On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order - Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Rotary Club” — transcript expanded below

   Ethics Presentation

   Attorney Nikki (Nicole) from a firm assisting the Florida League of Cities delivered the statutorily required ethics and Sunshine Law training to the City Council, covering public meetings, public records, and the constitutional/statutory basis (Section 286.011) for open meetings. The session was educational with Q&A; no formal action was taken. City Attorney Tim and a visiting Commissioner Merge from Safety Harbor also participated.

   📍Sims Park🏢Bayou Business Association🏢Florida League of Cities🏢Rotary Club🏢Tampa Bay Times👤Bill Phillips👤DeBella Thomas👤Debbie👤Judy👤Merge👤Nikki👤Phillips👤Tim👤Zach Lombardo#Chapter 286, Florida Statutes#Florida Constitution open meetings provision#Florida Sunshine Law#Four-hour ethics and Sunshine Law training requirement (effective Jan 2015)#Section 112.3142#Section 286.011, Florida Statutes

   ▶ Jump to 0:15 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:16] If we're being recorded. So thank you for having me today. I know everyone here [00:00:23] pretty much knows me, but I've been teaching these ethics courses for the [00:00:30] Florida League of Cities, and a lot of you might have come to some of the ones [00:00:33] that we did last year. I think, Commissioner Phillips, you came to the [00:00:36] one we did in Largo last year. And so the regional leagues tend to put them on [00:00:41] throughout the state, but when Debbie called and said, well, we were hoping, you [00:00:47] know, we kind of everybody that still needs to get it done in December, I was [00:00:52] happy to come and put on a little special session for you all here today. [00:00:56] But since we are here to cover our statutory requirements, which beginning [00:01:04] in January 2015, as you know, require four hours of ethics and Sunshine Law [00:01:10] training. So a lot of it may be a little bit of repeat. You might learn [00:01:16] something new, but at the end of the day, you'll be able to check off your box on [00:01:20] your reporting that you have been certified as ethical and experts in the [00:01:26] Sunshine Law. I asked Tim to be here today because, not only because he's your [00:01:33] city attorney, but I understand he's going to be doing a brief presentation [00:01:38] with you all as well. But also he can jump in, and if you all have questions [00:01:42] throughout the presentation, I like to have questions. I think that's been part [00:01:47] of one of the best ways that we all learn from one another is by, if there's [00:01:51] a burning question that you have, asking it, and then we all learn from the answer. [00:01:55] That's also an approved part of the statutory structure is question and [00:02:00] answer time. So we technically have to do at least 40 minutes of each hour of [00:02:06] instruction, but part of that can be composed or part of that 10 minutes of [00:02:11] instruction. So that can be also question and answer. So we'll dive right in. Yes, we [00:02:19] already have a question. Who's requiring this before the legislature passes? Yes. And they all have to do it as well, not just city officials? No, it is only... [00:02:27] Just like the Sunshine Law. We'll have a fun little tidbit on how the legislature will tell you with a [00:02:35] straight face that they believe they are subject to the Sunshine Law, but I'm [00:02:38] being recorded today too, so I'll have to be careful with how blatant that I get. [00:02:43] But yes, this provision was actually adopted initially in 2013, required in [00:02:49] 2014 for all county local government officials to complete the course. And [00:02:53] then they realized, whoops, we forgot cities. So they added cities in the 2014 [00:02:59] session, effective 2015. Now they're realizing that the world of local [00:03:04] government isn't just comprised of cities and counties, but independent [00:03:07] special districts and fire districts and a lot of other local governments. So [00:03:12] I think one of the things that you'll see out of legislature this year is a [00:03:16] bill amending section 112.3142 to require that all local government [00:03:22] officials can complete the annual training. And no, you're correct, they do [00:03:29] not require it of themselves. And my voice is slightly shot today. I'm not in [00:03:34] as bad a condition as Councilmember Phillips, but bear with me if I need to [00:03:40] take a break and have some water at some parts. We only need 50 minutes an hour. [00:03:48] 10 can be questions, so 40 minutes only of me talking, so for each hour. The way [00:03:54] we've broken up your schedule for today, I think most of you might have an agenda. [00:03:59] If not, okay, everyone's received the agenda. So I'm going to talk with you [00:04:04] first. We'll go over public meetings, take a short break if you want to, or we [00:04:08] can push through, have a longer break in between. Totally up to you guys. And then [00:04:13] we'll talk about public records. Then you'll have your city attorney talk with [00:04:18] you about some of the roles and responsibilities specific to the city. [00:04:21] And then an associate from our office, Zach Lombardo, who's been teaching the [00:04:25] ethics portion throughout the state with me for the past two years, will be [00:04:29] joining you. And he will be taking ethics one and two, and that's where [00:04:34] you're going to cover all the exciting topics like gift laws and conflicts of [00:04:40] interests and doing bribery and all the exciting stuff. But so that's how we've [00:04:46] broken it up in terms of topics, and then that way we cover all of it. So [00:04:52] because we need to cover all the broad statutory topics, if you have very [00:04:57] specific fact questions, even though your city attorney's here and we serve as [00:05:02] special counsel, we try to keep it to just covering the statutory stuff. And [00:05:07] then if we have something that maybe you need to follow up with Tim on after the [00:05:10] session or, you know, as Debbie needs, if she wants to reach out to me, we can [00:05:15] address if there's like a specific factual situation that you feel we need [00:05:21] to address. But for the purpose of today, we're going to try to keep the forum and [00:05:26] try to keep most of my examples very general. All that's to say that if I tell [00:05:31] you something today, I'm going to be giving you all the general black and [00:05:37] white letter law as it applies uniformly throughout the state. That's what the [00:05:42] state does and what the case law does. It sets the floor. It sets the [00:05:46] baseline. It sets the minimum requirements. Cities and counties [00:05:50] throughout the state often have adopted either higher standards or vary that. As [00:05:54] long as you require more, then some of the rules I'm saying today might be [00:06:00] varied by your city charter or city code. And so Tim might jump in and say that [00:06:04] might be the general rule, but in your city we require X or your charter [00:06:09] requires Y. And so that's another great resource to have him here. And of [00:06:15] course, you know, I'm fairly familiar with your... I'm going to try to keep it as [00:06:18] city-specific as possible. But so you can check the box, we have to go over the [00:06:22] general stuff as well. And because we have our esteemed guest, Commissioner [00:06:28] Merge from Safety Harbor here today. And so he'll be joining and sitting on with [00:06:34] us, so we want to make sure he gets all the general topics as well. So diving [00:06:40] right into public meetings. I like to start with this slide because what makes [00:06:45] our public meetings public in Florida is not just a legislative composed [00:06:49] requirement, which we often think of, or the case law that's developed out of [00:06:56] establishing what public meetings are or your requirement to meet in the [00:07:00] sunshine, but it really comes from the Florida Constitution. So it's been [00:07:04] adopted into the Florida... that's where the ultimate requirement comes [00:07:08] from, requiring that all meetings of all local governing bodies, including [00:07:14] counties, cities, school districts, special districts, at which any official [00:07:19] action are taken or public businesses to be transacted or discussed, so including [00:07:24] your workshops, have to be open to the public. So lest you thought the sunshine [00:07:30] law could go away with a statutory amendment, it can't, not without 66% of [00:07:35] the vote of the state of Florida. And I don't really see that happening anytime [00:07:41] soon. So probably for as long as you'll be in public service and as long as [00:07:44] you've been in public service, there's been a requirement that the meetings of [00:07:49] the city be open to the public. Oh, I hit the wrong button. [00:07:56] But the only time you can get away from that is when you do a special, if it has [00:08:01] to do with contract negotiations or collective bargaining. Yes, there are a [00:08:08] couple of statutory exemptions, which we'll go over today, but you're right. [00:08:12] There are a few areas that the legislature's carved out and said, and [00:08:15] you can see that, see the bottom of this constitutional provision, except with [00:08:21] respect to meetings exempted pursuant to this section or specifically closed by [00:08:25] this Constitution. And then the Constitution goes on basically to say [00:08:29] the legislature can create exemptions, which we will talk about some of the [00:08:34] exemptions today, but that's absolutely right. So the presumption, you always [00:08:37] start with meetings have to be open to the public, but there may be a few [00:08:41] exceptions that flow into it. This statutory or this constitutional [00:08:48] provision is then fleshed out a little bit more in Section 286, really Chapter [00:08:55] 286 of Florida Statutes, but which governs public business. But specifically [00:09:00] Section 286.011 is where we have the statutory requirement requiring that [00:09:08] all of your meetings be open to the public. And the statutory provision is [00:09:14] where we get our three requirements of what it means to be open to the public. [00:09:18] The three requirements, and these are all come from this very long text, I've [00:09:22] broken it out to you so that we have the basic three requirements, which [00:09:29] we are going to get to. The three requirements that flow from this [00:09:33] provision are that the meetings must be open to the public, reasonable notice [00:09:37] must be given, and minutes must be taken. Those are the three things that you [00:09:42] always have to do in order to comply with the public meeting side of the [00:09:46] Sunshine Law. And Tim, our notice provision is 24 hours? 48 hours? What's [00:09:56] the notice provision for our meetings? I believe it's 24 hours. And there's a [00:10:04] couple presumptions that have come in case law too. But before we get to those [00:10:08] three, how you meet those three requirements in a formal setting, which [00:10:11] is what you're more accustomed to, the law is first fleshed out when you are [00:10:17] considered to be meeting for the purposes of the Sunshine Law. Because [00:10:24] it's easy to think about your formal council meetings, but as I'm sure a lot [00:10:28] of you have run into, the definition of meeting is actually much broader. And so [00:10:33] that's where you get the requirement because the definition of [00:10:37] meeting is actually any time where two or more members of the same board meet [00:10:44] or just communicate in any fashion to discuss a matter that may become before [00:10:50] your City Council. Well that's a really broad definition because that's pretty [00:10:54] much any time two of you could speak to one another about a matter that's [00:10:58] foreseeable to come before the City Council. Thus creating the very [00:11:03] restrictive public meeting portion of the Sunshine Law. [00:11:10] I'd rather talk about other stuff. For today? Anytime. Anytime we see each other out in New Port Richey. [00:11:17] We'd rather talk about anything else but. But matters that might come before the [00:11:21] City Council. That is probably true. And those types of communications, [00:11:26] obviously, as you just stated, you're correct, do not fall under the [00:11:31] definition of meeting because it's something not reasonably foreseeable to [00:11:35] come before your City Council. But the definition is very broad. The definition [00:11:41] of communication is also very broad. It's any form of communication that includes [00:11:50] personal meetings. Yes, I included carrier pigeons because I wrote this [00:11:54] slideshow while I was finishing Game of Thrones and that seemed to be a pretty [00:11:58] common way of how they communicated. And interestingly, the legislature [00:12:03] would consider the same to be true. Drones, even now, if they have an ability [00:12:09] to communicate or drop letters. Nikki, you know we live in a small community and we [00:12:17] find ourselves sometimes in social settings or in situations where it's [00:12:21] maybe a conference, a seminar, another meeting, a lunch meeting, whatever, where [00:12:25] we may be together. And sometimes, you know, people will spot one of us, [00:12:31] especially if the mayor or whoever, and ask a question about something that's [00:12:36] pertaining to the city. When it's a circumstance like that, and it may be a [00:12:41] little bit, I'm remembering specifically, I had invited Deputy Mayor Bill Phillips [00:12:49] to speak at my Rotary meeting. And during the discussion period, I excused myself [00:12:53] because I felt uncomfortable, as I'm sure that Bill probably did as well, [00:12:58] because they were asking questions that were probably going to be voting issues. [00:13:02] So I excused myself. But if you find yourself in a setting like that, what is [00:13:06] the protocol? So the situation that you're describing comes up quite [00:13:12] frequently. You're in a setting that has designed to be to where you're not going [00:13:18] to discuss anything that might come before the City Council, but then [00:13:20] something comes up that might come before the City Council. And part of what [00:13:25] you're describing is what I call, so we'll go over the foundation of the law, [00:13:29] but then there's also something called the Tampa Bay Times Test. And I can tell [00:13:34] you that what they think is that every time that two of you are together [00:13:38] outside of this room, that you're violating the Sunshine Law. That's just [00:13:41] the baseline. So in situations like that, where, and in your example, it [00:13:48] sounds like it came up very specifically. Another good example of this is [00:13:52] homeowner association meetings. Sometimes City Council members will want [00:13:56] to attend a neighborhood association meeting, and then city business is going [00:13:59] to be discussed. And one of them might be on the HOA board or the neighborhood [00:14:03] board as well. And obviously the most clear way to indicate that you are not [00:14:11] going to be communicating on any matter that may come before the City Council is [00:14:15] to leave the room, as you did. That being said, are there people who have sat in [00:14:19] the room and been deemed to have not violated the Sunshine Law, just because [00:14:24] they're listening to one side? Yes, that's happened as well. The one thing [00:14:29] you shouldn't do is engage in the discussion as part of that Rotary [00:14:35] Club, unless that meeting has been publicly noticed. I'm sorry, it's [00:14:42] open to the public, it's been noticed, and minutes are being taken. So, and that's [00:14:49] been the case too. I know actually in Safety Harbor, when we had a pretty [00:14:53] controversial development that was going through, and there were a lot of [00:14:57] neighborhood meeting, neighborhood associations that [00:15:00] meeting about it and several of our planning and zoning board members were on those homeowner [00:15:04] association boards, we ended up noticing a lot of their meetings and having minutes be [00:15:09] taken and allowing the public to go and participate in at least that portion because the members [00:15:16] of the board really wanted to participate in their capacity as being on that board and [00:15:22] in that role, but still comply with the Sunshine Law. [00:15:26] So you can always work with the city too if you have a specific weird situation that's [00:15:31] coming up and you want to be sure it's properly noticed and that the meeting becomes open [00:15:37] to the public if there's no way to get around the fact that two of you will have to be discussing [00:15:41] city business outside of the parameters of your standard regular meeting schedule in [00:15:46] this room. [00:15:47] In my experience, we've been at some gathering where there's more than one of us at and somebody [00:15:54] outside of this group will walk up and start engaging one of us and typically my reaction [00:16:03] is just to walk away and let them bend Bill's ear or Judy's ear or whatever and just walk [00:16:10] away. [00:16:11] That way I'm not tempted to chip in. [00:16:14] Yeah, that's a great approach because you don't know what someone might come up and [00:16:18] ask you about and you're standing in a circle talking about the raise and now they're wanting [00:16:22] to talk about the improvements to Sims Park or something and then you might just say, [00:16:27] oh, get their take on it. [00:16:30] We'll talk about this at a public meeting and step away. [00:16:32] I was at a Bayou Business Association meeting and three county commissioners were there [00:16:38] and one decided it was okay to speak in front of everybody there including her other commissioners [00:16:44] or the county commissioners' other commissioners and then the other two said we're not speaking [00:16:50] at all when they're asked to. [00:16:51] So that's probably the most prudent way to go, right? [00:16:55] We shouldn't really be speaking about anything in front of other commissioners with a crowd. [00:17:02] Yeah, I mean that's the easiest way and I don't know this particular commissioner but [00:17:07] that's certainly the easiest way to be, because once the first of you speaks then that obviously [00:17:14] precludes everyone else from speaking on the matter. [00:17:18] So that person's kind of saying I'm going to take this floor for them. [00:17:24] But that's why I was saying the first thing that you can do is completely walk out of [00:17:28] the room to where you're not even hearing what they're saying. [00:17:32] Technically it's only a violation of the Sunshine Law if you exchange, meaning if you respond. [00:17:38] But I think it's obviously a different appearance of propriety if you're just, you know, don't [00:17:46] have anything to do with the discussion that another council member has chosen to speak [00:17:49] on in that forum which is outside of a public meeting setting. [00:17:55] How does that relate when you go to a political debate or you go to a political function and, [00:18:11] you know, you're there to gain information but at the same time the questions are being [00:18:19] answered and a lot of proximity are going to be on city topics and city issues. [00:18:27] The first question always is, we get asked that question if you're candidates, if you're [00:18:32] a candidate for the office, for example, but you're not currently sitting on the city council. [00:18:37] Sunshine Law doesn't attach until your election results have been sworn and confirmed. [00:18:42] But it attaches even before you take office once you've been elected. [00:18:48] But so in a candidate forum, that would potentially be different. [00:18:52] If you have two candidates who are, for example, already on city council and are participating [00:18:57] in a candidate forum where city business is going to be discussed, then if you're going [00:19:02] to be discussing matters that may come before the city council at that meeting in your positions [00:19:08] on them, then that meeting should be publicly noticed and minutes should be taken. [00:19:15] Minutes can be taken after from a recording if that's necessary. [00:19:18] That's where the violation comes in because in most settings like that, minutes aren't [00:19:23] being taken. [00:19:24] Yeah, but they're probably being recorded and then minutes can be... [00:19:28] But you have to produce them as a valid instrument in defending that it was a public meeting. [00:19:37] It would most likely go to, if you have that situation, I would say to get with, you know, [00:19:43] Judy. [00:19:44] I'm sorry, Judy. [00:19:45] Don't get with Judy directly. [00:19:46] Tim will get into that. [00:19:48] Get with Debbie who can ensure if there is, let's say the forum's being put on. [00:19:54] If the forum's being put on by any kind of a news outlet, such as a local news outlet, [00:20:00] they're going to be well aware of some of the restrictions that are placed on you all. [00:20:04] And if you say, hey, if you want me to come and speak on this topic, but you're also going [00:20:08] to have Council Member DeBella Thomas there to speak on her thoughts on it, we need to [00:20:12] make sure the meeting's open to the public, reasonable notice has been given, and that [00:20:17] we've arranged for minutes to be taken, whether that's from the recording and then put on [00:20:21] file at the City Clerk's office or during the actual meeting. [00:20:26] But we need to make sure those things are met. [00:20:28] And if they are not respecting that limitation that they have on you, most, well, most news [00:20:33] outlets are going to because they're very familiar with it. [00:20:36] But if they're not, then I would not participate in that forum because it is ripe for a potential [00:20:42] violation. [00:20:43] It's an interesting point because last, this past year, we had a candidate forum. [00:20:48] We had multiple candidates, Council Members, that were running for re-election, plus some [00:20:53] other people. [00:20:54] And I hadn't even thought about that as being something that you'd need to take minutes [00:20:58] of. [00:20:59] But now that you say it, it makes sense. [00:21:02] And we need to take that responsibility. [00:21:03] We can't put it on any other agency. [00:21:05] That has to be the responsibility of the City. [00:21:07] Well, and