNING UP AND DOWN THE BOARD OR UP AND DOWN THE STREET. FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS YOU NEED TO PUT THAT INSIDE THE CHARTER. WE DON'T NEED -- EIGHT IS EIGHT. THAT'S IT. YOU DON'T NEED MORE THAN EIGHT, AND IF YOU DO, THEN YOU DON'T BELONG THERE ANYWAY. WE HAD TOO MANY PEOPLE STAY TOO MANY YEARS AT THE DANCE, AND JIM NORMAN IS ONE OF THEM, AND THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOUR BOARD, YOUR BOCC, IS A BLITHERING MESS. COVER-UP, COVER-UP, COVER-UP. AND HAGAN DID NOTHING TO TAKE CARE OF IT OR IMPROVE IT. I'M NOT DONE. I'M ALMOST DONE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU, MRS. SMITH. >> NOW, LET ME TELL YOU ONE MORE THING. I'VE GOT TO GO UPSTAIRS TO ANOTHER MEETING. I'M TRYING TO DO TWO THINGS. THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, WE VOTED ON THAT, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS A BAD IDEA. THE BOARD DID NOT GIVE EITHER OF THOSE PEOPLE VERY GOOD DIRECTION. IT IS AGAIN THE COUNTY COMMISSION'S FAULT THESE THINGS FAILED. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> DON'T BLAME IT ON THE PERSON. IT'S BY GETTING THE DOG. IF YOU DON'T FEED THE DOG OR POTTY TRAIN IT -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. SMITH, I ALLOWED YOU THREE MINUTES. >> -- DON'T BLAME THAT ON THE DOG. >>MITCHELL THROWER: PLEASE. >> HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE FOR HOURS. YOU COULD GIVE ME THAT MUCH TIME. I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AND PERSEVERING. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU. >> GOOD-BYE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS COMMISSIONER MARK SHARPE AT 6:15. SINCE WE'VE GOT A COUPLE MINUTES, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION AT OUR PUBLIC HEARING TOMORROW NIGHT WE'VE GOT A PICTURE PLANNED, A GROUP PICTURE. IF YOU COULD ALL ARRIVE A FEW MINUTES EARLY JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE EVERYBODY BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING STARTS AT 6:00. WE JUST WANT TO TAKE A GROUP PICTURE FOR THE -- GET A GROUP PICTURE OF EVERYBODY FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. ANOTHER ITEM -- ACTUALLY, I GUESS THAT'S IT. COMMISSIONER SHARPE, ARE YOU READY TO START A COUPLE MINUTES EARLY? WELCOME. >>MARK SHARPE: WELCOME, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS. IT'S AN HONOR TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU. I'LL KEEP IT VERY SHORT AND THEN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANTED, MR. CHAIRMAN? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH, THAT'S FINE. >>MARK SHARPE: I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD SINCE 2004, REELECTED IN 2006, AND YOU KIND OF GO THROUGH A TRANSFORMATIVE PERIOD OF TIME AS YOU SERVE ON THE BOARD, BUT WHEN YOU FIRST GET HERE YOU LISTEN TO STAFF AND YOU GET THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAFF AS TO HOW THINGS SHOULD OPERATE, AND IT TAKES A WHILE TO REALLY GET A GOOD FEEL FOR HOW GOVERNMENT SHOULD FUNCTION AND OPERATE AND THE CHANGES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO MAKE IT WORK BETTER. BY THE TIME YOU GET COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PROCESS, YOU'RE EITHER HEADING OUT OR YOU'RE KIND OF WORKING TOWARDS THE LEADERSHIP, AT WHICH POINT I THINK YOU SOMETIMES FIND YOURSELF DEFENDING THE STATUS QUO. I'M NOT SATISFIED WITH THE STATUS QUO. I'VE LISTENED TO MARILYN TALK. OFTENTIMES SHE'LL COME TO OUR MEETINGS. MANY TIMES SHE SAYS THINGS WHICH ANGER ME, BUT OFTENTIMES SHE NAILS THE POINT. I AM NOT SATISFIED WITH THE WAY WE'VE BEEN PERFORMING AND FUNCTIONING. I THINK WE NEED TO DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MUCH GREATER OPENNESS WITHIN THE SYSTEM. I'D LIKE TO SEE PEOPLE HAVE A BETTER FEEL FOR HOW THEIR GOVERNMENT OPERATES. I WANT THEM TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION. I WANT THEM -- I WANT THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THE PEOPLE SO THEY CAN EXPRESS THEIR OPINION AND/OR OFFER UP SOLUTIONS. WE DON'T DO THAT VERY WELL, IN PART BECAUSE I FELT THE LEADERSHIP REALLY WASN'T INTERESTED IN LISTENING TO WHAT THE CITIZENS WANTED, AND FOR ME, I BELIEVE THAT WE DO NEED FRESH LEADERSHIP, IN PARTICULAR AT THE STAFF LEVEL, AT THE UPPER MANAGEMENT LEVEL. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WORKED SO DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO CHANGE THE LEADERSHIP AT COUNTY CENTER -- NOT THAT I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS BAD OR THAT IT WAS CORRUPT OR THAT THERE WAS ANYTHING NECESSARILY INHERENTLY WRONG WITH IT, BUT I JUST FEEL AND STILL DO BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT'S GOT TO THINK MORE LIKE APPLE. APPLE IS ALWAYS REINVENTING ITSELF, IT'S ALWAYS LISTENING TO THE CONSTITUENTS BECAUSE FOR THEM TO SURVIVE AND MAKE IT IN THE MARKETPLACE, THEY'VE GOT TO PROVIDE A BETTER PRODUCT. GOVERNMENT NEVER THINKS THAT WAY. WE ARE JUST KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IT. WE'RE THE -- WE -- WE'RE THE MONOPOLY AND YOU COME TO US, YOU COME TO THE 26 STORIES OR THE 28 AND YOU -- YOU DEAL WITH US AND WE TELL YOU HOW IT IS, AND I DON'T LIKE THAT AT ALL, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE A MUCH MORE OPEN GOVERNMENT. I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF EXPANDING THE BOARD. I'LL TELL YOU WHY. ANY BOARD THAT I'VE EVER SERVED ON THAT HAS A LOT OF PEOPLE TENDS TO THINK THE OTHER GUY'S GOING TO GET IT AND I CAN GO AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, AND THERE TENDS TO BE THIS JUST SENSE OF, WELL, IT'S JUST A LARGE GROUP THINK ALMOST. I ALSO DON'T LIKE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AS MUCH AS I LIKE THE COUNTYWIDE. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A MIX, ACTUALLY, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE GOT. I LIKE IT BECAUSE AS A COUNTYWIDE COMMISSIONER, I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTY. EVERY ISSUE'S IMPORTANT TO ME. NOT LIKE IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO A SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, BUT YOU'RE TAKING THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE OFTENTIMES. YOU MIGHT BE VOTING ON SOMETHING IN THE SOUTH PART OF THE COUNTY, BUT -- YOU KNOW, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO SOMEBODY IN THE EASTERN PART OF THE COUNTY OR THE NORTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR THE WHOLE. I'VE ALWAYS FELT THAT WHEN WE START TO -- TO DIVIDE OURSELVES AND TO CREATE LIKE YOU HAD IN YUGOSLAVIA, THESE LITTLE, YOU KNOW, SECTIONS OF A NATION ALL PIECED TOGETHER THAT YOU NEVER SAW YOURSELF AS ONE WHOLE AND IT WAS ALWAYS THE CITY VERSUS THE COUNTY, WHICH I THINK IS AN ENORMOUS MISTAKE, WHETHER IT'S THE CITY OF PLANT CITY, TEMPLE TERRACE, OR THE CITY OF TAMPA. WE OUGHT TO BE LOOKING AND WORKING AS A WHOLE. I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON THE COUNTY MAYOR BECAUSE I THINK THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF ISSUES THEY NEED TO WORK THROUGH. I'VE TALKED TO MS. STILES ABOUT THAT. I DO BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO BE OPERATING WITH FAR GREATER EFFICIENCY, COUNTY AND CITY. I KNOW THERE'S SOME FOLKS IN THE CITY WHO DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF THE CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT, ONE LARGE GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS NO ONE WILL GET THAT SPECIAL CARE THAT THE -- PLANT CITY CAN PROVIDE ITS CONSTITUENTS, TEMPLE TERRACE CAN PROVIDE ITS CONSTITUENTS, OR THE CITY OF TAMPA CAN PROVIDE ITS CONSTITUENTS, AND THE COUNTY SITS HERE -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE THE LARGER GOVERNMENT. WE REPRESENT OBVIOUSLY 1,051 SQUARE MILES OR SO, AND I THINK THERE'S GOT TO BE A WAY, THOUGH, FOR US TO OPERATE BETTER AND MORE EFFICIENTLY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS. I SHARE SOME OF COMMISSIONER PLATT'S CONCERNS THAT WITH ONE MAYOR POWER IS CENTERED WITH ONE INDIVIDUAL AS OPPOSED TO A COUNTY STRUCTURE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE WHERE IT'S -- YOU'VE GOT SEVEN. YOU'VE GOT TO GET A MAJORITY OF FOUR. I UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN. I'M STILL NOT ABSOLUTELY SOLD, THOUGH, THAT WE CAN'T DO BETTER, AND BY THAT I MEAN IN ORDER TO MOVE THINGS THROUGH, WE'RE DESIGNED I THINK MUCH LIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, SLOW. IT'S DIFFICULT TO PUSH A LAW THROUGH FOR A REASON, BECAUSE YOU'RE FEARFUL THAT SOMEONE MIGHT COME UP WITH A WILD IDEA, IT RACES THROUGH, AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY WORK WELL. AT THE COUNTY WE'RE ALSO SLOW. YOU'VE GOT TO GET FOUR COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE GOT TO GET THEM TO AGREE, THEN YOU'VE GOT TO GO TO STAFF, YOU'VE GOT TO GET STAFF TO WORK IT. IF STAFF DOESN'T WANT TO WORK IT, THEY CAN SLOW THINGS DOWN. THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CAN DO THAT. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO MOVE THINGS THROUGH, AND A LARGE METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT LIKE WE ARE, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT THAT CAN MOVE AND IS RESPONSIBLE AND REFLEXIVE TO WHAT THE CITIZENS ARE LOOKING FOR WHILE AT THE SAME TIME RESPECTING THE FACT THAT THERE IS ALWAYS OR OFTENTIMES REASON TO BE CAUTIOUS AND WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL. AND YOU ALSO -- AND I THINK AGAIN COMMISSIONER PLATT WOULD SPEAK TO THIS -- WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE ARE MADE IN THE OPEN AND NOT BY A SMALL GROUP THAT'S HARD TO TRACK, AND THAT DOES WORRY ME. I AM NOT SATISFIED WITH THE WAY WE FUNCTION AND OPERATE. I DON'T THINK THAT WE DO THE JOB WE COULD DO, AND I'M WAITING TO HEAR FROM YOU AS TO HOW WE MIGHT DO BETTER, AND FOR ME THAT MEANT THE LEADERSHIP. IT'S LIKE A FOOTBALL TEAM. TEAM'S NOT PERFORMING WELL, YOU GET NEW LEADERSHIP, AND THIS WAS BEFORE WE HAD THE ISSUES WHICH HAD BEEN IN THE NEWSPAPER. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF IS THE LEADERSHIP OPENING, LISTENING, ENGAGED, WORKING, REALLY TRYING TO MAKE THINGS BETTER OR ARE THEY JUST PROTECTING THE STATUS QUO? AND I WANT TO SEE -- I WANT TO SEE THOSE CHANGES. I WANT TO SEE EVERY ASSUMPTION CHALLENGED. I HATE IT WHEN WE TRY TO TALK ABOUT ISSUES OR SOMETHING THAT'S COMING UP AND PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, THEY DON'T WANT TO GO INTO IT. WE NEED TO GO INTO IT, WHICH IS WHY AN IPA HAS BEEN HELPFUL. I LIKE THE IPA. YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S THE IPA OR THE ATTORNEY, I WANT THEM INDEPENDENT OF THE BOARD. I DON'T WANT THEM FEARFUL OF THE BOARD. I HATE IT WHEN THE ATTORNEYS COME TO US AND GIVE US AN OPINION, AND I ALMOST SOMETIMES SENSE THEY WANT TO TELL US WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR. EVERYONE'S THINKING ABOUT, WELL, GEE, CAN I MAINTAIN MY SUPPORT? THAT SHOULDN'T BE WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING. THEY SHOULD BE OFFERING US, IF IT'S THE ATTORNEY, THE LAW AS THEY SEE IT, WHETHER OR NOT WE LIKE IT, YOU KNOW. THAT WILL HELP US STAY OUT OF TROUBLE, AND I THINK IT WAS - - IT WILL -- IT WILL HELP THE CITIZENS HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THEIR GOVERNMENT, AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -- SOMETIMES I THINK THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS WELL, THE WAY WE'RE DESIGNED, MORE CONCERNED ABOUT SATISFYING THE BOARD MEMBERS THAN GOING OUT AND DOING HIS OR HER JOB. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FIX THAT. MAYBE THE SYSTEM WE HAVE IS THE BEST, BUT I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S THE BEST. I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER. BUT THE IPA -- WHAT I LIKED ABOUT AN INDEPENDENT PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, INDEPENDENT, WAS THAT THAT IPA COULD DIG INTO THE BOWELS OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT, AND WHETHER IT'S FINDING OUT THAT PEOPLE ARE PEEPING IN TO OR WE SUSPECT PEEPING INTO E-MAILS WHEN THEY SHOULDN'T BE, THERE'S A PROCESS YOU FOLLOW. EVERYBODY, WHETHER YOU'RE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, ATTORNEY, WHOMEVER IT MIGHT BE, MUST FOLLOW A PROCESS WHERE A RULE OF LAW -- YOU DON'T JUST GET TO DECIDE ARBITRARILY HOW YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, PERFORM YOUR DUTIES. YOU MUST FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW. I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S LOOKING OVER YOUR SHOULDERS, DIGGING IN, BUT THEN THE CHALLENGE IS TO GO BACK TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, NOT FOR BUT WITH, SAY, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT I FOUND. THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WILL THEN SAY, WELL, GEE, WE DISAGREE WITH YOUR ASSUMPTIONS. HERE'S WHY WE DO THINGS THE WAY WE DO THEM. THE IPA SHOULD THEN GO BACK, READDRESS THOSE ISSUES, AND THEN IF THEY'RE STILL CERTAIN AND CONFIDENT THAT THEY'RE RIGHT, COME BACK TO THE FULL BOARD AND SAY, OKAY, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, WE'VE PRESENTED OUR POSITION, THEY'VE HAD A CHANCE TO RESPOND, HERE'S OUR REPORT, HERE'S WHERE WE AGREE, HERE'S WHERE WE DISAGREE, NOW YOU, THE BOARD, TAKE ACTION. BUT IT WOULD GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIND THINGS. WOULD WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE 17% PAY INCREASE? WELL, WE SHOULD HAVE BECAUSE THOSE PAY INCREASES WERE REPORTED TO THE BOARD, NOT THE PERCENTAGE NECESSARILY BUT THE FACT THAT THE PAY INCREASES WERE GOING TO GO. WOULD WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE 1% INCREASES WITHOUT THE IPA? NO, WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN. AND I DON'T CARE WHETHER IT'S A 1%, 10%, OR A 100%, IT'S THE PRINCIPLE. IN FACT, SOMETIMES A SMALLER NUMBER IS MORE SINISTER, NOT THAT I THINK IT WAS NECESSARILY SINISTER, BECAUSE YOU CAN SLIP THAT THROUGH. AND I DON'T THINK THINGS SHOULD BE -- WE HAVE A CHARTER, WE HAVE A STATUTE, IT'S CLEAR. BOARD SETS THE SALARY, NO ONE ELSE DOES. SO I'LL CLOSE BY STATING I THINK WE'VE GOT A GOOD GOVERNMENT. I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER. I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE. I APPLAUD YOU FOR SITTING THROUGH ALL THESE MEETINGS, AND AS I'VE TOLD MY APPOINTEE -- APPOINTEES I DON'T ASK THEM TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT THEY THINK'S RIGHT AND REPORT BACK HOW THEY BELIEVE, IRRESPECTIVE OF MY OPINION, AND I WOULD -- I'M SURE THAT YOU'LL DO THE SAME. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SHARPE. QUESTIONS? MR. TOKLEY. >>JAMES TOKLEY: WHEN A GOVERNMENT IS OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, AND BY THE PEOPLE, YOU WOULD AGREE THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT SOMETIMES TO -- TO ENHANCE IT, TO MAKE IT BETTER WHEN IT REPRESENTS -- WHEN IT IS REPRESENTING ITSELF OF THE PEOPLE. IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT WOULD BOCC NEED TO DO TO GET BETTER BECAUSE BOCC IS A CONSENSUS, AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, IF IT IS ANYTHING, IS A CONSENSUS, SO HOW MIGHT WE MAKE THAT CONSENSUS BETTER, MORE STREAMLINED? >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, VERY GOOD QUESTION, MR. TOKLEY, POETIC. I THINK THAT FIRST WE DEFINITELY NEED TO BE MORE OPEN AND WE NEED TO BE MORE DIVERSE. DIVERSE OF OPINION, NOT NECESSARILY SKIN COLOR OR GENDER BUT DIVERSE. I BELIEVE IN DIVERSITY. I WANT THE VERY BEST AND I WANT THEM HERE WORKING TOGETHER AND ENGAGED. I ALSO WANT THEM LISTENING, AND SO WE NEED TO HAVE AN ENGAGED STAFF THAT LISTENS TO THE CITIZEN AND REALLY OPERATES A LITTLE BIT -- NOT NECESSARILY OUT OF FEAR, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN THE BUSINESS WORLD YOU'RE WORRIED THAT IF YOU'RE NOT PERFORMING, PRODUCING, YOU'RE GOING TO BE REPLACED, BEATEN OUT BY SOMEBODY ELSE. GOVERNMENT DOESN'T OPERATE THAT WAY. WE HAVE AN ARROGANT ATTITUDE SOMETIMES, SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO FIND A -- AND THAT'S WHAT I'VE TRIED TO DO. I MEAN, I CONSIDER MYSELF A VERY FRIENDLY, OPEN PERSON, BUT MY -- I ALSO WILL SAY -- AND I DON'T CARE WHO THE PERSON IS -- IF YOU'RE NOT PERFORMING, I'M GOING TO BE MOVING FOR YOUR OUSTER. I WANT SOMEBODY IN YOUR SEAT WHO'S GOING TO TAKE THE JOB SERIOUSLY AND GET THE JOB DONE, SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT MEANS THEN THAT THE LEADER AT THE TOP, HE OR SHE, HAS TO REALLY BE WORKING HARD TO HAVE A VERY GOOD STAFF, DIVERSE STAFF, AND CHALLENGING THEM ALL THE TIME, AND AS WELL OUR INFORMATION FOLKS NEED TO REALLY BE OUT THERE ENGAGED AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE HAS ACCESS TO INFORMATION. NO ONE SHOULD BE SEARCHING HAVING TO FIND IT. PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS OUGHT TO BE MOVING LIKE WITH THE SPEED OF LIGHT. THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN UNLESS YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, SPECIAL, AND EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION, OPPONENT OR SUPPORTER, AND BY THAT I MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO COME OUT HERE AND CHALLENGE US. THEY OUGHT TO HAVE IT BECAUSE OFTENTIMES THEY'RE MY GREATEST RESOURCE. LIKE I SAID, 90% OF THE TIME I MIGHT GO, OH, BUT THAT 10% I'M GOING, WELL, THAT'S PRETTY INTERESTING, I'M WRITING IT DOWN. >>JAMES TOKLEY: THANK YOU. >>MARK SHARPE: YES, SIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I AM VERY MUCH IN AGREEMENT WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAY ABOUT THE GOALS FOR CHANGE FOR BETTER COUNTY LEADERSHIP AND BETTER GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I FEEL LED TO PERHAPS A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION ON THE ISSUE OF EXPANDING THE BOARD TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS. I'M -- I'M WONDERING HOW YOU WOULD RESPOND TO THE SUGGESTION THAT, YOU KNOW -- NOT ALL OF OUR ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS ON THE BOARD EXPRESS THE SAME CONCERNS THAT YOU'VE EXPRESSED TO US TODAY FOR THE SAME GOALS, NOT ALL OF THEM HAVE THE SAME ENERGY FOR IMPLEMENTING THOSE GOALS, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT PEOPLE WHO DON'T ARE AT-LARGE COMMISSIONERS, I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM FOR THE PUBLIC WHICH LACKS ACCESS IN THE SAME WAY THAT THEY WOULD WITH SMALLER, MORE ACCESSIBLE, IN MY VIEW, YOU KNOW, SINGLE-MEMBER REPRESENTATION. IN ADDITION, ALL RESEARCH HAS INDICATED THAT SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS PROMOTE MORE DIVERSITY IN LEADERSHIP AND AT-LARGE DISTRICTS PROMOTE DILUTION OF MINORITY VOTING POWER. >>MARK SHARPE: UH-HUH. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WITH THAT IN MIND AND WITH YOUR GOALS IN MIND, HOW DO YOU LEAP FROM YOUR GOALS AND THAT RESEARCH INTO SAYING THAT YOU BELIEVE MORE AT-LARGE REPRESENTATION IS APPROPRIATE THAN SINGLE-MEMBER REPRESENTATION? >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I LIKE THE MIX THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. I LIKE -- I LIKE THE -- THE FOUR AND THE THREE. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD MIX. I JUST -- I WORRY THAT WHEN YOU DRAW -- WHEN YOU CREATE THESE REALLY LARGE BOARDS, YOU CREATE A LOT OF FACTIONALISM, AND I'M NOT SURE -- IT'S HARDER TO GET A CLEAR CONSENSUS AND CLEAR LEADERSHIP. IF YOU WERE GOING TO DO THAT, THEN I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO EITHER HAVE A STRONGER CHAIRMAN AND/OR A COUNTY MAYOR OF SOME SORT BECAUSE AT SOME POINT SOMEONE'S GOT TO MAKE HAY OUT OF ALL THAT HASH. I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT ALL THIS STUFF GOING ON. SOMEONE'S GOING TO HAVE TO RUN WITH IT, AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, EVEN WITH SEVEN. I'VE GOT PEOPLE UPSET AT ME, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE OF THIS, MORE OF THAT. I HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO THEM I CAN'T DO ANYTHING BY MYSELF. I'VE GOT TO GET SIX OTHERS -- I TRY TO GET SIX OTHERS TO AGREE AND A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WHO WILL THEN CARRY OUT OUR POLICY, AND IT'S A CHALLENGE, SO IF YOU -- YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU BEGIN TO BALKANIZE THE BOARD AND WE HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT LITTLE ENCLAVES OF, YOU KNOW, THIS AND THAT AND THIS AND THAT, I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU CREATE, A BALKANIZED BOARD AND A BALKANIZED COMMUNITY. I DON'T -- I DON'T FAVOR THAT. I LIKE THINKING OF MYSELF AS A WHOLE. YOU KNOW, PHILOSOPHICALLY, WHETHER IT'S REPRESENTING A CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OR A COUNTY COMMISSION DISTRICT -- YOU KNOW, WE CREATE THESE DISTRICTS WHERE LIKE AT THE CONGRESSIONAL LEVEL MAYBE YOU'RE ONLY REPRESENTING, YOU KNOW, AFRICAN-AMERICAN DEMOCRATS OR VERY CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS, AND SO YOU'VE GOT THESE LITTLE -- I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ALL THESE OTHER FOLKS, AND IT CREATES A DISTORTED VIEW OF PUBLIC POLICY, YOU KNOW. I WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO EVERYBODY. I WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE COMING IN FROM ALL DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, POSITIONS SAYING, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU REPRESENT ME, AND DAGGONE IT, I DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU JUST DID HERE BECAUSE YOUR POLICY HAD AN EFFECT ON SOMETHING THAT MAYBE I'M NOT EVEN SENSITIVE TO. HISPANIC COMMUNITY, I HEAR, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES FROM PATRICK MANTEIGA. HE'LL COME AT ME AND SAY, YOU KNOW, DID YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST DID OR DIDN'T DO? AND SO I NEED -- I -- YOU KNOW, WHEN I REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, I'M MORE SENSITIVE TO IT. IT'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION. I JUST PERSONALLY THINK THAT THE -- THAT THE -- THAT THE BOARD AS WE HAVE IT WORKS WELL. IT'S NOT PERFECT. COULD YOU DO BETTER? PERHAPS. WOULD MORE MAKE IT BETTER? I DON'T THINK SO. IF YOU HAVE MORE, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A STRONGER HEAD, WHATEVER THAT HEAD IS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I JUST WONDER IF IT DOESN'T PROMOTE COMPROMISE AND COALITION BUILDING AND LESS PARTISANSHIP OR LESS -- OR -- OR THE -- OR IT DAMPENS PARTISANSHIP BECAUSE OF THE NEED FOR COMPROMISE AND COALITION BUILDING. I JUST -- >>MARK SHARPE: I JUST THINK OF ITALY EVERY TIME I THINK OF THESE -- ALL THESE MULTIPARTIES AND SMALL -- BUT I DON'T KNOW. YOU MAY BE RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I DON'T KNOW EITHER. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. GRIMES. >>GINA GRIMES: THANKS FOR COMING. >>MARK SHARPE: YES, MA'AM. >>GINA GRIMES: APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES WE'RE DISCUSSING IS ELIMINATION OF THE IPA POSITION, AND ONE OF THE CRITICISMS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR HIMSELF -- AND I THINK MS. SMITH JUST TOUCHED ON IT -- WAS THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL WAS NOT GIVEN SPECIFIC DIRECTION AND ENOUGH TO DO FROM THE BOCC, AND I WAS WONDERING WHAT YOUR POSITION WAS ON THAT. DO YOU THINK THAT'S AN ACCURATE STATEMENT? DO YOU THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED? DO YOU THINK IT WAS A VALID CRITICISM? >>MARK SHARPE: ABSOLUTELY. I THINK WHEN IT WAS CREATED THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW GROUP THAT CREATED IT -- AND I'VE TALKED TO SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THAT BOARD -- REALLY DIDN'T LAY OUT THE SPECIFICITY WITH HOW IT WOULD PERFORM ITS FUNCTIONS. I MEAN, THEY TALKED ABOUT BUDGET REVIEW AND ALL THESE THINGS THAT IT WAS GOING TO DO. WE STAFFED IT WITH THREE PEOPLE. THE BOARD ITSELF WAS NEVER VERY CLEAR ON HOW IT WOULD FUNCTION. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ANY GREAT INTEREST IN EVEN HAVING A GOOD IPA. I'M NOT SURE IF THE ADMINISTRATION WANTED IT BECAUSE THEY SAW IT AS A THORN IN THEIR SIDE, NOW SOMEONE'S GOING TO BE CHALLENGING HOW WE DO OUR BUSINESS, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THE BOARD EVEN UNDERSTOOD WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THIS? SOME SAW IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO INVESTIGATE WHATEVER THEY MIGHT WANT TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE IPA LOOK INTO, ALL THESE FOUR-HOUR THINGS, YOU KNOW. GO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THE -- AND SOME OF THEM WERE VALID, VERY GOOD. JIM NORMAN, YOU KNOW, THE USE OF OVERTIME. THERE WERE SOME GOOD THINGS OUT OF IT, BUT NO ONE REALLY HAD A CLEAR SENSE OF WHAT DOES AN INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR DO? YOU KNOW, YELLOW BOOK, RED BOOK, ALL THESE DIFFERENT BOOKS, WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? YOU KNOW, DO THEY DO BUDGETS, DO THEY LOOK AT PERFORMANCE ITSELF, DO WE ACTUALLY DO PERFORMANCE AUDITS? THREE PEOPLE IN AN OFFICE CAN'T FUNCTION ADEQUATELY AS AN IPA OFFICE. I MEAN, KANSAS CITY, MIAMI HAVE BIG DEPARTMENTS. WHEN I SPOKE TO THEM BACK WHEN KATHLEEN MATHEWS WAS THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR AND WE WERE HAVING ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS, THEY WOULD TELL US IN ORDER TO FUNCTION WELL, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A BIG OFFICE. WELL, DO WE WANT A BIG OFFICE WITH ALL THESE EMPLOYEES? RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. SO, YOU KNOW, MIKE MERRILL'S TRYING TO CREATE THESE LITTLE SWOT TEAMS THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN AND LOOK AT THE DEPARTMENTS AND HOW THEY'RE PERFORMING AND WORKING -- YOU KNOW, WE'VE TRIED TO GET DOUG BELDEN WITH THE STERLING PROCESS, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT. I JUST WANT TO HAVE -- I LIKE -- I COME FROM THE MILITARY WHERE WE HAD AN INSPECTOR GENERAL. PEOPLE FEARED THE INSPECTOR GENERAL BECAUSE HE COULD COME IN AND WITH INDEPENDENCE LOOK INTO ANYTHING, AND SOMETIMES THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES TO UNCOVER STUFF THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT UNCOVERED, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW -- AND THE GREATEST, YOU KNOW -- YOU KNOW, DISINFECTANT FOR PROBLEMS IS SUNSHINE AND A GOOD INSPECTOR GENERAL, SOMEONE WHO PEOPLE KNOW ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING IN EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE AND SAYING, WHAT'S GOING ON, AND WE NEED THAT. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE IT BECAUSE NOTHING'S CHANGED, I MEAN, FOR THE LAST 300 YEARS IN HOW GOVERNMENT PERFORMS. YES, SIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. TOKLEY. >>JAMES TOKLEY: HOW DO YOU KEEP A SO-CALLED INSPECTOR GENERAL FROM BECOMING -- AND I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE MAN'S NAME, THE -- THE GENTLEMAN DURING THE '40s -- >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] >>JAMES TOKLEY: -- WITH THE -- >>MARK SHARPE: OH. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>JAMES TOKLEY: McCARTHY -- HOW DO YOU KEEP THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FROM BECOMING McCARTHY? WHAT -- WHAT -- WHAT DO YOU PUT IN PLACE TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE IPA OR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, EVEN THOUGH HE OR SHE MAY BE -- MAY BE INCISIVE BUT IS -- IS FAIR, PROFESSIONAL, ET CETERA? >>MARK SHARPE: THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THAT WAS THE FEAR WHEN THE OFFICE WAS CREATED, THAT THIS OFFICE WAS GOING TO RUN AMOK AND BE CHALLENGING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THROWING OUT ALL SORTS OF IDEAS THAT ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO IMPLEMENT. YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE WHEN TAXWATCH SOMETIMES WILL GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW YOU CAN SAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND YOU ALWAYS LOOK FOR THE DETAILS, HOW CAN YOU ACTUALLY DO THIS, AND SOMETIMES THEY DON'T PROVIDE YOU WITH THE DETAIL. I THINK THAT A -- A VERY GOOD -- WE'VE -- WE'VE HAD MR. TARR WHO'S COME IN AND WORKED WITH US. AN IPA THAT IS PROFESSIONAL WILL COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND PROVIDE US WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE CAN THEN WEIGH. STAFF HAS EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND. IF THE IPA'S OUT TO LUNCH, IT WILL -- THE MAJORITY WILL SEE IT AS SUCH. WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH SOME REAL TOUGH ISSUES. YOU KNOW, I'M STILL NOT QUITE CLEAR -- YOU KNOW, OFFICE DEPOT, YOU KNOW, ARE WE OR ARE WE NOT BEING OVERCHARGED, YOU KNOW, AND TONS OF INFORMATION. AND YOU ASK THE IPA TO GO IN AND LOOK AT THAT AND THEY LOOK AT IT, AND OTHERS LOOK AT IT, THE CLERK LOOKS AT IT. IT'S QUITE A CHALLENGE, BUT OVER TIME REALITY BEGINS TO KIND OF RISE TO THE SURFACE, AND IF THE IPA'S CONDUCTING, YOU KNOW, THEMSELVES IN A McCARTHY-LIKE FASHION, THEN IT BECOMES EVIDENT, AND THEN YOU WOULD HOPE THAT THE WISDOM OF THE FULL BOARD WOULD BE TO REMOVE THAT INDIVIDUAL AND REPLACE HIM WITH SOMEBODY WHO IS THERE -- I MEAN, THE IDEA OF THE IPA AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED IS TO ACTUALLY ENHANCE PERFORMANCE AT THE COUNTY CENTER. THAT MEANS THE IPA AND THE ADMINISTRATOR HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER AS PROFESSIONALS. WHAT HAS CREATED PROBLEMS FOR ME FROM THE BEGINNING IS THAT WHETHER IT WAS WITH KATHLEEN MATHEWS OR MR. BARNES, THERE WAS ALWAYS THIS ACRIMONY BETWEEN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE IPA, AND I THINK BLAME REALLY FELL ON BOTH OF THEM. >>JAMES TOKLEY: THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. ROBINSON AND THEN COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE, BUT I GOT MY MAMA IN THERE. YOU KNOW, I GOT MY MAMA I AIN'T SEEN IN TWO YEARS, SO I HAD TO DEAL WITH MS. THELMA OUT THERE, MY COUSINS FROM GEORGIA BECAUSE SHE DONE LEFT FLORIDA FOR A MINUTE, SO I'LL ANNOUNCE THEM AT THE END OF THE MEETING, TAKE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OR WHATEVER AT THE END AND ANNOUNCE THEM. BUT MR. SHARPE, I APPRECIATE YOU COMING OUT TODAY. I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING YOU. NOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES IS IS THAT WE GOT TOMORROW NIGHT A PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR -- THERE'S TWO ALTERNATIVES. WE ADDED A SECOND ALTERNATIVE FROM THE LAST MEETING. ONE OF THEM IS TO GET RID OF THE IPA COMPLETELY, JUST WIPE IT OFF THE BOOKS, GOOD-BYE -- SAY GOOD-BYE TO IT AND LET THE CLERK OF THE COURT TAKE OVER THE AUDITING FUNCTIONS. THEN THERE'S ANOTHER PROPOSAL THAT I PUT FORWARD AND WE GOT IT ON FOR TOMORROW, WHICH IS TO CHANGE THE TITLE FROM INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR TO INTERNAL AUDITOR, WHICH IS WHAT MR. TARR RECOMMENDED, AND ALSO ELIMINATE THE FUNCTION OF BUDGET ANALYST BECAUSE THAT'S A DIRECT CONFLICT FROM ALL THE TESTIMONY THAT WE HAD. IT WAS SAID HERE THAT THE MAJORITY OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND YOU BEING ONE IS FOR GETTING RID OF THE PERFORMANCE AUDITOR POSITION IN ITS ENTIRETY, SO MY QUESTION IS ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF GETTING RID OF THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR IN ITS ENTIRETY, ALLOW THE VOTERS TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT? >>MARK SHARPE: NO. I FAVOR YOUR OPTION. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: OKAY. >>MARK SHARPE: I DON'T -- I LIKE THE IDEA TO CHANGE THE NAME TO INTERNAL AUDITOR, AND I LIKE THE IDEA OF ELIMINATING THE BUDGET OVERSIGHT BECAUSE THAT -- MR. TARR HAD RECOMMENDED THAT. I DON'T THINK THE CLERK BY -- THAT OFFICE CAN HANDLE THE -- WHAT WE'RE ASKING THAT OFFICE TO PERFORM FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. I MEAN, THE BUDGETARY SIDE OF IT, THERE'S NO PROBLEM. THAT'S WHAT THE CLERK DOES AND THEY REVIEW, BUT, I MEAN, I'VE SEEN AUDIT REPORTS -- THE WORKFORCE ALLIANCE, YOU COME BACK, EVERYTHING'S FINE, AND ALL THE MONEY'S OKAY, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE SIGNS OFF, AND, YOU KNOW, NO ONE'S REALLY DIGGING IN AND COMING BACK AND GOING, WELL, HOLD ON A SECOND, THERE'S SOME PEOPLE EATING, YOU KNOW, CHEESECAKE AND THEY'RE CHARGING IT OFF. YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT TAKES SOMEONE -- IT TAKES SOMEONE WHO CAN BE A THORN -- I -- A THORN CAN BE USEFUL, AND I WANT THAT PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, SO THIS COMMISSIONER SUPPORTS IT. I WANT TO SEE A PERFORMANCE AUDITOR, SOMEBODY WHO CAN ACT INDEPENDENT OF THE BOARD AND OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, WHO CAN GO -- BUT THEN STILL HAS THE REQUIREMENT -- AND THAT'S THE THING. YOU DON'T WANT A ROGUE OFFICER, SOMEONE WHO'S OUT JUST RUNNING OFF ON THEIR OWN AND THEN THROWING REPORTS IN OUR LAPS SAYING, THEY'RE ALL OUT TO LUNCH AND THIS IS -- WE CAN SAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU GET THOSE TYPE OF REPORTS AND YOU REALLY CAN'T USE THEM BECAUSE THEN I'M SITTING HERE GOING, OKAY, STAFF, WHY ARE THEY WRONG, EXPLAIN IT TO ME, AUDITOR COME BACK, AND WE'RE BACK AND FORTH AND BACK AND FORTH, AND THAT'S A HEADACHE. SO THERE'S GOT TO BE THAT -- YOU WORK THROUGH THE ISSUE OF REPORTING TO EACH OTHER AND WORKING WITH EACH OTHER, BUT I LIKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION. I'D VOTE FOR YOURS. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S GOOD. OKAY. NOW, THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR IS THAT WE RECEIVED SOMETHING JUST IN THE LAST 48 HOURS FROM EDITH WHERE THE COUNTY COMMISSION IS -- BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE SAYING IS THAT A LOT OF THAT WHAT MR. TARR HAD SAID, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GOT TO DEAL WITH THAT. THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD CAN CHANGE THE TITLE, GET RID OF THE WORD WHERE IT SAYS BUDGET ANALYST, BUT ALL THOSE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS -- AND I BELIEVE YOU GUYS HAVE THAT ON YOUR AGENDA TO TALK ABOUT THAT, SO I'M ASSUMING IF THAT WAS TO GET ON THE AGENDA, THAT DOCUMENT, IF THAT WAS -- IF WE WERE TO GET TEN VOTES ON THAT -- ON THE PROPOSAL THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO COUNTY COMMISSION TO GET THE GUY -- TO GET A JOB DESCRIPTION AND ALL THAT STUFF MR. TARR'S TALKING ABOUT AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF THAT'S IN THERE, AND I LOOK AT THIS AS LESSONS LEARNED. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER, OKAY, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD BE JUST ELIMINATING IT ALTOGETHER. LET ME SWITCH ON YOU NOW. THERE'S A PROPOSAL ALSO -- WE HAVE AN ISSUE DEALING WITH THE COUNTY CHARTER. WHEN I GOT HERE THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT PASSED BY THE VOTERS ABOUT THE COUNTY MAYOR HAVING VETO POWER, AND IT'S IN THE CHARTER BUT IT AIN'T IN THE CHARTER, OKAY. IT AIN'T IN THE PRINTED CHARTER, IT AIN'T ON THE WEB SITE, AND THEY KNOW I'VE BEEN TELLING THEM THAT SINCE I GOT HERE. IT'S SORT OF A MYSTERY EDITION TO THE CHARTER. IT NEVER HAS GONE TO THE FEDS OR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR REVIEW, WHAT HAVE YOU. WELL, TOMORROW NIGHT WE ALSO HAVE A -- TWO ISSUES. WE HAVE ONE, TAKE IT COMPLETELY OFF THE CHARTER, JUST GET THAT LANGUAGE OFF, EVEN THOUGH THE VOTERS 53% VOTED FOR IT. THROW IT IN THE TRASH CAN AND GET RID OF IT. OR THE ALTERNATIVE I GAVE THEM WAS THAT -- LET'S CLEAN IT UP BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A COUNTY MAYOR OR NOT. PEOPLE VOTED IT IN, AND I RESPECT THE VOTERS. SO MY APPROACH WAS TO BE JUST DO WHAT THE LAWYER SAID IS WRONG WITH IT. THEY SAID CONSTITUTIONALLY THERE'S AN ISSUE IN THAT LANGUAGE THAT THE COUNTY MAYOR THAT WE DON'T HAVE HAS VETO POWER OVER THE BUDGET, AND THAT'S -- CLEARLY, ACCORDING TO OUR LEGAL STAFF IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO DO SO, SO I SUGGESTED -- AND THAT'S ALSO TOMORROW -- IS TO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT JUST TAKES OUT THAT PORTION THAT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE MANY LAWS FROM MY EXPERIENCE AT THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OVER THE YEARS -- YOU CAN HAVE A LAW. IF ANY PORTION OF THE LAW IS DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT DOESN'T STRIKE THE WHOLE LAW OUT. ONLY THAT SECTION THAT'S DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL GETS STRICKEN OUT, AND THE REST OF THE LAW IS THE LAW. SO WE HAVE THAT ON THERE. DO HAVE ANY FEELINGS ABOUT THROWING OUT THE WHOLE THING OR JUST GETTING AND CLEANING UP THAT PART WHICH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS SAID IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL? AND WE HAVE BOTH OF THOSE TOMORROW TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND THEN MAKE A DECISION IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM ON THE BALLOT. AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY COUNTY COMMISSIONER RESPONSE TO THAT, AND YOU'RE PROBABLY THE FIRST ONE. WE HAD MR. BECKNER, BUT WE HADN'T TALKED ABOUT THAT WHEN MR. BECKNER WAS HERE. >>MARK SHARPE: I WOULD KIND OF LEAN TOWARDS THE INCREMENTAL APPROACH. THEY WENT THROUGH THE TROUBLE OF TRYING TO GET IT ON THE BALLOT. BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE WITH THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS OFFICE, I THINK THAT THEY LOST THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE IT PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS, AND SO WHAT ENDED UP LEFT WAS THE -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: VETO. >>MARK SHARPE: -- VETO POWER, WHICH HAS SOME ISSUES. BUT, I MEAN, THE CONCERN I HAVE -- AND I'VE EXPRESSED THIS WITH THE SUPPORTERS -- IS JUST I THINK THERE'S SO MANY ISSUES YOU HAVE TO WORK THROUGH, RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE CONSTITUTIONALS AND THE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WHO THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED, AND IT'S KIND OF LIKE WITH TRANSPORTATION, YOU KNOW, OR ANY ISSUE. I THINK YOU SPEND THE TIME DOING THE LEGWORK, GET IT ALL WORKED OUT, AND THEN BRING IT BEFORE THE VOTERS AS A PACKAGE AND SAY, OKAY, HERE -- WHAT DO YOU THINK? AND WE'RE NOT THERE YET, AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE THERE YET. I DON'T KNOW. I'LL LEAVE THAT TO YOUR BEST, YOU KNOW, JUDGMENT. I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS THE NOT TOSSING THE WHOLE THING OUT BECAUSE I THINK THAT ULTIMATELY WE'RE GOING TO HEAD TOWARD SOME DIFFERENT VARIANT OF GOVERNMENT AND I THINK WE NEED IT. I'M JUST NOT SURE WHAT IT IS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE MAYOR, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A STRONG CHAIRMAN. I LIKE -- AGAIN, YOU KNOW, MY BACKGROUND -- I LIKE A STRONG LEADER. I MEAN, SERIOUSLY, YOU'RE THE LEADER, LET'S GO. AND WHEN YOU DON'T PERFORM, WE'LL PUT IN THE NEXT LEADER AND THE NEXT ONE. WHEN IT'S JUST ALL OVER THE PLACE AND IT'S HARD, NO ONE REALLY IS THE LEADER, I DON'T THINK A -- TAMPA BAY IS WELL SERVED BY THAT, SO -- BUT I -- BUT, YOU KNOW -- AND SOME HAVE MADE THE CASE AND I REALLY HAVEN'T BEEN ENGAGED IN THAT WHOLE DEBATE. MAYBE WHAT WE'VE GOT IS THE BEST. I'VE JUST GOT A FEELING THAT WE'VE GOT SOME ISSUES. I DIDN'T HELP YOU THERE, I KNOW. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THIS IS MY LAST QUERY, AND I'M SORRY FOR BEING LONG, BUT I WANT TO HEAR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER BECAUSE IT WAS SAID YOU-ALL DON'T AGREE WITH ALL THIS, AND I'M FINDING OUT NOW YOU'RE SAYING JUST THE OPPOSITE. SO THE OTHER ISSUE THAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT IF WE EVER GET A MEETING IN AUGUST -- IF WE CAN GET ALL 14 PEOPLE. IT SEEMS TO BE HARD TO DO. IT PROBABLY IS GOING TO BE A 2012 ISSUE. RIGHT NOW THE ISSUES WE TALKED ABOUT WERE 2010, BUT THE ISSUE OF EXPANDING THE BOARD FROM SEVEN TO NINE BECAUSE THE POPULATION HAS GROWN, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU -- I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU TALKING ABOUT THAT. I DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO THE DISTRICTS BECAUSE I WILL TELL YOU FROM WHAT EVERYBODY TELLS ME, IF YOU EVEN EXPAND THE BOARD, YOU START TALKING ABOUT SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, RACE IS GOING TO COME UP. >>MARK SHARPE: SURE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: AND RACE IS ONE OF THE MOST DIVISIVE THINGS IN THIS NATION RIGHT NOW WITH AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRESIDENT, SO I SUGGESTED THAT, HEY, LET'S NOT GET INTO THE MINUTIA OF WHETHER IT'S SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS, WHETHER IT'S 5-4, 7-2, WHATEVER, BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO JUST GO FROM SEVEN TO NINE. SO I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND YOU'RE THE FIRST ONE, SO TO ME I LOOKED AT -- BACK IN '80-SOMETHING WHEN THE CHARTER WAS STARTED, WE HAD SO MANY COMMISSIONERS. IT WAS SEVEN. NOW WE'VE GOT OVER A MILLION PEOPLE AND GROWING IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BIG EXODUS FROM HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, NOT WITH A BULLET TRAIN AND EVERYTHING ELSE COMING HERE, SO -- THANKS TO YOUR HELP, BUT THE THING ABOUT IT IS IS THAT -- I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS YOUR FEELING ON THAT, AND THAT'S MY LAST INQUIRY, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO HEAR BEFORE TOMORROW. >>MARK SHARPE: I SAID EARLIER BEFORE YOU HAD ARRIVED THAT I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REALLY STUDY IT IN-DEPTH, BUT MY SENSE IS STILL THAT WE'RE BETTER SERVED BY A SMALLER NUMBER THAN A LARGER NUMBER. THE LARGER YOU GET -- AGAIN, I'VE SERVED ON SOME BOARDS WHERE THERE'S 20 AND 30 MEMBERS. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DON'T SHOW UP. WHY DO I NEED TO COME, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER GUY WILL GET IT. WE'RE ALL DIVIDED, AND, YOU KNOW, I ONLY REPRESENT THIS LITTLE MINORITY COMMUNITY OF, YOU KNOW, SOUTH TAMPA AND WE'RE ONLY INTERESTED IN THIS, AND SUDDENLY WE'RE NOT TAKING THE LONG VIEW. THE ONE THING THAT I LIKE ABOUT THE FOUR IS THAT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO TAKE THE LONG VIEW AND A BROADER VIEW ABOUT THE ENTIRE -- YOU THINK REGIONALLY, AND I THINK WE'VE GOT TO START THINKING MORE REGIONALLY IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL, BUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU HAVE TO BE VERY SENSITIVE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL. THIS KIND OF GIVES YOU THAT. I LIKE THE MIX THAT WE HAVE NOW. I WOULDN'T SUPPORT A BROADER, BUT IF WE WENT BROADER, I THINK -- I DEFINITELY THINK, AS I SAID, IF YOU GO LARGER, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE SOMEONE AT THE TOP WHO HAS A BIT MORE POWER. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: I'M GOING TO -- COMMISSIONER PLATT'S THE NEXT SPEAKER, AND THEN WE'VE GOT A BUSY AGENDA, SO AFTER COMMISSIONER PLATT, I'D RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE ON. SO COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING AND BEING SO CANDID WITH US. >>MARK SHARPE: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >>JAN PLATT: I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT YOU'VE SAID AND I DISAGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT YOU'VE SAID, AND WITH THIS IPA ISSUE -- I GUESS MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS, IF YOU READ WHAT MR. TARR HAS PROPOSED, HE RECOMMENDS SOME CHARTER CHANGES, BUT HE ALSO RECOMMENDS SOME CHANGES ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTERNALLY, SO IT'S GOING TO BE PIECEMEAL SO THAT IF THIS BOARD TOOK AN ACTION AND IT GOT ON THE BALLOT AND PASSED AND IF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DID NOTHING, YOU'D STILL BE IN A MESS, AND IN MY OPINION -- IF YOU TRULY WANT TO CONTINUE ON THE COURSE OF THE IPA, IN MY OPINION, WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN AND THEN HAVE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAKE A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD GO ON THE BALLOT ALONG WITH THE SIDE BARS THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WOULD NEED TO PROPOSE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I NOTICE THAT ON THE 14th OF JANUARY YOU-ALL ARE GOING TO DISCUSS THE IPA POSITION, AND YOU MAY OR MAY NOT MAKE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES, SO THAT IN ALL GOOD INTENT THIS BOARD, IF IT DID PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, THE CHANGES THAT WERE PROPOSED, AND THEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DID NOT DO THAT OTHER, THEN IT'S STILL GOING TO BE CHAOS, AND I GUESS THAT'S A CONCERN OF MINE. SO MY -- MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN, AND THEN YOU AS A BOARD HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT, AND I DON'T KNOW IN ANY RECENT YEARS IF ANY BOARD HAS DONE IT, BUT IF THE BOARD -- IF THE -- IF THE PUBLIC FEELS THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO, THEY'LL VOTE FOR IT. YOU NEED FIVE VOTES. BUT I JUST NEEDED TO SAY THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS BOARD -- AND I KNOW THAT -- THAT MR. ROBINSON IS WELL INTENDED AND HE WANTS TO MAKE THE CHANGES, BUT IF -- IF WE DID PUT THAT ON THE BALLOT AND THE BOARD DID NOTHING, IT WOULD STILL BE CHAOS, AND AGAIN, I NEED TO SAY THIS, AND I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT THE PUBLIC REALLY DOESN'T TRUST THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ESPECIALLY WITH THIS IPA, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN PUBLICIZED MANY, MANY TIMES THAT COMMISSIONERS INDIVIDUALLY CAN HAVE A FOUR-HOUR WORK PROJECT BY THE IPA. THAT'S WHY OVER THE YEARS, AT LEAST THE 24 YEARS THAT I SERVED ON THE COUNTY COMMISSION, THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT WAS ALWAYS A STRONG, POWERFUL INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD -- WOULD DO THE AUDITS, AND IT WAS -- THAT -- THAT CLERK BECAUSE IT'S AN INDEPENDENT CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER IS NOT UNDER THE THUMB OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION. THAT IPA, IN MY OPINION, THE PUBLIC VIEWS IT UNDER YOUR -- UNDER THE THUMB OF THE BOARD, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S ON THE SAME FLOOR. ISN'T IT ON THE SAME FLOOR AS YOU-ALL? >>MARK SHARPE: YES. >>JAN PLATT: I MEAN, TO ME THAT WAS A BAD MISTAKE BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT LOOKS LIKE -- >>MARK SHARPE: I DIDN'T LIKE THAT WHEN I CAME IN. IT TOOK AWAY SOME OF MY OFFICE SPACE. >>JAN PLATT: I KNOW. I KNOW. AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. >>MARK SHARPE: I DIDN'T LIKE IT. I WANT THE BOARD -- I ALWAYS -- SOMETIMES THERE'S THIS SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HELP OURSELVES BY PUTTING THE -- WHETHER IT'S THE ATTORNEY OR THIS PERSON OR THAT PERSON UNDER US. I SAY BUNK. I BELIEVE THE EXACT OPPOSITE. GIVE THEM THE POWER AND THE LATITUDE TO DO WHAT THEY SEE FIT AND THEN COME BACK AND REPORT TO US AND WE CAN DUKE IT OUT IN THE PUBLIC, BUT I STILL LIKE HAVING THAT IPA IN THE SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, I CAN GO TO THE -- I'VE ASKED THE IPA TO LOOK INTO SPENDING AT THE CHILDREN'S BOARD. I'VE ASKED THE IPA TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, ISSUES CONCERNING CHILDREN'S SERVICES AND SUCH. YOU KNOW, HOW ARE WE REALLY DOING, WHAT IS -- IS IT PERFORMING? AND I -- AND A GOOD, HARD-BIT INSPECTOR WHO UNDERSTANDS THE ROLE OF PERFORMANCE AUDITOR CAN COME BACK AND REALLY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU'RE -- THEY'VE GOT TEN STEPS AND THREE OF THEM JUST DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL AND WE NEED -- WE RECOMMEND SUCH-AND-SUCH, AND THERE'S VALUE THERE, AND SOMETIMES YOU JUST -- THE CLERK'S OFFICE JUST FUNCTIONS DIFFERENTLY. I MEAN, I GET THE -- YOU GET THE STANDARD FINANCIAL AUDIT, AND IT'S VERY VALUABLE AND THEY DO A GOOD JOB, BUT I -- I LIKE THE FUNCTION, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW THEY PERFORM IT WITH THREE. I'M NOT SURE. NOW, TO YOUR OTHER POINT, I STILL PREFER MR. ROBINSON'S POSITION, WHICH IS TO TRY TO DO THE BEST WITH CLEANING IT UP, AND THEN I BELIEVE THE BOARD, THIS BOARD AND THE FUTURE BOARD -- WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW BOARD AFTER THE NEXT ELECTION -- THE FUTURE BOARD IS GOING TO BE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH MR. TARR, THE MAJORITY AT LEAST WILL BE COMMITTED TO -- I WILL. I'LL BE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH MR. TARR TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HE WANTS BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S VALUE IN WHAT WE'VE STARTED. WE JUST HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SHARPE. WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING BEFORE THE BOARD. >>MARK SHARPE: IT'S AN HONOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS MR. RONALD -- OR GENE GARDNER, THE DIRECTOR OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CIVIL SERVICE. WELCOME. >>GENE GARDNER: THANK YOU, SIR. I HAVE WITH ME KURT WILKENING, MY CHIEF OF RECRUITING, TESTING, AND CERTIFICATION, SO IF I STUMBLE, I MAY TURN AROUND AND CALL FOR KURT. SOME OF YOU I HAVE KNOWN FOR SOMETIME, OTHERS THIS IS MY FIRST TIME BEFORE YOU. I'M GENE GARDNER. I'M THE DIRECTOR FOR THE COUNTY CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. YOU SEE AND I HAVE PROVIDED YOU A -- A COPY OF OUR ANNUAL REPORT AS WELL AS OUR POWERPOINT, AND I -- IN TALKING TO THE CHAIR, I'VE GOT AN HOUR'S WORTH OF INFORMATION TO GIVE YOU IN TEN MINUTES, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE RATHER QUICKLY, AND PERHAPS YOU'LL SEE SOME THINGS THAT YOU'LL WANT TO BRING UP IN THE Q & A, AND WITH THAT, I WOULD CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE BOTTOM LINE THAT WE LOOK AT, THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, A SHARED SERVICES MODEL AHEAD OF ITS TIME. WE WERE CREATED IN THE 1950s AND CREATED TO BE AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE REST OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE AND TO ADMINISTER A MARRIED EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM, SO WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT SINCE THE '50s. THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS REWRITES OF OUR ENABLING ACT, AND THE MOST CURRENT WAS IN 2000 -- IT WAS AMENDED IN 2007. THERE ARE SEVEN MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THEY ARE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. THEY SERVE WITHOUT COMPENSATION. MR. REDDICK KNOWS THAT -- >>FRANK REDDICK: YES. >>GENE GARDNER: -- HAVING SERVED ON THE BOARD. VICTORIA BUTLER IS CURRENTLY THE CHAIR. SHE'S AN ATTORNEY WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. DAVID AGLIANO MANY OF YOU KNOW, WHO USED TO OWN A RESTAURANT, VALENCIA GARDENS, BUT HE'S NO LONGER EMPLOYED. CHRISTINE BRUNO IS A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WHOSE EMPLOYMENT IS WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. CHRIS KAVOUKLIS IS AN ATTORNEY NOW IN JOINT PRACTICE. ROB MITCHELL IS AN ATTORNEY. PAT SPENCER RETIRED BUT SAYS SHE SPENDS MORE TIME NOW DOING VOLUNTEER WORK, AND IT'S HARD TO TELL THAT SHE'S RETIRED. HEIDI SWANSON, ALSO AN ENGINEER. AGAIN, THESE PEOPLE ARE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. THEY SERVE WITHOUT COMPENSATION. THEY SERVE A FOUR-YEAR TERM. WE HAVE DEPUTIES TO THE BOARD, MR. DON WELCH, MS. VICKI SPENCE, GEORGE WILLIAMS, AND COLONEL ED DUNCAN. THEIR PURPOSE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE FOUR MAJOR APPOINTING AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE SYSTEM HAVE THEIR BEST INTERESTS REPRESENTED TO THE BOARD. THEY DO NOT HAVE A VOTE ON BOARD MATTERS, BUT THE BOARD OFTEN SEEKS THEIR INPUT ON POLICY ISSUES. ONE UNIQUE THING ABOUT THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD IS THAT WE HAVE A MINIMUM FUNDING REQUIREMENT. YOU SEE THAT SIXTY-FIVE ONE HUNDREDTHS OF 1% OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S CLASSIFIED PAYROLL. THIS COMPELS THE BOCC TO FUND THE BOARD AT A MINIMUM, AND THE BUDGET THIS YEAR IS THREE MILLION FOUR. WHY WE WERE CREATED. EXCUSE ME. TAKING -- EXCUSE ME -- POLITICS OUT OF THE EMPLOYMENT ISSUE, SAVING TAX DOLLARS BY ELIMINATING DUPLICATION; THAT IS, OUR AGENCY'S THE SOLE PROVIDER OF SEVERAL COMMON HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES TO 21 COUNTY AGENCIES -- THAT 10,300 FIGURE'S BEEN REVISED AS OF THE END OF JUNE, AND I HAVE AN UPDATED FIGURE FOR YOU THERE -- REDUCING INTERAGENCY COMPETITION FOR NEW EMPLOYEES, AND WE BELIEVE REDUCING THE FREQUENCY OF LAWSUITS OVER EMPLOYMENT PAY AND DISCIPLINE MATTERS. HOW WELL ARE WE LIKED? WELL, ABOUT 95% ARE SATISFIED, WERE VERY SATISFIED, OR EXTREMELY SATISFIED. THERE'S ABOUT 6% THAT ARE NOT, AND IN THE PERSONNEL BUSINESS, I WILL TELL YOU THESE ARE GOOD NUMBERS BECAUSE IN THIS DAY AND AGE, WHEN FOLKS ARE COMING IN TO APPLY FOR JOBS, THERE ARE SOME UNHAPPY FOLKS. THEY'RE TENSE, THEY'RE NERVOUS, AND WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS AND ASSIST THEM, BUT SOMETIMES YOU JUST CAN'T REALLY DO FOR THEM WHAT THEY WANT. OUR BUDGET, AS I SAID, MINIMUM STATUTORY FUNDING, THREE MILLION SEVEN. EXCUSE ME. I WOULD NOTE THE PERCENTAGE OF SAVINGS. THIS IS MONEY WE TURN BACK TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS EVERY YEAR, SO WE ARE A GOOD STEWARD OF THE MONEY. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE OURSELVES TO DO THAT BY INNOVATIONS WITH RESPECT TO HOW WE DO BUSINESS, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT NOW ELECTRONICS, TALKING ABOUT AN ON-LINE APPLICATION FORM THAT'S PROCESSED THROUGH JOB APPS, HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION SYSTEM, APPLICANT TRACKING. WE HAVE -- VIRTUALLY EVERY DOCUMENT NOW IN OUR OFFICE HAS BEEN SCANNED AND IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. COMMISSIONER SHARPE TALKED ABOUT AVAILABILITY. EVERY DOCUMENT IN OUR OFFICE IS SUBJECT TO PUBLIC RECORD, AND I WISH WE COULD RESPOND AS FAST AS HE SAID, BUT QUITE OFTEN IT TAKES A LITTLE TIME TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS. THERE ARE AS OF NOW, WITHIN ONE OR TWO, 9,971 CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES THAT ARE EMPLOYEES THAT FALL UNDER THE ACT, AND THERE ARE -- EXCUSE ME -- 593 UNCLASSIFIED; THAT IS, AT WILL EMPLOYEES, AND I CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER IF YOU LIKE. OUR OFFICE IS SET UP, WE HAVE FIVE DIVISIONS. POLICY IS A ONE-MAN BAND DIVISION. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO, AS I MENTIONED, INFORMATION MANAGEMENT WITH THE HRIS AND THE APPLICANT TRACKING SYSTEM, ATIS, AND WE MAINTAIN ABOUT 12,000 PERSONNEL RECORDS IN THE OFFICE, SOME 10,000 ARE ACTIVE, AND WE HOLD ABOUT 2,000 ON HAND AT ANY ONE TIME BEFORE WE RETIRE THEM TO THE REPOSITORY. A LOT OF OUR PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS ARE INVOLVED WITH COPIES OF PERSONNEL RECORDS NOT ONLY FROM THE IMMEDIATE TIME FRAME BUT IN SOME CASES SEVERAL YEARS BACK. WE ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THOSE RECORDS FOR 25 YEARS FROM THE TIME THAT AN INDIVIDUAL RETIRES OR SEPARATES FROM SERVICE WITH THE COUNTY. IN FACT, OUR OFFICE LED THE STATE TO CHANGE THAT LAW IN -- IN THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIREMENT FROM 50 YEARS TO 25 YEARS. SOME OF THE RECORDS THAT I SAW IN THE OLD WAREHOUSE, THE ROACHES HAD BEAT US TO IT. THEY WERE GONE, AND THERE WAS NO WAY YOU WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEM, BUT NOW ALL OF OURS IS ELECTRONIC. CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU. WE CLASSIFY THOSE 9,900-PLUS JOBS, AND THAT'S ACROSS THE COUNTY, ALL 21 OF THOSE AGENCIES, AND THAT ENSURES THAT A CLERK TYPIST WORKING FOR THE SHERIFF AND A CLERK TYPIST WORKING FOR ME ARE IN THE SAME PAY GRADE, HAVE THE SAME MINIMUM AND SAME MAXIMUM OF PAY. WE DO THAT THROUGH A SYSTEM CALLED THE HAY SYSTEM. IT'S A METHOD OF CLASSIFYING JOBS, A POINT FACTOR SYSTEM. WE WORK IT THROUGH, WE PRICE IT OUT. NUMBER OF POINTS LEADS US TO A PAY GRADE IN THE PAY STRUCTURE. THAT PREVENTS COMPETITION AMONG VARIOUS AGENCIES, SOME RICHER THAN OTHERS, FOR THE REALLY GOOD GUYS, SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THAT, AND WE ALSO PERFORM A LABOR MARKET ANALYSIS EACH YEAR. WE HAVE PAY FOR PERFORMANCE EXCEPT THERE'S NO MONEY FOR PERFORMANCE NOW, SO -- BUT WE CONTINUE TO THAT HAVE PROGRAM IN PLACE. AND THE NEXT SLIDE IS SIMPLY THE PROCESS TO RECLASSIFY A POSITION. THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU THE REQUIREMENT FOR EXEMPT SERVICE. I MENTIONED THE ALMOST 600 UNCLASSIFIEDS. IN CENTRALIZED RECRUITING I MENTIONED CENTRAL AGENCY DOING THIS. THE ECONOMY HERE IS WE RUN A RECRUITMENT -- I'LL CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT CLERK TYPISTS -- AND DEVELOP A LIST, AND TODAY THOSE LISTS ARE HUGE. WE HAVE ONE REQUIREMENT, WE SATISFY THAT -- LET'S JUST -- FOR EXAMPLE, THE SHERIFF HAD A REQUIREMENT. THEY HIRE FROM THAT LIST. THAT LIST LIVES FOR ANOTHER 90 DAYS IF IT WAS AN OPEN LIST, AND IF SOMEONE ELSE THE NEXT DAY COMES TO US AND SAYS WE WANT TO RECRUIT FOR A CLERK TYPIST, WE HAND THEM THE LIST AND SAY USE THIS LIST, WE JUST RECRUITED FOR IT, SO THERE ARE BIG SAVINGS IN THE PROCESS. ADVERTISING, WE DO OUR BEST TO REACH AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE WITHIN A BUDGET. THIS MAY NOT BE A SURPRISE, BUT THEN SOME PEOPLE LOOK AT THIS AND THEY'RE VERY SURPRISED. YOU CAN SEE THE RECRUITMENTS ARE DOWN AND THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS IS UP ENORMOUSLY, AND WE'RE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW -- HOW LONG WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT, BUT -- IF IT KEEPS GOING, BUT IF WE WERE ISSUING THE NUMBER OF RECRUITMENT BULLETINS TODAY THAT WE WERE, SAY, SIX, SEVEN YEARS AGO, WE WOULD BE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT. I THINK I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME. IS THAT WHAT THAT BELL MEANS? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU CAN FINISH UP YOUR PRESENTATION. I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOW A LITTLE BIT OF TIME FOR QUESTIONS, SO -- >>GENE GARDNER: YES. THESE SLIDES -- THIS IS JUST A SNAPSHOT OF WHERE WE ARE AT THE END OF JUNE IN OUR RECRUITMENTS AND THE ON-LINE RECRUITMENTS. YOU SEE WE HAVE VERY, VERY FEW PEOPLE USING PAPER APPLICATIONS NOW AND THEY USE THE ON-LINE SYSTEM, AND WE PROVIDE PASSWORDS FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE A COMPUTER AVAILABLE AT HOME. I WANT TO SAY ONE THING ABOUT TEST VALIDATION. WE TEST FOR VARIOUS CLASSIFICATIONS. NOT EVERY -- EVERY JOB HAS A TEST. THERE IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE WORK THAT GOES IN TO DEVELOPING A TEST AND GOING THROUGH THE VALIDATION PROCESS. GENERALLY IT TAKES AT LEAST SIX MONTHS TO DO FROM START TO FINISH A NEW TEST, SO OUR OFFICE DOES THAT FOR ALL THESE -- THESE 500-PLUS CLASSES THAT WE HAVE, AND IT TAKES A VERY SPECIFICALLY QUALIFIED PERSON TO DO THAT. AND THE BOARD'S MAJOR FUNCTION -- WE, OF COURSE, AS STAFF REPORT TO THEM, BUT THEY'RE REALLY -- THEY'RE MOST INVOLVED IN APPEAL OF DISCIPLINES AND IN HEARING OF GRIEVANCES. EMPLOYEES HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL ANY ACTION AGAINST THEM THAT TAKES MONEY OUT OF THEIR POCKET; THAT IS, A DEMOTION, DISMISSAL, OR A SUSPENSION. IN ADDITION, THE BOARD HEARS GRIEVANCES OF EMPLOYEES WHO BELIEVE THAT A CIVIL SERVICE RULE HAS BEEN VIOLATED BY THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, AND WE HAVE HEARINGS ON THOSE AS WELL. THE DISCIPLINE APPEAL PROCESS YOU SEE HERE, THERE IS AN APPEAL BEFORE THE BOARD. IT IS DE NOVO. WE START FROM SCRATCH, JUST LIKE IN COURT, EXCEPT THE BURDEN IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE FALLS ON THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO SHOW WHY THIS PERSON SHOULD BE DISCIPLINED, SO THAT ALL TAKES PLACE IN THE SUNSHINE. THE APPELLANT OR EMPLOYEE OR EX-EMPLOYEE KNOWS THE RESULT AT THE END OF THE HEARING. THERE'S NO SMOKY ROOM. EVERYTHING WE DO IS IN THE SUNSHINE. AND I'M THROUGH WITH THE -- THE PRESENTATION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARDNER? LET ME GET MR. ROBINSON, MR. TOKLEY, AND COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: MR. GARDNER, YOU KNOW ME AND YOU DONE BEEN THERE; RIGHT? I'VE BEEN KNOWING YOU A WHILE. I'VE REPRESENTED SOME CLIENTS OVER THERE, AND I'VE BEEN OVER THERE. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO ASK YOU HERE -- YOU KNOW, THE FIRST QUESTION IS IS THAT WITH THE CUTBACKS IN THE BUDGET THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION IS GOING THROUGH AND MIKE MERRILL'S GOING AROUND RECHANGING DEPARTMENTS, DOES THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OR THE CIVIL SERVICE ORGANIZATION YOU REPRESENT -- DO YOU GET INVOLVED WITH THESE LAYOFFS, WITH CHANGING JOB TITLES AND POSITIONS? I KNOW THEY'RE PUTTING -- CHANGING THE DIRECTOR OF LEE DAVIS. NOW HE GOING TO BE OVER AGING SERVICES. HE'S NOT A DIRECTOR, HE'S A DIRECTOR FOR A DIVISION, AND PEOPLE ARE TELLING ME THAT THAT'S A DEMOTION BUT IT'S NOT A DEMOTION, SO THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGING TITLES AND A LOT OF REORGANIZATION -- >>GENE GARDNER: YES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: -- AND I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT SOME OF OUR CLASSIFIED -- WELL, THAT WON'T BE A CLASSIFIED, BUT SOME OF THESE POSITIONS MAY GET -- DO YOU-ALL REVIEW THAT OR ARE THEY JUST DOING THAT IN THE BLIND WITHOUT COMING THROUGH YOU GUYS? >>GENE GARDNER: LET ME SPEAK TO YOUR FIRST PART, SIR. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: OKAY. >>GENE GARDNER: THE RIF OR REDUCTION IN FORCE, WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO HELP THOSE EMPLOYEES. THEY'RE IDENTIFIED TO US, AND WE SET UP MEETINGS WITH EACH ONE OF THEM IF THEY'RE WILLING TO COME TO THE OFFICE AND SET THEM ON A COURSE TO ACCESS OTHER COUNTY JOBS, AND WE'RE PRETTY SUCCESSFUL AT THAT. WHEN I SAY PRETTY SUCCESSFUL, WE ARE ABLE TO PLACE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN RIF'D OUT OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IN ANOTHER APPOINTING AUTHORITY WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION. YOUR MAJOR QUESTION INVOLVES IN THE REORGANIZATION UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES. THE ISSUE THAT SURFACES HERE, AS YOU PUSH MORE AND MORE OF THESE UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS DOWN INTO MANAGEMENT LEVEL -- LET'S SAY THEY WERE AT THE THIRD OR FOURTH LEVEL AND NOW SUDDENLY THEY'RE AT THE SIXTH LEVEL -- THEN WE LOOK AT THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, DOES THIS MEET THAT DEFINITION THAT YOU JUST -- YOU SAW EARLIER ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE MANAGER? MAYBE THIS POSITION SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED. SO WE GET IN -- WE WILL BE INVOLVED IN THAT WAY. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ONGOING ACTION, I THINK, 20 -- I'M SORRY, KURT, HOW MANY ARE WE WORKING WITH ON THE RIF? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>GENE GARDNER: WE HAVE 34 THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH GIVING INDIVIDUAL ATTENTION TO. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE SPOKEN ENOUGH TO YOUR QUESTION. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: NOW, DO YOU REMEMBER WE HAD A CASE -- I DON'T WANT TO SAY NO NAMES, BUT WE GOT INTO THIS ISSUE WITH THE WRITTEN REPRIMAND, AND -- AND I'M STILL A STICKLER. THAT'S GOT TO BE DEALT WITH. AND WHAT HAPPENS IS IS THAT AN EMPLOYEE CLASSIFIED CAN GET A WRITTEN REPRIMAND, AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME, WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE PROCESS, ALL THE APPEAL PROCESS, THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE, AND THEN WE DIDN'T GET A FAIR DECISION AND WE WENT TO THE CHARTER -- THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, MS. SPENCER, AGLIANO, AND ALL THOSE FOLKS. AND THEN WHEN WE GOT THERE, THEY SAYS, WELL, GUESS WHAT, OUR HANDS ARE TIED, THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO. AND I SAID, WELL, THIS IS A WRITTEN REPRIMAND THAT'S GOING INTO AN EMPLOYEE'S FILE THAT WILL BE USED ON THEIR JOB PERFORMANCE, AND THEY ACTUALLY GET POINTS TAKEN OFF. WHEN THEY GET THEIR RAISE, THEY'VE GOT A LITTLE POINT SYSTEM IN THERE. HAS THERE BEEN ANY LOOKING AT THAT OR DOES THAT GOT TO COME TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION? DOES THAT HAVE TO BE A CHARTER CHANGE, IS THAT A COUNTY COMMISSION CHANGE? >>GENE GARDNER: NO. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: WHO CAN -- YOU KNOW THE -- WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? >>GENE GARDNER: SURE. REMEMBER I SAID THE BOARD HAS AUTHORITY TO DEAL IN APPEALS WITH DISMISSALS, REDUCTION OR -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SUSPENSIONS. >>GENE GARDNER: -- SUSPENSIONS OR DEMOTIONS. THAT'S ALL THE LAW PROVIDES FOR US. THE ISSUE OF THE WRITTEN REPRIMAND BOILS DOWN TO ONE THING, IN THE COURSE OF THE GRIEVANCE, WHICH YOUR CLIENT GRIEVED, DID YOU OR SHE COMMUNICATE A MISAPPLICATION OF THE RULES OR LAW, AND IF THE ANSWER IS YES, THEN THIS IS HEADED FOR A HEARING. YOU'LL RECALL THAT MY ANSWER -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: RIGHT. >>GENE GARDNER: -- FOR THAT WAS NO -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: RIGHT. >>GENE GARDNER: -- INITIALLY, AND THEN YOU SUBMARINED ME - - >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: WELL, COME ON NOW. [LAUGHTER] >>GENE GARDNER: -- AND THE BOARD DID HEAR IT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: RIGHT. >>GENE GARDNER: BUT NO, IT HAS NOT CHANGED. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >>GENE GARDNER: BUT I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE -- NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF MANAGEMENT BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T THERE IN THIS REPRIMAND. THERE'S -- IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE BOARD TO GO THAT LOW IN HANDLING DISCIPLINE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ACTUALLY, I JUST WANT TO REMIND OUR BOARD WE'RE TRYING TO FOCUS ON CHARTER ISSUES, SO -- JUST TO STAY ON -- FOCUS ON ISSUES DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE CHARTER IN YOUR QUESTIONS, PLEASE. MR. TOKLEY. >>JAMES TOKLEY: [INAUDIBLE] >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: I HAD ASKED THAT HE COME TONIGHT TO SORT OF EDUCATE THE BOARD ON THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD BECAUSE I -- I'M NOT SURE THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE IS AN INDEPENDENT BOARD THAT IS CREATED BY STATE LAW THAT IS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR THAT BASICALLY GOVERNS THE MAJORITY OF THE EMPLOYEES UNDER THE ADMINISTRATOR, UNDER THE SHERIFF, UNDER THE -- UNDER THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, AND SO THAT IF SOMEBODY TALKS ABOUT HAVING A MAYOR, THAT KIND OF THING, THE -- THERE'S A CIVIL SERVICE BOARD THAT WILL DEAL WITH THE EMPLOYEES, THE BROAD-BASED EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY AS IT DOES RIGHT NOW. IF YOU NOTICE UNDER THE ADMINISTRATOR 45 -- 4,541 OF THE EMPLOYEES ARE UNDER CIVIL SERVICE, AND IT WAS CREATED -- IN FACT, WHEN I FIRST GOT ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE SCHOOL BOARD WAS ALSO A PART OF THIS. >>GENE GARDNER: YES. >>JAN PLATT: NOW, THEY BROKE AWAY, UNFORTUNATELY, AND ONE OF THE -- ONE OF THE POSITIVE PARTS ABOUT THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AS IT OPERATES IS THAT YOU FIND THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR IS NOT COMPETING WITH A SALARY FOR A SECRETARY WITH THE SHERIFF OR -- THE SALARIES ARE CONSISTENT, AND IT BRINGS PEACE AND HARMONY, AND I -- I -- UNLIKE THE CITY OF TAMPA WHERE YOU'VE GOT A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT, THERE IS A CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, BUT IT'S NOT -- IT DOES NOT HAVE THE POWERS THAT THIS GROUP DOES, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR US ALL TO UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO TALK ABOUT STRONG MAYOR, THAT KIND OF THING -- IT'LL NEVER BE A STRONG MAYOR AS LONG AS YOU'VE GOT A GROUP LIKE THIS THAT EXISTS, AND IT BRINGS PEACE AND GOODWILL AMONG ALL OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS BECAUSE YOU'RE COMPETING -- AND IF YOU NOTICE THE COURTS TOO, ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE ANCILLARY TO THE COURT SYSTEM FALL UNDER -- MOST OF THEM FALL UNDER THIS SYSTEM. THEY'RE PEOPLE WHO ARE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. IT'S HANDS OFF LOCALLY. I MEAN -- AND IT'S WORKED WELL OVER THE YEARS. AND WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THE COUNTY IS THEIR EMPLOYEES ARE NOT UNIONIZED. CITY OF TAMPA IS BIG TIME. THE -- HAVING RUN FOR MAYOR, I CAN TELL YOU WHO RUNS THE COUNTY -- THE CITY IN MY OPINION IS THE POLICE UNION AND THE FIRE UNION WITH THE ELECTIONS, AND -- BUT THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES REALLY -- THERE ARE VERY FEW UNIONS OTHER THAN THE FIRE THAT I KNOW OF. I THINK THE DEPUTIES AT ONE POINT HAD TALKED ABOUT -- >>GENE GARDNER: THEY WERE AND THEN THEY -- >>JAN PLATT: THEY DECIDED NOT TO, SO THERE'S REALLY PEACE AND GOODWILL AMONG THE EMPLOYEES IN THE COUNTY LEVEL. >>GENE GARDNER: IN THAT REGARD, IF THERE -- IN THE CASE OF UNIONS -- AND THERE IS A -- AN ISSUE AND THE EMPLOYEE IS -- IS DISCIPLINED, DISMISSED, THE EMPLOYEE HAS TWO CHOICES. THEY CAN CHOOSE THE PATH PROVIDED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AND APPEAL THAT DISCIPLINE. IF THEY'RE IN THE BARGAINING UNIT, THEY CAN ALSO APPEAL THROUGH THE UNION PROCESS. WHAT THEY CAN'T DO IS SHIFT BACK AND FORTH. ONCE COMMITTED ON ONE OF THOSE TRACKS THAT'S PROVIDED IN STATUTE 447 -- ONCE THEY'RE COMMITTED, THAT'S THE WAY THEY'VE GOT TO GO. THEY CAN'T SEE THAT THINGS AREN'T GOING WELL WITH THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, SO I'LL SHIFT OVER TO THE UNION SIDE. THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARDNER? MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, THAT LEADS TO A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION BECAUSE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THERE'S SEVERAL LARGE COUNTIES THAT HAVE ELECTED EXECUTIVES OR ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR THAT SERVE AS MAYOR. HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THOSE COUNTIES AND HOW THOSE COUNTIES ARE OPERATING WITH THEIR CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES? >>GENE GARDNER: SOME HAVE CIVIL SERVICE AND SOME DO NOT. YOU NEED ONLY GO ACROSS THE BAY TO SEE A CONSOLIDATED PERSONNEL SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT THIS IS, WITH PINELLAS COUNTY. THERE ARE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEMS EMBEDDED IN OTHER CITIES AND COUNTIES AROUND THE STATE. THERE USED TO BE MORE. >>GERALD WHITE: IF THE PEOPLE WERE TO DECIDE TO CHANGE THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND CREATE AN ELECTED CHAIRMAN OR AN ELECTED INDEPENDENT EXECUTIVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, DO YOU BELIEVE UNDER YOUR EXISTING LAW THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS DESIGNED TO RECEIVE AND TAKE IN A CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT? >>GENE GARDNER: YES. >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY LAST QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARDNER? OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. GARDNER. >>GENE GARDNER: YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR. NICE SEEING ALL OF YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA, MS. MARY ANN STILES. WE'LL TAKE -- WE'LL TAKE A RECESS AFTER MRS. STILES' PRESENTATION AND TAKE QUESTIONS, JUST SO THE BOARD'S AWARE OF THAT. >>JAMES TOKLEY: [INAUDIBLE] >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE -- AT THE LAST MEETING WE HAD MENTIONED 30 MINUTES. I TALKED TO HER BEFORE, AND I SAID IF YOU COULD HOLD THAT 30 MINUTES QUESTIONS AND -- JUST -- HER PRESENTATION AND QUESTIONS. >> I'LL TRY NOT TO TAKE THAT LONG. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >> THANK YOU FOR ASKING ME TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS BOARD. I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU DO. I SERVE ON A LOT OF BOARDS MYSELF, AND I KNOW HOW MUCH TIME IT TAKES. IN 19 -- IN 2005 AND 2000 -- EARLY 2006, A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT I KNOW AND MET WITH FELT THAT WE HAD A DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE FELT THAT NO ONE WAS IN CHARGE AND THERE WAS NO LEADER, COULDN'T LOOK TO A LEADER IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, SO WE -- A BUNCH OF US GOT TOGETHER AND HAD A MEETING AND -- HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS AND DECIDED TO LOOK AT THE STATUTE AND TO SEE WHAT ALTERNATIVES HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAD. I KIND OF GET A KICK OUT OF WHEN I HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THE STRONG MAYOR BECAUSE IT REALLY ISN'T A STRONG MAYOR, IT CANNOT BE WHAT THE CITY OF TAMPA IS. I GET A KICK OUT OF PEOPLE THINK THAT WE CREATED THIS MONSTER THAT WE HAVE OUT OF OUR HEADS. IT CAME RIGHT OUT OF THE STATUTE. I REFER YOU TO 125.85 IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE THREE -- THREE PROVISIONS THAT'S PROVIDED TO ALLOW US TO DO THIS. WHEN -- I DISCUSSED LAST TIME KIND OF HOW WE GOT WHERE WE ARE, SO I WON'T GO BACK THROUGH ALL THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT OUR CITIZENS INITIATIVE BY STATE LAW HAD TO BE COMPLETED BY FEBRUARY 1, 2010. THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGES THAT'S BEEN MADE TO THE CONSTITUTION, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T DISCUSS THE ISSUE IN OUR CHARTER, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE STATE OR THE CONSTITUTION, SO WE HAD TO HAVE OUR LANGUAGE FINISHED BY FEBRUARY 1st, 2010. THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE SUPERVISOR, AND WE HAVE SIX MONTHS FROM THAT DATE TO GET OUR SIGNATURES, SO WE HAVE TO GET OUR SIGNATURES BY I GUESS IT'S JULY -- EXCUSE ME -- JULY 30th. MY ALLERGIES ARE BUGGING ME, SO YOU'LL HAVE TO FORGIVE ME. ANYWAY, WE HAVE TO GET THEM BY JULY 30th OF 2010, AND ONCE WE GET THEM, THEY'RE NOT -- SOME PEOPLE SAY, WELL, WHY AREN'T THE OTHERS GOOD, WHY AM I HAVING TO SIGN THESE NEW ONES, WHY, WHY, WHY, AND IT'S BECAUSE THESE ONLY LAST SIX MONTHS. CONSTITUTIONALLY THEY LAST FOUR YEARS, AND THEY HAVE FOUR YEARS TO GET THEIR SIGNATURES. WE HAVE SIX MONTHS, AND IF WE DON'T GET THEM, THEY'RE NOT - - THEY'RE NO LONGER ANY GOOD AND WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK AGAIN AND START ALL OVER. WE HAVE TO GET 41,261 VALID SIGNATURES. THAT'S TAKEN FROM THE FOUR DISTRICTS, AND THERE'S A PERCENTAGE THAT ADDS UP TO ALL THAT FOR THE FOUR DISTRICTS. THE VOTERS HAVE ALREADY SIGNED 40,000 FOR THE COUNTY MAYOR BECAUSE WE ONLY NEEDED 38 BACK WHEN WE DID IT IN 2006. THEY ALSO EXECUTED ANOTHER 40,000 FOR THE VETO POWER. BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE CRITICISM OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE LAST PETITION ON THE POWERS OF THE MAYOR -- BECAUSE WE TRIED TO SUMMARIZE IT -- THE POWERS OF THE MAYOR ARE -- IS REALLY -- THE STATUTE WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT SAYS EXECUTIVE -- IT SAYS EXECUTIVE, BUT ALL THE OTHER COUNTIES HAVE USED THE WORD "MAYOR," SO WE DID. WHETHER THAT'S RIGHT OR WRONG, I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT HAS CAUSED CONFUSION BECAUSE PEOPLE AUTOMATICALLY THINK OF THE CITY OF TAMPA, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT. THEY SHOULD LOOK OVER TO ORLANDO OR DOWN TO MIAMI OR OVER TO BROWARD BUT NOT -- AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT CONSOLIDATION AT ALL. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSOLIDATION. A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK IT DOES, BUT CONSOLIDATION ONLY EXISTS IN THE -- DUVAL COUNTY. I UNDERSTAND PROBABLY BEFORE I STARTED VOTING, MAYBE AFTER I STARTED VOTING, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER IT, WE HAD THE CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT TWO OR THREE TIMES, AND IT HAS NOT PASSED. SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT'S THE ELECTED COUNTY MAYOR, BUT THAT'S NOT. THIS HAS NOT BEEN BEFORE. IN THOSE COUNTIES WHERE THERE IS A COUNTY MAYOR, IT HAS BEEN DONE BY THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD OR THEIR -- OR THE BOARD. IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE BY CITIZENS INITIATIVE. THIS IS THE FIRST CITIZENS INITIATIVE IN THE STATE. SO WHEN WE GOT THE DATE -- WHEN WE GOT THE PETITION -- YOU'VE GOT A COPY OF IT. IF YOU LOOK ON THE BACK, WHAT WE DID WAS WE COPIED RIGHT OUT OF THE STATUTE THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE MAYOR OR EXECUTIVE, AND IF YOU WANT TO FIND THAT IN THE STATUTE, YOU WOULD GO TO 125.85. SO WE DIDN'T CREATE THIS. IT'S NOT A NEW IDEA. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE LEGISLATURE CREATED IN 1974. WE STARTED RAISING MONEY ON FEBRUARY -- WELL, ON FEBRUARY 1st, AND WE STARTED GETTING OUR PETITIONS SIGNED, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN FOCUSING ON. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT OR NOT. I MEAN, WE'VE TRIED. IT TAKES MONEY, AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE IF YOU'RE RUNNING -- IF ANYBODY'S RUNNING FOR OFFICE, THEY'RE PROBABLY FINDING THAT OUT. THE ECONOMY'S CHANGED, AND I DIDN'T PUT IT -- I DIDN'T PUT A BUNCH OF MONEY IN IT EITHER BECAUSE I FELT LIKE I'D ALREADY DONE IT ONCE. IF THE PEOPLE WANTED THIS, THEN THEY KNEW IT WAS OUT THERE, BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT -- THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION BECAUSE OF WHAT WE DID IN 2006, 2008. HOWEVER, SINCE I MET WITH YOU ON JUNE 29th, I HAVE BEEN TALKING TO THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND HAD MEETINGS WITH SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THAT COMMUNITY. THEY HAVE CONCERNS, BUT MOSTLY -- AND I APPRECIATE THEIR CONCERNS -- IS THAT RIGHT NOW I THINK WE HAVE FIVE OR SIX DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS, WHICH WOULD BE -- THAT -- THAT LAW WOULD JUST CARRY OVER AND BE -- BE TREATED THE SAME UNDER A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -- I MEAN COUNTY MAYOR. THEY WANT TO HAVE ONE OF THOSE DEPUTIES DEDICATED TO THE MINORITY COMMUNITY WITH A BUDGET SO THAT THE MINORITY COMMUNITY HAD SOMEONE IN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MINORITY -- MINORITIES. I LISTENED TO THAT. IT MADE A LOT OF SENSE. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU NEED TO KNOW. I CAN'T CHANGE MY PETITION. ONCE IT'S APPROVED BY THE SUPERVISOR, THAT IS THE PETITION, AND THERE CAN BE NO WORD CHANGE WHATSOEVER. SO THERE'S NO WAY THAT I CAN DO ANYTHING THIS TIME TO HELP THEM WITH THAT PROBLEM. THE BOARD COULD IF IT WANTED TO. IT COULD CREATE -- IT COULD DECIDE TO SUPPORT A COUNTY MAYOR IN WHATEVER FORM THAT IT DECIDES TO GO FORWARD WITH. IT COULD HOLD TWO MEETINGS, PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE, AND PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. I DO WANT TO DISCUSS WITH YOU ESPECIALLY MR. WHITE THE ORANGE COUNTY AND WHY OUR COMMITTEE CHOSE NOT TO GO THAT WAY BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK PUT INTO THIS. I KNOW SOME PEOPLE THINK WE JUST THOUGHT THIS UP AND WE RAN FORWARD AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO AND MARY ANN STILES' BRIGHT IDEA. I AIN'T THAT BRIGHT. I WENT BY STATUTES, I WENT BY RULES, AND I TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT BACK-ROOM DEALS, AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT COMES FROM BECAUSE THE WAY THE SYSTEM'S SET UP TODAY, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CAN MEET WITH EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS AND SHOULD. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CONCERNED US ABOUT THE COUNTY MAYOR SITTING IN ON THE BOARD IS THE COUNTY MAYOR WOULD NEVER HAVE A -- COULD NEVER HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH ANOTHER COMMISSIONER OUTSIDE SUNSHINE BECAUSE SUNSHINE LAWS APPLY, AND SUNSHINE LAWS APPLY WHEN THE -- WHEN THE ADMINISTRATOR MEETS WITH THE COMMISSIONER BECAUSE SHE CAN'T MEET WITH TWO AT ONE TIME, SHE CAN MEET WITH ONE. LAW ALSO APPLIES BECAUSE YOU CANNOT CARRY VOTE INFORMATION FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER, BUT I'M SURE YOU-ALL HAVE ALREADY HAD THAT LECTURE. MOST NEW BOARDS DO. HOWEVER, THAT BOTHERED US A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE DO THINK THAT WHO'S RUNNING THE COUNTY SHOULD BE ABLE TO TALK TO THE LEGISLATIVE BODY. WE THINK THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SHOULD TALK TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. THE OTHER THING WAS THAT IT DOES CREATE ANOTHER LAYER OF GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT DOES CREATE THE ISSUE OF HIRING AN ADMINISTRATOR. IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT IN THE STATUTE, THAT THEY HAVE TO HIRE A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. NOW, WE WERE UPSET AND STILL ARE THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TODAY IS ONLY RESPONSIBLE FOR FOUR PEOPLE AND THAT THERE'S A SEVEN-HEADED COMMITTEE THAT NO ONE CAN LEAD, AND THAT'S WHAT'S WRONG WITH OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT IN MY OPINION. THIS STATUTE SAYS IN ORLANDO -- I MEAN, IF YOU DID THAT -- THEN THAT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CAN ONLY BE RESPONSIBLE TO THE MAYOR AND NOT TO ANYBODY ELSE, SO THAT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WOULD WORK ONLY FOR THE MAYOR, AND I THOUGHT THAT -- WE JUST THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS A PROBLEM, ESPECIALLY IN THIS COUNTY BECAUSE IT WOULD SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CHAIR. AND YOU CAN'T REALLY GO OUT AND CREATE IT A LITTLE -- WHEN YOU'RE CREATING IT -- IT'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE MORE MINUTES. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THAT'S FINE. >> OKAY. MY POINT IS -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET IT ACROSS -- IF YOU'RE CONCERNED THAT THE MAYOR -- THE ADMINISTRATOR'S ONLY RESPONSIBLE FOR FOUR AND THEN IF YOU CREATED ORANGE COUNTY'S, IT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ONE. MAYBE THE FACT THAT THE MAYOR'S ELECTED HELPS, I DON'T KNOW. IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO FLUSH OUT, BUT THAT WAS A CONCERN TO OUR COMMITTEE. I'M TRYING TO GET PAST ALL THE STUFF I SHOULDN'T. I DO WANT TO SAY A COUPLE THINGS, THOUGH, THAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT. THE SAME STATUTE THAT CREATES THE POWERS OF THE BOARD ALSO -- I MEAN -- EXCUSE ME -- CREATES THE POWERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR ALSO CREATES THE POWERS OF THE BOARD, AND YOU'VE BEEN ADVISED THAT OUR VETO POWER'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND THAT IT CONFLICTS WITH STATE LAW. I DON'T KNOW WHY -- I DON'T BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE, FIRST OF ALL, 125.87 STATES VERY CLEARLY THAT STATUTE -- AT -- PARAGRAPH 4 STATES THAT THE LEGISLATIVE BODY SHALL APPROVE THE ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS IN ANY LONG-TERM CAPITAL OR FINANCIAL PROGRAM. IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT FINAL BUDGETS THERE IN -- IN THE LANGUAGE THAT CREATES THE POWERS OF THAT LEGISLATURE. IT DOESN'T. BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT, EVEN IF IT DID, PARAGRAPH 8 OF THAT SAME STATUTE THAT CREATES THE POWERS OF THE BOARD STATES, ALL OTHER POWERS OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT, NOT INCONSISTENT WITH GENERAL LAW, AS RECOGNIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE AND WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN LIMITED BY THE CHARTER -- YOU CAN HAVE STATE LAWS THAT CONFLICT IF THE CHARTER PROVIDES FOR IT, AND I'M SURPRISED THAT YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HASN'T DISCUSSED THAT LEGAL REASONING WITH YOU. SO IN MY OPINION, IT'S NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IN MY OPINION, IT DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW, AND EVEN IF IT DID, IT'S OKAY BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE IT IN THE CHARTER THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE A VETO POWER INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. LET ME MOVE SOME MORE PAGES PAST BECAUSE I KNOW YOU WANT ME TO HURRY. I DID PREPARE FOR 30 MINUTES. WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT WE NEED A CHECKS AND BALANCES. WE NEED SEPARATE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT LIKE OUR CHARTER SETS FORTH. OUR CHARTER SETS FORTH A LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A PERSON WHO IS HIRED BY THE BOARD AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE FOUR PEOPLE HAPPY -- I THINK IT'S FOUR CONSECUTIVE MEETING -- FOUR -- AT TWO CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS OR FIVE OVERALL -- THEN WHO DOES THAT PERSON REALLY WORK FOR AND WHO IS SHE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND WHO'S REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE, THE SEVEN PEOPLE THAT LEAD THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND I AGREE WITH THAT. I HAPPEN TO THINK THAT THEY DO A GOOD JOB, BUT THEY ARE THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, AND THERE'S NOBODY IN OUR SYSTEM THAT CAN CHALLENGE ANYTHING THEY DO. THEY ARE THE POWER OF THIS COUNTY, AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE SHARED WITH THE PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHY WE SUPPORT AN ELECTED COUNTY MAYOR. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. THAT'S NOT A THREAT. I DON'T MEAN IT AS A THREAT. I WOULD THINK AFTER ME DOING THIS FOR FIVE YEARS THAT YOU KNOW I'M NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. I'M A VERY STUBBORN WOMAN, AND THE CITIZENS DO WANT THIS. I KNOW YOU SAY YOU HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THEM, BUT I HEAR FROM THEM. THEY SIGNED 40,000 PETITIONS LAST TIME. THEY'VE ALREADY SIGNED ALMOST 15,000 THIS TIME. I WISH I HAD THE MONEY TO GO GET THE REST OF THEM. MAYBE THEY'LL SIGN ANOTHER 5- OR 10,000, BUT WE PROBABLY WILL NOT GET 31,000, BUT THEY WANT AT LEAST TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON IT. THAT'S ALL IT DOES. THEY MAY VOTE IT DOWN, AND YOU KNOW WHAT, IF THEY VOTE IT DOWN, I'M GOING TO BE FINE WITH THAT, BUT AT LEAST THEY HAD THE CHOICE. AT LEAST THEY HAD THE CHOICE. YOU COULD PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COULD PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, AND WHAT'S SO INTERESTING ABOUT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THEY CAN PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AT A SPECIAL ELECTION OR A REGULAR ELECTION AS THEY CHOOSE. THEY COULD REMOVE THIS VETO POWER, AND THAT WAS THE POINT I POORLY MADE LAST WEEK PROBABLY IS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORK ON IT BECAUSE THEY CAN DO IT. IF WE DIDN'T GET THE VETO -- IF WE DON'T GET THE PETITIONS SIGNED, THEN AFTER THAT, AFTER THE ELECTIONS IS OVER, THEY COULD PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AT ANY ELECTION THEY WANT TO AND GET RID OF IT. THAT'S WHY NONE OF US UNDERSTOOD WHY YOU WERE MOVING SO FAST AND THAT YOU WERE TOLD THAT YOU HAD TO DO IT BEFORE AUGUST 24th. WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. WE HAPPEN TO BELIEVE THAT WE WANT IT, WE WANT A COUNTY MAYOR, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET A COUNTY MAYOR. IF YOU TAKE THIS OFF, WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND PUT IT RIGHT BACK ON. SO OUR POINT WAS GIVE US A CHANCE ANYWAY TO WIN OR AT LEAST GIVE US A CHANCE TO GET PAST THE PROBLEMS WE RAN INTO IN '06 WITH THE COUNTY -- COUNTY SUPERVISOR. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS AND THE CITIZENS WIN, IT WILL BE THE FIRST CHARTER THAT HAS EVER BEEN AMENDED BY CITIZENS PETITION -- CITIZENS INITIATIVE, AND I THINK THAT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >> THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME. I'M SORRY, MY ALLERGIES ARE KILLING ME, BUT I APPRECIATE THE JOB EACH OF YOU DO, I REALLY DO, AND I DON'T DISRESPECT THAT, AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT IT'S HARD TO SERVE IN A PUBLIC POSITION OF ANY KIND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. YOU READY -- ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE SOME QUESTIONS? >> SURE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MR. REDDICK. >>FRANK REDDICK: THANK YOU. MS. STILES, I WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR REACHING OUT TO THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY, AS YOU STATED. I DON'T THINK YOU REACHED OUT ENOUGH THEN, AND YOU PROBABLY HAVEN'T REACHED OUT TO A VARIETY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE VARYING DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. >> I HAVE FOUND THAT OUT. >>FRANK REDDICK: OKAY. BUT I WANT TO SAY TO YOU THAT IT'S MORE LIKELY TO -- FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU WILL NOT REACH THIS GOAL BY THE END OF THIS MONTH WITH US BEING HALFWAY THROUGH THE MONTH OF JULY. I HEARD YOU MENTION SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU'VE BEEN PUSHING BEFORE AND THAT IS INCLUDING TWO DEPUTIES. >> ONE DEPUTY. >>FRANK REDDICK: ONE DEPUTY? ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT IF THIS BOARD WERE TO SUPPORT PUTTING THIS ON THE BALLOT, THE COUNTY MAYOR, THAT THAT BE ATTACHED TO -- >> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. I THINK THE -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MINORITIES IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THEY MAKE UP A GREAT PORTION. THEY NEED TO FEEL INCLUDED. THEY DON'T FEEL INCLUDED. I CAN'T -- OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE, YOU KNOW -- I CAN'T SPEAK FOR A MINORITY COMMUNITY. I'M NOT A MINORITY. I'M A WOMAN MINORITY, BUT I'M NOT A MINORITY, SO IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SPEAK ON ANYONE'S BEHALF. >>FRANK REDDICK: WELL, THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION. WHAT DEFINITION DO YOU HAVE FOR MINORITIES? >> HISPANICS AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN. THAT'S AS FAR AS I'VE GONE, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE ANYONE WHO MEETS THE MINORITY DEFINITION. >>FRANK REDDICK: WELL, WHEN -- YOU KNOW, WHEN WE USE THE TERM "MINORITY," SOMETIMES WE'RE VERY LOOSE WITH THAT TERMINOLOGY BECAUSE IF YOU DEAL WITH MINORITY BUSINESS CONTRACTORS, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL TELL YOU IN A MINUTE -- I'M PRETTY SURE MR. ROBINSON IS ABOUT TO JUMP OUT OF HIS CHAIR BECAUSE THEY'LL SAY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WOMEN, SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY I WANTED TO GET CLEAR ON THAT WHEN YOU SAID "MINORITY." MY FINAL QUESTION WOULD BE -- >> GOOD POINT. >>FRANK REDDICK: -- ARE YOU -- DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU'RE ISOLATING ONE SEGMENT OF THE COMMUNITY BY DESIGNATING A DEPUTY POSITION TO THE COUNTY MAYOR FOR REPRESENTATION BECAUSE -- GO BACK TO WHAT I'M SUPPORTING AND THAT IS WITH THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS AND EXPAND THE BOARD BY TWO INCLUDING SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS -- ADDITIONAL SEATS, SO DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE ISOLATING THE OTHER SEGMENT OF THE COMMUNITY BY SPECIALIZING IN MINORITY POPULATION ONLY? >> NO. >>FRANK REDDICK: OKAY. >> MAYBE I AM, BUT MAYBE I'M NAIVE, BUT I DON'T THINK SO. AND I DO WANT TO MAKE ONE POINT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IF YOU-ALL INCREASE THE DISTRICTS -- THE NUMBER OF DISTRICTS, WHICH PROBABLY DOES NEED TO BE DONE, WITHOUT HAVING A STRONG LEADER, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WORSE THAN WE HAVE NOW. IT'S GOING TO BE WORSE THAN IT IS NOW. YOU HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT THAT. >>FRANK REDDICK: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MRS. STILES? >>JAN PLATT: I HAVE A QUESTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO MAKE THE MAYOR PARTISAN THIS TIME? LAST TIME IT WAS NONPARTISAN. AND YOU'VE ALSO NOW IN THIS ONE ALLOWED THE MAYOR TO INVOLVE HIM OR HERSELF IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS WHICH TO ME YOU'VE GONE FROM BAD TO WORSE. YOU KNOW, I'VE ALWAYS OPPOSED YOUR PROPOSALS, BUT THIS IS WORSE THAN THE FIRST ONE. >> WELL, THE PARTISAN -- WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MS. PLATT, YOU ARE ONE OF THE ONES THAT KEPT SAYING, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A NONPARTISAN MAYOR, THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS THOSE ELECTIONS, AND EVERYWHERE I WENT TO DEBATE NOBODY SEEMED TO CARE BUT ME AND YOU, SO WE HAD A MEETING AND THEY VOTED TO MAKE IT A PARTISAN BECAUSE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY DOES IT REALLY MATTER? EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT PARTY EVERYBODY BELONGS TO, AND I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND AS FAR AS NOT BEING INVOLVED IN POLITICS, NO ONE WILL EVER TELL ME THAT PAT BEAN WAS NOT INVOLVED IN POLITICS BECAUSE SHE WENT OUT AGAINST WHAT WE WERE DOING, AND ALSO THE PERSON'S GOING TO BE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, THEY'RE IN POLITICS, SO IF THEY'RE ELECTED, THEY'RE GOING TO BE A POLITICAL PERSON. >>JAN PLATT: WELL, YOU'RE ACTUALLY STRIKING THE LANGUAGE ABOUT BEING INVOLVED IN PARTISAN POLITICS, AND YOU'VE GOT FIVE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ALL OF WHOM ARE PARTISAN POLITICIANS, PLUS YOU'VE GOT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND SO NOW YOU'RE ADDING ANOTHER PARTISAN, AND I JUST WAS JUST WONDERING HOW THEY'RE GOING TO REALLY - - >> IF YOU-ALL PICK IT UP AND DO IT, THEN PUT BACK IN NONPARTISAN. I MEAN, IT'S MORE -- TO ME THAT'S -- THAT IS JUST ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT -- THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT IS GOING TO GO AWAY. I REALLY BELIEVE THAT. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL STRONGLY THAT YOU HAVE A -- SEE, THE COMMISSIONERS ARE PARTISAN; RIGHT? >>JAN PLATT: YES. >> AND SOME OF THEM -- SOME PEOPLE ON OUR COMMITTEE FELT THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THE PARTISAN COMMISSIONERS AND THE NONPARTISAN MAYOR, YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE YOU GOING WITH THAT, AND -- YOU KNOW, I DON'T FEEL STRONGLY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ABOUT IT. >>JAN PLATT: BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK IS INTERESTING IS YOU STILL -- AND YOU KNOW, YOU AND I HAVE DEBATED THIS SO MANY TIMES, BUT YOU'VE LEFT IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, WHICH, IN -- IN -- IN FACT, GIVES THE COMMISSIONERS THE ABILITY TO ORGANIZE THE -- THE ORGANIZATION OF THIS -- THIS MAYOR, AND THERE'S NO -- THERE'S NO NUMBER. I THINK YOU'VE MENTIONED A NUMBER, BUT THERE'S NO -- NO LIMITATION ABOUT -- ABOUT NUMBERS ABOUT HOW MANY -- YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT YOUR VICE MAYORS, BUT -- >> WE KEPT THE STATUTE AS IT IS TODAY. TODAY IT SAYS AS MANY AS NECESSARY TO OPERATE. IF THE LANGUAGE ISN'T UNDERLINED, WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT. IT'S THE CURRENT LANGUAGE. >>JAN PLATT: OKAY. BUT THERE'S NOT A LIMITATION IN THE CURRENT CHARTER. >> NO, THERE'S NOT. >>JAN PLATT: YOU KNOW, BACK IN THE '70s OR IT MAY HAVE BEEN IN THE '80s, THERE WAS A CITIZENS COMMITTEE THAT MET IN THE SUNSHINE, HAD PUBLIC MEETINGS, AND CAME UP WITH SOMETHING -- AN ADMINISTRATOR THAT WAS AN ELECTED PERSON, BUT THERE'S A GREAT VALUE IN HAVING PUBLIC OPEN MEETINGS WHERE YOU HASH OUT SOMETHING THIS IMPORTANT. >> AND DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD WE'VE TRIED FOR FIVE YEARS TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN? >>JAN PLATT: I NEVER SAW -- I NEVER SAW ANY MEETING ADVERTISED ABOUT CREATING THIS DOCUMENT. >> WELL, WE DON'T HAVE TO HOLD IT IN THE SUNSHINE. >>JAN PLATT: NO, I KNOW YOU DON'T, BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. >> ANYBODY COULD SHOW UP. >>JAN PLATT: BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO THINK THROUGH -- >> THIS COUNTY COMMISSION HAS NOT DONE IT. THEY REFUSED -- >>JAN PLATT: MAY I FINISH? >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >> I'M SORRY. YOU'RE RIGHT. >>JAN PLATT: I THOUGHT -- THAT'S ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE DOCUMENT IS ALL OF THE -- ALL OF THE REPERCUSSIONS AND THINGS OF YOUR LANGUAGE HAVE REALLY NOT BEEN OPEN TO THE SUNSHINE FOR PEOPLE TO REALLY TELL YOU OR SHARE WITH YOU HOW THAT WOULD REALLY OPERATE, AND YOUR GROUP HAS BEEN VERY HESITANT TO HEAR ANY -- ANY IMPROVEMENTS, AND YOUR VETO THING IS PROOF THAT IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT ANYWAY -- >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT THIS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -- AND SEVERAL OF THEM MADE IT CLEAR TO ME, AND I MET WITH A LOT OF THEM -- THAT THEY'RE NOT EVER -- THERE WILL NOT BE AN ELECTED COUNTY MAYOR IN THIS COUNTY, AND THERE COULD BE PUBLIC HEARINGS. YOU-ALL COULD HAVE HELD THEM STARTING WHEN YOU FORMED IN FEBRUARY AND YOU-ALL HAVEN'T. AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE -- IT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO COME FORWARD AND ASK YOU TO DO IT. YOU-ALL YOU KNOW -- I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW IT'S OUT THERE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: [MICROPHONE NOT ON] SORRY. I THINK THAT YOUR EFFORTS IN THIS REGARD HAVE BEEN EXTRAORDINARY, AND I COMMEND YOU FOR THEM BECAUSE IT'S OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT YOU BELIEVE IN STRONGLY, AND I THINK PUTTING IT OUT THERE IS -- YOU KNOW, IT'S A GREAT THING FOR A CITIZEN TO DO, TO TAKE THAT STEP, BUT I HAVE TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER PLATT SAID. YOU HAVE NOT CONVINCED ME, BUT I'M STILL OPEN TO BEING CONVINCED, AND I DON'T THINK THE PROCESS THAT YOU'VE PURSUED -- AND I SAY THIS WITH GREAT RESPECT BECAUSE I REALLY DO THINK THAT WHAT YOU'VE DONE IS -- IS EXTRAORDINARY, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST OF THE HIGHEST ORDER OF CITIZEN TO DO IT, SO I DON'T MEAN TO BE CRITICAL OF THE NOTION THAT WE NEED A COUNTY MAYOR, BUT I AM VERY CRITICAL OF YOUR PROCESS. AND I, LIKE COMMISSIONER PLATT, AM SITTING HERE READY TO BE CONVINCED THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I ALREADY HAVE MY DOUBTS THAT THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU ARE CIRCULATING FOR CITIZENS TO SIGN IS A PROPOSAL THAT I COULD SUPPORT. I THINK IT IS NOT ONE THAT I COULD SUPPORT BECAUSE I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE A PARTISAN POSITION COUPLED WITH VETO POWER OVER BUDGETARY MATTERS. THAT JUST SEEMS TO ME TO BE A RECIPE FOR DISASTER, BUT -- >> THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: BUT -- BUT THIS BOARD -- I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU VERY STRONGLY TOO WHEN YOU SAY IT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO COME HERE TO THIS BOARD AND CONVINCE THIS BOARD THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. I THINK IT'S YOURS, BUT IT'S ALSO EVERYONE ELSE THAT AGREES WITH YOU. IT'S NOT YOUR PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ANY MORE OR LESS THAN IT IS ANY CITIZEN WHO THINKS THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT THIS BOARD SHOULD TAKE UP BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY WITHOUT YOU SPENDING 15,000 OR 50,000 OR WHATEVER THE FIGURE WAS THAT YOUR COMMITTEE HAS SPENT OVER THE YEARS TO TRY TO PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT WITHOUT YOU, YOU KNOW, SPENDING A NICKEL, BUT I -- I THINK YOU'VE BEEN UNDER A MISAPPREHENSION -- AND I SAID THIS LAST TIME -- THAT THIS BOARD WAS SOMEHOW JUST NOTHING BUT A -- YOU KNOW, KIND OF A PATSY FOR VARIOUS COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED TO YOU THEIR PERSONAL OPINIONS AGAINST THE NEED FOR A COUNTY MAYOR. I WILL SAY TO YOU AGAIN THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT ME. >> I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I DO FOR A LIVING IS COUNT BY VOTES. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I DO FOR A LIVING EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE, AND I'M A GOOD VOTE COUNTER. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: ALL RIGHT. LET ME SAY TOO, THEN, THAT IF YOU REALLY THINK THAT COMING HERE AND WORKING THROUGH THIS BOARD IS NOT PRODUCTIVE -- AND YOU MAY BE RIGHT -- >> THE POINT I TRIED TO MAKE EARLIER -- AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. I DON'T THINK IT'S NOT PRODUCTIVE. I THINK IT'S AWESOME THAT YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM ME AND THAT YOU WANT TO -- BUT MY POINT WAS I -- AS A CITIZENS INITIATIVE, I HAD TO BE FINISHED WITH EVERYTHING BY FEBRUARY 1st, AND I HAVE SIX MONTHS TO FOCUS ON GETTING THOSE SIGNATURES. IT MAKES IT KIND OF HARD TO DO ANYTHING ELSE WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: IT DOES, BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF PLANNING, TO THE EXTENT THAT YOUR PETITION -- YOUR CURRENT PETITION IS NOT ONE THAT I COULD SUPPORT AND GO OUT INTO MY COMMUNITY AND CONVINCE MY CIRCLE OF INFLUENCE THAT IT'S ONE THAT THEY SHOULD SUPPORT, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE MORE PRODUCTIVE PRIOR TO THIS TO HAVE HAD MORE SUNSHINE, MORE MEETINGS, MORE PUBLIC -- MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE HEARD AND TO BRING TO YOUR COMMITTEE SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT WE COULD SUPPORT. >> WELL, WE DO HAVE WEB SITES THAT PEOPLE COULD HAVE COME FORWARD ON, AND WE HAVE HAD PEOPLE. BELIEVE ME, WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE. MAYBE WE DIDN'T DO IT RIGHT, BUT WE DID IT THE ONLY WAY WE KNEW HOW BECAUSE WE -- WE DO HOLD -- WE HELD A LOT OF HEARINGS -- NOT HEARINGS, WE HAD MEETINGS, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE CAME TO THOSE MEETINGS, AND WE DIDN'T CHANGE VERY MUCH OF THIS PETITION FROM THE PREVIOUS PETITION, AND WE DIDN'T CREATE ALL THIS LANGUAGE. LOOK AT IT IN THE STATUTE. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, LIKE I SAID, MY BIG POINT RIGHT NOW IS MY CONCERN THAT IT'S A PARTISAN POSITION COUPLED WITH THE VETO OVER BUDGETARY MATTERS, WHICH I AM ABSOLUTELY AGAINST AND I THINK IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER, BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN I THINK ALL THINGS ABOUT THE COUNTY MAYOR PROPOSAL IS WRONG. >> IT'S OUR OF HOW OUR LEGISLATURE WORKS AND IT WORKS AND IT'S HOW OUR CONGRESS WORKS. YOU HAVE VETO POWER, YOU HAVE -- OVER BUDGET AND IT'S PARTISAN. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IF IT WORKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT FOR 200 YEARS, WHY CAN'T HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY EVEN CONSIDER IT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: LET ME LET COMMISSIONER PLATT AND MR. ROBINSON. >>JAN PLATT: WELL, LET ME TELL YOU WHY THE COUNTY CAN'T CONSIDER IT. IT'S BECAUSE WE OPERATE UNDER THE FLORIDA STATE CONSTITUTION WHICH CREATES THE COUNTIES WITH CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, AND THERE ARE STATE LAWS THAT GIVE THOSE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS THE ABILITY THAT IF THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY'VE BEEN BUDGETED, THEY CAN GO UP TO TALLAHASSEE BEFORE THE GOVERNOR AND CABINET AND HAVE THEM OVERTURNED. WE'VE BEEN VERY LUCKY IN THIS COUNTY THAT THE SHERIFF HAS NEVER DONE THAT, BUT IF THE SHERIFF -- IN OUR STATE, IF THE SHERIFFS DON'T LIKE WHAT HAS BEEN BUDGETED TO THEM, THEY CAN GO TO THE GOVERNOR AND CABINET AND GET IT OVERTURNED, AND THE OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ALSO HAVE SPECIAL ABILITIES AS IT DEALS WITH THEIR BUDGET. >> I UNDERSTAND. >>JAN PLATT: WE'RE NOT LIKE THE LEGISLATURE, WE'RE NOT LIKE CONGRESS, AND WE'RE A CREATURE OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION, AND WHEN THE STATE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN, THE CURRENT ONE, WE WERE A RURAL STATE. NOW, IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THINGS, GO CHANGE THE STATE CONSTITUTION. I SAT AS A MEMBER OF THE CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION BACK IN 1976, AND WE TRIED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES, BUT EVEN IN 1976 -- THERE ARE MORE RURAL COUNTIES IN THIS STATE THAN THERE ARE METROPOLITAN ONES. THINK ABOUT IT. AND SO WE'RE NOT -- IN OTHER WORDS, YOUR ARGUMENT, UNFORTUNATELY OR FORTUNATELY, CANNOT OPERATE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR COUNTIES BECAUSE OF OUR STATE CONSTITUTION. AND IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE. >> AND I RESPECTFULLY TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU, AND I COVERED THAT 1976 CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION COMMISSION. >>JAN PLATT: WELL, I DIDN'T SEE YOU. YOU WERE PROBABLY THERE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. ROBINSON. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MS. MARY ANN STILES, YOU'RE FINALLY HERE IN FRONT OF US. IT'S OBVIOUS THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET THE PETITIONS UNLESS A MIRACLE HAPPENS. >> I DON'T GIVE UP. I BELIEVE IN MIRACLES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I KNOW. YOU SAID IF -- >> I BELIEVE IN MIRACLES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: -- IF YOU DON'T GET THEM, YOU'RE GOING TO STAY ON IT UNTIL YOU GET IT. I'M GOING TO GET THIS THING -- SEE, MY THING IS IS THAT I LISTENED TO MS. PLATT, I LISTENED TO MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE. I HEAR THEM ALL TALKING, BUT I'M TELLING YOU IN MY CIRCLES, PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE COUNTY MAYOR WHETHER YOU GET A PETITION OR NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE -- THEY HAVE THE PERCEPTION, WHETHER IT RIGHT OR WRONG, IS THAT IT'S DYSFUNCTIONAL. NOW, MY OPINION IS LET'S THROW EVERYBODY OUT AND GET SOME PEOPLE. SEE, IT'S NOT THE POSITION, MY THING IS PEOPLE MAKE THINGS HAPPEN, PEOPLE MAKE THINGS DYSFUNCTIONAL, NOT THE POSITION, NOT THE TITLE, IT'S THE PEOPLE IN THE POSITION, AND THAT'S HARD TO DO BECAUSE YOU'RE WORKING WITH PEOPLE FROM ALL DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS AND ALL DIFFERENT PARTIES AND NONPARTIES AND ALL THAT, BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU THIS. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT, AND I'M GOING TO ASK THIS BOARD HERE -- WE DON'T NEED TEN PEOPLE TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT UP LANGUAGE FOR A COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, AS YOU ELOQUENTLY EXPLAINED, BUT YOU CHOSE THE WORD "MAYOR," AND I THINK "MAYOR" IS MORE DECISIVE BECAUSE ONCE YOU SAID THAT, THE FIRST THING PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IS THE CITY OF TAMPA -- >> I KNOW. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: -- OR TEMPLE TERRACE OR WHOEVER ELSE HAS GOT A MAYOR. BUT I THINK THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD NOT ON -- NOT MAYBE GETTING ANYTHING ON 2012 -- 2010 OR EVEN 2012, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE WHAT OUR ATTORNEY -- OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY DRAFT SOMETHING UP FOR COUNTY MAYOR THAT MEETS ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT MS. PLATT SAID DON'T HAVE, EVERYTHING THAT MY BUDDY OVER HERE IS SAYING THEY DON'T LIKE, AND LET'S GET THIS OVER WITH AND SEE IF WE CAN GET OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT SOMETHING UP, AND I'M FOR THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT, AND EVENTUALLY YOU MIGHT GET LUCKY AND PULL IT OFF, BUT PEOPLE ARE STILL -- WANT THIS VETTED OUT. THERE HASN'T BEEN A WHOLE BUNCH OF -- 200 PEOPLE WALKING IN HERE SAYING, WE WANT A COUNTY MAYOR, WE WANT YOU TO DRAFT SOMETHING UP. WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT. I'VE HEARD THEM TALK ABOUT IT BECAUSE ONE OF THE REASONS IS THEY THINK IT'S ALREADY OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS PETITION DRIVE YOU ALREADY HAVE. >> TELL ME ABOUT IT. TELL ME ABOUT IT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: OKAY. I HEAR THAT. I HEAR THAT. THEY THINK IT WAS ALREADY OVER, SO I DON'T FEEL LIKE DOING IT AGAIN IS WHAT I'M HEARING. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SO I THINK THE -- >> YOU'RE TALKING TO THE SAME PEOPLE I'M TALKING TO. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: NOW, I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO GET THIS OVER WITH, AND I THINK IF WE GET EIGHT VOTES -- MAYBE ON A NIGHT THERE AIN'T 14 PEOPLE IN HERE, IT MIGHT TAKE SIX VOTES, BUT IF WE CAN GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT IT -- >>FRANK REDDICK: IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK, JOE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: IT WILL. IT WORKED BEFORE. IT WAS 7-6 TO EVEN GET WHERE WE'RE AT, SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS IS THAT JUST DRAFTING LANGUAGE IS NOT GETTING IT ON THE BALLOT, BUT GETTING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PUT LANGUAGE THAT MAKES SENSE WITH ALL OF THIS INFORMATION AND THEN PUTTING THAT OUT THERE IS GOING TO BE A LOT BETTER THAN WHAT YOU GOT, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, BUT I THINK WE DESERVE THE COUNTY -- THE VOTERS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO SPEND SOME MONEY AT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT UP WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO DO A COUNTY MAYOR SITUATION AND TILE THAT TOGETHER, AND THAT DON'T TAKE TEN VOTES, THAT JUST TAKE EIGHT, SO I'M ALL FOR STILL GETTING IT -- LANGUAGE DRAFTED BY OUR ATTORNEYS. THAT'S WHAT I'M PUSHING FOR. MAYBE I'LL CATCH THEM WHEN THEY AIN'T SHOWING UP IN AUGUST OR SOMETHING, BUT THE THING ABOUT IT IS I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DONE SO WE CAN GET THIS NIPPED IN THE BUD. LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING. THEY GOT -- ORANGE COUNTY GOT SUPPOSEDLY SOMEWHAT COUNTY MAYOR, SO DON'T SAY IT CAN'T BE DONE. YEAH, THEY'RE DIFFERENT. IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WE'D NEVER HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT IN AMERICA IF WE LISTENED TO EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT CAN'T BE DONE. OBAMA WOULD NOT BE THE PRESIDENT LISTENING TO IT CAN'T BE DONE. >> IT CAN BE DONE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THINGS CAN BE DONE. >> I AGREE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: AND THINGS CAN BE DONE PROFESSIONALLY, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THE MONEY, THE TIME, OR THE PROFESSIONAL LAWYER STAFF THAT THE COUNTY GOT, AND IF WE ASK OUR COUNTY TO DRAW SOMETHING UP FOR THE COUNTY MAYOR, I THINK THAT WE WILL GET WHAT WE NEED IN WRITING, AND I THINK WE CAN GET POSSIBLY TEN VOTES, BUT I'M PUSHING TO JUST GET EIGHT VOTES OR GET VOTES WHEN SOME PEOPLE AREN'T HERE, GET A MAJORITY VOTE TO GET THAT COUNTY ATTORNEY OVER THERE TO DRAFT SOMETHING UP FOR THIS COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WITH WHAT THEY FEEL WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO GO. >> I TELL YOU, WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD, SO HAVING YOUR INPUT OF A DRAFT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: CAN I RESPOND? >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: YEAH, I WANT TO RESPOND TO MR. ROBINSON'S SUGGESTION. FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK WE ARE ANYWHERE READY TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT UP A COUNTY MAYOR PROPOSAL, AND I'M NOT SO SURE THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS THE PROPER ENTITY TO DRAFT SUCH A PROPOSAL FOR THIS BOARD UNDER THE -- THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OF A DEGREE OF INDEPENDENCE WHEN IT'S ALREADY BEEN PUBLICLY DISCUSSED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. THAT PUTS THEM IN A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION, AND WE ARE NOT -- I DO NOT WANT TO ASK THEM TO TELL US WHAT THEY THINK IS APPROPRIATE WHEN THEIR BOSSES HAVE ALREADY SAID IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE AT ALL, RATHER IT SEEMS TO ME WHAT I WONDER IS GOING -- AND AGAIN, I JUST DON'T FEEL -- AND I'VE -- I'VE BEEN A VERY -- YOU KNOW, I PAT MYSELF ON THE BACK A LITTLE BIT, BUT I'VE BEEN AN ASTUTE STUDENT OF LOCAL POLITICS FOR A LONG TIME, AND I HAVE FOLLOWED YOUR EFFORTS, YOU KNOW, PRETTY DILIGENTLY, AND I SIT HERE AND I TELL YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART IN ALL CANDOR, I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU -- WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT -- WHY YOU THINK THIS IS -- THIS WOULD WORK BETTER THAN MR. ROBINSON'S SUGGESTION THAT WE FRANKLY NEED SOME DIFFERENT PEOPLE ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE THE PERSONALITIES THEMSELVES ARE WHAT'S CAUSING THE PROBLEM. I HAVE NO -- I'M NOT PERSUADED AND I HAVEN'T HEARD -- AND SO I WONDER THIS. FOR ME, ANYWAY, WHEN I ORGANIZED IN THE CITY OF TAMPA TO GET A RESOLUTION PASSED AGAINST THE PATRIOT ACT, WHAT WE DID WAS WE WENT OUT AND WE MET WITH EVERY CIVIC GROUP THAT WE COULD IMAGINE MEETING WITH. WE OPENED OUR MEETINGS TO THE PUBLIC, AND IN THE END WE WENT TO ALL THE NEWSPAPERS AND WE WENT TO THE EDITORIAL BOARDS AND WE ASKED PEOPLE TO SPONSOR A DEBATE, AND WE ASKED THE PUBLIC -- WE CAME TO THIS VERY ROOM, AND ON THE NIGHT THAT THERE WAS A CHAMPIONSHIP HOCKEY GAME IN A POURING RAINSTORM, THERE WASN'T AN EMPTY SEAT IN THIS BOARDROOM WHEN WE HAD AN ENGAGING DEBATE OF EXPERTS ON THE QUESTION OF THE PATRIOT ACT AND WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS A GOOD OR BAD THING. AND I WONDER WHY YOUR GROUP, RATHER THAN MEETING, TALKING TO -- >> WE HAVE DONE ALL THAT. DO YOU REALIZE THAT? WE'VE -- ASK JAN HOW MANY TIMES SHE'S DEBATED ME IN DIFFERENT GROUPS. ASK HER. >>JAN PLATT: I HAVEN'T AT ALL THIS TIME. I HAVEN'T AT ALL, THOUGH, THIS TIME. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: BUT NOW -- NOW -- YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY, TO THE EXTENT THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE APATHETIC ABOUT IT, THEY'RE NOT SIGNING YOUR PETITIONS -- >> THEY'RE NOT SIGNING THE PETITIONS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT BEFORE THEM. IT TAKES MONEY TO GO OUT AND GET IT DONE. IT'S NOT THAT THEY'RE NOT SIGNING PETITIONS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, YES -- >> YOU OUGHT TO SEE THE ONES COMING IN THE MAIL AFTER I APPEARED HERE LAST WEEK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WERE PEOPLE CLAMORING FOR THIS AS -- AS SOMETHING THAT THEY THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT TO CHANGE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, I WOULD IMAGINE THEY WOULD BE FILLING THIS ROOM AND COMING TO US SINCE WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN TOO, AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. >> AND I SAID LAST WEEK WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU COULD SAY THE SAME ABOUT THE VETO POWER. I MEAN, YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE IT OFF THE BALLOT, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN A HUE AND CRY OUT HERE TO TAKE IT OFF THE BALLOT. [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. ROBINSON, LET ME -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE ANYONE WHO HASN'T ASKED A QUESTION HAS AN OPPORTUNITY. I'VE GOT MR. WHITE TO ASK A QUESTION, AND I'D LIKE -- BEFORE I GO BACK TO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WHICH -- WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF TIME HERE. WE NEED TO MOVE ON PRETTY SOON. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IF THERE ARE ANY BOARD MEMBERS WHO HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK OR ASK A QUESTION IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A BOARD WHERE CERTAIN MEMBERS ARE JUST DOMINATING THE QUESTIONS, MONOPOLIZING THE QUESTIONS. MR. WHITE, AND ANYBODY ELSE, IF YOU HAVEN'T SPOKEN, I'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY. OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE ON. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I WANT TO RESPOND TO HER TALKING ABOUT WHAT SHE SAID. SHE -- I SAID SOMETHING ABOUT -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. ROBINSON, YOU HAD -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SHE SAID MY NAME. I HAVE TO RESPOND IF SHE RESPONDED. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >>MR. ROBINSON: OKAY. SHE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT I SAID, AND I WANT HAVE TO RESPOND TO IT, SO I THINK AFTER GERALD [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. I WILL LET YOU RESPOND DIRECTLY TO THAT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO LET YOU SPEAK FOR FIVE MINUTES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT, I WANT TO SPEAK TO HER. SHE SAID MY NAME AND THAT'S WHY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MR. WHITE, AND THEN I'LL LET YOU BRIEFLY, BUT WE REALLY HAVE TO MOVE ON. I CAN'T LET YOU MONOPOLIZE THE CONVERSATION HERE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>GERALD WHITE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MS. STILES, THANK YOU FOR COMING, AND I'M GLAD YOU'VE COME TO THE CENTER OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO MAKE YOUR CASE, TO PUBLICLY HAVE YOUR FULL SAY BEFORE THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND WHAT YOU BELIEVE RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT. I APPRECIATE THAT. THIS IS A SERIOUS DEBATE IN OUR COMMUNITY. LARGE COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA HAVE CHANGED, AND IT DOES REQUIRE THE LEADERS OF THIS COUNTY TO LIFT UP AN EYEBROW AND -- AND EXAMINE ARE WE BEHIND, ARE WE DOING SOMETHING WRONG, ARE THE OTHER COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA GOING TO SURPASS US BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T TAKEN THE STEP THAT THE OTHER COUNTIES HAVE? WE GOT AN INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL CONVENTION COMING HERE. THE WORLD WILL BE FOCUSED -- THE ENTIRE WORLD WILL BE FOCUSED ON HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IN A VERY SHORT TIME, AND SO THESE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS THAT THE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY LEADERS REALLY NEED TO EXAMINE AND TAKE YOUR EFFORT AND LOOK AT WHAT THIS CHARTER BOARD IS DOING AND COME TO SOME SORT OF DECISION ON WHAT WE WANT OUR COMMUNITY TO LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE. WE HAVE HAD A GREAT DEAL OF SUCCESS IN THE -- IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT CAN WE DO BETTER UNDER A DIFFERENT FORM OF GOVERNMENT? I HAVE ONE CONCERN ABOUT YOUR COMMENT RELATED TO DEPUTY MAYOR BEING AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN OR HISPANIC. THE VALUE OF HAVING THE LEADERS THAT ARE COMING UP IN OUR COMMUNITY -- AND I'LL USE MAYOR PAM IORIO AS AN EXAMPLE -- IS THAT THAT WAS THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, BUT WE MOVED AWAY FROM THAT, FROM HAVING THE BLACK DEPUTY OR THE HISPANIC DEPUTY, WHATEVER. WE JUST WANT THE BEST PERSON IN THE JOB. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY CALLING FOR -- I'M NOT CALLING FOR ANY KIND OF SPECIAL SEAT, SPECIAL SPOT FOR ANYBODY. I'M NOT CALLING FOR THAT, AND MAYOR PAM IORIO HAS PROVEN AND HAS SHOWN THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT IN ORDER TO HAVE GOOD GOVERNMENT. THE RECORD IS CLEAR OVER THERE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, AND SO IF THERE WAS A MODEL, THAT'S THE KIND OF MODEL I WANT TO LOOK AT MOVING FORWARD. I STILL BELIEVE THAT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY NEEDS SOME LEADERSHIP, BUT THERE ARE LEGITIMATE, SERIOUS CONCERNS, AND SO IF YOU WOULD SUPPORT ME IN TAKING THE FIRST STEP AND JOE FOR DRAFTING SOME LANGUAGE FOR AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIRMAN AND ALLOW THAT TO WORK FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, TWO OR THREE YEARS, FOR A TERM, AND SEE HOW IT GO. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A COUNTY THAT, COMMISSIONER PLATT, WAS OVER A HUNDRED YEARS WITH JUST FIVE COMMISSIONERS, AND THEN WE CHANGED FROM FIVE COMMISSIONERS TO, WHAT, SEVEN COMMISSIONERS UNDER A CHARTER, AND SO THERE HAS NOT BEEN A LOT OF CHANGE IN THE HISTORY OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT, AND NOW YOU'RE CALLING FOR THIS MASSIVE CHANGE, AND I'M TELLING YOU PEOPLE ARE JUST AFRAID, OUTRIGHT AFRAID, AND THERE'S SERIOUS -- AND I'LL CLOSE, MR. CHAIR -- SERIOUS ISSUES ABOUT HOW BLACK FOLKS ARE GOING TO BE TREATED UNDER A DIFFERENT FORM OF GOVERNMENT, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE AND TALK ABOUT CHANGE. JUST BEING THERE TO TALK ABOUT IT AND TO DISCUSS IT WILL MAKE A TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE WHEN CHANGE DO COME ABOUT, AND THAT'S I'M CALLING FOR, THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR, BUT I REALLY BELIEVE THE FIRST STEP IS TO USE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WE HAVE IN PLACE NOW AND TAKE THE FIRST STEP AND ALLOW THAT TO WORK FOR A LITTLE BIT AND LET EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY, NO MATTER WHAT CORNER OF THE COUNTY YOU COME FROM, SEE THAT AND SEE HOW IT WORKS. >> WHAT EXISTING? EXCUSE ME, WHAT EXISTING, THE CURRENT EXISTING BOARD YOU MEAN? >>GERALD WHITE: NO, ALLOW -- ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO CHANGE AND HAVE AN ELECTED -- ELECTED -- A CHAIRMAN THAT IS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, NOT BY THE SIX MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> WELL, I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT IF THIS BOARD DECIDED TO DO THAT, I WOULD NOT OPPOSE IT AND I WOULD BACK OFF, AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE AT LEAST IT MOVES US FORWARD. WE ARE ABSOLUTELY BEHIND OTHER COUNTIES. SURPASS -- SOMEBODY MIGHT SURPASS US? WE'RE BEHIND OTHER COUNTIES. I MEAN, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ANYBODY OUT THERE THAT I KNOW OF TRYING TO HELP SOMEBODY FIND JOBS, TRYING TO DO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. I MEAN, EVEN MY LAW FIRM WHO HAS DONE WELL IN ALL KIND OF ECONOMIES IS -- EVERYBODY'S HAVING TROUBLE, AND I DON'T SEE ANY LEADER OUT THERE SAYING, LET'S DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. SO IF YOU-ALL BELIEVE AS A MAJORITY THAT THAT WILL HELP, I'M NOT GOING TO STAND IN THE WAY, I'M NOT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE SOMETHING'S GOT TO CHANGE, AND IF YOU WANT TO GO TO MORE THAN SEVEN DISTRICTS -- WHICH YOU'VE GOT TO BE REAL CAREFUL ABOUT THAT BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL ELECTION LAWS -- I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I'LL HELP YOU IF YOU-ALL DECIDE TO DO THAT AND I DON'T GET MY SIGNATURES BY THE 31st. BUT I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, THANK YOU. AND I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT POLITICAL OFFICES HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY -- THIS IS JUST A PERSONAL THOUGHT I'VE HAD FOR A WHILE -- WE ARE TURNING AWAY QUALIFIED, HIGHLY SKILLED INDIVIDUALS THAT STILL HAVE LIFE AS IT RELATE TO PUBLIC SERVICE, POLITICAL OFFICE, SENATOR LEE, MAYOR PAM IORIO WILL BE COMING OUT OF OFFICE, COMMISSIONER SHARPE JUST LEFT UP OUT OF HERE. I MEAN, JIM NORMAN -- I MEAN JIM DAVIS. I MEAN, THE SOLID QUALITY PEOPLE THAT IS COMMITTED TO PUBLIC SERVICE, AND WE'RE SENDING ALL THIS TALENT BACK IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. WE SHOULD FIND A WAY TO USE -- USE THIS -- THIS -- THESE GREAT PEOPLE AND OTHERS THAT ARE COMING UP AND PUT THEM TO WORK IN AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR POST, AND SO, JOE, IF YOU WOULD SUPPORT ME WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT DRAFT, THAT WILL BE A START. I'LL SUPPORT YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ACTUALLY, BEFORE -- I AM GOING TO LET MR. ROBINSON RESPOND BRIEFLY TO MRS. REBACK'S STATEMENT, BUT IT'S GOT TO BE BRIEF, PLEASE, AND BEFORE THAT, IS THERE ANYONE WHO HASN'T ASKED A QUESTION, ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS? LIKE I SAID, I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY. IF THERE'S ANY BOARD MEMBERS WHO HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK MRS. STILES A QUESTION THAT WOULD LIKE. OKAY. MR. ROBINSON, PLEASE BE BRIEF. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: BREVITY IS THE SOUL OF WIT. I'VE READ SHAKESPEARE. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS: MY COLLEAGUE OVER HERE IS TELLING US THAT WE HAVE INCOMPETENT LEGAL STAFF, OKAY. THAT'S -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: [INAUDIBLE] >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: LET ME FINISH TALKING. I DIDN'T TALK WHEN YOU TALKED. THIS IS MY PERCEPTION. I LET YOU TALK. YOU'RE TELLING US THAT YOU DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DRAFT SOMETHING UP FOR A COUNTY MAYOR OR EVEN - - I WOULD EVEN ADD IF YOU HAD AN ELECTED CHAIR. I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. I DISAGREE WITH THAT. I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT COUNTY ATTORNEY STAFF, AND THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO, AND NOT ONLY THAT, WE JUST HIRED TWO ADDITIONAL CONFLICT ATTORNEYS IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT DRAFTING UP A COUNTY MAYOR. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HIRED TWO FOLKS -- TWO FIRMS OUT THERE AND PUT THEM ON THE BOOKS THAT IF WE HAVE A CONFLICT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF IT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE JUST DID, SO I DON'T BUY INTO THAT WE DON'T HAVE LEGAL STAFF, THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CAN'T COME UP WITH ANY LANGUAGE WE WANT ON ANYTHING DEALING WITH THE COUNTY, AND IF THEY AIN'T GOT IT, THEY CAN GO GET IT, SO I DON'T BUY THAT. AND TO SAY THAT THEY CAN'T DO THAT, THEN I'M GOING TO TAKE THE OPINION THAT ANY TIME WE ASK THEM TO DO SOMETHING, I'M GOING TO ASK DO THEY HAVE THE QUALIFICATIONS. I'M GOING TO SIT RIGHT HERE AND ASK YOU DO THEY HAVE THE QUALIFICATIONS BECAUSE NOW YOU DONE THROWED IT OUT THERE TALKING ABOUT THEY DON'T HAVE THE QUALIFICATIONS TO DRAFT UP SOME SIMPLE THINGS DEALING WITH THE COUNTY MAYOR. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I DIDN'T SAY THAT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: WELL, THAT'S THE IMPRESSION I GOT. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS I THINK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS GOOD. I THINK THEY CAN DRAFT ANYTHING UP THAT WE WANT. THEY ALREADY DRAFTED UP THE STUFF THAT WE GOT ON FOR TOMORROW, WHICH WAS CONTROVERSIAL, AND I THINK THEY CAN DO A COUNTY MAYOR IF THEY WERE ASKED TO, BUT I CAN SEE THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE RESOLVED TONIGHT, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE RESOLVED TOMORROW. GERALD, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT ISSUE DEALING WITH AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR. THAT WOULD CUT A LOT OF NONSENSE OUT. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING. TO DO NOTHING, YOU'RE GOING TO GET THE SAME RESULTS. THE ONLY OTHER WAY IS CHANGE THE PEOPLE. I'M THROUGH WITH IT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU, MR. ROBINSON. THANK YOU, MRS. STILES. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE ARE GOING TO -- THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A -- WE'LL TAKE A RECESS UNTIL 8:10. [RECESS TAKEN] >>MITCHELL THROWER: GOOD EVENING. WELCOME BACK TO THE JULY 12th CHARTER REVIEW BOARD. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY UPDATES. MARY HELEN FARRIS IS GOING TO UPDATE US ON SOME ITEMS. WELCOME, AND MRS. MINCEY, WELCOME. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: [INAUDIBLE] ON NUMBER 7 ON YOUR AGENDA. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE HOPEFULLY VERY QUICKLY. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA TONIGHT. ON THE DISCRIMINATION PROVISION, WE'VE SPOKEN TO OUR ADA. WE HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM THEM, AND THERE'S ALSO A LAWYER IN OUR OFFICE THAT'S AN EXPERT AT THIS TO GET SOME INFORMATION, AND THEN WE CAN BE BRINGING THAT LANGUAGE BACK. I THOUGHT THAT GIVEN THE THREE OR FIVE OR HOWEVER MANY RESOLUTIONS THAT WE HAVE NOW, IF WE JUST MAYBE ATTEND TO THOSE AND THEN IN AUGUST GET TO THIS IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE BOARD, BUT WE ARE WORKING ON IT. THE -- THE CHANGE TO THE VETO AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD ONLY STRIKE OUT THE WORD "BUDGET" HAS BEEN DONE AND I THINK DISTRIBUTED, SO THAT IS READY TO ALSO BE CONSIDERED AT TOMORROW'S PUBLIC HEARING. THE CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE FOR APPORTIONMENT, I PUT A DRAFT. I HOPE ALL OF YOU HAVE IT AT YOUR SEATS. I TRIED TO CAPTURE THE INTENT OF THE BOARD, WHICH BASICALLY SHOULD -- SHOULD THEY DESIRE -- THE BOARD DESIRE TO MAKE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO A MAP AT THAT MEETING, THEN THE CHARTER NOW ALLOWS FOR FURTHER ADVERTISEMENT AND A FOLLOWING MEETING TO CONSIDER THOSE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES. ONE THING I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE BOARD IS AN ISSUE OF TIMING. IF THIS DOES NOT GO ON THE 2010 BALLOT, THEN IT WOULD GO ON THE 2012 BALLOT AND WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL YOU DO THE NEXT REAPPORTIONMENT, SO THAT'S -- THAT'S -- I'M JUST SAYING THAT FOR A TIMING ISSUE IF YOU SEE BECAUSE WE WILL DO THE NEXT APPORTIONMENT IN 2011, AND IT WILL BE FOLLOWING THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IF IT'S NOT CHANGED BEFORE 2011, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE BOARD MINDFUL OF THAT -- THAT TIMING ISSUE, IF THEY CHOOSE TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS -- WITH THIS CHANGE. THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS ON THE CHANGE TO THE -- THE 5-4 SPLIT, IF WE -- IF WE MAKE A CHANGE TO THIS REAPPORTIONMENT LANGUAGE, JUST AS A NOTE, THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE THAT REFLECTIVE IN THIS ONE AS WELL, BUT I CAN MAKE SURE THAT THOSE COORDINATE. THEN I ALSO SAID THE LANGUAGE FOR THE 5-4 HAS BEEN DRAFTED AND IS READY TO BE DISCUSSED OR TO GO OUT FOR PUBLIC HEARING. IT JUST EFFECTUATES THE 5-4 SPLIT. THERE'S REALLY NOTHING IN THE DRAFT THAT HAS ANY KIND OF POLICY DECISIONS IN IT, IT'S SIMPLY TO TAKE THE BOARD FROM THE CURRENT TO THE 5-4 SPLIT AND JUST PROVIDES FOR THE NECESSARY JUST WORDING CHANGES IN THAT. THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE 60% REQUIRED VOTE CHANGES. I CHECKED WITH EDITH, AND THAT DISCUSSION WAS POSTED TO THE WEB SITE. THE BOARD ULTIMATELY DECIDED NOT TO, YOU KNOW, GO FORWARD WITH THAT, BUT THAT IS ON THE WEB SITE, AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY TROUBLE FINDING THAT, LET ME KNOW, AND EDITH AND I CAN MAKE SURE THAT YOU -- YOU GET THAT INFORMATION. AND ON THE STATUS OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE, I'M GOING TO HAVE DEBORA COME UP HERE -- SHE HAD DONE THAT RESEARCH -- UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD MEMBERS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. FARRIS? >>RALPH FISHER: YES. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. FISHER. >>RALPH FISHER: WHAT ABOUT THE CHANGE IN THE IPA LANGUAGE. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: THAT WAS DONE, AND I WILL MAKE SURE EDITH GETS THAT OUT. I DID THAT THE NEXT DAY THAT INCORPORATED YOUR WORDING CHANGES. I'VE GOT A COPY OF IT HERE. IF I COULD GO FIND A COPIER -- >>RALPH FISHER: CAN WE GET IT BY TOMORROW, EVERYBODY? >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: OH, ABSOLUTELY. THIS WAS DATED 6/30, BUT IT INCORPORATES YOUR CHANGES AS WELL. >>RALPH FISHER: AS LONG AS WE HAVE IT BY TOMORROW. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: OKAY. >>RALPH FISHER: THANK YOU. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: YES. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. ROBINSON, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: YES. JUST SORT OF FOLLOWING UP ON MR. FISHER'S STATEMENT THERE, I GOT AN E-MAIL SAYING ABOUT WE'RE NOT PUTTING OUR AMENDMENTS ON THE WEB SITE FOR THE PUBLIC, IF SOMEBODY IS COMPLAINING ABOUT INFORMATION NOT BEING AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON OUR AGENDA OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SO I HAVEN'T SEEN -- HAVE WE BEEN SENT -- >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: I SENT AN E-MAIL, BUT I DON'T -- DON'T PUT THINGS UP ON THE WEB SITE, BUT I -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I UNDERSTAND. BUT THE PUBLIC HAS HAD THE LANGUAGE FOR THE IPA CHANGE AND ALL -- >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: YES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: -- OF THAT ALREADY? I'M SORT OF A LITTLE LOST. WHAT IS THIS ONE? I HAD THIS ONE JUST POP UP ON ME HERE. WHO MADE THIS MOTION AND GOT THIS -- >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: COMMISSIONER, ON THE REDISTRICTING, ON THE REAPPORTIONMENT? >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: SHE -- THAT'S WHAT SHE TALKED ABOUT AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT -- TALKING ABOUT THE CHANGE AT THE LAST BOARD, WHEN THEY DID THE -- YEAH, AND ASKED ALSO FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA LANGUAGE THAT WAS IN THERE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SO WE WON'T BE HEARING THIS TOMORROW NIGHT, NOW, WILL WE? >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: NO, SIR. NO, SIR. I'M SORRY. I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLEAR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU, MRS. FARRIS. MS. MINCEY. >>DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY: GOOD EVENING. DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I WON'T BE BEFORE YOU LONG. AT THE LAST MEETING MS. PLATT ASKED OUR OFFICE TO FIND THE NEW SUPREME COURT CASE DEALING WITH BALLOT PETITIONS AND DISCLOSURE PETITION SIGNATURES. THE CASE NAME IS DOE V. REED. THE NUMBER -- THE CASE NUMBER FOR THAT IN CASE YOU-ALL ARE INTERESTED IS 09-559, AND BEFORE I GET STARTED ON THE BACKGROUND, I'LL BE HAPPY TO SHARE EITHER THE SYLLABUS OR THE SUMMARY OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE WITH YOU OR THE ENTIRE OPINION. JUST E-MAIL EDITH, AND I'LL BE SURE TO GET THAT OUT TO YOU IF YOU WISH. THE ENTIRE OPINION IS ABOUT 20-SOME-ODD PAGES, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- IF ANYBODY IS INTERESTED, JUST LET ME KNOW. BUT BRIEFLY, THIS CASE INVOLVED A CITIZEN INITIATIVE PETITION WHICH SOUGHT TO CHALLENGE A NEWLY ENACTED WASHING STATE LAW. THIS LAW EXPANDED THE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE- REGISTERED DOMESTIC PARTNERS, INCLUDING SAME SEX DOMESTIC PARTNERS. AFTER THE PETITION WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE VERIFICATION PROCESS, WHICH IS PART OF THE STATE -- WASHINGTON STATE LAW REQUIREMENT, AS IS FLORIDA, A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST WAS MADE FOR A COPY OF THE PETITION, AND THE PETITION CONTAINED THE SIGNERS' NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND THE COUNTY IN WHICH HE OR SHE WAS REGISTERED TO VOTE. THE PETITION SPONSOR AND CERTAIN SIGNERS FILED AN ACTION IN COURT TO STOP THE RELEASE OF THE PETITION INFORMATION, ALLEGING THAT THE STATE OF WASHINGTON'S PUBLIC RECORDS ACT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL SINCE IT ALLOWS FOR THE RELEASE OF THIS PETITION INFORMATION, THE NAMES, THE ADDRESSES, AND THE COUNTY IN WHICH THEY ARE REGISTERED TO VOTE. THEY WERE WORRIED MOSTLY ABOUT BEING HARASSED BECAUSE OF THEIR DESIRE TO REPEAL WASHINGTON'S GAY RIGHTS LAW. IN AN 8-1 DECISION -- CLARENCE THOMAS WAS THE -- THE LONE DISSENTER -- THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE STATE'S PUBLIC RECORDS ACT WHICH ALLOWS DISCLOSURE OF REFERENDUM AND PETITION INFORMATION IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL -- UNCONSTITUTIONAL, SO IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL. THE SUPREME COURT DECISION DOES NOT CHANGE FLORIDA'S CURRENT PUBLIC RECORDS LAW STATUS. CURRENTLY UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW THE PETITION INFORMATION IS RELEASABLE, WE WOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE IT, SO THIS CASE ACTUALLY DOES NOTHING FOR FLORIDA IN TERMS OF CHANGING WHAT IT CURRENTLY PROVIDES, SO -- >>JAN PLATT: CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >>MITCHELL THROWER: COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: I HAD -- IF YOU REMEMBER, I HAD ASKED -- MADE A MOTION THAT WE FIND OUT ABOUT THAT IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT TO CHANGE THE CHARTER, ONE OF THE AVENUES IS TO HAVE PETITIONS, AND RIGHT NOW THERE IS A PETITION DRIVE GOING ON, AND THE QUESTION IS IS ARE THE PEOPLE WHO SIGN THOSE PETITIONS -- IS IT PUBLIC RECORD SO THAT EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY CAN KNOW WHO IS SIGNING PETITIONS? AND THE ANSWER IS YES? >>DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY: YES, IT IS. >>JAN PLATT: AND I DON'T THINK PEOPLE REALLY REALIZE THAT BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE WHO SIGN PETITIONS THINK THAT IT'S VERY MUCH LIKE YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE, THAT IT'S SECRET -- THAT IT'S A SECRET BALLOT, BUT THOSE PETITIONS ARE NOT SECRET, THEY ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. >>DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY: ABSOLUTELY. >>JAN PLATT: SO ANYONE WHO HAS SIGNED THIS CURRENT PETITION, IN FACT, DRIVE, THAT'S PUBLIC RECORD? >>DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY: YES. THIS FLORIDA -- I'M SORRY, THIS SUPREME COURT CASE DID NOT CHANGE THAT. IF IT DID FIND THAT WASHINGTON STATE LAW PUBLIC RECORDS ACT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, FLORIDA'S PUBLIC RECORDS ACT WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM AS WELL, BUT IT DID NOT. OKAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU, MS. MINCEY. >>DEBORA CROMARTIE-MINCEY: THANK YOU. UH-HUH. >>MITCHELL THROWER: NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 21st. EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED THOSE. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND APPROVE? >>FRANK REDDICK: MOVE TO ADOPT. >> SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT UP IS OLD BUSINESS, AND I'M GOING TO LET EDITH -- MRS. STEWART IS GOING TO COME UP AND ADDRESS SOME OF THE ITEMS ON THIS THAT SHE'S PREPARED. >>EDITH STEWART: I WANTED TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE POLL THAT WE DID FOR THE AUGUST PUBLIC HEARINGS. FIRST OF ALL, MR. PRESEAU DID RESPOND TO ME. I SOMEHOW OVERLOOKED HIS RESPONSE, AND HE CAN ATTEND ALL OF THE DATES, AND MS. REBACK, ON AUGUST 12th I MISLABELED HER. SHE CANNOT ATTEND ON THE 12th. SO I WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT. ALSO I WANTED TO TELL YOU THE LIST OF CONFIRMED SPEAKERS. LATE TODAY I HAD CONFIRMATION FROM SHERIFF GEE THAT HE CAN APPEAR SEPTEMBER 13th. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: DIDN'T WE JUST HAVE SHERIFF GEE? >>MITCHELL THROWER: HE CAME BEFORE US, BUT HE -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THE LETTER HE WROTE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: HE GAVE THE LETTER, AND WE WANTED -- WITH THE DISCUSSION, WE INVITED HIM TO COME JUST IF THERE WAS ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THAT LETTER IN HIS PROPOSAL, JUST TO BE PRESENT. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: [MICROPHONE NOT ON] >>MITCHELL THROWER: SO IT'S NOT A FORMAL PRESENTATION, IT'S MORE THE FACT THAT HE'LL BE AVAILABLE IF WE HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING HIS LETTER. >> WE HEARD FROM MARILYN SMITH EARLIER NOW. [LAUGHTER] >>EDITH STEWART: AND THAT'S ALL I HAD FOR THE CORRECTIONS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. STEWART? >>GERALD WHITE: EDITH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- MR. CHAIR. EDITH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IN OUR COMMUNICATION PLAN THAT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WE ARE HAVING -- I KNOW THAT THEY'RE POSTED ON THE WEB SITE, BUT ARE YOU -- IS THE COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT PURCHASING AN AD IN THE METRO SECTIONS OF -- >>EDITH STEWART: WE ARE NOT. WE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS, AND THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT WE DO PAID ADVERTISING. >>GERALD WHITE: SO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS' PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE PUBLICIZED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEETINGS, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION, ARE NOT? >>EDITH STEWART: WE DID NOT. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT AT LEAST ONE PUBLICATION BE NOTICED IN THE NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION SUCH AS THE TAMPA TRIBUNE, ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, FLORIDA SENTINEL, La GACETA, BE PUBLISHED RELATED TO PUBLIC HEARINGS ABOUT CHANGES TO THEIR -- THE CITIZENS' CONSTITUTION. >>JAMES TOKLEY: SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: I WOULD AMEND IT SO THAT IT WOULD ALSO HAVE ALL OF OUR MEETINGS LISTED ON THERE TOO. JUST GO AHEAD AND DO IT IN ONE -- ONE BIG LUMP SUM BECAUSE OUR MEETINGS OUGHT TO BE PUBLICIZED TOO, AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE VERY FEW -- >>EDITH STEWART: WE HAVE DONE PAID ADVERTISEMENT FOR ALL OF THE MEETINGS? >>JAN PLATT: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>GERALD WHITE: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] BUT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS SHOULD BE IN THERE. THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW THAT WE'RE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING - - >>JAN PLATT: I AGREE. >>EDITH STEWART: MR. WHITE, THE TURNAROUND WAS SO QUICK, YOU-ALL SET THE DATE FOR JUNE 29th, AND THERE WAS NOT ADEQUATE TIME TO PLACE AN AD, AND THE ATTORNEY OPINED THERE WAS NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, I WISH THE CHAIR -- CHAIR, WERE YOU NOTIFIED OF THAT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: I -- WELL, I KNEW THE TURNAROUND TIME. I HAVE SEEN ARTICLES IN VARIOUS MEDIA PUBLICATIONS. TBO.COM, I BELIEVE, IS ONE OF THEM AND OTHERS WHERE THEY'VE MENTIONED THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE GOING TO OCCUR, BUT -- >>GERALD WHITE: THAT'S JUST A STANDARD PRACTICE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, SO I'D LIKE TO LET THAT MOTION STAND. IF WE SCHEDULE ANY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS, I'D LIKE THOSE TO BE PUBLISHED. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: [MICROPHONE NOT ON] >>EDITH STEWART: OH, ABSOLUTELY. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I'M SORRY. THE QUESTION WAS DID YOU DO A PRESS RELEASE? >>EDITH STEWART: OH, ABSOLUTELY. WE'VE DONE NUMEROUS PRESS RELEASES, AND IT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED. I'VE SPOKEN WITH REPORTERS. THEY ARE FOLLOWING THIS. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I KNOW ONE IS WATCHING THIS ON HTV. >>MITCHELL THROWER: AND THE ST. PETE TIMES HAD AN ARTICLE AND -- >>GERALD WHITE: I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE CITIZENS BEING NOTIFIED THAT A VOTE CAN TAKE PLACE THAT CAN PLACE SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT TO CHANGE THE CHARTER OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION? >>FRANK REDDICK: WELL, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE FUNDING. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH, MR. REDDICK. >>FRANK REDDICK: DO WE HAVE FUNDING SET ASIDE FOR THIS? >>RALPH FISHER: NO. >>EDITH STEWART: YES, I TOLD YOU THAT WE COULD COVER THE COSTS. >>FRANK REDDICK: OKAY. SO WE COULD COVER THE COSTS FOR THIS? >>EDITH STEWART: YES. >>FRANK REDDICK: ALL RIGHT. I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. FISHER AND MR. ROBINSON. >>RALPH FISHER: I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR MS. STEWART, BUT, I MEAN, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DID NOT BUDGET ANY MONEY FOR US TO SPEND. I MEAN, I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE HAVING OUR PARKING PLACES PAID FOR, SO I CERTAINLY AM OPPOSED TO US PUTTING ADS IN THE NEWSPAPER. I MEAN, APPARENTLY THIS STUFF IS ON THE INTERNET, ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO FOLLOW THIS. I MEAN, THERE ARE PEOPLE WITHOUT JOBS, PEOPLE WHO ARE STARVING -- NOT STARVING, BUT WE NEED -- WE DON'T NEED TO BE SPENDING THIS MONEY. WE CAN'T SPEND MONEY THAT IS NOT BUDGETED TO US BY THE BOARD. NOW, WE MAYBE COULD MAKE A MOTION -- A RESOLUTION -- EXCUSE ME -- TO ASK THE BOARD TO VOTE ON MONEY FOR US TO DO THIS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO SPEND MONEY THAT HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED TO US EXPLICITLY. >>EDITH STEWART: MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES, EDITH -- MRS. STEWART. >>EDITH STEWART: BOARD MEMBERS, I HAD BELIEVED THAT THIS MONEY HAD BEEN ERASED FROM THE BUDGET, BUT THERE IS $9,000 FOR YOU, AND I THINK I MENTIONED THAT WHEN WE HAD THE CONFLICT COUNSEL, BUT THERE IS $9,000 APPROPRIATED FOR THIS COMMITTEE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MR. ROBINSON. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I'M LOOKING AT THE -- DID THE NAACP -- DID THE LADY -- IS SHE ON THIS LIST TO SHOW UP YET? >>ROCHELLE REBACK: NOT YET. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: OKAY. SO SHE'S NOT ON HERE NOW. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: NO, BECAUSE -- >>GERALD WHITE: CALL THE QUESTION -- QUESTION FOR THE MOTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >> THAT'S A SECOND. OKAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH. CALL TO QUESTION. >>FRANK REDDICK: CAN I GET A POINT OF CLARIFICATION? THIS $9,000, WILL THIS DEDUCT FROM THE CONFLICT COUNSEL BUDGET FUNDS ALLOCATION? >>EDITH STEWART: YES. >>FRANK REDDICK: ALL RIGHT. SO THE MORE WE SPEND, THE LESS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOR THE TWO COUNSELS? >>EDITH STEWART: CORRECT. >>FRANK REDDICK: OKAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >>GINA GRIMES: [INAUDIBLE] DID THE MOTION COVER THE COSTS FOR THE ADVERTISING FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS? >> CAN YOU USE YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE. >>GINA GRIMES: I'M SORRY. DID THE MOTION COVER THE COSTS FOR ADVERTISING FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS ONLY OR -- >>GERALD WHITE: ANY -- ANY -- THE FINAL -- ESPECIALLY -- I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PUBLIC HEARING WHEN THE VOTE TAKE PLACE -- >> WHICH IS TOMORROW; RIGHT? >>GERALD WHITE: IT'S TOO LATE FOR TOMORROW. >>MITCHELL THROWER: HE SAID FOR FUTURE ONES, FUTURE PUBLIC HEARINGS. >>GINA GRIMES: OKAY. I GOT IT. >>GERALD WHITE: WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING THAT. THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUT A NOTICE IN THE PAPER WHEN THEY'RE PUTTING A LINE ACROSS THE ROAD. I MEAN, I READ THEM ALL THE TIME. YOU DO A SIDEWALK, YOU PUT A NOTICE IN THE PAPER; YOU DO A LIGHT, YOU PUT A NOTICE IN THE PAPERS, AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNTY AND -- >>EDITH STEWART: WELL, WE'RE HOLDING -- THE BOARD IS HOLDING A SERIES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON WEDNESDAY AT THEIR REGULAR BOARD MEETING. MARY HELEN. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THOSE WERE ADVERTISED IN THE PRESS. NO, THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT THE BOARD IS HOLDING ON WEDNESDAY. >>GERALD WHITE: THEY WILL PUBLISH THOSE UNDER A LEGAL REQUIREMENT WHEN -- WHEN IT'S DUE. THEY HAVE A LEGAL REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW TO PUBLISH A NOTICE WHEN THEY HAVE THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: UNDER THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF THE BOARD'S AGENDA, IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF PUBLIC HEARING, BUT MOST OF THOSE DO HAVE A SEPARATE -- BECAUSE IT'S AN ORDINANCE OR IT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT MAY HAVE A SEPARATE LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER. >>GERALD WHITE: THAT'S CORRECT, SO -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: AS CHAIR, I AGREE WITH MR. WHITE IN TERMS OF IT SHOULD BE ADVERTISED. I MEAN, THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION, SO -- >>JOE AMON: CALL THE QUESTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: CALL TO QUESTION. ALL IN FAVOR OF CALL TO QUESTION PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO BASICALLY -- I'LL LET MR. WHITE RESTATE HIS MOTION JUST TO BE SURE. >>GERALD WHITE: ANY FUTURE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT COULD POSSIBLY TRIGGER A BALLOT QUESTION, THEY NEED TO BE ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED. OKAY. TWO INDIVIDUALS OPPOSED, MR. FISHER AND MR. PRESEAU. MOTION PASSES. OKAY. >>GERALD WHITE: I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: THE -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A COPY OF THE SIGNED -- ONCE THE CLERK SIGN THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED THAT THIS BOARD VOTED OUT AND PASSED TO -- RELATED TO BONDING ISSUES. CAN YOU MAKE SURE WE GET A COPY OF THAT ONCE ALL THE SIGNING DOCUMENTS HAVE TAKEN PLACE? AND I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE -- IT JUST DON'T GO ON A SHELF SOMEWHERE THAT THE CHAIR HAVE A TIME CERTAIN OR THE VICE CHAIR HAVE A TIME CERTAIN TO PRESENT THE RESOLUTION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MRS. STEWART? AND I'LL DEAL WITH THAT. I'LL DEAL WITH THAT. >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS UNDER OLD BUSINESS? OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS. >>JAN PLATT: WELL, WAIT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>JAN PLATT: WE'VE GOT THAT LETTER FROM THE CLERK REGARDING THE IPA, AND I WOULD ASK THAT THAT BE PUT ON OUR AGENDA FOR TOMORROW BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT ISSUE. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. GOOD POINT. >>JAN PLATT: SO THAT COULD JUST BE SHIFTED OVER THERE AND MADE AVAILABLE. >>GERALD WHITE: ALSO, MR. CHAIRMAN -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>GERALD WHITE: -- UNDER OLD BUSINESS RELATED TO THE IPA, I PULLED A COPY OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE IPA AND THE PREVIOUS BUDGETS FOR THE IPA POSITION OFF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WEB SITE FOR YOUR REVIEW. JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT ON THIS POST. THAT WAS PASSED OUT ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE POLICY RELATED TO THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE WORKING WITH THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. I THOUGHT THAT WAS IMPORTANT THAT YOU-ALL KNOW THAT QUITE A BIT OF MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT ON THIS POST ALREADY. AND THAT DIDN'T GO ALL THE WAY BACK, MR. CHAIR, TO WHEN THE POSITION FIRST WAS AUTHORIZED THROUGH AN ORDINANCE. THAT'S JUST THE FURTHEST I COULD FIND IN THE RECORD. I KNOW I HAD ASKED ERIC JOHNSON TO GIVE ME THOSE DOCUMENTS, BUT THEY'RE ON THE INTERNET. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. WHITE. MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: ON OLD BUSINESS, WE ALSO HAVE AN E-MAIL FROM TERRY FLOTT FROM U-CAN, AND WE HAVE THE LIST OF ISSUES RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC DURING PUBLIC COMMENT THROUGH THE JUNE 21st MEETING. I'M WONDERING, ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CREATE ONE COMPREHENSIVE LIST AND PUT IT UP ON THE WEB SITE OF ALL THESE ISSUES? WHAT -- WHAT -- HOW ARE WE GOING TO PROCEED TO WORK THROUGH THESE ISSUES I GUESS I'M ASKING, AND IN ADDITION, HOW IS THE PUBLIC GOING TO KNOW HOW AND WHEN WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED TO WORK THROUGH THESE ISSUES? >>MITCHELL THROWER: I SPOKE WITH EDITH. THE LIST OF ISSUES FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, EDITH WAS GOING TO CONTINUE TO UPDATE THAT GOING FORWARD, AND MY THOUGHT WAS WE COULD KEEP THAT -- THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENT DURING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. THE ISSUES THAT ARE COMING TO US THROUGH E-MAILS ARE POSTED IN THEIR ENTIRETY ON THE WEB SITE SO THAT SOMEBODY CAN REVIEW ANY -- ANY E-MAILS IN THEIR ENTIRETY THAT HAVE COME BEFORE US, AND THOSE ARE ALSO ON THE WEB SITE, SO THAT -- THAT WAS MY THOUGHT ON THAT, THAT WE'D HAVE A RUNNING LIST OF PUBLIC COMMENT ISSUES AND THE E-MAILS IN THEIR ENTIRETY WOULD BE AVAILABLE. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: ON THE WEB SITE? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY THERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE ISSUES LIST IS THERE, BUT WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT IS THERE, AND EDITH SAID SHE WOULD KEEP THAT -- MAKE SURE THAT'S KEPT UP-TO-DATE. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: MY QUESTION IS HOW -- AND THIS IS A PROCESS QUESTION. HOW IS IT THAT WE ARE -- HOW ARE WE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND ADDRESS THESE ISSUES? >>MITCHELL THROWER: WELL, AS -- AS CHAIR, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE YOU'D LIKE TO BE BROUGHT UP ON THE AGENDA, WE CAN DISCUSS IT DURING THE BOARD MEETING OR YOU CAN LET ME KNOW. I THINK OUR RULES OF ORDER ARE BASICALLY A WEEK IN ADVANCE GIVE ME THAT INFORMATION, AND IF I BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE BASED ON THE CONTENT AND WHAT, YOU KNOW -- AND I PRETTY MUCH -- AS YOU CAN SEE, I TEND TO LEAD TOWARDS LETTING PEOPLE TALK THAN CUTTING THEM OFF. AT TIMES I DO, I HAVE TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT I TEND TO BE MORE -- IF ANY WEAKNESS I HAVE, IT'S PROBABLY LETTING PEOPLE TALK TOO MUCH, BUT I PERSONALLY BELIEVE IT'S BETTER TO LET YOU -- I'D RATHER HEAR FROM EVERYONE AND THEN MAKE A DECISION RATHER THAN HEAR ONE SIDE AND MAKE A DECISION, SO THAT'S -- IF YOU WANT AN ISSUE PUT ON THE AGENDA, GET IT TO ME. IN TERMS OF OUR RUNNING LIST FROM THE PUBLIC, YOU ASKED HOW WE'RE GOING TO APPROACH EACH ONE. WE'RE A BOARD. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO BRING UP AN ISSUE, BRING IT UP AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT AS A BOARD. THAT'S HOW I THOUGHT. SOME PEOPLE HAVE CRITICIZED OUR PROCESS AND EVERYTHING. WE'RE A BOARD. WE'VE GOT 14 MEMBERS. WE'RE BRINGING ISSUES UP FOR DISCUSSION. WE'RE LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC. I THINK WE'RE DOING A GOOD JOB. OUR KEY IS TO HEAR FROM AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. WE LOVE TO SEE THE PUBLIC OUT THERE. IN TERMS -- YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE WAY WE'RE APPROACHING IT, THAT'S MY THOUGHT ON IT, BUT I'M OPEN TO OTHER OPINIONS, SO IF ANYONE HAS A SUGGESTION, I'M WILLING TO HEAR FROM YOU. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL -- AND I AGREE -- I AGREE. I THINK THE PROCESS GOING WELL. I MEAN, WE'VE HAD SOME PROMINENT SPEAKERS HERE WHO SAID DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING, AND WE HAVE GONE BEYOND THAT. WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING PUBLIC HEARINGS ON CONSIDERING SOME CHANGE, SO I THINK WE'RE ON COURSE. I THINK WE'RE DOING A THOROUGH JOB. WE HAD MARY ANN STILES TONIGHT TO TALK TO THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ABOUT THE COUNTY MAYOR. I MEAN, WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS HERE, AND SO IT'S A SLOW PROCESS, BUT IT -- BUT IT'S PROGRESS RELATED TO THE STUDY, AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE STUDY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: BUT LIKE I SAID, IF ANYONE HAS ANY SUGGESTIONS, I'M -- I'M OPEN TO ANY SUGGESTIONS YOU HAVE AS A BOARD, YOU KNOW. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE AS OPEN AND -- AND I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THROUGH THE MEETINGS SOMEWHAT QUICKER AT TIMES, SO -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, IN TERMS OF PROCESS THEN, I WOULD JUST -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION OR JUST SAY THIS AS A SUGGESTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU CAN JUST SAY IT AS A SUGGESTION. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: YEAH. BUT I THINK NOW THAT WE HAVE THIS LIST AND WE ALSO HAVE THE LIST FROM U-CAN, AND -- I WOULD JUST ASK IF EVERYBODY REVIEW THESE TWO DOCUMENTS, AND MAYBE AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING WE COULD HAVE A SENSE OF PRIORITIZING WHERE -- WHERE WE WANT TO GO FROM HERE BECAUSE THE TWO BIG ISSUES THAT WE KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO ADDRESS, THE IPA AND THE COUNTY MAYOR ISSUE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THOSE, AND WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER VERY MEATY AND WEIGHTY ISSUES IN THESE SUGGESTIONS, SO -- SO NOT TO WASTE TIME, MAYBE EVERYBODY COULD LOOK AT THESE TWO DOCUMENTS AND COME BACK AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING WITH SOME SENSE OF PRIORITY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: AND I AGREE WITH YOU, AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE ATTENTION OF THE ISSUE THAT -- A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO IN TERMS OF IF YOU HAD TEN ISSUES OR A NUMBER OF ISSUES, E-MAIL THEM, AND -- THAT WAS KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT BECAUSE I THOUGHT AS CHAIR I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO SCHEDULE ALL THE SPEAKERS. YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY WHO WE'VE VOTED TO INVITE, WE'VE EITHER INVITED. WE'RE WAITING ON SOME INDIVIDUALS TO REPLY TO US, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THE ISSUES LIST IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE IF THERE'S AN ISSUE YOU SEE ON THAT LIST, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO KNOW AND MAKE SURE THAT WE AT LEAST SCHEDULE -- WE COULD SCHEDULE IT ON OUR AGENDA IF WE HEAR FROM ENOUGH PEOPLE AND EVERYTHING. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: RIGHT. ESPECIALLY IF OUR AGENDAS ARE GOING TO BE PUBLICIZED IN THE NEWSPAPER, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING, I THINK WE NEED TO LIKE BE STAGGERED ONE MEETING BEHIND, SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IN TERMS OF PROCESS, IF WE CAME TO OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING AND SELECTED, I DON'T KNOW, FOUR OR FIVE ISSUES -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: -- TO PRIORITIZE FOR THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING, THEN THEY COULD BE INCLUDED IN OUR PUBLIC AGENDA. >>MITCHELL THROWER: LET ME CLARIFY REAL QUICK. YOU SAID IN TERMS OF PUBLICIZE, THEY DO A PRESS RELEASE AND EVERYTHING, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO MR. WHITE'S MOTION. MR. WHITE'S MOTION WAS ONLY FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: OKAY. I MEAN -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: SO WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR ADVERTISEMENTS FOR EACH BOARD -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: OKAY. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE AGENDA ITSELF IS PUBLICIZED -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: -- HOWEVER WE PUBLICIZE THE AGENDA, I JUST WANT TO TRY TO INCLUDE AS MUCH SPECIFICITY IN THE TOPICS THAT WE'RE GOING -- SO INSTEAD OF JUST NEW BUSINESS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE DECIDE ON OUR NEXT MEETING THAT THE NEW BUSINESS WILL INCLUDE SOME OF THESE SPECIFIC ITEMS ON THESE LISTS, I THINK IT SHOULD SAY WHAT THEY ARE SO THAT IF SOMEBODY HAS AN INTEREST -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEP. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: -- IN THAT PARTICULAR ITEM, THEY KNOW TO COME AT THE FOLLOWING MEETING, SO I JUST WANT TO ASK AS WE CREATE OUR AGENDAS THAT THE NEW BUSINESS MATTERS ARE AS SPECIFIC AS POSSIBLE, AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS BOARD WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT MS. STEWART HAS THE INFORMATION SHE NEEDS ABOUT OUR PRIORITIES SUFFICIENTLY IN ADVANCE TO ADD THEM AND TO UPDATE THEM ON THAT AGENDA. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH. THE ONLY THING I DO WANT TO -- NEW BUSINESS IS ONE ITEM THAT I DON'T WANT TO -- IF SOMEBODY HAS AN IDEA THAT THEY - - YOU KNOW, COMES UP TO THEM OR THEY THINK ABOUT DURING THE BOARD MEETING, I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO SHY AWAY. MR. TOKLEY HAD A SUGGESTION CONCERNING THE CHARTER REVIEW CONCERNING DISCRIMINATION, AND HE BROUGHT IT UP, AND I THINK AS A BOARD WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO FEEL COMFORTABLE DISCUSSING NEW BUSINESS; HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T VOTE ON IT WHEN IT'S NEW BUSINESS, BUT I DO SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING, AND I AGREE WITH YOU. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO PUBLICIZE THE INFORMATION SO WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF WHAT THE ISSUES ARE AND THEY CAN COME PREPARED IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY FOR NEW BUSINESS, I DON'T WANT THE BOARD MEMBERS TO THINK THAT THEY CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF NEW BUSINESS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, MAYBE IT'S OLD BUSINESS THEN. IF WE TAKE IT UP IN WEEK ONE AND SAY NEXT MEETING WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT "X," THEN IT WILL BE ON THERE AS OLD BUSINESS. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A SENSE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING WHEN. >>MITCHELL THROWER: AND I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY THERE. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT. MR. ROBINSON, AND THEN I'D ENCOURAGE US, IF WE CAN TRY TO MOVE ON. MR. ROBINSON. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I AGREE WITH YOU, MS. REBACK. I MEAN, YOU WANT TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE DAY MEETING ON FRIDAY, THE 30th, TO PRIORITIZE THE LISTS WE'VE GOT OR TALK ABOUT PRIORITIZING THEM, WE CAN GET IT ON THE AGENDA. [INAUDIBLE] DOUG BELDEN RIGHT NOW. WE GOT A LIST HERE. BY THAT TIME WE CAN -- THAT WAY IT'LL BE ON THE AGENDA AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT NEW OR OLD BUSINESS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: OKAY. DO I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION? >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I'LL SECOND IT. [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>ROCHELLE REBACK: OKAY. THEN I MOVE THAT WE TAKE UP THE ISSUES LIST AND WE -- EVERYBODY REVIEW IT AND WE COME PREPARED TO PRIORITIZE IT AND ASSIGN SOME DATES TO THESE ISSUES. >>GERALD WHITE: WELL, I'M READY TO DISCUSS AN ITEM TONIGHT ON THIS LIST RELATED TO NEW BUSINESS, SO -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: WELL, IT'S A LITTLE LATE. >>GERALD WHITE: -- I CAME TO THIS MEETING READY. >> [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: ACTUALLY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE BOARD IS PREPARED AND READY AND RESTED FOR TOMORROW'S PUBLIC HEARING, SO -- >>GERALD WHITE: I JUST -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: HOPEFULLY WE HAVE A LONG ONE IF WE GET A LOT OF THE PUBLIC OUT HERE, WHICH IS OUR -- WE WOULD HOPE. >>GERALD WHITE: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] ONE ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN REQUESTED TO BE LOOKED AT, AND SO WHEN WE GET TO NEW BUSINESS, I'M GOING TO MENTION ONE ISSUE ON THIS LIST, SO -- UNDER NEW BUSINESS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: SO WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE VOTE ON THAT IN? >>RALPH FISHER: CLARIFY THE MOTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. REBACK. I'LL LET HER STATE THE MOTION -- OKAY. I'M GOING TO LET YOU STATE IT. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I WANTED AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR THIS BOARD HAVE -- TO COME PREPARED HAVING EXAMINED THE LIST OF ISSUES ON THE ISSUES RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, THE ISSUE AS CONTAINED IN THE E-MAIL OF MONDAY, JULY 12th, FROM TERRY FLOTT OF U-CAN, AND I SUPPOSE I NEED TO DIRECT OUR ATTENTION TO THE WEB SITE FOR THE -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: ALL THE E-MAILS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: -- FOR THE ISSUES THAT CAME IN VIA E- MAIL AND TO BE PREPARED TO DISCUSS A LIST OF PRIORITIES FROM AMONG THESE ISSUES OR OTHERS AND ASSIGN SOME DATES TO -- TO THE VARIOUS TOPICS. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SECOND. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: SO THAT WE'LL DISCUSS THEM THEN. >>RALPH FISHER: THANK YOU. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. COMMISSIONER PLATT. >>JAN PLATT: CLARIFICATION. DID THAT INCLUDE THIS LIST THAT WE WERE JUST -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I JUST SAID THAT. >>JAN PLATT: YES. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: YES, ALL THE ISSUES FROM ALL SOURCES, AND IF YOU TALK TO YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW AND YOU COME UP WITH ANOTHER ONE, BRING THAT TOO. >>JAN PLATT: WELL, BUT -- >>GINA GRIMES: BUT THIS SHOULD BE THE RUNNING LIST. >>JAN PLATT: BUT -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: WELL, THAT'S THE RUNNING LIST -- >>GINA GRIMES: THAT'S THE RUNNING LIST. YOU CAN ADD TO IT OR -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: BUT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE E-MAIL ISSUES, APPARENTLY, AND I HAD ASKED CAN WE HAVE ONE COMPREHENSIVE LIST, BUT APPARENTLY NOT, SO -- >>JAN PLATT: DO WE HAVE TO RUMMAGE THROUGH ALL OF OUR PAPERS TO COME UP WITH ALL THESE THINGS, OR IS THE STAFF GOING TO COME AND -- >> NO. >>JAN PLATT: -- COMPILE THEM ALL FOR US THAT DAY? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>JAN PLATT: NO, BUT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT MORE STUFF. >> I KNOW. >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE HAVE -- THIS IS THE RUNNING LIST FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENT. THE E-MAILS WOULD BE ANOTHER -- AND THOSE ARE ALL AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE. >>GINA GRIMES: SOME OF THOSE IDENTIFIED BY U-CAN -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>GINA GRIMES: EXACTLY. -- ARE ALREADY ON THIS LIST. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>GINA GRIMES: SOME OF THESE EVEN -- THE ISSUES ON THIS LIST, SOME OF THESE ARE DUPLICATIONS OF THE SAME ISSUE. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: BUT I JUST DON'T WANT -- RIGHT. I JUST DON'T WANT TO EXCLUDE ANY SOURCE, SO WHATEVER YOU'RE COMFORTABLE EXAMINING, EXAMINE THAT, BUT I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO EXCLUDE ANY SOURCE. IT WOULD BE GREAT TO FEEL SECURE THAT THIS LIST IS COMPREHENSIVE, THE ONE THAT'S TITLED "CHARTER ISSUES FROM CITIZEN TESTIMONY," BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS. >>GINA GRIMES: I WOULD JUST RATHER TALK ABOUT -- LET'S JUST IDENTIFY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT A PROCESS THAT -- WHERE WE'RE GOING TO AGREE UPON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT. LET'S JUST PUT THEM ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING ON JULY 30th. LET'S JUST DO IT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN AMENDED MOTION TO ME, MR. CHAIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: AMENDED MOTION. >>GINA GRIMES: ALL THESE ISSUES WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH, SO LET'S GET IT DONE NOW, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S NOTHING ON THE JULY 30th AGENDA. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: DOUG BELDEN. >>GINA GRIMES: WELL, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO HAVE A MEETING WHERE WE'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO BE PRODUCTIVE. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: IT'S IN THE DAYTIME TOO. >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS AMENDED MOTION BEFORE WE VOTE? OKAY. >>FRANK REDDICK: HE WANTS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: POINT OF CLARIFICATION. MRS. GRIMES, PLEASE STATE YOUR MOTION BASED -- >>GINA GRIMES: MY GOAL IS TO AT THE END OF EVERY MEETING IDENTIFY THE ISSUES WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS AT THE NEXT MEETING, THAT SIMPLE. WE CAN USE THIS RUNNING LIST. WE JUST AGREE UPON IT BEFORE WE LEAVE, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT AT THE NEXT MEETING. WE CAN DO THAT STARTING TONIGHT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: FOR CLARIFICATION, ARE YOU OMITTING -- CURRENTLY OUR RULES OF ORDER, IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO SUGGEST SOMETHING TO ME, THEY CAN SUGGEST IT TO ME. ARE YOU OMITTING THAT? >>GINA GRIMES: NO. I MEAN, YOU CAN STILL DO THAT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ADD ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE THE BOARD? >>GINA GRIMES: RIGHT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >>FRANK REDDICK: MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO PUT A -- UNDER NEW BUSINESS PUT AN ITEM UP FOR DISCUSSION PERTAINING TO THE SECTION 8.02 THAT REFERENCE THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, AND IT'S IN REFERENCE TO THE APPOINTMENT AND THE TERMS THEY SERVE. AND I KNOW THEY -- RIGHT NOW THE CHARTER READS THAT MEMBERS CAN SERVE ONE YEAR AT THE TERM, AND I WANT TO LOOK AT AMENDING THAT SO IT WON'T BE CONSECUTIVE TERMS. I DON'T FEEL THAT YOU SERVE EVERY FIVE YEARS AND YOU CAN BE APPOINTED CONSECUTIVELY OVER AND OVER. I THINK YOU SHOULD SERVE THE FIVE -- THAT ONE YEAR, AND THEN THE NEXT FIVE YEAR, OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE, AND BASED ON THOSE WHO [INAUDIBLE] BUT I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE CONSECUTIVE. I WANT THAT TO BE AN ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION RIGHT THERE OR ARE YOU JUST -- >>FRANK REDDICK: I'M JUST REQUESTING -- >>GINA GRIMES: ADDING IT TO THE LIST. >>MITCHELL THROWER: FOR NEW BUSINESS. >>FRANK REDDICK: FOR NEW BUSINESS TO BE BROUGHT FOR DISCUSSION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ISSUES? >>GERALD WHITE: UNDER NEW BUSINESS? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEP. >>GERALD WHITE: YES, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE AN ISSUE. SEVERAL CITIZENS HAVE COME BEFORE THIS BOARD AND -- AND REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONERS HAVE A TERM LIMIT, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE CITIZENS ARE FOR TERM LIMITS TODAY OR AGAINST TERM LIMITS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SOME COMMISSIONERS SERVE OUT A TOTAL OF AN EIGHT-YEAR TERM AND THEN GET ELECTED TO A WHOLE NEW SERIES OF TERMS, AND SO I WOULD LIKE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO REALLY EXPLAIN HOW SOME COMMISSIONERS CAN SERVE EIGHT YEARS, THEN SOME CAN SERVE TEN YEARS, AND THEN -- I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS TERM -- FOUR-YEAR TERM PLUS A TWO-YEAR TERM, ALL THAT IS WORKING, AND IS THERE A WAY UNDER THE LAW THAT YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY LIMIT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I THINK THE PUBLIC HAS REQUESTED INFORMATION ON THAT, AND I NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO -- I WOULD LIKE TO SCHEDULE THAT AS AN IMMEDIATE DISCUSSION BECAUSE I THINK OUTSIDE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED, THAT FALLS INTO -- RIGHT IN LINE TO ONE OF THE TOP ISSUES THE CITIZENS HAS REQUESTED THIS BOARD TAKE UP. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: MR. CHAIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT WE GOT PEOPLE SITTING ON HERE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE 24 YEARS. >>JAN PLATT: AND YOU KNOW HOW THAT HAPPENED? I CAN TELL YOU HOW THAT HAPPENED, IS BECAUSE I WAS ON THE BOARD BEFORE WE HAD TERM LIMITS. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I KNOW. >>JAN PLATT: THAT'S HOW IT HAPPENED. AND THEN I WAS TERMED OUT, AND THEN I STAYED OUT FOR TWO YEARS. THAT'S HOW TERM LIMITS ARE SUPPOSED TO OPERATE. AND THEN TWO YEARS LATER I RAN FOR EIGHT YEARS. SO THAT'S HOW THAT WORKED. I DIDN'T SWITCH AROUND LIKE THEY'RE DOING NOW. >>GERALD WHITE: SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT A MOTION BECAUSE I WANT THAT ON THE AGENDA -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THAT'S JUST TO BE DISCUSSED ON THE AGENDA? >>GERALD WHITE: ON THE AGENDA. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT. [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>GERALD WHITE: YOU GOT ME GOING ON THE MOTION STUFF NOW. >>MITCHELL THROWER: AS CHAIR, IT'S APPROPRIATE. AS CHAIR, IT'S APPROPRIATE. WE'LL PUT IT ON THE -- >>GERALD WHITE: OKAY. I'D REALLY LIKE THIS TERM -- JUST REALLY MAKE SURE WE REALLY -- AND THE CITIZENS UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COMMISSION TERM IS WORKING, AND I WANT THE CITIZENS TO REALLY LET US KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ARE THEY FOR TERM LIMITS OR AGAINST TERM LIMITS? YOU KNOW, THE CITIZENS MAY WANT US TO JUST TAKE IT OUT OF THE BOOK. I DON'T KNOW. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT RELATED TO HOW MANY YEARS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL SHOULD SERVE ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: SO IF THAT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN UP ON THE 30th, THEN I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT APPEARS ON THE WEB SITE, ON THE AGENDA, AS A TOPIC THAT THIS BOARD'S GOING TO ADDRESS AT THAT TIME AND THAT THE PUBLIC'S INVITED TO COME COMMENT AND ANSWER MR. WHITE'S QUESTION, WHAT DOES THE PUBLIC WANT WITH REGARD TO TERM LIMITS. >>GERALD WHITE: AND I HAVE A SECOND ISSUE, MR. CHAIR. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MR. WHITE. >>GERALD WHITE: AND MY SECOND ISSUE IS, AS YOU KNOW, I'VE PRESENTED A PROPOSAL FOR AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR, AND SO I WOULD LIKE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO LOOK AT ALL THE POWERS THAT'S INSIDE THE ORANGE COUNTY CHARTER AND BREAK THEM OUT FOR US SO WE COULD SEE THEM, AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO WHEREVER -- MAYBE SHE HAS TO TELL ME, WHERE THE POWERS OF THE EXISTING CHAIR -- WHAT ARE THEY? WHAT IS THE POWERS OF THE CHAIR TODAY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY? I DON'T THINK THE CITIZENS KNOW. I DON'T KNOW THEM ALL, AND SO I WANT TO GET EDUCATED ON THAT. IS MY PROPOSAL TOO FAR OUT, IS IT IN LINE TO WHERE THE POWERS ARE TODAY, CAN WE LOOK AT THAT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YOU'RE SAYING THE COUNTY MAYOR OF ORANGE COUNTY? >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: NO. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR. >>GERALD WHITE: THE POWERS OF THE EXISTING CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TODAY -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY? >>GERALD WHITE: -- OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND THEN COMPARE IT TO -- PARALLEL IT TO WHAT'S INSIDE THE ORANGE COUNTY CHARTER. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: FOR AN ELECTED -- >>GERALD WHITE: FOR THE ELECTED CHAIR, YES. >>MITCHELL THROWER: FOR THAT, I'M GOING TO -- YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: SECOND, MAN. >>GERALD WHITE: THAT'S A MOTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE'VE GOT A SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THAT BEFORE WE VOTE? >>ROCHELLE REBACK: I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT TOO. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. NO DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THIS IS JUST TO HAVE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY GET SOME RESEARCH FOR THAT. OKAY. ANYONE OPPOSED? MR. FISHER'S OPPOSED. THAT MOTION PASSES. OKAY. >>RALPH FISHER: MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE DECIDE THE DATES FOR THE AUGUST HEARINGS. AND I WOULD SUGGEST THE DATES THAT ARE THE LEAST DISRUPTIVE TO THE BOARD, WHICH IS THE 2nd AND THE 12th SIMPLY BECAUSE THE LESSER NUMBER OF PEOPLE COULD NOT APPEAR AT THOSE TWO HEARING DATES BASED ON THE INFORMATION EVERYONE SUBMITTED TO MS. STEWART. >> SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE'VE GOT A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE DATES OF AUGUST 2nd AND AUGUST 12th FOR THE TWO AUGUST PUBLIC HEARINGS? AUGUST 2nd AND AUGUST 12th. WHAT -- DO YOU KNOW THE DATES OFFHAND -- >>RALPH FISHER: MONDAY, AUGUST 2nd, THURSDAY, AUGUST 12th. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: SO THOSE ARE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: IN AUGUST. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: OR FOR -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: THOSE ARE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WE VOTED ON ALREADY, THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ABOUT INCREASING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER -- >>ROCHELLE REBACK: SO THOSE ARE IN ADDITION TO OUR REGULAR MEETINGS? >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. OKAY. NO DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: WHOA, WHOA, WHOA, WHOA, WHOA. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: THAT'S IN AUGUST. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: IF SOMETHING MAGIC COMES UP BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A MEETING ON THE 30th, WE CAN STILL ADD SOMETHING TO THAT; CORRECT? WAS IT JUST FOR THAT AND NOTHING ELSE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: WELL -- AND THAT'S SOMETHING -- THAT'S SOMETHING WE MAY WANT TO DISCUSS. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: THAT'S SOMETHING WE MAY WANT TO DISCUSS -- ESPECIALLY NOW THAT WE'VE GOT -- WE'RE ADVERTISING IN THE NEWSPAPER AND EVERYTHING. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: RIGHT. >>MITCHELL THROWER: -- WE MAY WANT TO DISCUSS, AND THEN MARY HELEN FARRIS MENTIONED THE REAPPORTIONMENT AMENDMENT. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I KNOW. >>MITCHELL THROWER: IF WE WANT TO GET THAT -- IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WANTS TO BE DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, FOR 2010, IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED QUICKLY. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>MITCHELL THROWER: WHAT? >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: TO BE FLEXIBLE ABOUT -- I'M READY TO GO AS FAR AS SETTING IT, BUT THE ONLY THING I THINK WE GOT ON THAT IS THE SEVEN TO NINE; RIGHT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: RIGHT NOW FOR THAT, BUT, I MEAN -- >>RALPH FISHER: THE ONLY PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE VOTED ON TO HAVE IS ON THE ISSUE ON EXPANDING THE SIZE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: RIGHT, THAT WAS IT. >>RALPH FISHER: AND I RECOMMENDED THAT WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE ON THE 2nd AND ONE ON THE 12th, TO DISPOSE OF THAT ISSUE. THAT'S THE MOTION. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THAT BASICALLY MEANS WE HAVE ONE MORE MEETING, JUNE 30th -- JULY 30th MEETING TO SEE -- AND LET ME ASK YOU. MARY HELEN FARRIS, DO YOU SEE ANY PROBLEM IF WE ADDED AN ITEM ON JULY 30th FOR AN AUGUST 2nd PUBLIC HEARING IN TERMS OF -- I MEAN, IT'S SUCH A SHORT TURNAROUND TIME. IF THERE'S -- >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: NO, I DON'T -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: -- SOME REASON THE BOARD DECIDED TO ADD SOMETHING ELSE TO THAT PUBLIC HEARING -- >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: WE COULD ACCOMMODATE THAT. WE COULD GET THE THING DRAFTED RIGHT AWAY, AND, YOU KNOW, PUT IT OUT WITH THE ELECTRONIC NOTICES. WE CAN DO IT. WE'LL DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO GET IT OUT TO AS MANY PLACES, SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT. >>GINA GRIMES: WHAT ABOUT THE NEWS AD? >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: I DON'T KNOW IF -- >>GINA GRIMES: I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU COULD TURN THAT AROUND THAT FAST. >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: EDITH, HOW MANY DAYS DO WE NEED TO DO A NEWSPAPER? SHE SAYS FIVE DAYS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YEAH. SEE [INAUDIBLE] >>MARY HELEN FARRIS: THAT'S NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT, BUT WE CAN DO EVERYTHING ELSE AND NOTIFY THE, YOU KNOW -- >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: I JUST WAS ASKING THAT JUST IN CASE. I CALL FOR THE QUESTION NOW. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE CALL FOR QUESTION PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED. OKAY. NOW WE'RE VOTING ON THE AUGUST 2nd AND AUGUST 12th PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE INCREASING THE COUNTY COMMISSION SIZE TO NINE. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THAT ISSUE WILL BE AUGUST 2nd AND AUGUST 12th. >>JOSEPH ROBINSON: PUBLIC COMMENTS. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: COULD I JUST ASK -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: MRS. REBACK. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: CAN WE JUST MAKE SURE TO INVITE MR. MANTEIGA BACK FOR THAT -- FOR THOSE DATES? >>MITCHELL THROWER: WELL, I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY -- IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. HE'S GOING TO KNOW WHEN IT IS. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO INVITE HIM. >>ROCHELLE REBACK: IT WILL BE ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER. >>MITCHELL THROWER: I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY, ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE TRY TO ARRIVE A LITTLE BIT EARLY TOMORROW NIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO TAKE A GROUP PICTURE BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING BEGINS AT 6:00 P.M. PROMPTLY, SO PLEASE ARRIVE -- YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN GET HERE 20 MINUTES OR 15 MINUTES EARLY -- A FEW MINUTES EARLY TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE TIME TO GET A GROUP PICTURE BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING BEGINS. >>FRANK REDDICK: [INAUDIBLE] >>MITCHELL THROWER: IF YOU CAN GET HERE AT 5:30, THAT'S GREAT. >>RALPH FISHER: IT'S LIKE A MUGSHOT FOR WHAT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: IT'S A GROUP PICTURE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? >>GERALD WHITE: BEFORE WE -- >>MITCHELL THROWER: OH, I'M SORRY. I DID THAT ONCE BEFORE. I APOLOGIZE. ACTUALLY, I RECEIVED ONE FROM MRS. WHITE. I HAVEN'T RECEIVED -- DID YOU FILL OUT A CARD? IF YOU CAN GO FILL OUT A CARD IN THE BACK, WE'LL MAKE SURE WE GET YOU NEXT. >>GERALD WHITE: MR. CHAIRMAN, BEFORE WE GET TO THE PUBLIC, COULD I HAVE ONE MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE? I READ THE NOTES OF MR. BARNES WHEN HE SPOKE BEFORE OUR BOARD IN THE TRANSCRIPTS. IF EVERYBODY WOULD TAKE A MOMENT, I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED TO MR. BARNES WAS FROM THE VICE CHAIR, MR. REDDICK. IF YOU CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE TRANSCRIPTS AND -- AND READ THE QUESTIONS THAT MR. REDDICK ASKED MR. BARNES AND LISTEN TO HIS RESPONSE. OUT OF THE WHOLE QUESTIONING, THOSE WERE THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS I BELIEVE THAT WAS ASKED, AND THERE WAS VALUABLE INFORMATION SURRENDERED BY MR. BARNES RELATED TO MR. REDDICK'S QUESTIONS. ONE OF THEM WAS HOW MANY AUDITS HE HAD DONE, AND OUT OF ALL THE MONEY THAT HAS BEEN SPENT, HE SAID HE -- HE HAD DONE LIKE FIVE, SO LOOK AT THE MONEY THAT BEEN ALLOCATED TO THIS POST VERSUS WHAT MR. BARNES TESTIFIED THAT HE HAD ONLY DONE FIVE AUDITS. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. MR. AMON, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. >>JOE AMON: I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THAT TOO. I STILL HAVE A REAL CONCERN THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND, WE COLLECTIVELY, INCLUDING THE GOVERNMENT, DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN AUDIT -- THE KIND OF AUDIT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, A PROCESS AUDIT, COMPARED TO A MONETARY AUDIT, AND YOU CAN READ THE LETTER FROM PAT FRANK AND READ -- GO BACK AND READ MR. BARNES, AND -- IT'S A CONFUSING ISSUE. THEY'RE STILL CONFUSING THE YELLOW BOOK AND THE RED BOOK. >>GERALD WHITE: YEAH. >>MITCHELL THROWER: ACTUALLY, GOING ALONG WITH MR. AMON'S COMMENT, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION WE RECEIVED AN E-MAIL FOR THE BOCC SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION THAT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE THE BOCC -- THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON JULY 14th. THE LAST COUPLE PAGES HAVE SOME DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUDITS. IT'S PRETTY HELPFUL INFORMATION, OPERATIONAL, PERFORMANCE, NONAUDIT, FINANCIAL, SO YOU MAY WANT TO LOOK AT THAT BEFORE TOMORROW -- YOU KNOW, OUR PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S JUST INFORMATIONAL. I THINK IT'S HELPFUL. >>RALPH FISHER: WHERE IS THAT? >>MITCHELL THROWER: WE WERE E-MAILED THE BOCC -- THIS WENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND IT WAS MR. TARR'S ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON STRUCTURAL CHANGES AND EVERYTHING. IT DISCUSSED THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THESE ARE STRUCTURAL CHANGES THAT HE RECOMMENDS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DO IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, HELP OUT THE OFFICE BE SUCCESSFUL. >>GERALD WHITE: AND MR. CHAIR -- >>JAN PLATT: AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S AFTER OUR PUBLIC HEARING. >>MITCHELL THROWER: YES. >>GERALD WHITE: AND WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE TO DO ANYTHING. WE DON'T HAVE TO ELIMINATE THE POST, WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE THE POST. IF WE'RE NOT CLEAR -- IF I'M NOT CLEAR ON THE DECISION TO BE MADE, I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR EITHER ONE OF THE OPTIONS BECAUSE I WANT TO DO THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT THING, AND JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION, ALL RIGHT, SO DO WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. NEXT UP, PUBLIC COMMENT. MRS. WHITE IS FIRST UP. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> GOOD EVENING. I AM ANN SANKEY WHITE, EVANGELIST, EDUCATOR, AND RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. GOOD EVENING TO ALL OF YOU MEMBERS OF THIS, OUR CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER BOARD FOR 2010 AND '11. I'VE BEEN WATCHING THE MEETINGS LATELY FROM MY HOME VIA TELEVISION SINCE I DO HAVE A TEENAGER AT HOME, AND I'VE BEEN HAPPY TO SEE AND TO HEAR SO MANY OF THE PRESENTERS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE YOU LATELY, AND I HOPE THAT THIS CYCLE WILL CONTINUE. AS I LISTENED TO THE DISCUSSION ON THE COUNTY MAYOR FROM MS. STILES AND FROM YOUR VARIOUS COMMENTS, I MUST SAY AS AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN THAT I DO NOT SUPPORT A COUNTY MAYOR AT THIS TIME IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HISTORY. THIS COUNTY IS NOT READY YET FOR A COUNTY EXECUTIVE. WE HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY NEED TO CRAWL A WHOLE LOT BETTER BEFORE WE WALK IN A COUNTY EXECUTIVE OR A COUNTY MAYOR IN TO THE POSITION OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY LEADERSHIP. ALSO, I WANTED TO COMMENT, AS I'VE HEARD YOU DISCUSS THIS EVENING, ABOUT YOUR ADVERTISEMENTS. YOU DO NEED BETTER ADVERTISEMENTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC AND, OF COURSE, IN A MORE TIMELY MANNER. ALSO, REGARDING YOUR CHARTER BOARD MEETINGS, I WOULD THAT YOU WOULD REVIEW YOUR MEETING MINUTES FOR ACCURACY AND FOR CORRECTIONS. I'VE READ THROUGH SOME OF THEM SINCE I'VE BEEN SPENDING SOME TIME AT HOME, AND I HAVE OBSERVED SEVERAL ERRORS IN YOUR MINUTES. ALSO, LET ME REITERATE FOR THE RECORD THAT THIS IS, IN FACT, ONE OF THE MOST, IF NOT THE MOST, IMPORTANT BOARD IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GOVERNMENT. THAT'S HOW I SEE IT. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I MAKE IT MY BUSINESS EVERY TIME THAT THIS BOARD IS SEATED TO ACTUALLY BECOME A PART OF THIS BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THE BOARDS THAT I ACTUALLY SUPPORT BECAUSE IT CENTERS IN OUR CONSTITUTION, IT CENTERS IN THE RULES AND REGS THAT GOVERN THIS COUNTY, AND THAT MAY NOT BE IMPORTANT TO MANY PEOPLE, BUT IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, SO PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY BEARING THAT KNOWLEDGE IN MIND. AND AS IT RELATES TO YOUR BUDGET, I WOULD THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER MAYBE IF YOU CAN -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE -- ACTUALLY VOTING IN THE BUDGET AND PLACING IT INTO THE CHARTER ITSELF. AND ALSO, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE FROM PAST EXPERIENCES WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD -- EDITH IS QUITE CAPABLE, BUT I DO FEEL THAT YOU-ALL NEED TO BE INDEPENDENT, VERY MUCH SO, SO I THINK YOU NEED YOUR OWN STAFF, AND IF YOU COULD PUT THAT INTO THE CHARTER AS WELL, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BENEFIT THIS BOARD GREATLY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS MR. JARVIS EL-AMIN. EL-AMIN. WELCOME. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. >> I WILL. JARVIS EL-AMIN, 4818 EAST 99th AVENUE., COHOST OF "HONEST OPINION" TALK SHOW, WTMP, ENTREPRENEUR. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK YOU DID SOME GREAT WORK HERE THIS AFTERNOON, A LITTLE ROCKY. I THINK THAT -- I COMMEND THE CHAIRMAN AND ESPECIALLY MR. JOE ROBINSON FOR BEING POIGNANT IN THIS CONVERSATION. I WANT TO SAY TO THIS BOARD IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP HAVING THE COUNTY -- ELECTED COUNTY CHAIRMAN, HAVE THE LEGAL STAFF TO DO THAT, WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE THEM LOOK INTO THE COUNTY MAYOR AS WELL WITHOUT SUCH VETO POWER OVER THE BUDGET. I THINK THAT THE QUESTION I WANT TO ASK THIS CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, THE TASK THAT YOU'RE ASSIGNED TO, IS THAT WITH THE COUNTY ELECTED CHAIR OR COUNTY MAYOR, AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND LATINO WOULD NOT HAVE NO REPRESENTATION BECAUSE THAT COUNTY MAYOR, THAT COUNTY -- ELECTED COUNTY CHAIR CAN BE ELECTED WITHOUT AFRICAN-AMERICAN SUPPORT. THAT MEAN THEY DON'T HAVE TO PUT NOTHING IN THE BUDGET FOR LATINOS, NOTHING IN THE BUDGET FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS. THAT'S A TRUE ISSUE FOR THIS COMMUNITY, AND YOU NEED TO CONSIDER THAT, SO I HEARD ONE OF THE -- THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS SAY, OH, HE WOULD NOT SUPPORT A DEPUTY MAYOR IN THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN -- SO-CALLED MINORITY COMMUNITY WITHOUT A BUDGET. WELL, THAT DON'T SIT VERY WELL WITH ME BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW HOW WITH AN ELECTED COUNTY CHAIRMAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET SOME REPRESENTATION. WE EITHER ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GET A BETTER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAD BECAUSE PAT BEAN SHOULD HAVE BEEN GONE -- SHE STAYED THERE TOO LONG. ANYTIME YOU STAY THERE TOO LONG, IT'S LIKE I GIVE YOU THIS WATCH AND I GET READY -- YOU HOLD IT SO LONG, YOU THINK IT'S YOUR WATCH, AND I GET READY TO ASK YOU BACK FOR IT, YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE IT BACK. SHE STAYED THERE TOO LONG, AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT, BUT THEY JUST WAS NOT -- THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE INTENTIONAL FORTITUDE TO SAY THAT. SO THE PROCESS OF GETTING FOUR VOTES TO DO SOMETHING NOW -- IN MODERN TIMES THIS COUNTY GOVERNMENT MOVES AT A SNAIL'S PACE TO GET SOMETHING DONE, AND EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL. DON'T THINK IT AIN'T POLITICAL BECAUSE SHE WAS POLITICAL. YOU THINK -- CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THAT BOARD NEVER WOULD VOTE AGAINST HER BECAUSE THE HAND WAS WRITING ON THE WALL, SO DON'T THINK -- AND EVEN THIS BOARD HERE IS POLITICAL. DON'T THINK THIS BOARD AIN'T POLITICAL. WHAT THIS COUNTY'S MISSING IN MY CONCLUSION IS ONE VISIBLE LEADER WITH THE VISION TO LEAD THIS COUNTY GOVERNMENT. YOU DON'T HAVE THAT IN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. SHE TRYING TO SATISFY THOSE PEOPLE, THE FOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. SHE JUST DON'T HAVE IT. THINK ABOUT IT. YOU GOT A GREAT TASK TO DO. YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB. >>MITCHELL THROWER: THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT -- >> MOTION TO ADJOURN. >>MITCHELL THROWER: SECOND? >> SECOND. >>MITCHELL THROWER: OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? MEETING'S ADJOURNED. 1