MEMBERS PRESENT:

K. Richard Blount, Harvey Budd, Edward Crapo, Mitchell Glaeser, Pegeen Hanrahan, Regina Hawkins, Jimmy Massey, William "Clay" Martin, Thomas McKnew, Fredrick Peterkin, Beverly Thomas, Janet Wootten, and Susan Wright.

COUNTY STAFF:

Dave Wagner (County Attorney), DJ Williams (ATCM), Pauldine France (Intern)

OTHERS PRESENT:

George Nickerson (CRC Legal Counsel), Randall Reid (County Manager), Dianne Dubberly, Phyllis Saarinnen, Jim Pendland, Doris Bardon, Olen Barber, Arthur Saarinnen, Jim Konish, Commissioner Robert Hutchinson, and Vinse Manousi.

Summary:

After confirming the quorum, Chair Wootten called the hearing to order at 6:00 p.m. A motion was made by Member Peterkin/Budd to approve the agenda. The motion was passed unanimously.

There was a brief introduction of the newly appointed CRC member, Thomas McKnew.

DJ Williams was recognized for a presentation on the proposed amendments. Language for each of the proposed amendments environmental ordinances prevailing over municipal ordinances, independent auditor, joint planning, and conflicts in the charter was presented.

George Nickerson was introduced and was asked for his comments on the proposed amendments.

Member McKnew stated his concern about the clarification of the proposed amendment language regarding environmental ordinances prevailing over municipal ordinances. He stated that the language does not specify whether or not power could default to municipalities. He also asked to what extent was it legal for the CRC to provide for enforcement of joint planning. Mr. Nickerson replied that the environmental ordinance needed to be better "crafted" and that joint planning could be authorized by Charter, but the issue was still unclear. He also stated that the provision simply makes joint planning available and permissive.

The Chair opened the public hearing.

Jim Konish was recognized. He provided input on the conflicting environmental ordinances issue and gave the following suggestions:

1. The title need to reflect language. The language in the title needs to reflect the content of the ordinance more accurately.
2. The words "municipal" and "county" need to be in lowercase.
3. The word "ordinance" needs to be plural.
4. Address the issue of enforcement by adding "and be enforceable by the County within municipal boundaries" to the section 1.04 language.

Mr. Randall Reid (County Manager) was recognized and stated his concerns about section 2.3c (Independent performance auditor). He stated that the position was not independent because the individual was to be hired by the County and that the proposed amendment was counter-productive. He said that he speaks as the County Manger whose main responsibility is internal auditing. He also stated that the proposal dilutes the position of the County Manager and conflicts with the "separation of powers" clause in the Charter. He suggested that the auditor could report to the County Manager instead of working independently.

Arthur Saarinnen was recognized and urged the CRC to adopt section 1.04 regarding County environmental ordinances prevailing over municipal ordinances proposal. He also stated that section 1.5 on joint planning does not take into account the inadequate communication between the County and the municipalities.

Olen Barber (Mayor of High Springs) was recognized and stressed that wording was very important and clarification was needed in the environmental ordinances proposal. He also stated that he did not know why a prevailing ordinance was needed because municipalities know what is best for their citizens.

Doris Bardon representing Women for Wise Growth was recognized. Ms. Bardon stated her organization's support of the joint planning issue because it would encourage various agencies to work together and County environmental ordinances prevailing over municipal ordinances.

Phyllis Saarinnen was recognized and stated her support for the County environmental ordinances amendment proposal.

The public hearing was closed.

Mr. Nickerson stated that he supported the changes suggested by the public concerning the County environmental ordinance amendment and that the CRC needed to discuss the suggestions made by the public so that any necessary changes can be made.

After some discussion, the CRC came to a consensus that the current proposed language was not definite and that further discussion was needed in order to create consistent and clear amendment proposals.

Mr. Reid advised not to submit the proposal for the independent performance auditor because the Charter is clear on the 'separation of powers" and that two people with the same responsibilities create conflict. Member Budd stated that the performance auditor can be a tool to the County Manager and that the language reads "may" and thus can be debated with the County Commission.

The public hearing adjourned at approximately 7:35 p.m.