I think that's what you learn as this law becomes implemented and you go from [00:21:11] year to year. [00:21:12] You find all of the items that trigger, and then you have to take those extra steps. [00:21:19] And now, obviously, it filters down to all your board members, as well as having to give [00:21:25] your annual financial statement. [00:21:28] So it's amazing how the legislature continues to increase their oversight on us when it's [00:21:37] not a shared situation. [00:21:40] We've got a lot of ground to cover. [00:21:43] But it's the unique situations that you feel like you live in a community, and then all [00:21:50] of a sudden, you really don't. [00:21:52] You have to be very conscious about who walks in the room and what's going on. [00:22:00] And especially if somebody, because it relates down here a little bit further about being [00:22:06] a conduit from one to one. [00:22:08] I mean, even at Christmas, every time you get up in the morning, there's stuff posted [00:22:13] eight ways from Sunday. [00:22:14] Somebody said so-and-so said so-and-so. [00:22:16] So I'm like, you know, we all like to draw on a hole once in a while and not have to [00:22:22] respond to some of these. [00:22:23] But just want to make sure we don't get ourselves in trouble. [00:22:25] The way to think of it is, you really want to make sure that any discussions of city [00:22:29] business, which for a city council is a very broad subject matter, because the idea of [00:22:36] something coming before you pretty much includes virtually anything that can happen in this [00:22:41] city. [00:22:42] The condition of the sidewalks, the conditions of our streets, it could be anything. [00:22:44] So you have to keep that in the back of your head. [00:22:46] And then you have to realize that the purpose behind the law is that the public should be [00:22:50] able to come to one place, and that's this room right here, to find out what you think [00:22:54] about city business, if it's important enough to express to your fellow council members. [00:23:00] So if you operate under that framework, everything else is pretty easy. [00:23:05] It's one of the easiest statutes to follow and kind of the silliest to violate, in my [00:23:11] opinion, because the consequences are grave. [00:23:14] First of all, it's criminal. [00:23:16] Secondly, you could cause something that you've approved to be overturned by a court. [00:23:22] So the consequences are pretty serious. [00:23:25] So it gives you the right to be rude to each other, because if you see each other out in [00:23:29] public and somebody wants to start bringing up business, you say, hey, sorry, I got to [00:23:33] go. [00:23:34] And I think it's your responsibility to walk away from those conversations, as much as [00:23:37] it is your responsibility to refrain from even engaging them in the first place. [00:23:41] Because I'm not sure that I ever thought when I got on council that I would ever have to [00:23:46] contemplate the idea of talking about dinosaurs, statues in somebody's backyard. [00:23:53] Because I was offended that our city fathers didn't put it in the original charter, that [00:23:58] we had ordinances over dinosaurs. [00:24:00] Right. [00:24:01] And the noise that they created. [00:24:02] Yeah. [00:24:03] Yeah. [00:24:04] Right. [00:24:05] So, I mean, you know, we can't think all the way around that. [00:24:06] And that's why we didn't talk at all during the boat parade. [00:24:07] We just sang Christmas carols up and down the river. [00:24:08] There you go. [00:24:09] There you go. [00:24:10] We were all good. [00:24:11] Yeah. [00:24:12] Kumbaya was the favorite song that night. [00:24:13] And that's what I think what you're describing is, so, you know, it's black and white. [00:24:14] We can see these things. [00:24:15] We can see, okay, two people don't talk to one another about a matter that might become [00:24:16] before your board, if you're on the same board. [00:24:17] That's another question we get asked a lot. [00:24:18] Can I talk to somebody else? [00:24:19] Can I talk to somebody else? [00:24:20] Can I talk to somebody else? [00:24:22] City Council. [00:24:36] That's fine. [00:24:37] Because you don't serve on the same City Council. [00:24:39] But it's hard sometimes to be a human being in that way. [00:24:43] And especially with a lot of the pressures of social media communications. [00:24:49] But we'll talk about my baseline advice to social media communications. [00:24:54] And then you can take it from there. [00:24:56] Like Tim's saying, a lot of it's going to be what you are personally comfortable with. [00:25:02] We advise a lot of commissioners that just say, I'm not going to engage in any discussions [00:25:07] whether they're about City Council business or not because of the Tampa Bay Times test. [00:25:11] We have other council members who have been friends for years. [00:25:15] And you're not going to stop being friends just because you're serving on the same board. [00:25:18] But then it becomes very, very complicated sometimes to think about the things that might [00:25:24] come before the City Council. [00:25:25] We've had county commissioners in this county that, you know, ride to meetings and all the [00:25:30] time. [00:25:31] And, you know, your potential thought is they can't talk about the weather the whole time [00:25:37] on the trip. [00:25:38] Well, that's the other thing. [00:25:39] It's the appearance, too. [00:25:40] Sometimes you have to be more concerned about the appearance than the actual violation. [00:25:46] Because if two people see you at a party talking and it just happens to be this very [00:25:51] controversial zoning issue that's coming up next week and they happen to be on the side [00:25:55] that they think you're against, then, you know, you can see where that could go. [00:26:00] And you can see where the suppositions get made. [00:26:03] Whether something can be proven or not, obviously, is a whole other matter. [00:26:07] There have been, I think, very few, Nicole, I don't even, do you know if there's even [00:26:12] been a conviction? [00:26:13] I think there's never been a conviction under this statute for a criminal violation. [00:26:16] No, they just put them out there. [00:26:20] It's pretty rare. [00:26:21] Even on your financial... [00:26:22] But you don't want to be the first one. [00:26:23] Even on your financial thing, you can go back and claim, you know, lack of knowledge and, [00:26:31] you know, 85% of the time they haven't, you know, cited against the offender. [00:26:38] There have been people who have been removed from office. [00:26:40] There have been substantial fines imposed. [00:26:43] There have been, but like Tim said, no criminal prosecutions yet. [00:26:53] But the standard for this second bullet point on any matter which may come before your board [00:26:57] or council, the standard that case law has, this is an extremely fact-based inquiry that [00:27:04] the courts will go through to determine whether or not a topic is a matter which may come [00:27:09] before the board or council. [00:27:12] They look not only, as Tim said, at the things going on in the city, the hot button issues, [00:27:18] so to speak, what is the typical climate. [00:27:22] They impose a reasonable person standard on that, on those facts. [00:27:28] So basically, if something's been in the newspaper every day, you are deemed to have knowledge [00:27:33] of it, whether you personally read the newspaper or not. [00:27:39] And then they will look at what are the matters you typically know will come before city council [00:27:46] based on the number of years you've been serving. [00:27:51] Not only that, but on your knowledge of the process. [00:27:54] You're basically imputed with, as Tim said, knowing about everything that's going on. [00:28:00] In terms of the process, the one example that I'd like to give is, because a question that's [00:28:06] frequently asked is, well, what happens, we've had this big controversial project, we have [00:28:12] a vote, can I now, now that matter's over, may I now go and talk with Councilmember Starkey [00:28:20] or Mayor Marlowe about the matter? [00:28:24] Well, that depends. [00:28:26] I think it's probably pretty risky because you're still dealing with city business. [00:28:31] If it's a quasi-judicial matter, it is 30 days where it might come back before you on [00:28:37] reconsideration, which can happen and has happened to us one time in Safety Harbor on [00:28:42] a controversial rezoning. [00:28:44] They filed a motion for reconsideration and we had to bring it back to the city commission [00:28:49] after it had been approved. [00:28:52] And also, oftentimes with large issues, there are a lot of moving parts. [00:28:56] There are a lot of components. [00:28:57] You might have a rezoning application today, but then next month you're going to have a [00:29:02] site plan. [00:29:03] And then after that, you're going to maybe have a development agreement. [00:29:07] There can often be a lot of different votes that roll into one topic and the courts are [00:29:11] going to look at all of that on whether or not it's a matter which may come before your [00:29:15] board. [00:29:16] So you can't just say, well, that particular vote was over. [00:29:19] It's about the continuing process and things that might come back before you. [00:29:25] So those are a lot of the different factors that they look at if you're under a microscope, [00:29:32] factually. [00:29:35] We talked about this a second ago, or someone had alluded to it, exchanging information [00:29:40] between members of a board or, that should say, or governing body through a liaison. [00:29:48] Is that a meeting? [00:29:50] It can be if the person that you're communicating through is relaying information back and forth [00:29:57] to one another. [00:30:00] So that includes spouses, that includes city staff, [00:30:05] city managers. [00:30:06] That doesn't mean that you're prohibited [00:30:08] from meeting individually one-on-one with those people, [00:30:11] including your spouse. [00:30:12] It just means that person can't go to another council member [00:30:15] and say, Council Member Phillips told me to tell you, [00:30:21] Council Member Starkey, that he intends to vote this way, [00:30:24] or he thinks this, what do you think about that? [00:30:27] And then you respond, and you say, [00:30:29] you tell him I said this. [00:30:31] That's obviously the easiest example. [00:30:35] But again, that's another appearance thing. [00:30:38] There have been cases where spouses of city council members, [00:30:42] if they are having lunch once a week, [00:30:46] it gives the appearance that the two council members [00:30:50] can't talk, so the spouses are exchanging information. [00:30:54] That might not be the case, [00:30:56] but all of that is going to depend, you know, [00:30:58] factually on the situation. [00:31:00] If they've been friends for years, [00:31:01] or if they've just started having these weekly meetings [00:31:03] since everyone's been elected on council, [00:31:05] then that's obviously going to paint [00:31:07] a different light to the situation. [00:31:10] But ultimately, if you're using any method of communicating, [00:31:16] whether that's through a liaison, [00:31:17] through electronic means, and there's an exchange, [00:31:21] the important part, the one baseline [00:31:24] that has come out of case law [00:31:26] is not just the ability to cure [00:31:27] that Tim talked about for a minute, [00:31:29] and we'll talk about later, [00:31:31] but there has to be an exchange. [00:31:33] So if you go on social media, [00:31:35] and you see someone has posted something, don't respond. [00:31:40] Don't create an exchange. [00:31:42] You haven't committed a violation [00:31:43] just by seeing an article in the newspaper [00:31:45] about what, you know, Mayor Marlowe thinks, [00:31:48] but you do create a violation [00:31:51] if you go on to the online version, [00:31:53] and you post what you think about it. [00:31:55] Now it's starting to look like an exchange [00:31:58] of a communication as opposed to just news, [00:32:03] or just you putting out there what you think. [00:32:07] How does that deal with quotes in the paper? [00:32:10] Well, that's what, so quotes in the paper, [00:32:12] if you read someone else. [00:32:12] If you write a blog, or if you do something else. [00:32:15] I mean, those are all the examples, [00:32:17] but you know, obviously, since you can't say it up there, [00:32:22] and you get asked by a reporter, [00:32:23] and you're trying to answer the question, [00:32:24] because that's a Times test. [00:32:26] If you don't answer, then you're obfuscating their question. [00:32:30] You're disrespecting them, [00:32:32] because they're the only source in town. [00:32:34] But how do you, you know, [00:32:35] how are quotes in the paper dealed with? [00:32:38] If they're inflammatory, or if they're about, you know, [00:32:42] bring out as many people as you can. [00:32:45] Let's run out the squad. [00:32:46] Let's, you know, it creates a hysteria. [00:32:49] It's like yelling fire in a crowded room. [00:32:52] So, you know, what's the, you know, [00:32:55] and sometimes when they ask you something, [00:32:57] it could be after the heat of a, [00:33:00] heat of exchange word battles and stuff. [00:33:03] So, just trying to understand, you know, [00:33:05] what kind of the baselines are on that. [00:33:08] Well, you're permitted to talk to newspaper reporters. [00:33:11] They may take your quotes, and report, [00:33:14] and do a news story where you're quoted. [00:33:19] The standard for the Sunshine Law [00:33:20] is that you don't use a reporter [00:33:22] to communicate with one another. [00:33:24] So, the same standard. [00:33:26] You can't tell them to use them as a conduit. [00:33:30] They can't serve as a conduit. [00:33:31] So, if they start asking you a question like, [00:33:35] well, Council Member Starkey told me this. [00:33:38] You need to say, stop right there. [00:33:41] I'm not violating the Sunshine Law with you. [00:33:43] Do not, unless Council Member Starkey [00:33:45] said it at a public meeting. [00:33:49] But if they're just coming to you, [00:33:50] trying to build a story, [00:33:51] trying to bait you into responding to information [00:33:56] through a news article that they are telling you, [00:33:59] they're serving as a liaison at this point, [00:34:01] you should say, stop right there. [00:34:03] I'm not violating. [00:34:03] If you want to know what I think about a topic, [00:34:05] ask me about it. [00:34:06] But I'm not going to be responding [00:34:08] to Council Member Starkey through you. [00:34:09] That'd be a violation of the Sunshine Law. [00:34:12] And, but the news standard is essentially, [00:34:14] you're going to read things about each other [00:34:17] that one of you may say or be quoted on in the newspaper. [00:34:20] The issue is you have to try to make it very clear [00:34:25] that you are not responding to that. [00:34:26] And that's why I gave the example of, [00:34:28] if someone keeps a blog, [00:34:29] if Council Member Phillips keeps a blog, [00:34:32] don't go on to Council Member Phillips' blog [00:34:34] and start responding to things about city business. [00:34:38] Because that is going to be an exchange, [00:34:40] a communication without following the parameters [00:34:43] of the Sunshine Law. [00:34:46] Because now you've started a dial, [00:34:48] you've started that communication exchange. [00:34:50] I do indeed have one. [00:34:51] And in fact, generally, it's pretty generic stuff, [00:34:54] but occasionally have touched on stuff that is coming up. [00:34:58] I've made a point at the bottom, [00:35:00] if any of my colleagues. [00:35:04] Yes, do not, and so I'll, [00:35:09] before we move away from this point, [00:35:10] I'll jump in, I'll give my one social media tip. [00:35:13] Because the general advice that I think lawyers used to give [00:35:16] was block each other on social media. [00:35:19] And I don't know if you know what that means, [00:35:21] but essentially blocking means you don't see anything [00:35:23] that the other person posts, [00:35:25] the other person doesn't see anything that you post. [00:35:28] I alter my generic advice slightly in that arena. [00:35:32] And I instead advise, [00:35:36] don't be friends with one another on social media, [00:35:40] as in don't link your accounts [00:35:42] where you can send private messages and things like that, [00:35:45] but don't block one another either. [00:35:47] And the reason is this, [00:35:48] if you go on to, let's say a local news channel, [00:35:52] puts out a story on Facebook or on LinkedIn [00:35:54] or on social media that's about Sims Park, [00:35:58] and you have one of your fellow council members blocked, [00:36:02] but you go on and you say, I think this is a great idea, [00:36:06] great article, glad someone's finally covering it. [00:36:10] Well, if you have a city council member blocked, [00:36:13] they can't see that you have made that comment. [00:36:16] So they may unwittingly go on to the same news story [00:36:22] and maybe they make a different comment, [00:36:23] maybe they make the same comment. [00:36:25] Either way, the fact that they've now commented, [00:36:29] what the outside world is going to see, [00:36:33] because they might have neither of you blocked, [00:36:35] is a back and forth. [00:36:39] Even if it's not intentional. [00:36:40] So my general social, the way to avoid that, [00:36:43] because that seems like another convoluted thing, [00:36:46] is to not link your accounts in whatever way that is. [00:36:51] So on Facebook, that's called being friends. [00:36:53] On LinkedIn, I think it's just called a connection. [00:36:56] Don't make, don't connect the two accounts, [00:36:59] but don't block them either. [00:37:01] So that that way you can see, [00:37:03] if I'm reading this news article [00:37:04] and I see council member Davila Thomas has made this comment, [00:37:09] I can't, if I now go on there [00:37:11] and I add to this comment thread, [00:37:13] it is going to be an exchange of a communication [00:37:18] and I shouldn't do that. [00:37:19] So that's why the advice has changed slightly [00:37:22] over the years, but I think it's sound, [00:37:24] because then at least you can see [00:37:26] what your other council members are doing [00:37:28] and be sure not to be even giving the appearance [00:37:32] of communicating in that method. [00:37:35] Just to add to the newspaper thing, [00:37:37] I really think you should limit your comments [00:37:39] to things that you've already said at a public meeting. [00:37:41] I mean, that's what I would highly recommend you do. [00:37:44] And the other thing I would never do [00:37:45] is tell someone how you're going to vote on something, [00:37:47] because you always want to make sure that the appearance [00:37:52] and hopefully the reality is that you make your decisions [00:37:54] based on all the information that's presented to you [00:37:56] at the public meeting, then you make that decision. [00:37:59] So if you start telling people, [00:38:00] I'm going to vote against this project, [00:38:02] you're already setting the city up for failure. [00:38:04] You're already setting us up for litigation and for issues [00:38:07] and you're setting yourself up as well. [00:38:09] So I think you limit your comments [00:38:12] to what you've already said at the public meeting [00:38:14] and encourage them to come to the public meeting [00:38:16] to hear your views. [00:38:17] I think that's the best course of action. [00:38:19] I know that that's not always the popular way to go [00:38:22] and it's not necessarily a violation if you don't do that, [00:38:25] but I just think that's just good general standard advice [00:38:28] and a good way to operate. [00:38:32] Yeah, certainly, that is a way [00:38:34] to be completely above reproach. [00:38:38] Our three basic requirements. [00:38:39] We've done a lot of talking about what's a meeting [00:38:42] in the context of under the law. [00:38:46] And so the reason why it's considered a violation [00:38:49] if you have one of those Facebook exchanges [00:38:52] or out of the context of your regular meetings, [00:38:57] communications, is because the law requires [00:39:00] these three things that we've just talked about. [00:39:02] Must be open to the public, reasonable notice [00:39:04] must be given, minutes must be taken. [00:39:06] Those seem like very clear black and white things, right? [00:39:09] Well, they are and they aren't [00:39:12] because we've already sort of had this. [00:39:14] You said, okay, what does our code say about [00:39:16] what's reasonable notice again? [00:39:19] A lot of the litigation initially [00:39:23] when the Sunshine Law was implemented, [00:39:24] which was around the 70s, hasn't been here forever, [00:39:28] was what does it mean to be open to the public? [00:39:31] So case law has established essentially three parameters. [00:39:37] The time that you're meeting, the space, and the location. [00:39:44] So in terms of what constitutes to be open to the public, [00:39:51] the courts will look at your community and will say, [00:39:55] if you have a community that cannot attend your meetings, [00:40:01] except for at night, but you choose to meet [00:40:05] at four in the morning, the court can consider [00:40:08] that to not be truly open to your public, [00:40:12] to your constituents. [00:40:14] If the location of your meeting is not reasonably large, [00:40:19] the space is not reasonably large enough [00:40:22] to accommodate the crowd that would like to attend, [00:40:25] whether that's by, they can sometimes have overflow rooms [00:40:29] or things like that, but really, [00:40:31] if you, you guys have a very large council chambers, [00:40:34] but I know you guys have ran into the situation recently [00:40:36] where you had expected a large number of people, [00:40:40] and the courts have been very clear [00:40:42] that if you have reason to believe [00:40:44] that you're gonna try to fit a football stadium room [00:40:46] of people into a council member chambers fit for 50, [00:40:52] then that's not a reasonable space [00:40:54] to be considered open to the public. [00:40:58] And if it changes any time after you've noticed the meeting, [00:41:02] then you have to cancel and re-notice. [00:41:05] Re-notice the new location. [00:41:07] We'll go over that on the notice requirements, [00:41:09] but when you're thinking about the concept [00:41:11] of being open to the public, there are, [00:41:16] it's easy for us to think about it now [00:41:18] because you guys have this big, beautiful chambers [00:41:20] that have been built specially for you all [00:41:22] to meet all these requirements [00:41:23] that have come out of case law, [00:41:25] but initially when the law was developing, [00:41:27] I think pretty well-intentioned people [00:41:30] might have made some mistakes because they said, [00:41:32] well, we've always met, at the same time, [00:41:35] it could be perfectly reasonable [00:41:36] for you all to meet in a conference room at Summit. [00:41:40] I have some public boards that no one comes, [00:41:44] they keep the doors open the whole time, [00:41:46] but they meet in a room [00:41:48] that's maybe half the size of this room [00:41:50] because that's all the space that's reasonably required, [00:41:54] and that would be perfectly fine, [00:41:56] so it really depends on all the facts in your community [00:42:00] of how big your space needs to be. [00:42:03] ADA compliant, that was an issue for several years [00:42:08] that people would want to open their doors to the public [00:42:12] and say anyone from the public can come in, [00:42:14] but the court said that's not reasonably open to the public [00:42:17] if individuals who have a disability [00:42:19] can't get into the building. [00:42:21] If you don't have audio equipment, microphones, [00:42:26] so that people can hear you speaking, [00:42:29] meaning that the size of your room [00:42:32] is to the point where if you all [00:42:34] didn't have those microphones [00:42:35] and someone was sitting in the back row, [00:42:37] they couldn't hear you, [00:42:38] then the case law has said you need to have microphones [00:42:41] in order to be considered open to the public. [00:42:45] So this technology, not only is it helpful, [00:42:49] but it's legally required [00:42:52] because as Tim said, the standard is [00:42:54] the public has a right to observe your deliberations [00:42:58] and that includes hearing you speak. [00:43:01] And so if your room is not equipped [00:43:04] with this type of audio-visual equipment [00:43:07] and members of the public can't hear you, [00:43:10] courts have said that's not open. [00:43:13] Location-wise, three basic parameters. [00:43:18] You wanna be within your jurisdiction [00:43:21] and you wanna be in an area [00:43:24] that I just mentioned to you is ADA compliant [00:43:28] and does not have unnecessary distractions. [00:43:31] So courts have struck down private people [00:43:36] from city or local government boards [00:43:39] from meeting within private clubs [00:43:41] where the person at the private club door, [00:43:44] such as say a yacht club, [00:43:46] instead of saying, oh, anyone that comes [00:43:49] for this meeting, tell them to come right in. [00:43:50] They said, are you a member? [00:43:51] No, then you can't come in. [00:43:53] Obviously that's not open to the public. [00:43:56] Restaurants, if you are, [00:43:59] that can be an often loud and noisy scenario. [00:44:03] You've got the potential to run into a lot of inability [00:44:06] to hear or be able to appropriately observe [00:44:11] the decision-making process. [00:44:12] So that has been struck down. [00:44:14] Within the jurisdiction, there are a few exceptions [00:44:18] for very small cities and there are exceptions [00:44:21] if you're going to do a joint meeting with the county [00:44:25] that it be within the county. [00:44:27] But aside from that, in general, [00:44:29] most cities should be meeting within their jurisdiction. [00:44:32] This actually came out of a case [00:44:36] where a bunch of city council members were meeting in, [00:44:41] they were attending a conference in Orlando, [00:44:44] which was about 100 miles away from their jurisdiction. [00:44:48] It was not this jurisdiction. [00:44:48] It was 100 miles in the opposite direction. [00:44:51] But they decided that while they were all over [00:44:54] at the conference, they had some public business [00:44:56] that they needed to attend to, [00:44:58] and so they were going to. [00:45:00] find a space that would be ADA compliant and open to the public. They were going to give reasonable notice, and they were going to have a minute, they arranged for the city clerk there to have to take minutes. But the court said that was not open to the public because your constituents shouldn't have to drive 100 miles to hear and see your deliberating process. In general, you need to meet within your jurisdiction. [00:45:28] How about when multiple municipalities have a group? We have one in Pasco called the Municipal Association of Pasco, and we meet on a quarterly basis in different parts, and we all drive there. I'm not sure how it's noticed. I'm not sure how open it is, but we all get together as a group. [00:45:54] I'm just wondering if there's any lines that we blur by doing that. [00:46:04] The members of all the city councils get together. [00:46:09] Yes is the short answer, right. [00:46:14] Those should be, especially because you're with a bunch of other government officials, they should be making sure. I'm not sure you said you're not sure about the openness of your meetings, but I'm sure you probably tend to pick rooms that are within either someone's city hall or someone's government building. [00:46:33] We've done restaurants. We've done Benedictine monasteries. I don't know if they were praying for us that night, but it was really nice. Since this has come out, those elements are there. We want to make sure we don't get viewed as that we're all meeting to do business out of the public eye. [00:46:59] You probably sit at separate tables, right? [00:47:02] Oh, yeah. We see each other eat all the time. [00:47:05] That gives you some insulation, because obviously you're not discussing things while it's going on. Generally, at these things, you probably have a speaker, and that speaker is just speaking. You're not responding to it. It does get a little dicey if you decide you want to ask a question, that kind of thing, but a question isn't necessarily too vain. [00:47:23] Well, there are topics that come up, like the local option gas tax element, where the county was going to redo it a couple of years ago. We sat there, and then we formed as a group to come back to take a group to go over and voice our opinion at a county commission meeting as a group. [00:47:41] I think we actually, separately, each city decided to bring to our own group a petition, so in a sense, five of us were consolidatory to do that, and we all then brought back to our cities an ordinance supporting the issue. [00:48:02] Resolution or something of those matters. [00:48:04] But it sounds like, from everything you just described, it sounds like if you go and speak at a county meeting, you're at a public meeting. [00:48:11] That's fine, but I'm just talking about when we get together. I just want to make sure that, because that group changes, and the people that format... [00:48:20] It's an interesting point, and the gas tax was the thing that I immediately thought of, too, because that was something where we had a couple of county commissioners that, in very nice terms, told us go to hell. [00:48:36] Take the gas money and leave us short. But I think to a council, every one of the councils then went back. Something to send to the county in opposition to their claim. [00:48:54] But then that ordinance was adopted at a public meeting. [00:48:57] Yeah, but... [00:48:58] And you had a discussion about it. [00:49:00] The whole thing is, if we're meeting as a group like that, that whoever's quarterbacking that group for that year needs to make sure we meet these three requirements that are in place. [00:49:11] And, of course, this is... [00:49:12] If they're going to expect you to participate on matters that are going to come before the city council, then yes. [00:49:18] If they're going to, like Tim said, you just listen to a speaker, and then you might take back action items and say, Debbie, let's get an ordinance together on this, and then you all discuss it at your public meeting, then you've now brought it back to discuss among you all in a public setting. [00:49:35] You also have to be careful about the location. [00:49:37] Right. [00:49:38] Exactly. They do take minutes, but I'm not sure at all that they're publicly noticing, and some of the locations have been less than public. [00:49:48] And it's the only group that we all collectively go to. Like, each of us is appointed to another entity that we meet and go to represent us. [00:49:56] Right. [00:49:57] But that one, we all are encouraged to attend. [00:50:00] And so the point about restaurants is, is it always inherently wrong to meet at a restaurant? [00:50:06] No, because it could be open... Restaurants are often ADA compliant. [00:50:10] The room could be certainly large enough to house your discussion and members of the public who want to attend. [00:50:16] The complicated, sticky things get into, can people hear each other? [00:50:21] So those become more factual scenarios. [00:50:24] So if you have questions, all of these same groups that you're describing should all be kind of on the same interest of we're all trying to comply with the Sunshine Law here. [00:50:35] We have concerns that this might not be, that we want to make sure are addressed. [00:50:40] And then, therefore, if they're not willing to put those in place for you to ensure that, well, this particular topic is going to come up. [00:50:47] I know I'm going to speak, and if others are going to speak, too, you need to make sure that we get our city clerk the notice so that we can notice it. [00:50:56] We need to make sure we get those things in line. [00:50:59] But the situation that you're describing where maybe one thing is discussed, then you come back and discuss it as a city council in your own public setting, [00:51:10] that, to me, wouldn't be a blatant violation because you've done your public discussion in your public meeting. [00:51:19] I think the only dicey thing would be that sometimes the meeting places that we meet are pretty cramped for us. [00:51:26] Let alone, I can't imagine the last time we met at Coquipelli's that there would have been room for anyone. [00:51:32] Right, and so if you know that, if you've reason to believe that members of the public are going to attend and want to attend, then that might not be considered open. [00:51:44] And case law has come down that way. [00:51:46] If you have a space that is big enough to fit you all, but you have reason to believe 15 or 20 people want to show up and you have no place to put them, [00:51:56] then that's no longer considered open. [00:51:59] And again, it goes back to the topics of discussion. [00:52:01] Like you said, Commissioner Phillips, it goes back to what is the purpose? [00:52:06] What are the topics that are going to be discussed? [00:52:08] Are they a matter that comes before the city board? [00:52:10] Two or more of you are going to be there, and you kind of walk through that analysis every time. [00:52:16] And then if the end game is only that, yes, we're all going to be there and we're all going to speak, [00:52:21] then we need to make sure that these requirements are met. [00:52:25] Like Tim said, there's no one else. [00:52:27] It's not even the host organization, even if it's the county. [00:52:31] If they fail to do it properly, we still need to be vigilant in trying to make sure that it is done properly for you because we can't say, [00:52:39] well, the county made us do it or another organization made us do it. [00:52:44] But I'm glad that you brought up the part about speaking at county meetings because that is a question that we receive, [00:52:51] especially in counties such as Pinellas and Pasco because the cities are so close together [00:52:56] and often you all might want to meet with one another. [00:52:59] And you can do joint meetings at times as long as you're meeting within the county. [00:53:07] What constitutes reasonable notice? [00:53:09] That's another matter that has been litigated almost at nauseam since the adoption of the Sunshine Law. [00:53:18] Technically, the time as a baseline can vary based on the facts and circumstances. [00:53:24] As we mentioned in the beginning, I think that the city has adopted a baseline of minimum 24 hours. [00:53:32] I can tell you the case law has evolved into a seven-day, 24 to 72-hour presumption, [00:53:40] meaning if you have a regularly scheduled meeting, one that you know is coming up [00:53:45] and you're going to discuss city business, then as long as you have given at least seven days notice of that meeting, [00:53:52] you are presumed to have given reasonable notice. [00:53:56] Most cities, if you all know that you're by charter going to meet on the first and third Tuesday of every month, for example, [00:54:06] you all probably advertise you have your meetings on the city calendar for months, maybe a year in advance. [00:54:14] You never get in trouble for giving more notice. [00:54:17] The only times people end up in litigation is when you don't give enough notice, [00:54:22] but technically the law is as long as you give seven days notice of a regularly scheduled meeting, [00:54:27] you're presumed to have given reasonable notice. [00:54:30] For emergency or special meetings, a minimum of 24-hour notice is required. [00:54:37] A preferable, the case law has said they prefer at least 72 hours if possible. [00:54:44] So again, it depends on the facts and circumstances. [00:54:47] If something comes up, you know you're going to have to have a special meeting for it. [00:54:52] Let's say you know about that five days before the meeting, [00:54:56] but you decide we're just going to wait and give notice one day before. [00:55:02] Courts don't like that as much. [00:55:04] You want to try to give as much notice as possible in any scenario, [00:55:08] but the absolute baseline, anything less than 24 hours I think would be presumed unreasonable [00:55:15] and has been presumed unreasonable, that is the absolute floor. [00:55:19] And that's also what is codified into your city requirements is that it would never be less than 24, [00:55:26] but I'll tell you the courts have made it very clear they prefer 72. [00:55:30] So that's the 724-72 presumption of when you've provided a reasonable amount of time for people to get there. [00:55:38] The content of the notice, there's no specific prescribed form. [00:55:42] The Attorney General, who would most likely be involved in any litigation that you might come across [00:55:47] in terms of the Sunshine Law and their opinions become very persuasive, [00:55:51] has said you at least need to cover accurately the time of the meeting, the place, [00:55:56] and generally the subject matter. [00:55:59] There's no Sunshine Law requirement to have an agenda, [00:56:03] but although that's what most cities do to capture the various subject matters they may be discussing, [00:56:10] but that's general. [00:56:12] You could put something as simple as to discuss city business. [00:56:15] That's the subject matter. [00:56:17] And they haven't prescribed the platforms that you have to use either, correct? [00:56:23] They have not in terms of the law. [00:56:25] The only thing that has been litigated is that it is a presumption that if you post notice at City Hall, [00:56:31] in terms of the location or the manner, the method of giving your notice, [00:56:37] technically posting a notice at City Hall is presumed to have been given notice of that meeting. [00:56:43] Now, as we have evolved since the 70s with our various methods of communication that we have been discussing, [00:56:52] the Attorney General's Office recommends that you do what is accustomed in your community. [00:57:00] So if your community more often get their information from web sources, it hasn't been litigated yet, [00:57:09] but I think if there was a city that absolutely refused to put their notices on the web, [00:57:16] that would, in this day and age, probably begin to presume to be unreasonable. [00:57:22] Technically, the baseline requirement is posting an 8-by-10 sheet at City Hall. [00:57:28] But, like I said, the more you do, the better. [00:57:32] So press releases, putting things on the web, having your calendar the way that you all do, [00:57:41] that's accessible both through, I think y'all's is accessible through mobile, [00:57:47] through a very mobile-friendly website. [00:57:50] You all do, I think I see there are people who can basically register with the city and say, [00:57:57] hey, if there's ever a meeting, if there's ever something that I need to know about, [00:58:00] homeowners associations and things like that, I know Safety Harbor does that, [00:58:04] the agenda and the notice go out to all of them by email. [00:58:08] So the more things like that that you do, the better. [00:58:16] Exactly, to be able to see that. [00:58:19] The criteria, though, between the 7, 24, 7. [00:58:22] 7 would be 7 days that there's going to be a published meeting, right, [00:58:27] but the agenda is within the confines. [00:58:36] Yeah, technically, the concept of subject matter is a recommendation from the Attorney General's office, [00:58:45] but an agenda is not required for your meeting. [00:58:48] It's not required to be in order to have a properly noticed meeting. [00:58:52] So the 7 days is 7 days where your time, place, and general subject matter need to be noticed. [00:59:01] So that would be who is meeting the city council to discuss what? [00:59:05] Regularly scheduled city business. [00:59:07] There's no statutory or legal requirement that you do an agenda formally. [00:59:15] And once you've done an agenda, absent any local requirement, [00:59:19] there is no prohibition on you considering things outside of that agenda, [00:59:25] as long as you're in your public meeting space. [00:59:29] You can, let's say something comes up and you all decide, [00:59:32] I think you have a method for adding things to the agenda last minute if you say, [00:59:35] hey, we all need to talk about this, we're here in the public, let's do it now. [00:59:40] You're not prohibited from doing that just because it wasn't on your agenda. [00:59:44] So does that make sense? [00:59:46] Don't make it a habit. [00:59:48] You probably don't want to have a very bare bones agenda and then add things on. [00:59:53] It's an emergency. [00:59:55] And then everybody of course doesn't know. [00:59:57] Yeah, yeah. [01:00:00] Right. But I'll tell you a story about the city of Arcadia, which I defended a public [01:00:07] records lawsuit against when they elected to terminate their city manager at a properly [01:00:14] noticed public meeting. The city manager challenged the termination based on the fact that the [01:00:25] termination was not scheduled on the agenda. So that matter was appealed and the city prevailed [01:00:33] because the Sunshine Law does not require that you have a particular matter on the agenda [01:00:40] unless there's some other legal requirement, code requirement. There might be some statutes [01:00:45] that say you can only do this if notice has been given and there can be special parameters. [01:00:52] But routine business in the city of Arcadia, even deciding to hire or fire city personnel, [01:01:00] in their case the city's executive director, it doesn't need to be on the regularly scheduled [01:01:06] agenda. And so they were successful in defending that Sunshine Law challenge because it's about [01:01:15] the public notice and opportunity for the public to attend your meeting as a whole. [01:01:24] It does not need to be tailored to that agenda. That being said, like Councilmember Phillips [01:01:29] said, is it a better idea? Yes. Is it obviously create more transparency and give your constituents [01:01:35] the opportunity to be present and to be heard on matters? Absolutely. So what I have told [01:01:42] Arcadia before they hired us to defend them because they were already in that situation, [01:01:47] go ahead and do it this way. But absolutely not because an ounce of prevention is worth [01:01:53] a pound of cure. The more notice you give of things, the more information and backup [01:01:59] you have in your agenda, the better it is for everybody and then the less likelihood [01:02:03] that you ever run into even the appearance of having violated it. But the requirements [01:02:09] are actually pretty bare minimum when it comes to the form and there's actually nothing [01:02:17] prescribed. We've gotten all of this out of case law and attorney general opinions. And [01:02:21] I say we, I mean we as a collective community, that's how this law has been established. [01:02:26] You won't see in this constitution or in the statute something that says seven days notice [01:02:31] is presumed reasonable. Now special districts this year have a new requirement that I don't [01:02:38] think is far off from being imposed on cities. And we're of course going to track the legislation [01:02:44] and we'll let you know if anything changes. But special districts now have to have an [01:02:48] agenda posted on their website one week before their meetings. Whether it's regular or and [01:02:56] there's some wiggle room for special or emergency type meetings, but we're talking emergency [01:03:00] meetings like the fire district has to meet because we're about to have a hurricane type [01:03:05] emergency. It's not we just waited to notice it so we can shorten the seven days. But I [01:03:10] think you might, there might be some push in the bills this year to start to impose [01:03:17] requirements like that on, I think you'd see it as a ratchet first probably on cities and [01:03:23] then likely on counties. Although I think it's something that FACA and the league would [01:03:28] be pushing back against just to keep that local home rule ability to be managing your [01:03:35] own agenda. But special districts, the legislatures went right in because those are all subdivisions [01:03:41] of the state and they said you have to have an agenda and any available backup posted [01:03:48] seven days before on your website. So just be wary that some of this might be changing [01:03:54] over the next year and you might have additional requirements. Yes. We are at two now so we [01:04:03] can go ahead and take a break. We can zip through the last of these few slides because [01:04:07] we've talked about a lot of them and then public records should be able to be a little [01:06:12] These predecessors would sometimes give us information Friday afternoon through the next Tuesday. [01:06:41] Yeah, most people are already operating on that. It's just not a [01:07:09] Are we having fun yet? [01:07:39] What's funny is depending on, you know, this is great because I love that, you know, we're [01:07:53] all able to kind of do it as more of like a discussion because I think that not only [01:07:59] makes it more interesting, but we get more out of it. But, you know, you know before [01:08:10] where it's just 40 minutes in and out and then other times we spend a little bit more [01:08:15] time on some things. But I think this last part will be. And they already said how you [01:08:33] already get them their stuff seven days before. Anyway, so who cares if they put a statutory [01:08:38] requirement on of that nature? And I was like, I don't know. And that's pretty standard. [01:08:43] It's just it was odd when they added it to special districts because it was like special [01:08:48] districts before then had not, you know, they just had nothing. And then all of a sudden [01:08:52] they were like agendas and backup and everything need to be need to be seven days before legal [01:08:58] cities are probably fighting anything they try to do. Yeah, they'll definitely fight [01:09:03] for you know, for the city. Yeah, there's gonna be nothing they can do now about them. [01:09:07] It's so they have they face such an uphill battle whenever you're fighting. [01:09:12] Would you like a sandwich? Oh, I already grabbed a brownie. Did you? Okay, good. I ate one too. [01:09:20] I think I was glad that we found a time during the day too, because this would have that would [01:09:35] have been pretty daunting to do at night. Yeah, for a four hour one. Yeah, but no, I [01:09:40] think it worked out good. Is it four hours or is it three point? It's technically 50 [01:09:47] minutes of instruction per hour. Okay, so we went a little bit over on the first one. [01:09:51] So if we finish the second part a little earlier, then I have no problem being like we've covered [01:09:55] everything and oh, good, but we're, but it's technically 50 minutes of instruction per [01:10:00] hour. Okay, and so that works out to being what, like three hours and 40 minutes total. [01:10:07] Call it the four hour. Yeah, and then and it's all on our system. So there's no, I don't [01:10:13] report anybody. I don't report anyone's stuff. And I'll you'll hear I'll kind of tell them [01:10:18] that at the end. It's just an ethics question. It's yeah, it is. It's self reported. So I've [01:10:25] had someone say, Oh, I had to take a call for 15 minutes. Can I and I'm like, I can't [01:10:31] tell you what to do. But I sat here for three hours and 30 minutes. I think if you had to [01:10:36] take a 15 minute call, you're okay. But it's all self reporting. So yeah, it's an honor [01:10:42] system. I actually already sat through the one online. This is a lot. This is a lot more [01:10:48] fun. Thank you. I'm here support supporting my colleagues who hadn't finished. Yeah. Plus, I [01:10:55] like I was just saying I like the roundtable. More of a discussion as opposed to just a [01:11:03] talking head for four hours. I mean, yeah, if I get up and walk around. There's no excuse [01:11:10] for you. Debbie, I couldn't call but you've been you've been pushing those notices out to [01:11:16] us a lot earlier, which is good. Solves the problem in seven days. [01:11:23] I gotcha. Well, we're gonna get through this next part. [01:11:29] We'll see you guys through it. Thank you. Did it last an hour? Yeah, about an hour. Was it? Okay, great. Good to go. [01:11:38] All right. Thank you. [01:11:46] It'll switch when I told him at the well. Yeah, Tim starts at three, right? [01:12:13] Yeah. 250. 250. If that works. That's fine. Yep. 250. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. You know, that's what I was saying. It depends. [01:12:32] I've been in this course where people are more heavily have more questions about public [01:12:42] records rather than meetings or vice versa. Or, you know, it just depends. So it's yeah, [01:12:47] I think this discussion was more indicative of what you all thought, you know, we'll go [01:12:52] over public records and kind of what everybody needs to deal with. But you all won't have [01:12:59] to get into, not to use Commissioner Phillips as the, but you won't have to get as much [01:13:03] into the weeds on those things. Just knowing. That's right. Knowing what the law is, knowing [01:13:08] what's there, but your more direct involvement is in what we're talking about now. What's [01:13:13] that? Oh, and you, we missed this. Okay. Real quick. I'll just tell you the anecdote because [01:13:22] I skipped it on the slide because we're a little bit behind. The legislature will tell [01:13:26] you with a straight face that they are subject to the sunshine law. And you know why? Because [01:13:33] there's reads or we have the definition here of meeting communication between two or more [01:13:38] board members of the same board or council. They will tell you with a straight face that, [01:13:45] well first of all, remove the second bullet because they don't have that. It only applies [01:13:50] if they're going to vote, but they will tell you with a straight face that they are subject [01:13:54] to the sunshine law. The only difference is their definition reads communications between [01:14:01] no more than two members of the same house or Senate. So they say, no, no, no, no. It's [01:14:10] the same thing. Just says no more than two. And it's anytime we're going to take a vote [01:14:14] and they will stoically. And I'm like, you don't think that we all don't know what that [01:14:20] means? No more than two. So Cliff and I can talk, and then you tell him, and then you [01:14:26] tell him, and then you tell him, and then you tell him, and then that's what they do. [01:14:30] But they will tell you with a straight face that they are subject to the sunshine law. [01:14:36] And that is, I think, because they've put a statutory requirement on local government [01:14:45] offices that say you have to do it every year. [01:14:47] Well, at least say we did. [01:14:49] We were just talking about that. It's a self-reporting system, but... [01:14:56] Don't you have to submit a certificate? [01:14:58] You submit on your form. [01:15:00] On your financial reporting form, you check a box. [01:15:03] Oh, that's it? [01:15:04] Mm-hmm. [01:15:05] But obviously, if someone ever came and said, [01:15:10] Chopper Davis didn't do it, well, [01:15:12] Chopper would be like, well, ask Jeff, and Judy, and Nikki, [01:15:15] and Cliff, and Tim, and Debbie. [01:15:17] They were there. [01:15:18] I did it. [01:15:19] And we would say, yes, he did it. [01:15:21] Or they're, did that. [01:15:22] I just want to understand, because it's not [01:15:24] going to be any different next year. [01:15:26] If you did the one four-hour one, [01:15:27] you might need a one-hour refresher, but not [01:15:31] a four-hour refresher. [01:15:32] I agree. [01:15:33] I try to, you'll see when I come, [01:15:35] I've tried to incorporate a lot of the case law that's [01:15:38] come out over the last year. [01:15:40] So that way, it's at least updating. [01:15:43] But you have, but yeah, unfortunately, [01:15:46] and it doesn't make any distinction [01:15:48] between if you've been in office versus if you're [01:15:50] newly in office. [01:15:51] Well, no, I'm just saying everybody [01:15:53] should do a four-hour course, and then a one-hour, [01:15:55] as long as you continue in service. [01:15:57] I mean, if you break off, like he did, [01:15:59] and come back a year later, yeah, then do the course again. [01:16:02] But you've got to understand, we are [01:16:04] talking about the legislature came up with this rule. [01:16:07] Call them, and call your. [01:16:08] Exempting themselves from the requirement, [01:16:09] because they're perfect. [01:16:11] Yeah. [01:16:12] When do we get the financial reporting thing? [01:16:14] Is it mailed to us? [01:16:15] At the end of the year? [01:16:16] First of July. [01:16:17] Yeah, usually it's July 1st. [01:16:19] But it's, but this runs calendar. [01:16:22] So they'll ask you about, I think, [01:16:24] whenever your forms are due for 2015, which are in July, [01:16:27] that's when you report on whether or not [01:16:29] you completed the ethics training for 2015. [01:16:33] But, yeah, sorry. [01:16:37] I don't know what the, I don't even know what year it is. [01:16:40] What's that? [01:16:41] They don't ask how much you make, [01:16:42] just where do you get your income from, pretty much, [01:16:43] if I recall right. [01:16:45] Yes, but another thing that the league [01:16:47] is going to be pushing out back on [01:16:48] is there were two bills that were introduced last year [01:16:51] to try to make you all do the same level of reporting [01:16:54] as legislatures do, which is everything, [01:16:57] which is a much more extensive, exactly. [01:17:06] The league fought back against it last year. [01:17:08] It did not pass. [01:17:09] They anticipate it will be introduced again, [01:17:11] but hopefully it will not pass, because I just [01:17:13] think it would be burdens. [01:17:14] That would be insurmountable. [01:17:16] I mean, you're comparing people who [01:17:19] do that only for a living and go up to Tallahassee [01:17:23] to be in session, and for a lot of them, [01:17:24] it's almost a full-time gig. [01:17:27] You won't be able to track talent [01:17:31] like you do at the local level if someone knows, [01:17:34] if the financial reporting is everything, sources, [01:17:39] every, I mean, yeah, locally. [01:17:40] People won't run. [01:17:41] People won't, why would you run? [01:17:44] I already think the stuff that local government officials have [01:17:48] to deal with is burdensome enough. [01:17:50] If you add that to it, I just think it's short-sighted, [01:17:55] but they always have a good, whenever you're [01:17:59] dealing with ethics and sunshine and transparency, [01:18:03] they have a great PR selling point [01:18:05] to try to push anything through, because the minute you push [01:18:08] back on it, you're unethical, or you don't want transparency, [01:18:14] or you want, and it's like, no, we just [01:18:16] want to keep the requirements reasonable, [01:18:18] because most of the people at the local level [01:18:21] are volunteers, essentially. [01:18:23] I mean, you. [01:18:24] It is. [01:18:25] It's basically a part-time volunteer job. [01:18:28] Right. [01:18:32] But, you know, we'll see what happens in the next session. [01:18:45] You're right, yes, as of right now, [01:18:47] you don't have to report numbers. [01:18:49] You only report sources, and only if they, [01:18:52] depending on whether you choose to do, [01:18:55] they're like the two different, you [01:18:56] can do valuation or income-based, [01:18:58] and you can pick between it, and then that's all you report. [01:19:01] But. [01:19:04] It's supposed to be a 10-minute break. [01:19:06] I know, tell them to come back. [01:19:09] Shut her down for 10 minutes. [01:19:11] It's your day. [01:19:12] Bill just went to the bathroom. [01:19:14] Oh, I can't, I don't ever turn off. [01:19:16] I had a game last night, soccer. [01:19:18] I had a soccer game. [01:19:19] That's impossible, right? [01:19:21] I had a soccer game last night, where the offensive guy [01:19:29] and the keeper both went to kick the ball, [01:19:32] and it busted the keeper's shin guard, [01:19:35] and he had to be kind of hauled off. [01:19:37] He didn't break his leg, I don't think. [01:19:38] Hands came running out on the field, which is appropriate. [01:19:51] The father was yelling from the sidelines, [01:19:53] telling me he wanted to get our attention. [01:19:55] Well, somebody yelling in the sidelines, [01:19:57] I'm not going to turn around. [01:19:58] He says, if he just said calmly, I'm his father, [01:20:00] can I come on the field, I'd probably do that. [01:20:06] And it came running out on the field. [01:20:07] They have to go through the fence, [01:20:09] come across the track, because it's high school. [01:20:13] I shut him off, I get him. [01:20:15] He said, I'm a coach, I'm a coach. [01:20:16] Well, what are you going to do? [01:20:16] You're not a coach, you don't know how to pick somebody. [01:20:20] Said he'd meet me in the parking lot afterwards. [01:20:25] Only if we had the administrator and the SRO there, [01:20:27] and we walked out. [01:20:30] Oh, my. [01:20:31] And this was a youth sports event? [01:20:37] No, high school. [01:20:38] High school. [01:20:38] Oh, my goodness. [01:20:39] Nature coach against Citrus High. [01:20:41] OK. [01:20:44] Wow. [01:20:44] He would have been a Citrus High coach. [01:20:49] Citrus coach, somewhere up in Citrus County, [01:20:51] coaching his father. [01:20:54] The father, I don't mind, but the way [01:20:56] he yelled to get on the field was inappropriate. [01:20:58] He just, he would say, hey, hey, hey, ref, [01:21:07] I know you can hear me. [01:21:10] Does anybody go into the event on Saturday night, [01:21:16] the triple threat thing? [01:21:19] That's most of the day. [01:21:21] I will probably make that. [01:21:23] If you see him, extend my courtesy and stuff, [01:21:27] because I'm not going to be able to. [01:21:32] I'm going to be out of town. [01:21:33] I'm going to be over in Daytona. [01:21:36] That's the only recent one we've done [01:21:37] with less than seven days notice. [01:21:39] It was an add-on to the last meeting agenda [01:21:43] for an alcoholic beverage permit for this coming Saturday. [01:21:46] It was a week ago today that we had a meeting. [01:21:49] A guy, a member of the Bearded Brothers band, [01:21:54] got clocked on his motorcycle. [01:21:56] Oh, my gosh. [01:21:57] Illegally turning a lady under the age of 19 and killed. [01:22:00] Oh, my gosh. [01:22:02] So you guys tagged that on. [01:22:04] See, that's acceptable. [01:22:06] We'll get picked back up as people are coming back in, [01:22:09] because we'll zip through this last part in time to, [01:22:14] yeah, he'll be right back in. [01:22:15] So quickly wrapping up public meetings, [01:22:18] just the last few things that I want to be sure that we cover, [01:22:23] so you all can check your box with ethical sincerity. [01:22:31] Minutes, a question we're commonly asked about minutes, [01:22:34] especially in this day and age, [01:22:36] where you've got microphones, things are being recorded. [01:22:38] You're on TV, for Pete's sake. [01:22:40] You're on YouTube. [01:22:41] People are preserved on YouTube. [01:22:43] They say, well, we've recorded, we've done all this stuff. [01:22:46] Does that count as minutes? [01:22:48] They can serve as the recording [01:22:53] from which minutes may be taken, [01:22:55] but the law still requires written minutes of your meetings. [01:23:00] Now, written minutes does not mean a verbatim transcript. [01:23:03] It just means it needs to capture all the business actions [01:23:07] that have been taken at the meeting. [01:23:09] So you're under no obligation to create [01:23:13] or preserve a verbatim transcript from anybody. [01:23:16] In fact, you'll notice most of your meeting notices say, [01:23:19] if you want a verbatim transcript, [01:23:22] make sure you have a court reporter there [01:23:24] to arrange for that. [01:23:25] It's not the city's responsibility, [01:23:27] but I think that's worth noting [01:23:28] because in this day and age, we have so much technology, [01:23:31] but the law has not totally caught up, [01:23:34] but the standard is still written minutes, [01:23:38] and then they get filed with the city clerk's office. [01:23:42] Bill quickly mentioned exemptions [01:23:44] at the beginning of the meeting. [01:23:46] There are exemptions to everything [01:23:48] that we've been talking about, [01:23:49] meaning times when you can meet at a group [01:23:51] to discuss things that are city business, [01:23:54] but the difference is the legislature [01:23:56] has carved out certain statutory exemptions. [01:23:59] The important thing for you all to know [01:24:00] is they're all statutory. [01:24:02] So Tim and Debbie would walk you through each one of these [01:24:07] should it come up and you need to discuss it [01:24:09] in a shade meeting or in a closed door session. [01:24:14] But the important thing is [01:24:15] that they're all statutory [01:24:16] and they all have statutory requirements [01:24:18] that must be followed in order to meet [01:24:20] within the closed session, [01:24:23] or for example, in a pending litigation scenario [01:24:27] in what's called a shade session. [01:24:29] It's called a shade session [01:24:31] because a court reporter's there [01:24:32] and eventually the transcript becomes public. [01:24:34] So you're never totally out of the public in that instance. [01:24:37] You're only out of the public during the time [01:24:39] that the litigation is pending. [01:24:42] What's a security system meeting? [01:24:44] There's an exemption basically [01:24:46] to discuss security infrastructure, [01:24:52] building... [01:24:54] Location, kind of GPS. [01:24:57] Security system is a defined term under section 119. [01:25:03] It's pretty much anything that relates to the security [01:25:06] or the security system plan of public infrastructure. [01:25:10] And if you're meeting to discuss how to change that plan [01:25:14] or how to institute certain security systems [01:25:16] into a public building, [01:25:18] then that part would be exempt obviously [01:25:19] because the security system plans themselves are exempt. [01:25:25] And so discussing them at a public meeting [01:25:27] would similarly be able to be closed. [01:25:29] One thing that's been added in this past year, [01:25:32] the definition of trade secret information [01:25:34] has been broadened [01:25:36] to include financial information of vendors. [01:25:40] Used to just be that was a public records component [01:25:43] over the past year, effective August 1st. [01:25:45] You also now have a corollary public meeting exemption [01:25:52] to where financial information [01:25:54] that is trade secret of a vendor [01:25:56] and being discussed at a public meeting can be closed. [01:26:00] Now, there are a lot of different criteria [01:26:02] for how that meets trade secret. [01:26:04] But if you have a vendor who submits a request for proposal [01:26:07] back to the city and they claim and prove [01:26:10] that their financial information [01:26:12] that they've submitted as part of their bid, [01:26:14] for example, is trade secret, [01:26:17] then if that financial information [01:26:19] is going to be discussed at a public meeting, [01:26:21] there is now a corollary exemption. [01:26:23] So that was new, adopted this past legislative session [01:26:27] and became effective October 1st. [01:26:29] There is, oh, go ahead. [01:26:32] Let's say there's virtually no, [01:26:35] I don't want to say no guidance, [01:26:36] but we represent a lot of cities in Pinellas County [01:26:39] and we've talked with them [01:26:40] and they're most just want to kind of handle it ad hoc. [01:26:43] Some are adopting procedures in place, [01:26:46] basically by resolution to say [01:26:49] how they're going to handle claims [01:26:52] of trade secret exemption in their public meetings. [01:26:54] And that's something that you all [01:26:55] can feel free to do as well. [01:26:57] But I just wanted you to know the update in the law [01:26:59] is that that definition has been broadened [01:27:02] and it now has a corollary public meetings. [01:27:05] Under any of these exempt statutory elements, [01:27:11] does it give council [01:27:15] or does it give a council person [01:27:19] the ability to either meet with department, [01:27:24] not department, with manager and legal [01:27:27] when it comes to acquisition of property [01:27:31] or eminent domain? [01:27:33] Two specific distinctions. [01:27:38] You could always individually meet [01:27:39] with Debbie and the city attorney. [01:27:42] I understand that. [01:27:43] I just want to be clear. [01:27:43] Meeting as a group, [01:27:45] if you do not fit within the statutory and- [01:27:49] But you've given me titles. [01:27:51] I don't know what, [01:27:52] I don't know, you know, it's like making a sandwich. [01:27:53] I know that there's bread on top and bottom, [01:27:56] but I just didn't know if there was anything [01:27:58] in any of these that allows you to go to shade [01:28:01] to discuss something about, [01:28:05] because you're talking about property acquisition, [01:28:08] you know, because as soon as you identify it, [01:28:10] everybody, so I'm just trying to- [01:28:13] Yeah, I don't know of any [01:28:14] that just relate to property acquisition. [01:28:17] Eminent domain would only be if you were in pending, [01:28:20] meaning you'd already made the decision to file [01:28:22] and then you had to have a strategy session [01:28:24] on how you might like to settle [01:28:25] that eminent domain lawsuits. [01:28:27] That would be pending litigation. [01:28:29] But outside of that, [01:28:31] there's no just general- [01:28:36] It's more in understanding [01:28:39] that you can't call shade. [01:28:43] And I always think of get smart [01:28:45] when they used to go into the cone of silence. [01:28:46] I'm sorry. [01:28:47] Yeah. [01:28:48] But, because obviously, you know, [01:28:52] sometimes when you're up on the dais [01:28:54] and you get wound up, [01:28:55] sometimes you just blurt something out [01:28:57] and next thing you know, that's your thought. [01:28:59] You've done it in a public setting, [01:29:01] but all of a sudden you've already, [01:29:02] you also, there may have been a strategy in play. [01:29:05] There may be something that you might working on [01:29:07] as a bigger thing with your strategic plan, [01:29:09] all those things. [01:29:10] I just wanted to make sure [01:29:11] that there wasn't something in one of these five or six [01:29:16] that allows you, [01:29:17] because obviously, you know, trade secret wise, [01:29:22] you know, it's kind of like a city secret, [01:29:24] because as soon as you put out [01:29:25] who your potential user might be, [01:29:29] then you got every vulture in town swooping down on them. [01:29:32] So I'm just, [01:29:33] I just wanted to make sure [01:29:34] that there hadn't been anything different [01:29:36] than I had known for 25 years, [01:29:39] that if you want to go acquire a piece of property [01:29:41] or you want to do some kind of eminent domain [01:29:43] or something like that, [01:29:45] you can't go behind closed doors to discuss a strategy. [01:29:49] You can only do it after you've come [01:29:52] to a decisive collective vote. [01:29:57] Is that right, Tim? [01:29:59] Yeah, there is. [01:30:00] I'll send you a great case just offline that where a particularly sensitive deal was being [01:30:09] negotiated between a little organization called the Major League Baseball Association and [01:30:14] the city of Sarasota for potentially relocating spring training in Sarasota. [01:30:20] And so there were obviously Major League Baseball had a lot of different concerns that they [01:30:25] wanted to keep private. [01:30:26] That was before they had the vendor trade secret financial information exemption. [01:30:34] And so there were, it was a very sensitive issue. [01:30:37] It got challenged as potential Sunshine Law violation basically claiming that the city [01:30:42] had engaged in improper negotiations through the city manager because a lot of the terms [01:30:49] would be hammered out by the city manager and then brought to the public in workshops [01:30:53] or it was years of meetings over going back and forth with Major League Baseball. [01:30:59] And at the end of the day, it was challenged and it was upheld and it was actually appealed [01:31:03] to the Florida Supreme Court and Susan Schiruti, who you all know, defended the city of Sarasota [01:31:09] and successfully the court held that there had been no Sunshine Law violation. [01:31:16] And you can read the case, but it was almost, you know, it was exactly a lot of the different [01:31:20] things that you're... [01:31:21] So it was, I'll say artfully done, but it was not a violation because they basically [01:31:30] Major League Baseball said, we're only comfortable disclosing certain things to your city manager [01:31:34] because we don't want to have a big, you know, we don't want all of Major League Baseball's [01:31:41] stuff to become public. [01:31:43] My only other question to that is that we've put out an RFP on the Hacienda and if a private [01:31:50] entity came to us and in their submittal said, this information I'm providing to you [01:31:58] as proprietary, and it's outside of what your RFP is asking for, because you're asking for [01:32:05] financial... [01:32:06] And you know, some of that's pretty personal to those people. [01:32:09] So I just want to... [01:32:11] Talk to Tim to go through it factually, step by step, because the definition of trade secret [01:32:15] is pretty... [01:32:17] It's codified in section 800 of Florida statutes. [01:32:20] There's a number of different things, but if they meet that definition, and now it also [01:32:23] includes financial information, now there is a closed session exemption that you can [01:32:30] travel under. [01:32:31] But the thing about exemptions too, is you want to be sure to stick within the parameters [01:32:36] of whatever it is they say you can talk about. [01:32:39] So for example, in pending litigation, you can't just talk about anything to do with [01:32:43] litigation. [01:32:44] Your discussion, according to the statute, has to be limited to settlement strategy related [01:32:49] to expenditures. [01:32:51] That's it. [01:32:52] So you can't go and start talking about, what about this other case, or how does it affect [01:32:57] this? [01:32:58] It has to be limited to whatever the statutory enumerated topic that you're allowed to talk [01:33:03] about. [01:33:04] But if that ever came up, I know Tim and Debbie would guide you guys through that well. [01:33:09] We talked about this a little bit. [01:33:11] What happens if the law is violated? [01:33:13] All these scary things, scariest of which, by the way, for the lawyers, is the last one, [01:33:18] because any action taken is technically like it never happened. [01:33:22] So you have people performing under contracts that were never actually approved, and it's [01:33:26] just a conundrum. [01:33:28] But there's obviously all these other individual things, and all these other potential consequences, [01:33:35] but the biggest one from a Sunshine Law perspective is the action is like it never happened. [01:33:42] We already talked about social functions, so we'll skip that slide. [01:33:48] Can violations be cured? [01:33:50] Yes, as long as there is a full and public robust discussion, not merely a public vote [01:33:58] or a perfunctory public discussion that is merely ratifying secret meetings. [01:34:03] And so that's when you're going to look at, does everybody come together and just suddenly [01:34:08] one person makes a motion out of the blue and everyone votes yes, and you say, well, [01:34:11] we voted in the public. [01:34:14] There has to be a robust, open discussion about any matter. [01:34:19] So if you... [01:34:20] I put this slide up there to highlight two things. [01:34:24] One, in the Major League Baseball case, I'll send you the Florida Supreme Court, even said [01:34:28] to the extent there was any impropriety about one meeting that the city manager had held [01:34:34] with Major League Baseball, and basically they argued it was an improper delegation, [01:34:39] should have been subject to the Sunshine Law. [01:34:42] They said any of that was cured, because here you are having meeting after meeting after [01:34:45] meeting with all this public discussion, public's got input out the yin-yang, any potential [01:34:53] violation was bathed in the sunshine, was cured. [01:34:57] So if you find yourself in a situation, I'm being recorded so I won't use an oh no moment, [01:35:07] call Tim, call Debbie. [01:35:09] There are things that you can do to cure a potential Sunshine Law violation, potentially [01:35:24] or more than likely if you realize, oops, I just hit reply all to this email, oops, [01:35:31] I just... [01:35:32] That never happens. [01:35:33] That never... [01:35:34] No one's ever gotten in trouble with the reply all. [01:35:36] It's better to call them and say, hey, I just realized I hit reply all, then you open it [01:35:42] in the sunshine, you cure it, that all happens before it's ever even an issue, rather than [01:35:47] going back years later and you say, I don't even remember I did that reply all email. [01:35:50] But if you have an oh no moment, call them, there are things that can be done. [01:35:54] How about voicemail, how about voicemails? [01:36:01] What about them? [01:36:02] Calling and leaving each other voicemails? [01:36:03] I don't know if there's a voicemail that's been taped and somebody produces it. [01:36:12] Response to a public records request or... [01:36:15] Response to actions that the council is taking or whatever, I mean, does that get outside [01:36:20] of the purview or just, you know, there's so many potholes in this stuff, so I'm just... [01:36:29] Well, I mean, the definition of communication is very broad, so any time that it could be [01:36:33] seen as you all having a communication exchange with one another, the thing about a voicemail [01:36:39] is it is kind of one-sided, but then that's why I say don't text, we're going to get into [01:36:43] that with our public records, because that not only creates a public records nightmare, [01:36:48] but it also could potentially be a violation of the Sunshine Law if you're having an exchange [01:36:53] about a matter that might come before the board. [01:36:57] Just as we move into public records, at 3, we need to take 10 minutes, because that's [01:37:03] what the calendar said, and I set a quick call, so I don't want... [01:37:08] I'm going to be done by 2.50, and I'm giving you to Tim, and then Tim, you've got to be [01:37:13] done by 3. [01:37:14] Okay, public records, again, where do public records become public from? [01:37:20] Not from the statute, direct from the Constitution, so lest we thought that the city clerk and [01:37:26] the city's plight with dealing with this concept of having a very broad... [01:37:32] Florida has one of the most broad public record and public meeting laws in the nation, and [01:37:37] so it's broad not only in its... [01:37:41] Mostly in its applicability, meaning it applies to most everything that the city does, and [01:37:46] it comes from the Constitution, so lest you thought it was going away anytime soon, it's [01:37:49] not. [01:37:50] It's then codified into mostly Chapter 119 of Florida statutes. [01:37:56] I say mostly because it is everywhere. [01:38:00] It is everywhere through the statutes. [01:38:02] The general provisions, the general state policy on records, general exemptions, things [01:38:07] like that, those are all pretty neatly tucked within Chapter 119, which you might see referred [01:38:12] to from time to time, but it really is scattered throughout Florida statutes. [01:38:19] General policy is that every record, meaning every document, every piece of data, in any [01:38:24] form whatsoever, made or received in connection with official business, is considered to be [01:38:29] a public record, meaning it has to be available for inspection and copying to any member of [01:38:34] the public. [01:38:35] Under what time frame? [01:38:38] Well, that's what we're going to talk about. [01:38:40] We have people that ask for just an absorbent amount of information and want it tomorrow. [01:38:46] Yes, there are sort of reasonableness standards, but general law, general public records law [01:38:52] is that every public, every document, every bit of information in any form is considered [01:39:00] a public record of the city if it's made or received in connection with official business. [01:39:04] Do you have to provide it on a hard copy? [01:39:07] What's that? [01:39:08] Do you have to provide it on a hard copy? [01:39:10] You have to provide it in the medium requested if that is a medium that is retained by the [01:39:14] city, meaning if the city keeps a paper copy of this record and someone says, I want a [01:39:19] paper copy, you have to give it to them. [01:39:22] If the city keeps an electronic version of that record and someone says, I want an electronic [01:39:27] copy, that's the medium that you have to give it in. [01:39:30] If someone says, you have this piece of paper, I want it in an electronic form, you have [01:39:37] no duty to alter the medium to provide it in the form requested. [01:39:41] Does that make sense? [01:39:42] Vice versa. [01:39:43] Vice versa. [01:39:44] If you have it electronically and they say, we want it printed, then you have no obligation [01:39:50] to print it, but if they want to pay the copying costs, then they may do so. [01:39:57] Then you have to pay. [01:39:58] That's the can of worms. [01:40:01] Yes. [01:40:02] Then they can request it in that they make a copy of it, but if they want a print paper [01:40:08] copy, then it's going to be based on the cost for that request, they're going to be based [01:40:12] on the statutory parameters, which is, I think it's 10 cents a page, 15 cents for double-sided, [01:40:20] $1 for certified copies, that part is in 119, the statutory cost that can be recovered [01:40:27] for someone taking an electronic copy and saying, I want it printed. [01:40:32] But in general, if it's a medium that you keep the record in, someone can request it [01:40:38] in that medium and you have to provide it in the medium that they requested. [01:40:42] But it doesn't say anything about personnel time and time to view it. [01:40:49] It does say, it does talk about personnel time, which we will- [01:40:52] Yeah, and then you extrapolate that out and you give them the total bill and then they [01:40:56] want to, then you spend all the time discussing that as adults or not as adults. [01:41:04] If the, and we will go over that on the slide, the ability to impose a special service charge [01:41:11] has to be based on the nature and the volume of the request. [01:41:14] The charge must be based on the actual cost to the city, meaning you take that actual [01:41:19] personnel time, you take that, the actual cost of their labor, which can include benefits, [01:41:25] which can include all those things, it's the actual cost to the city. [01:41:28] And it has to be based on the lowest paid person that is capable of doing the work, [01:41:33] doing the work, meaning you don't charge someone for Debbie standing at a copy or making copies [01:41:40] because she's one of the higher paid employees of the city. [01:41:43] And that work could probably be done by an assistant to Debbie. [01:41:47] And you need, so you need to charge for the lowest paid person who is capable of doing [01:41:54] the work to do the work. [01:41:56] And we'll- [01:41:57] As a side question, Debbie, how many requests for information do we get? [01:42:01] I mean, we're not in that chain. [01:42:05] Do you get them- [01:42:06] We do get a good number of requests for information. [01:42:09] Weekly, daily? [01:42:10] Weekly. [01:42:11] Okay. [01:42:12] Of public records requests? [01:42:13] Yes. [01:42:14] Yes. [01:42:15] I knew it was prevalent prior to bringing Debbie on because we dealt with some controversial [01:42:22] elements and services. [01:42:27] So just trying to understand how onerous it becomes on both sides. [01:42:32] It's definitely more onerous on the city than on the requester. [01:42:36] I said we have somebody come in and say, I want a copy of every one of your red light [01:42:39] violations from your red light camera for the last three years. [01:42:44] So again, that's going to be based on the nature. [01:42:46] You mean in terms of, so what you all are getting into are the general requirements [01:42:50] to respond. [01:42:51] So we have the umbrella. [01:42:54] Everything has to be open, given to the public when they want it. [01:42:56] But then what does that mean? [01:42:57] How quickly do you have to do it? [01:42:58] Well, you have three things. [01:42:59] First, you have a duty to acknowledge promptly, meaning not respond, acknowledge. [01:43:05] So someone sends you, let's say you on your city email receive a public records request [01:43:10] for something. [01:43:13] If you have a, let's say they say, I want all of your emails with the city manager. [01:43:20] You would say, well, it's not just a city clerk's job. [01:43:23] That's part of the training today. [01:43:25] While you might be able to hand that off to someone and say, will you help me handle this? [01:43:30] The statute is written so that it's on whoever has the record. [01:43:35] So that's one of the things that, so the duty is, can fall on you legally. [01:43:41] It's not just something you can say, talk to the city clerk about that. [01:43:45] But all that being said, is the city clerk or the city manager's office likely going [01:43:50] to be the one that facilitates and does most of the public records requests? [01:43:53] Absolutely. [01:43:54] And with good reason. [01:43:55] But there's essentially three duties. [01:43:58] You have a duty to acknowledge promptly, to respond within a reasonable time, and to [01:44:04] only impose costs as may be provided by law. [01:44:09] So the first thing is acknowledging promptly. [01:44:13] That can be as simple as, I received your email, I forwarded it along to the city clerk [01:44:18] who will get back with you in response to your request. [01:44:21] But that initial, that's the initial step, is always acknowledging the request. [01:44:26] So letting the requester know you've received it, and it's being processed. [01:44:31] In terms of how long, how long is a reasonable time to respond, it's always going to depend [01:44:36] on the nature and the volume of the request. [01:44:39] So if the nature is all of your red light tickets for the past three years, the response [01:44:45] to the requester is likely going to be something like, we've received your request. [01:44:50] Due to the nature and the volume of this request, we anticipate it's going to take X number, [01:44:56] it's going to take, there's going to be a special [01:45:00] service charge imposed, because you're talking about records that are for three years and [01:45:04] are very broad, it's going to take time for someone to compile. You can then do a, you [01:45:12] can include the, what the estimate of those costs are in your response. You can require [01:45:19] a deposit before beginning undertaking review. And then you, and you can also set the parameters [01:45:26] within that first communication to say, we anticipate it will take this much in costs [01:45:34] and this much in time to respond to your records requests. And everything that the court looks [01:45:40] at is nature and volume. So if you're looking at three years of records, that's pretty voluminous. [01:45:47] A week, maybe even longer, depending on your other staffing needs, may be appropriate. [01:45:53] If it's, I want this document that's in front of Nikki right now, and it's one document [01:46:00] and you tell someone it's going to take a week, then that's likely not going to be considered [01:46:05] a reasonable time to respond. But there is no set timeframe of when you, what is considered [01:46:16] reasonable. It's always based on the nature of the records and the volume of the request. [01:46:22] So the one example that I give on this, I think articulates everything and then we'll [01:46:27] wrap it, wrap it up in terms of public records stuff. Because I think you guys can, you guys [01:46:34] can sift through most of this stuff on your own. But a public records request was made [01:46:40] to the City of Gainesville for all of the human resources directors' emails for the [01:46:44] past year and to give them to the requester. And the City of Gainesville responded and [01:46:54] they said, great, we'll have that for you in a month and it'll be $40,000. I'll just [01:46:59] cut to the chase. The court upheld that as not a violation of the public records law. [01:47:06] Why? One, the nature of the request. Human resources emails, likely going to be a lot [01:47:10] of exempt information in there. We need to review it. We need to be sure that any exempt [01:47:15] or confidential information is pulled out. We need to have someone with a legal background [01:47:19] review it. So we're going to have a paralegal do most of it, but we're going to ultimately [01:47:23] have to have a lawyer look at some of the emails that may be questionable. The volume [01:47:28] of the request. Emails for the last year were about 10,000 emails. So there were 10,000 [01:47:34] emails to go through that were initially going to be gone through by a paralegal and then [01:47:39] a lawyer doing the final review. So once the court broke all this down, they said, actually, [01:47:45] this is a reasonable cost and reasonable time to respond based on the nature and the volume [01:47:51] of the request. But all of those things are always going to flow into it. And they said [01:47:56] you structured your costs correctly. You used the lowest paid person to do the work that [01:48:01] could do the work, a paralegal initially, and then you only have the review by the attorney. [01:48:06] So they said they upheld it as a reasonable estimate of the time and cost. [01:48:11] So I use that as the example, because just because you hear a number doesn't mean it's [01:48:19] patently unreasonable. The same is also true if you have a very simple public records request, [01:48:24] but you're telling someone, well, it's going to have to take...legal has to review all [01:48:31] the citations. Well, I mean, you might...if you look at one, you'll know that any category [01:48:38] of information that's exempt, but you don't have to review every single one. So it's always [01:48:42] going to depend on the nature and the volume in terms of both the response time, whether [01:48:47] your delay is reasonable or unreasonable, and the amount of costs that you can impose. [01:48:55] The common question that we get from council members, this will be the last point because [01:48:59] we have one minute, and I'm going to be honest about my time. A lot of people want to know [01:49:04] if your personal notes that you write are public record. Public records are, the definition [01:49:10] I told you, anything made or received in connection with official business. They have to be created [01:49:14] to communicate, formalize, or perpetuate knowledge. Meaning, if you're writing a note to someone [01:49:20] else about city business, public record. You're writing a note to yourself to jog your own [01:49:26] memory, not a public record. You're writing...you're formalizing something, so you're writing an [01:49:34] official proposal that you intend to present to the city council at your next meeting. [01:49:40] Possibly a public record, but that is always the standard. So typically, most of your notes [01:49:45] that you write to jog your own memory, or for your own personal use, are not going to [01:49:49] be considered a public record. When it comes to whether or not...and that same definition [01:49:56] applies and standard applies to a lot of people ask, what about if it's a...I have a personal [01:50:04] email on my city computer. Did that become a public record? It's always about content, [01:50:11] not location, not where it's kept. So if it is related to city business, whether it's [01:50:17] on your home computer, or on your city computer, or on your home email, or your city email, [01:50:23] it's about the content, not about the location of where it's stored. [01:50:27] So my post-it notes are saved? [01:50:31] Your post-it notes may need to be saved. We already went over these, the basic requirements, [01:50:38] duty to acknowledge, respond promptly. You're either going to do one of two...the city's [01:50:42] going to do one of two things at the fork in the road. It's either going to be allowing [01:50:46] access, and if it's denying access, or if there's a delay, we need to review for...because [01:50:52] to make sure that there aren't any exemptions apply. Exemptions, again, are all statutory, [01:50:58] just like public meetings. They're narrowly applied. They have to be provided in writing [01:51:04] to the requester. New case that just came out this past year, it can be a categorical. [01:51:11] You can provide that statutory reference categorically, meaning redactions have been made pursuant [01:51:16] to this statute, this statute, this statute. You don't need to go line by line showing [01:51:20] each of the redactions. That came out in August of this year. There's also a difference between [01:51:26] information that the city has an obligation to hold back, that is confidential information [01:51:31] in the statute, and information that the city can hold back, that is exempt. One's a business [01:51:36] decision, one's a requirement. But the law has two types of exemptions, and some are [01:51:42] exempt and confidential, some are just exempt. We talked about costs of responding to public [01:51:48] records requests pretty thoroughly, but you have basically everything that I just stated [01:51:54] on here, essentially, that we've talked about just summarized into the three bullet points. [01:52:01] What happens if it's violated? Knowing violations can equal jail time. Like Tim said, thankfully [01:52:07] we've avoided that so far. And any violation can mean civil actions. There's a mandatory [01:52:12] attorney's fee provision in it, meaning the judge has no discretion, no matter how well-intentioned, [01:52:17] to not award attorney's fees to the other side. But there's no reciprocal, meaning if [01:52:24] the city wins, the city does not have the ability to seek its attorney's fees in return. [01:52:30] There have been several bills introduced on that. They've not passed. And, of course, [01:52:36] the most harsh sanction, removal from office. Global picture for you guys, here's what [01:52:41] you do if you receive a public records request in your email. Of course, defer to Tim's advice, [01:52:47] too. But there is a statutory duty for you to acknowledge. But that doesn't mean you [01:52:52] have to necessarily be the one to respond. So contact Debbie, and contact Tim if you [01:53:00] have any questions. But I think Tim would agree with me, it would be perfectly appropriate [01:53:04] to say, I've received your email, I'm getting in touch with our city manager who will be [01:53:09] in touch with you, or something to that effect. So that you have at least satisfied your job [01:53:14] of just acknowledging that you've received the request. I've sped through that one, so [01:53:21] we could spend a little more time on public meetings. But if you have any questions, you [01:53:24] all have my number. You've got Tim, you've got Debbie, and thanks for having me. I went [01:53:30] three minutes over, sorry. And you have a pretty picture of the Sunshine Skyway. [01:53:37] Do you want to go do your phone call now, and I'll start after you come back? [01:53:43] Yeah, give me, I think I can call early. [01:53:45] Nikki, one of the things that I have had is people have been known to send to my personal [01:53:51] email address, or heaven forbid, IM me on Facebook. And typically what I've been doing [01:53:58] is forwarding that personal email to my city mailbox, and then responding from there. [01:54:04] Or doing a copy, in the case of the IM's, copy and paste, and emailing it to my city. [01:54:10] So it's- [01:54:11] That's a great, that's a great method of preservation. Because once something is a public record, [01:54:16] it's required by the city to be preserved according to the records retention schedule. [01:54:20] So what you just described is a great way to accomplish that. Because you're moving [01:54:24] it to a location to where Judy and Debbie can easily capture it. [01:54:29] And I'm under no obligation to keep the original email. [01:54:32] No, once you've got a copy, once you have it forwarded into the city system, and it's [01:54:38] being preserved in that manner, then you're fine. But I think that's a great way to deal [01:54:43] with it, to deal with the preservation issue. Which is, once something's a public record, [01:54:49] you can't just delete it outside of the retention schedule. And that's also why I say, just [01:54:54] don't, if you need to text Debbie, don't text her something substantive about city [01:55:01] business. Because we did have to try to claw back information from a cell phone one time, [01:55:06] and it was incredibly expensive. And it took an incredible amount of time. And it's not [01:55:11] easy to preserve text messages or the data associated with them. So if you need to talk [01:55:18] with Debbie or someone substantively about city business, try to take it into a forum. [01:55:25] That would be easy for you to do what you just described. So if a constituent's wanting [01:55:30] to rant with you on text message, say, hey, send me an email about this. So that that [01:55:35] way you can get the public records in a method that is easier to maintain. And that sounds [01:55:43] like exactly what you've been doing. But yeah, don't text, just don't text about city business. [01:55:50] It was the most expensive exercise in futility than I'd ever seen. [01:55:55] Do people ask for stuff on your blog? [01:56:02] No, not usually. Occasionally I'll get comments where they'll comment back, and sometimes [01:56:09] I'll reply and thank them for sharing the information. But also with the blog, I made [01:56:18] the point of it's not my personal Facebook account. It is a public official's mayor's [01:56:27] Facebook. And conceivably, it's all visible. [01:56:32] No, I just wanted people to ask it. [01:56:34] Yes, it's all visible. And what you can do too, if there's ever a question of I want [01:56:38] all the activity on Mayor Marlowe's Facebook account, there is a button under Facebook [01:56:45] in the settings section where you can click send me my data. And they will send you everything [01:56:52] associated with that account up to that day. It can be a large file and it can take a little [01:56:56] bit longer, but that's an easy way. If you do have it separated like that, where you [01:57:00] have a mayor's Facebook account, it's certainly easier from a preservation standpoint because [01:57:06] then you can just capture all that data by clicking that link, send it. If there's a [01:57:11] public records request and Judy says, great, I need all that Facebook data, you send it [01:57:15] to her, she sends that out, and then you've been able to both preserve and respond to [01:57:20] the public records request. So I don't think Facebook did that intentionally for local [01:57:24] government officials, but I think it's been a good addition to help with some of that [01:57:29] preservation issue because it will show even, it will at least have the algorithm associated [01:57:36] with when things have been deleted. So how you can extrapolate that is not required under [01:57:43] the public records law, it's the manner of producing it. But it makes it a little easier. [01:57:50] The opposite of what Rob said was that he sends in when it's personal and he forwards [01:57:55] it to the city and then answers it. You get a personal message sent to you on your city [01:58:00] account and then you forward it to your home account and then continue with it. It's equally [01:58:09] as correct, right? Yes, it always depends on the content, not [01:58:12] the location. So just because that personal email came to your city account doesn't mean [01:58:18] now that you forward it to your personal account that it's a public record. It's always [01:58:22] based on content, not where it's stored. I tend to get too many of those for whatever [01:58:29] reason. No, but where that usually comes up is that [01:58:33] someone will receive a personal email, it'll be in their city email, and someone will say [01:58:37] I want all of Mayor Marlowe's emails. And so Debbie or Judy goes in and says okay, here's [01:58:44] all his emails. And you say, wait, wait, wait, that one wasn't a public record. Well, the [01:58:51] city doesn't have an obligation to go through and say, oh, Cliff getting an email from his [01:58:56] wife to pick up milk, that's not a public record. We have an obligation to hold it back. [01:59:00] So meaning that if it's on a city system, it can be produced inadvertently even though [01:59:06] it's not a public record. And so where most people, if they want to keep their private [01:59:10] life private and their public life public, you'd do well to forward that to your own [01:59:17] personal email, delete it, and then that way you don't have anything being produced that [01:59:23] is maybe something that you don't want being produced. The egg example is very benign, [01:59:28] so people probably don't care, but some people receive personal emails that are unrelated [01:59:31] to city business that they don't want to go out into the public. And so the best thing [01:59:36] to do is if it's not a public record, storing it separately can be beneficial, but it's [01:59:46] always based on the content in terms of whether or not it's public. [02:00:00] My day job is as a geek and I've long held that you don't put anything either in social [02:00:10] media or email that you would not be perfectly okay with reading on the front page of the [02:00:16] Tampa Bay Times. [02:00:19] And that is a great baseline to live by because it will keep you out of a lot of headache. [02:00:24] But not everybody does that and so sometimes they want to come back and say, hey that wasn't [02:00:28] a public record, why did you produce it? [02:00:30] And there's no expectation of privacy in your city email, you know, it can pretty much all [02:00:36] be open to it. [02:00:37] So if you have something, if you want to keep your personal stuff separate, just forward [02:00:41] it out and then you can delete it as long as it's, you know, you're sure it's not a [02:00:46] public record. [02:00:47] But you can again factually check with Debbie if you have any questions. [02:00:52] Real quick before the others come back, I'll just do a quick introduction because you guys [02:00:55] will probably be, I'm going to meet with Crystal and some folks about the utility [02:01:00] fund stuff. [02:01:04] Behind me is Zach Lombardo from our office. [02:01:07] He'll be walking you through the wonderful world of ethics. [02:01:11] Zach's been an associate with our firm for almost two years now and was a law clerk before [02:01:15] so he's been bitten by the local government bug just as much as the rest of us. [02:01:22] And he has again taught this seminar for the Florida League of Cities throughout the past [02:01:29] two years. [02:01:30] So he's a wealth of knowledge when it comes to all of the Florida Commission on Ethics [02:01:36] opinions that there are, what, like 11,000 of or something? [02:01:40] They go back at least to 1979, so there's quite a dearth of them, 16 a year or so. [02:01:46] So it's a lot. [02:01:47] I'm going to go through a big stack of them, it's going to be fun. [02:01:51] He's kidding, but he does get the interesting topics, so that'll be after you have your [02:01:58] time with Tim. [02:01:59] So there you go, you're through the first part, you're welcome. [02:02:05] I'll see you all on the third. [02:02:06] Yes, thank you. [02:02:08] Is there city council? [02:02:12] I'll be at your city council. [02:02:13] Oh, the purchasing utility system. [02:02:15] Yep. [02:02:16] We'll be back. [02:02:18] I'll give you my seat here, Zach, and, yeah, if you guys want to take a little break. [02:02:25] Since he's out doing his meeting. [02:02:28] No problem. [02:02:29] Oh, no, you're fine. [02:02:30] Good job, thanks. [02:02:31] It was really nice. [02:02:32] Good job. [02:02:33] Yeah, if there are any other follow-ups. [02:02:34] Yeah, sure. [02:02:35] You guys did great. [02:02:36] You too. [02:02:37] You too. [02:02:38] It's been too long. [02:02:39] I know. [02:04:10] Thank you. [02:04:11] Thank you. [02:04:12] Thank you. [02:10:10] I'm going to talk about the city manager form of government that we have here. [02:10:40] And just try to update you on some things you're probably familiar with, but it never [02:10:46] hurts to have a little refresher on some of these things. [02:10:49] First of all, there's really two types of municipal governments in our state. [02:10:53] One is a strong mayor form of government. [02:10:55] That's not very prevalent in this area, in the Tampa Bay area. [02:10:59] You're basically looking at Tampa and St. Petersburg are the two strong mayor governments. [02:11:03] And St. Petersburg is a very recent strong mayor form of government. [02:11:08] And basically in that particular form, the mayor is the administrative head of the city, [02:11:13] but is also elected by the people. [02:11:15] So that's a very rare type of form that we have here. [02:11:19] What is more typical and what you find throughout the state is the council manager form of government, [02:11:25] which is very prevalent among especially smaller cities, and that's what we have here. [02:11:30] So what does that mean? [02:11:31] I like to use the analogy of the federal system, where you have the three branches of government [02:11:36] to illustrate how the division of responsibilities and duties and powers is provided. [02:11:44] So for using that analogy, the city council basically becomes the legislative branch. [02:11:51] That's pretty obvious. [02:11:52] But you also become the judicial branch, in our case the quasi-judicial branch. [02:11:57] So I'll talk about that a little bit more. [02:12:00] But as the legislative branch, much like in our own federal system, you have the responsibility [02:12:06] to establish the overall direction of the city, and you provide a very broad-based, [02:12:11] policy-based direction to the city and how you want to see the city operate. [02:12:18] And you appoint a city manager, who is your administrative official, [02:12:21] to handle the day-to-day operations of the city. [02:12:24] The city manager is the executive branch. [02:12:26] Basically it's the city manager's responsibility to execute the policies that you create [02:12:31] and the legislation that you create. [02:12:35] So one of the things as a legislative branch that you do is you propose, debate, and vote [02:12:39] on legislation that governs or affects the city. [02:12:43] That's a very critical component. [02:12:45] You have the power to adopt ordinances, which under state law have the power equal to statutes [02:12:51] for purposes of enforcement. [02:12:54] You also have the ability to approve budgets and expenditures in excess of $25,000. [02:13:00] That is a specific administrative type of function that you serve that's provided by [02:13:05] ordinance and is very typical of most cities throughout the state. [02:13:09] You also conduct these quasi-judicial proceedings. [02:13:12] When quasi-judicial was first brought up many years ago, most city officials looked [02:13:19] to their city attorney and said, what are you talking about? [02:13:21] What does that even mean? [02:13:23] But by now, if you've been doing this for any length of time, and if you've been involved [02:13:26] in city government, that term has become a little more secondhand to you and you understand [02:13:31] what it means. [02:13:32] Basically, that means when you're acting in that judicial role, you have to think of [02:13:36] yourself as a judge or a panel of judges. [02:13:40] One of the things, the component of that is the ex-party communication requirements. [02:13:46] I try to tell councils to be very careful with the ex-party communications because you [02:13:51] really, if you think about it, if you were going to court and your judge was out talking [02:13:56] to one of the adversaries in your case, how would you feel about that? [02:14:00] You probably wouldn't be very comfortable with it. [02:14:02] So although we have a provision that allows you to do it and allows you to disclose it, [02:14:06] my general advice is don't have them. [02:14:08] Just don't have them. [02:14:09] Tell them to come to the meeting. [02:14:11] Whatever is that important, bring it to the meeting and we'll talk about it at the meeting [02:14:14] because you really have to make your decision based on the evidence that's presented for [02:14:18] it to be defensible. [02:14:19] Yes? [02:14:20] Refresh my memory. [02:14:21] Variances, that's quasi-judicial, correct? [02:14:22] Yes. [02:14:23] So anyone, if we're going to be voting on a variance and one of the parties involved [02:14:28] calls us, we should just advise that party, sorry, I don't feel comfortable talking about [02:14:33] you. [02:14:34] We'll have an open discussion at the meeting. [02:14:35] Yes, absolutely. [02:14:36] That's exactly what I would do. [02:14:37] I would encourage them to come to the meeting. [02:14:39] You don't want to discuss it. [02:14:40] You really can't. [02:14:41] And that includes meeting with developers, for instance. [02:14:44] Don't go meet with a developer that's got a project coming up. [02:14:47] Tell them to come to the meeting. [02:14:49] And that's the appropriate way to do that. [02:14:51] If there's something that an applicant wants to get across to the city, you can direct [02:14:56] them to the city manager, who in turn can then direct them to the appropriate... [02:15:00] department to provide that information at the development department. [02:15:03] So that's really what you need to do and you can do that with citizens too that may be [02:15:06] opposed to something for instance. [02:15:09] Come see the city manager and make sure that whatever information you have is brought to [02:15:14] the city and is available at the meeting because you are the judges and so you have to make [02:15:19] sure that you keep that unbiased view of the evidence as best you can. [02:15:26] And like I said you can have ex-party communications but again then you have to disclose them at [02:15:31] the meeting and you can understand where that can get real dicey and so especially if it [02:15:37] looks like you're meeting with one side or the other you've already made the other side [02:15:42] very circumspect about your potential ruling. [02:15:45] So like I said I generally encourage and I've always encouraged elected officials to avoid [02:15:50] those communications completely if possible and you can encourage them to come to city [02:15:56] hall and get any information they want and present any information that they want. [02:16:01] The other aspect of this is the independence of the city manager's office and whether or [02:16:07] not you can interfere with administration. [02:16:10] We have very specific prohibitions in our charter and this is very typical. [02:16:15] Every city has these and one of the things that it provides is that you can't remove [02:16:20] or appoint administrative officers or officials of the city. [02:16:24] The only two that you have direct control over are the city attorney and the city manager [02:16:28] sitting right here. [02:16:30] Everybody else is under the special magistrate. [02:16:38] All the other officials are under the umbrella of the city manager. [02:16:41] So the city manager has the authority over removal and placement and disciplinary actions [02:16:47] and all aspects of it. [02:16:50] The other provision that you have that's very specific in the charter and this is at section [02:16:54] 2.05 subsection C, interference with administration. [02:16:59] This is a pretty typical provision that you'll find in pretty much every city charter throughout [02:17:05] the state except for the purposes of inquiries and investigations under section 2.09 and [02:17:10] that's a specific section that gives you the authority to conduct investigations if you [02:17:14] feel the need to as a collegial body. [02:17:17] And you have to understand that everything you do as a city council person is really [02:17:23] done in the course and scope as a group, as a collegial body. [02:17:28] None of you individually has any particular power or authority over anything. [02:17:32] You have your power and authority derives from the fact that you all get together and [02:17:36] you vote on those things and collectively you have that power. [02:17:40] One example is the mayor has more of a figurehead power and or in an emergency situation the [02:17:47] governor can appoint the mayor as the head of the city. [02:17:51] But other than that, everything you do is really as a collective unit. [02:17:55] So you have to keep that in mind. [02:17:56] Can we go back to what you just said, God forbid something happened to Debbie, can you [02:18:00] tell me the governor could say, Mayor Marlow, you're not running the city until you hire [02:18:04] a new city manager? [02:18:05] No, because the city manager can have a deputy city manager and the deputy would take over [02:18:10] and perform the functions of the city manager. [02:18:13] I'm talking in a state of emergency. [02:18:16] It's very rare, but it can happen. [02:18:18] I'm not even aware of any cases where it has happened, to be honest with you, but it'd [02:18:21] probably be like in a hurricane situation or something. [02:18:23] The governor can appoint the mayor as the executive of the city. [02:18:27] So it says the city council or its members shall deal with city officers and employees [02:18:31] who are subject to the direction and supervision of the city manager, which as we just discussed [02:18:36] is virtually everyone here in the city. [02:18:39] Solely through the city manager. [02:18:41] So that means that your communications, your interface with city staff technically has [02:18:45] to go through the city manager. [02:18:47] And neither the city council nor its members shall give orders to any such officer or employee [02:18:53] either publicly or privately. [02:18:56] And that's a pretty strong statement. [02:18:57] So that basically says you can't tell a police officer to do something. [02:19:02] You can't tell a sanitation worker to do something. [02:19:07] You have to direct all those inquiries directly to the city manager. [02:19:10] All the way down to minimal tasks, like for instance, I was driving around the lake. [02:19:15] I always try to drive around the lake and the park at least once a day. [02:19:19] We just passed a shopping cart ordinance. [02:19:20] There's a shopping cart on the east side of city hall for three days over the weekend. [02:19:24] Then I just saw another one across from in the First Baptist lot across from Orange Lake. [02:19:32] So based on what you're telling me, I shouldn't call the police stations. [02:19:36] I shouldn't say, hey, can you guys come get this cart? [02:19:38] I should call Debbie and have her handle it. [02:19:40] In miniscule, things like that. [02:19:42] Well, I would say you probably should call the city manager, but you're also citizens. [02:19:46] So if you see something, you can point it out. [02:19:48] I guess the difference is if you call and you say, hey, this is Councilman Starkey, [02:19:53] and I just saw a violation of some kind, can somebody get over there right away? [02:19:59] You can see where that could interfere with the management. [02:20:03] You have to understand, if you're telling a city employee to do something, that's coming [02:20:08] from the top. [02:20:09] And they're already going to be intimidated by the fact that it's coming from you. [02:20:13] So they may feel compelled to drop everything, but in reality, Debbie's got them tasked with [02:20:19] doing something else and didn't want them to go waste time to go pick up a shopping [02:20:22] cart or something right at this moment because we've got other things that we need to get [02:20:26] done. [02:20:27] So you're interfering with her ability to make sure the city functions properly. [02:20:33] If the city manager doesn't have an issue with you just reporting those things directly, [02:20:37] I don't see any problem with it. [02:20:39] But it comes in the nature of whether it's in order or not. [02:20:42] Are you telling somebody to go out there? [02:20:44] So it's not a direct issue? [02:20:45] I'm sorry? [02:20:46] It's a reporting or a directing issue? [02:20:47] Yes, exactly. [02:20:48] Like you said, as soon as I call up and say, hey, this is Councilman Starkey, whoever answers [02:20:52] the phone is going to... [02:20:53] They're going to get right through and you're... [02:20:54] Yes, exactly. [02:20:55] Yeah, and they do tend to. [02:20:59] The most recent example I can give of something where I talked directly to Robert Rivera actually [02:21:07] was I had had somebody walk in to the door of my office and say, hey, there's a hole [02:21:12] forming on Adams Street. [02:21:15] And so I sent an email to Robert saying, you know, it's just the other side of the police [02:21:19] station from my office. [02:21:21] If you could get somebody to check that out because our thought was it might be a sinkhole [02:21:25] or something. [02:21:26] But I cc'd Debbie on the email so that she could follow up. [02:21:30] And that's a good way to do it, cc the city manager so she knows and she can actually [02:21:33] contact them and say, I saw that you got this and decide what priority it really needs to [02:21:39] have because you really should be working through the city manager and you can certainly [02:21:44] direct her as to those priorities. [02:21:46] So one last question then, since we're all here and it's public and I guess this is more [02:21:50] directed towards Debbie. [02:21:51] As you know, I try to stay out of your business, I let you do your job the best that I can. [02:21:56] However, I like being in touch with some of our department heads. [02:22:01] A chief will have lunch every couple of months. [02:22:04] Would you rather me say, hey, I'm going to call the chief up and have lunch, would you [02:22:08] like to join us or call him directly or does that not matter? [02:22:11] I don't object to you having lunch with any of the department heads. [02:22:15] As long as I'm not giving them direction. [02:22:16] As long as you're not asking them or members of their staff to perform specific duties [02:22:22] on your behalf. [02:22:24] The other nice thing about this arrangement, and I've noticed it more as mayor than I did [02:22:30] as a council member, I will have people that either pick up the phone and call me up because [02:22:36] they got a red light camera ticket or they had some sort of problem with Liz and my response [02:22:47] is invariably, you need to call Debbie Mance, her phone number is 853-1021. [02:22:53] Which is a great way to get out of it, too, and not have to mess with it. [02:22:55] Yeah, you tell them I'm prohibited from doing anything. [02:23:00] You can kind of tell me, a citizen got a hold of me and they're having problems with their [02:23:05] neighbors. [02:23:06] They think their place is trashed and it's rental. [02:23:10] So I went and saw Derek, I said, is this even licensed as a rental in the town? [02:23:14] And so he says, yeah. [02:23:17] And he said, well, have you looked at it yet? [02:23:19] And he said, no. [02:23:19] And I said, well, I don't know what the situation is there, and I haven't heard back from him. [02:23:28] They gave me a report and I'm due to give you that report. [02:23:34] But that's an example of where things can go wrong, more than anything. [02:23:40] And what I fear is that, you know, should a lawsuit or anything ever ensue, a councilperson [02:23:50] directed a member of the staff to go into a district that we're not even currently looking [02:23:56] at, where if you would have came to me, I would have said this is an ordinance issue [02:24:01] and sent ordinance right away to them. [02:24:04] See, I didn't even really know. [02:24:05] Right. [02:24:05] I mean, I kind of left it in his hands. [02:24:08] I didn't know which direction it was going to go. [02:24:10] But he, of course, jumped on it. [02:24:12] It's hard from a management perspective to serve two directors. [02:24:16] Yeah. [02:24:18] And especially when the manager is actually the one that's doing the annual review, is [02:24:28] my best example, because they know what their marching orders are. [02:24:34] And don't get me wrong, we all get fired up once in a while and we'll see somebody or [02:24:38] we'll say something, but it's better to take a breath and then send Debbie. [02:24:44] And that's the one nice thing since we brought these devices online, as opposed to trying [02:24:53] to do everything by phone or by letter or whatever, because on my previous time on [02:24:58] council, it was a little tougher. [02:25:00] But with these iPads, an email to her copying the people with your specifics, then [02:25:06] you've got a document of what it is and there's a follow trail, because what you're [02:25:11] talking about on the public records and all that, if that trail of information gets [02:25:18] interrupted, that gives people in certain professions an opportunity to load their [02:25:27] weapons and stuff. [02:25:29] Debbie and I are dealing with one right now in Laila's on Central, who's been having [02:25:32] issues with Carl Reef and the music. [02:25:33] She keeps emailing me, but I keep forwarding the emails to Debbie, CC and her, and she's [02:25:38] been in contact. [02:25:39] But it kind of puts me in the awkward position I've had is, I know a lot of city [02:25:44] employees prior to being on council, and I've had disgruntled employees contact me saying, [02:25:49] you know, is there anything you can do? [02:25:50] I don't like what's going on in the police department. [02:25:52] I don't like what's going on. [02:25:52] I'm just using an example, and I've done the same thing. [02:25:55] I'm just forwarding, I'm like, listen, I can't get involved. [02:25:57] I'm like, I run my own business. [02:25:59] We're an executive body, but we're not in day-to-day operations. [02:26:02] I can't tell you. [02:26:03] You know, I can't do you any favors here, and I'm just going to advise them to contact [02:26:07] Debbie or Human Resources. [02:26:08] But that's almost always the right answer, which is, you need to talk to Debbie Manz [02:26:13] if you've got a problem with the department head or, you know. [02:26:15] And that really comes back to play a lot in my mind when we're talking about projects [02:26:19] we're working on or vendors that are popping around. [02:26:22] Because we all get somebody that didn't get the bid. [02:26:25] Yeah. [02:26:25] You know, I got a call. [02:26:26] Yeah. [02:26:27] I got a call during my first term from a former sheriff who had a friend out in Land [02:26:33] O'Lakes that didn't feel like his person got the right protocol in the bid process [02:26:38] and the, you know, the points and all that. [02:26:41] And so I had to go back and try to, and look at what was all done. [02:26:44] And it was done right by how it's laid out, but then you have to go back. [02:26:48] But again, you know, but to, and to express an opinion that, without being in a [02:26:53] collective body that, yeah, I think I agree with you. [02:26:57] Next thing you know, you, you open yourselves up to a really big challenge. [02:27:01] Folks may have no idea what, what, what's going on about it, you know, so that, [02:27:06] you know, I don't know, call somebody, you know. [02:27:10] Call, call Debbie, is the stock answer. [02:27:13] It really is. [02:27:15] Just in. [02:27:15] She probably doesn't get half the calls that I tell them to call her in. [02:27:19] Which is to your advantage. [02:27:21] In light of full disclosures, on my way here today, I was eight minutes at the [02:27:25] light at Florimar Terrace. [02:27:32] Who of, you know, who's in charge of that light? [02:27:34] Is it the city or, or the state, and the police officer, sheriff's department. [02:27:40] By the time I was ready to come out of my rotary meeting, I don't know if it was [02:27:43] just coincidental or what, there were like six sheriff cars there. [02:27:47] There was a police car. [02:27:47] I don't know if it was anything to do with that. [02:27:49] But that was something where, for one brief minute, I was going to call Debbie, [02:27:54] and I just thought, well, let me find out first if it's even to us. [02:27:57] Typically, you know, my go-to response is exactly that. [02:28:01] Any conversation that ever comes in, immediately the, the email back is to [02:28:09] that person, thank you for bringing this up. [02:28:17] And you just have to be aware of the power of your office that, you know, if [02:28:20] you have even a meeting with city staff or a lunch meeting, that, you know, if [02:28:25] you're talking about things that are a priority to you, you're putting it in [02:28:29] their head that they need to take care of that, and they're thinking, well, geez, [02:28:32] you're the city manager's boss, and you're telling me that I need to do this. [02:28:37] And the city manager might be telling them something different. [02:28:39] So you can see where that could just disrupt the wheels. [02:28:41] And make things sticky. [02:28:42] So basically, if we're not happy with, with the, the priority list, even, we can, [02:28:47] we shouldn't express it if we have it. [02:28:49] We need to have our, our, our interaction with the person that we hired. [02:28:53] Yeah, it's just like the, you hire a city manager. [02:28:56] The public elects you to do a job, and you're a representative of the public. [02:29:00] You've appointed a city manager, she's your representative to run the city, and [02:29:04] that's how you have to look at the, the flow of, of the power structure. [02:29:08] And, and, and some cities actually make it a criminal act to violate that provision. [02:29:13] We don't have that in our charter, but I've definitely seen cities that have that. [02:29:17] The, the, the ramifications of violating it here are that you could lose your office. [02:29:22] It's one of those things. [02:29:23] If you violate the charter, you could forfeit your office. [02:29:26] Among other thing, ways that you could forfeit your office. [02:29:28] So, it has a pretty powerful ramifications. [02:29:32] And I think you just have to be mindful of it. [02:29:34] I mean, we talked about enforcement ordinances under the city manager's powers. [02:29:37] That's one of the city manager's powers. [02:29:39] That's the executive branch's responsibility to enforce ordinances. [02:29:43] One of the things that I see many council people get involved in [02:29:46] is some aspect of code enforcement, whatever it might be. [02:29:52] And typically what happens is a citizen who happens to be one of your neighbors or [02:29:56] a friend thinks, well, I'm having this problem either with my. [02:30:00] neighbor or I'm having a problem with the city who has a problem with my house or my [02:30:04] property and they think that they're going to reach out to you and have you intervene [02:30:08] and take care of it. [02:30:10] That's where you have to educate them a little bit because they don't know any better. [02:30:14] And probably back in the day that was the way you did get things done, but that's not [02:30:18] how things are done today. [02:30:19] So now you have to tell them, listen, I would be glad to pass on any information you want [02:30:23] that you really need to talk to the code enforcement office, you need to talk to the city manager, [02:30:28] you need to take that information elsewhere. [02:30:31] Because you adopt the ordinances, it's the city manager's responsibility as the executive [02:30:35] to see that they're enforced and it's my responsibility to guide her in that process. [02:30:40] All of these things tend to be, or are, not tend to be, but are very litigious in nature, [02:30:47] they're very factually sensitive and if you start interfering with that process, you're [02:30:52] more likely to cause an issue for us legally than you're probably going to be helpful to [02:30:58] it. [02:30:59] And we have to make sure that one of the most important things that we have to do is recognize [02:31:05] the constitutional requirement of providing equal protection. [02:31:09] And that means that everybody needs to be treated equally in the law, under the law, [02:31:13] so that no matter who it is, no matter who you know, we still have to enforce that ordinance [02:31:18] that you adopted in the way that it was adopted against everybody equally. [02:31:23] And if in the course of hearing maybe an objection from a citizen about a particular [02:31:28] ordinance, you think, you know what, that ordinance doesn't make sense to me, I'd like [02:31:31] to revisit that, then that's a perfect opportunity for you to bring that back to this body and [02:31:35] say, hey, I've gotten some information about this ordinance, I'm not real comfortable with [02:31:39] it, I think we need to look at this ordinance, rather than look at this particular case and [02:31:43] can we do something for this particular individual. [02:31:46] So keep that in mind, that that is a power that is strictly belongs to the city manager [02:31:52] to enforce those ordinances, and your role is to create them and adopt them. [02:31:58] How about our role when we get up here and we get fired up and all of a sudden we make [02:32:04] a statement, we make our statement, and in some ways we don't impugn our colleagues, [02:32:12] that we put everybody on point, but we may have said something that offends or puts us [02:32:18] in a bad spot with a citizen, a vendor, an employee, or whatever, what's the counseling [02:32:26] there? [02:32:27] Well, you're acting for the city any time you're up there, you're never lone rangers [02:32:32] or independent, so everything you do you can't hide behind the act, well this is just my [02:32:35] own personal thought, it's not, it's the thought of an elected official in the city of Newport [02:32:40] or Ritchie, and one of the biggest things that you can do, I mean these are public meetings, [02:32:47] everything is supposed to be open, everything is supposed to be available, all information [02:32:50] should be shared, the public should know everything you know, and we should make the best decision [02:32:54] based on the accumulation of this information, however, you do have a public forum that you're [02:33:01] operating in, which can also be dangerous, so for instance, one of the things that you [02:33:06] can do is you can damage someone's reputation, for instance, by impugning somebody from the [02:33:11] dais or something, that would implicate that person's liberty interest, and when you think [02:33:17] about a constitutional right, a lot of people don't think of liberty including your reputation, [02:33:22] but it does, it's not just your freedom of movement and your ability not to be incarcerated [02:33:27] or your freedom of travel, it's also the protection of your reputation, so if you're up there [02:33:33] and you're impugning citizens or vendors or anybody that comes before us, you're potentially [02:33:40] causing damage that the city could ultimately be responsible for, and you may be personally [02:33:44] as well, because state law also provides that if you do something maliciously or willfully, [02:33:51] that then takes you outside the protection of the entity, and in fact, the city doesn't [02:33:55] even have to indemnify you for whatever you've caused and or the expenses, the legal expenses [02:34:01] that you've incurred, because you've stepped out of your role, now you're acting willfully [02:34:06] and maliciously. [02:34:07] Two quick things, the point you just made on a personal umbrella liability application, [02:34:12] one of the underwriting questions are, is are you an elected official, so they ask that [02:34:17] for a reason, back to when we're up here though, we each, you said we're acting on the city, [02:34:22] I may have a little bit of a problem with how you interpreted that, and I'm sure it's [02:34:25] how the law is read, but my interpretation on what's best for the city may be different [02:34:31] than Bill's on a certain issue. [02:34:33] Say that again, I'm sorry. [02:34:34] My interpretation on a certain issue as to what's best for the city may be different [02:34:39] than Bill's. [02:34:40] So, I mean, how can we say that we're not able to portray our opinions, it's our personal [02:34:44] opinion as to what's best for the city. [02:34:46] Yeah, and that's of course a big part of it, is that you all are going to have different [02:34:50] views, and that's why there's five of you to make collectively all the decisions that [02:34:54] impact the city. [02:34:55] What I'm talking about is if you're up there, you are representing the city, and that is [02:34:59] your personal view, but it's also your view as a council person. [02:35:03] And so, if in the course of, and I think, you know, the example that Deputy Mayor is [02:35:07] bringing up is, basically if you impugn someone's character, if you impugn someone's character, [02:35:13] that's the city impugning that person's character, you too, personally, potentially, and like [02:35:16] I said, there might be a point where you've crossed a line, now you're on your own, depending [02:35:20] on the nature of it, but you are a representative of the city, so you just have to be careful [02:35:26] that you, what you do, what you say, has ramifications maybe beyond what you think is happening right [02:35:31] in front of you at that particular meeting. [02:35:35] So just to finish up, the other points I wanted to cover is that, you know, the city manager [02:35:40] as the executive branch is, she's your main technical advisor, she provides you all the [02:35:44] information that you need to make your informed decisions, she is the day-to-day operator [02:35:48] of the city, she's responsible for preparing, monitoring, and executing your budget. [02:35:53] You decide how much money we're going to spend and where it's going to come from, but she [02:35:56] has to execute that plan, she has to carry it out and make sure that it's done. [02:36:01] And then finally, she has to do, provide for recruitment, dismissal, and other disciplinary [02:36:05] functions with respect to city employees, and that goes back to that section we talked [02:36:09] about earlier. [02:36:10] But I think that's all I wanted to cover, is there anything else you wanted me to? [02:36:14] Tim, I had one question. [02:36:15] Sure. [02:36:17] I think that part of it's public notice, part of it's preparation, and when you come to [02:36:22] the meetings, and when we come to a meeting and the prepared information that we received [02:36:30] has been modified maybe once or twice so that when we show up, there's new information in [02:36:38] front of us, there is some time sensitivity to it in looking at it, getting it dealt with. [02:36:47] Some of it's statutorily driven, some of it's just we need to get this moved along. [02:36:53] What's the counseling there, because we've had instances over the last year where we [02:36:58] have prepped, come to meetings, we show up, and there's a new booklet or new information [02:37:06] in front of us, and in some cases you want to say time out, let's re-notice, let's do [02:37:13] that. [02:37:14] Other cases you try to deal with it, and wanting to make sure if we're representing the city, [02:37:21] and so I'm asking for a counseling situation there, because every decision, as you mentioned, [02:37:27] has a ripple effect. [02:37:29] One conversation leads to another. [02:37:32] I think that's up to you each individually and collectively, and that is if you don't [02:37:37] feel comfortable that the information is provided to you in a position where you can make an [02:37:41] informed decision at that particular meeting, then you need to address that and decide whether [02:37:47] or not it does need to be postponed. [02:37:49] I always say you've got to vote your conscience, and you've got to do what you think is correct [02:37:55] for you, and then collectively you can certainly establish any types of rules that you want [02:38:01] to over those kinds of things as well, although I will give you my general caveat is that [02:38:07] I don't like us to adopt a lot of rules governing how we do things, especially at this level, [02:38:12] at the city council level, because invariably those are going to become traps that you're [02:38:16] going to want to get around at some point in the future because of a particular item. [02:38:21] So I'd rather us try to provide a general framework, and then as needed we can deviate [02:38:28] from that when it's appropriate and necessary, but hopefully, like you said, that's the exception, [02:38:34] not the rule. [02:38:37] Any other questions for anything I've brought up? [02:38:38] No, good job. [02:38:39] You just brought up a really good point earlier. [02:38:41] It's easy for us, like when I walk through City Hall, call me Jeff, call me Jeff, but [02:38:44] the bottom line is we're their bosses, bosses, bosses, and it's easy to forget that sometimes [02:38:49] being a council member, so I'm glad you brought it up, and when we say something to somebody [02:38:53] it's different than most other people saying something to somebody. [02:38:57] And we know you mean well. [02:38:58] You know, I've been doing this for 30 years, and everybody is in the same boat. [02:39:03] Everybody means well, but there's just, you forget that you've got to watch those lines [02:39:07] a little bit. [02:39:08] Yeah, and it is real important that we've got one head of state, if you will, in the [02:39:13] city, and that's our city manager. [02:39:16] I don't want that report in Friday's. [02:39:19] Okay. [02:39:20] I just wanted some information, and the reason is... [02:39:34] That'd be great. [02:39:35] Yeah, because I don't really want a lot of paperwork on this. [02:39:46] Okay. [02:39:48] Okay. [02:39:49] Yeah, we don't want to do that. [02:39:50] The city did that about 25 years ago over somebody's back fence, and it cost us a lot [02:39:55] of money. [02:39:56] Well, no, this is the problem, is recording. [02:39:59] Oh, gosh. [02:40:00] All right, we've got to let this young man do his thing. [02:40:03] Zach, you're up, I guess. [02:40:06] Where are you driving back to? [02:40:09] Tampa. [02:40:10] Well, you'll be going against traffic most of the way, too. [02:40:14] Yeah. [02:40:15] I'm not concerned about it. [02:40:16] Well, you know, if you live... [02:40:18] Depending on where you live in Tampa. [02:40:19] All the other people coming out, you'll be just cruising right there. [02:40:21] Yeah, you can just wave at them. [02:40:22] Hey, hi, good to see you. [02:40:23] I'm a soccer referee. [02:40:24] I cruise in on time going in. [02:40:26] Wonderful. [02:40:27] All right, well, welcome to EPIC's class. [02:40:29] We're optimistic city council people, so that's how you get it. [02:40:32] Perfect. [02:40:33] Perfect, perfect. [02:40:34] I trust you all did the assigned reading from the textbook. [02:40:37] Yeah. [02:40:38] Absolutely. [02:40:39] I'll just be calling on them randomly. [02:40:43] My middle name is Essex. [02:40:45] You saw this notice already, but Tim's your guy here [02:40:47] as far as the hard legal questions. [02:40:49] I'll do the easy ones. [02:40:51] So what we are talking about here is Florida ethics law, [02:40:55] and specifically, these are regulations that were created [02:40:58] to regulate you as public officials, [02:41:00] as opposed to just generally ethics laws, [02:41:03] as might be discussed in this book. [02:41:05] And so the course that you're taking here is required, [02:41:09] actually, by the legislature that you complete this course. [02:41:12] It really just means that you sit here. [02:41:14] But I brought all kinds of questions to ask you, [02:41:16] so it feels more like a real course. [02:41:18] The final exam is going to be a breeze, though. [02:41:20] Don't worry. [02:41:21] I hope you guys can do the Scantrons. [02:41:23] Of course you can cheat. [02:41:24] It's an ethics class. [02:41:25] I'm just kidding. [02:41:27] Well, that's how the legislature works. [02:41:30] All right, all right. [02:41:31] And importantly, the legislature is not regulated by this ethics code, [02:41:35] which should give you some indication as to what's going on here. [02:41:38] Where does this come from? [02:41:39] We're going to zoom in. [02:41:41] It's coming from the very far point. [02:41:43] It starts in the Florida Constitution. [02:41:44] The Florida Constitution requires that there be an ethics code. [02:41:48] And the reason it does this is because of this line right here, [02:41:51] a public office is a public trust. [02:41:54] As officials, you are in a very important position [02:42:00] in that you do have a lot of power, [02:42:01] and you are looking over the welfare of others. [02:42:05] So to avoid temptation, [02:42:08] we have these rules here to prevent you from getting into trouble. [02:42:14] So we're going to kind of read some of this stuff here. [02:42:17] This is the idea behind the ethics laws. [02:42:19] It says that it is essential to the proper conduct and operation of government [02:42:23] that public officials be independent and impartial, [02:42:25] and that public office not be used for private gain [02:42:28] other than the remuneration provided by law. [02:42:30] Public interest, therefore, requires that the law protect against any conflict of interest [02:42:33] and establish standards for the conduct of elected officials [02:42:36] and government employees in situations where conflicts may exist. [02:42:39] This statement is sort of the entire course, [02:42:43] but we'll be going through each specific rule and going through some examples. [02:42:48] But the general idea is that you're executing something on behalf of the public, [02:42:54] and if it ever looks like it's for you, that's probably a red flag. [02:42:59] Remuneration provided by law, is that our $300 a month? [02:43:02] Why, yes, it is, sir. [02:43:05] That is exactly what it is. [02:43:06] Before taxes. [02:43:08] Well, you get $400. [02:43:10] You get big bucks. [02:43:14] So let's see here. [02:43:18] Kind of moving along because we're a little late here. [02:43:22] So before we dive into this law, [02:43:25] I think it's always worth pointing out that there are, of course, other laws [02:43:28] that you're subject to and may be more susceptible to now that you're public officers. [02:43:33] We actually have seen sort of an uptick in Florida, [02:43:37] and one of them is the Honest Services Fraud in the southeast region. [02:43:42] We had a mayor recently who was sent to federal prison for violating the Florida Ethics Code. [02:43:50] He accepted a bribe, but instead of going for the Ethics Commission, [02:43:53] which is a much preferred route, he went before a federal judge, [02:43:57] and it was determined that he will be spending three years in federal prison [02:44:02] for violating the basic rules that we'll be talking about. [02:44:05] So I think it's just important to keep in mind that we are swimming in a sea of rules and regulations, [02:44:11] the least of which are these ethics rules. [02:44:14] But I think that as long as that's sort of like the negative view, the positive view, [02:44:18] is that you guys are in this really cool position [02:44:20] and can make a lot of difference in a lot of people's lives. [02:44:23] But with power comes responsibility. [02:44:25] I think that was Batman or Superman or someone said that. [02:44:29] So the body that sits over all of this is the Commission on Ethics. [02:44:34] This is a quote-unquote nonpartisan board. [02:44:39] It consists of five governor appointees, two Senate president appointees, [02:44:44] and two Speaker of the House appointees. [02:44:47] And what do they do? [02:44:49] They issue advisory opinions, and these are fully text searchable on their website. [02:44:54] If you ever have any questions or you just love reading legal opinions, [02:45:00] You can go in and read all kinds of advisory opinions that are, frankly, [02:45:04] they're quite detailed and very accessible. [02:45:06] And as Nikki mentioned earlier, they go way back to about 1979. [02:45:12] And so if you're wondering about it, somebody's wondered about it, [02:45:14] and ask the advisory commission, and they've issued an opinion. [02:45:17] They investigate complaints. [02:45:19] They recommend penalties. [02:45:21] But the one thing that they can do without, just instantly, [02:45:26] is issuing automatic fines for failure to file annual financial disclosures. [02:45:31] So that's one thing that there's no gray area there. [02:45:34] If you miss your disclosure, you will be fined automatically [02:45:38] by the ethics commission. [02:45:40] So we'll talk about that at the end. [02:45:42] That's the last topic. [02:45:44] But what are the rules? [02:45:46] These are the rules, and this is a very small text. [02:45:48] But we'll be going through each of these. [02:45:50] And these are the things that you can't do, [02:45:52] or at least maybe there are exceptions. [02:45:55] We have solicitation or acceptance of gifts. [02:45:58] We have unauthorized compensation, misuse of public position, [02:46:02] disclosure or use of certain information, solicitation or acceptance [02:46:06] of honoraria, which is sort of like the gifts thing, [02:46:10] but it's worth much more points than Scrabble, [02:46:13] doing business with one's agency, employees holding office, [02:46:17] conflicting employment or contractual relationships. [02:46:20] Oh, look at that. [02:46:21] Proofreading, dual public employment, restriction on employment [02:46:25] of relatives, nepotism, lobbying restrictions, voting conflicts, [02:46:29] and then, of course, financial disclosures. [02:46:32] So we'll dive right in here. [02:46:34] The first one is solicitation or acceptance of gifts. [02:46:37] And the real issue here is bribery. [02:46:43] And the rule, quite simply, is that no public officer [02:46:47] shall solicit or accept anything of value, including a gift, loan, [02:46:52] reward, promise of future employment, favor or service, [02:46:55] based upon any understanding that the vote, official action, [02:46:58] or judgment of the public officer, employee, local government attorney, [02:47:02] or candidate would be influenced thereby. [02:47:04] It's a pretty intuitive concept here. [02:47:06] But I think as we look a little further into it, [02:47:08] it becomes maybe a little more complicated. [02:47:11] The first thing is we have the definition of what a gift is, [02:47:14] which, of course, the legislature has provided us this beautiful text here. [02:47:19] But I think this is better explained by an example. [02:47:22] So we will dive into the ethics opinions here. [02:47:25] This is going to be an audience participation round, so get ready. [02:47:33] So the question that was asked to the Ethics Commission about this one [02:47:37] was, and I'll give you some facts, then I'll ask you the question, [02:47:41] I'll look for raised hands, and then I'm just going to, [02:47:45] you all have name tags, which is just great. [02:47:47] So I'm just going to call on someone, except for you, [02:47:49] you don't have a name tag, so you'll probably be first. [02:47:52] Yes, I was planning to do it, but it's on my shirt. [02:47:55] Thank you very much, Mayor Morrow. [02:47:58] So we've got a recently elected member of city council, [02:48:03] and they're employed by a chamber of commerce [02:48:05] that focuses on relocating aviation and aerospace companies. [02:48:12] Into various areas, including the city. [02:48:15] And frequently, the member is required to travel for his employer [02:48:18] in order to cultivate business contacts and facilitate the relocations, [02:48:23] and his employer pays for the travel and expenses. [02:48:26] And so because the aviation authority comes before the city, [02:48:29] the question is, are these travel expenses that [02:48:34] are being paid for by the chamber of commerce [02:48:36] to their employee, the city councilman, [02:48:38] does that trigger the gift law? [02:48:41] Is that a gift? [02:48:43] Does anyone have any thoughts on that? [02:48:44] No. [02:48:45] He's going to pay to do so, it's his job. [02:48:48] There's no inherent gain back to him. [02:48:51] It's part of his business setting, because he's not [02:48:55] voting on the chamber of commerce. [02:48:57] Unless then he was. [02:48:59] It still wouldn't in most cases. [02:49:00] Well, if the issue was with the chamber of commerce, [02:49:03] and they brought it in front of him, he'd [02:49:05] have to declare that he works for him, so there [02:49:06] would be a conflict at that point. [02:49:08] So the real easy way to answer this is we [02:49:11] look at the slide that's up right now, and it says what gifts are not. [02:49:15] And the first couple things, we have salary, benefits, service fees, [02:49:18] commissions, or gifts, or expenses associated with employment. [02:49:21] And so this is for his job, they're paying him for that. [02:49:24] And so even though there appears to be this maybe sort of impropriety, [02:49:29] it's fine, because it's not actually in the statute. [02:49:32] It's contemplated by the statute. [02:49:33] And so the reason I like that example is just [02:49:36] because, and this is often the case in law, [02:49:39] words don't necessarily have the meaning that we put in our minds. [02:49:42] It's whatever they say on the actual page. [02:49:44] Well, down on a simple level, it's your employer [02:49:47] paying you for use your own vehicle. [02:49:51] So he's providing a vehicle. [02:49:52] In this case, it happens to be an airplane. [02:49:55] In another sense, he might provide you with a car allowance or gas. [02:50:00] Sure. [02:50:01] That'd be the same thing. [02:50:02] But the key here is that it's part of his employment, [02:50:05] so it's not considered a gift. [02:50:07] He's making it look pretty, because he's flying around in an airplane. [02:50:10] Right. [02:50:12] And that's what I was trying to do. [02:50:13] I was trying to throw you off with the attraction of the travel. [02:50:17] So in addition to accepting gifts and money, [02:50:22] compensation is the same sort of thing as a gift. [02:50:25] Sorry to interrupt you. [02:50:26] Let's say his company really, really wants to maybe make a deal with him. [02:50:33] Do they fly in first class rather than coach? [02:50:40] Oh, right. [02:50:41] How would that come across? [02:50:42] Where normally, if he was going to any other business meeting, [02:50:45] they would fly in first class. [02:50:47] I think the, let's see here. [02:50:52] That seems like it would pretty clearly be a problem. [02:50:55] If they're treating him beyond the way they would normally. [02:51:00] His job was to travel around and to speak at various things, [02:51:04] and they would pay for him to do that. [02:51:06] That's sort of the course of business that they'd establish. [02:51:08] If all of a sudden, now that he's a council member, [02:51:11] they're flying in first class, and we're using better cars to pick him up [02:51:16] at the airport and these sort of things, that seems like we're leaving salary [02:51:20] benefit services and fees, because this isn't how they pay all their employees. [02:51:24] This is how they pay their employee that sits as a council member. [02:51:27] Does he have any? [02:51:28] So. [02:51:30] Well, it's like your radar has to be up. [02:51:32] Your antenna has to be raised. [02:51:33] Why is this guy doing it this way, for this one particular thing? [02:51:37] You just have to ask yourself, is something amiss? [02:51:39] You're moving it to top shelf. [02:51:41] Yeah. [02:51:42] So everything has exceptions, especially in the law. [02:51:47] It is possible to receive gifts. [02:51:50] And the first broad category of reasons when it's possible, [02:51:53] this is a very fine line sort of answer, is that if it doesn't influence you, [02:51:59] you could accept any gift. [02:52:00] Presumably, someone could show up and write you a check for $1 million. [02:52:03] If it doesn't influence you, we're not triggering this law. [02:52:08] However, I think that it's important, when looking at exceptions like that, [02:52:14] to ask yourself, how would this look? [02:52:17] Because at the end of the day, only you truly know whether it influenced you. [02:52:21] But that's not the question that's going to be asked as you sit before the Commission on Ethics. [02:52:25] And the people that are looking at the situation [02:52:27] aren't going to say, well, he said it didn't influence him. [02:52:30] And so we then, the better thing is, but even if it doesn't influence you, [02:52:37] you have to report it if it's over $100. [02:52:41] And so this is an important area that this could get somebody to keep in your mind [02:52:46] about reporting gifts. [02:52:47] Because dinners sometimes, and these things can quickly add up, [02:52:51] and you have to report them. [02:52:54] There is an exception that you cannot accept gifts from political committees [02:53:00] and vendors of the city. [02:53:03] So that's the exception to the exception for someone [02:53:07] that hears tracking exceptions. [02:53:09] I need that button from the movie Inception, [02:53:11] so you know every time we drop one deeper. [02:53:14] But if it's regarding a campaign, you're an elected official, [02:53:18] you're wanting to get re-elected, and you're accepting donations. [02:53:23] Reporting that. [02:53:25] You are reporting it under the. [02:53:26] It says cannot accept a gift from a political committee. [02:53:28] So let's say there's political action committees all over Tallahassee. [02:53:34] I know this is on a different level, but. [02:53:36] Well, and as far as legislative campaigns go, [02:53:39] those are going to be distinct, because as far as local government. [02:53:43] Let's say this was a partisan position, and whatever party affiliation I had, [02:53:49] I accepted a donation while I was running for election, [02:53:54] while I'm currently a council member. [02:53:57] That's a different rule. [02:53:58] It's a campaign contribution. [02:53:59] Yeah, I think it's going to be a distinct situation, which is not. [02:54:03] It's to your campaign, not to you. [02:54:06] You are elected, and I understand that you could be elected [02:54:09] as you're going for re-election, but that's a different analysis. [02:54:11] To me, it's to the campaign, so it's totally different. [02:54:15] Just for that exception, you said the exception is you cannot receive a gift, [02:54:20] and it says you cannot receive a gift from a political committee or a vendor. [02:54:24] Any reported amount, or? [02:54:27] So this slide will help. [02:54:32] And I think it's just because this slide is sort of poorly constructed here. [02:54:35] But so you can receive a gift from lobbyists, [02:54:43] but it's reported over $25, as opposed to $100, [02:54:47] and then it can never be over $100. [02:54:50] So it's just sort of like tightening it down on these sort of things. [02:54:53] And it's tightening it down in problem areas. [02:54:57] And a lobbyist is anyone who has paid, who's received income in the past 12 [02:55:04] months to influence your decision. [02:55:08] And this includes if the lobbyist, it doesn't come directly from the lobbyist, [02:55:13] but from the person that hired the lobbyist, or if it comes from someone [02:55:15] that the lobbyist hired, if there's a lobbyist involved, [02:55:19] then you are further tightened down to $25 or $100. [02:55:25] But a very easy way to avoid many of this, much of this, [02:55:29] is to avoid receiving all gifts in this area. [02:55:34] Or to ask upon receipt. [02:55:37] And now there is a way to do it. [02:55:38] So everyone's a lobbyist. [02:55:39] Yeah, I think that's the best way to go. [02:55:41] But don't worry, this is getting technical. [02:55:44] And so there is a cure if you make a mistake. [02:55:47] And the cure is that you just pay for the gift within 90 days. [02:55:51] And there's, if you don't know how much it costs, [02:55:54] there are these valuation standards conveniently provided. [02:55:56] And as I assure you, clearly written by the legislature. [02:56:00] And in that little site right there. [02:56:02] So you can all just scribble that down. [02:56:04] And you'll know what to do. [02:56:06] But probably a better idea would be to ask your team here [02:56:10] what to do if you need a cure. [02:56:11] So this isn't an end of the world scenario, if you do receive it. [02:56:15] But it's something to sort of be on the lookout for. [02:56:19] And again, going back to that first paragraph we read, [02:56:23] it all comes down to, are they giving you this gift [02:56:26] because they want to give you this gift? [02:56:28] Or are you receiving this gift because you're a council member? [02:56:31] Would you have received this gift if you had not been elected? [02:56:34] In almost every single slide we're going to talk about, [02:56:36] that question can guide you in the right direction. [02:56:41] Is this happening because I'm a council member? [02:56:42] Or is it because I'm Judy? [02:56:46] Which I understand that you're still Judy as a council member. [02:56:48] So I'm not trying to demean you as a person. [02:56:52] Is the lobbyist one who is registered as a lobbyist? [02:56:58] It's anyone who is coming across that has a reason to talk to you. [02:57:02] Like you said, just somebody who made money doing that. [02:57:04] If they've been paid. [02:57:05] Then you wouldn't know that. [02:57:06] You wouldn't know that. [02:57:07] Yep. [02:57:08] There's no way to know. [02:57:09] And it would be convenient if they had defined it [02:57:12] and said if they're registered. [02:57:14] Because there is a registry, and you can go look them up. [02:57:16] But that is not the standard. [02:57:19] It's just simply if they've been paid. [02:57:22] So that's a great point. [02:57:24] You can't know that. [02:57:25] I guess you could point blank ask them, [02:57:27] now you're trusting them. [02:57:28] Never trust a lobbyist. [02:57:29] That's rule number one. [02:57:32] Never run for lobbyist. [02:57:35] So that was gifts. [02:57:37] And the general idea there is generally [02:57:44] you should probably avoid this because of that trap involving [02:57:48] the lobbyist. [02:57:48] But I think if you're sure that this is less than $25, [02:57:53] you can know that regardless of whether it's lobbyist, [02:57:56] you're in an OK space. [02:57:57] But err towards reporting, and probably [02:58:01] err towards not accepting. [02:58:02] Especially if it fails that first test of, [02:58:04] am I receiving this because I'm Judy [02:58:06] or because I'm counsel for Judy. [02:58:09] So then we move on to the next rule, which [02:58:12] is misuse of public position. [02:58:14] And the rule here is that no public officer shall corruptly [02:58:17] use or attempt to use his or her official position [02:58:21] or any property or resource which [02:58:24] may be within his or her trust to perform [02:58:28] his or her official duties to secure a special privilege, [02:58:30] benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others. [02:58:34] Which that last part gets extremely broad. [02:58:38] This isn't just about misusing something [02:58:40] so that you can benefit. [02:58:41] It's really using it for anyone. [02:58:45] And we have a couple examples here. [02:58:47] These are flagrant. [02:58:49] So it's very easy to identify these. [02:58:50] And then we'll get into a couple audience participation ones [02:58:53] that are not so obvious. [02:58:54] Got a fire chief here. [02:58:56] He had a, and the fire chiefs are also regulated by this, [02:58:59] even though they're not elected officials. [02:59:02] They are city managers, basically. [02:59:04] He was using a van that the department owned [02:59:06] to go on a family vacation. [02:59:09] This is a very obvious misuse of public position. [02:59:11] He would never had access to that van [02:59:12] if he wasn't the fire chief. [02:59:13] And he took it to his own personal gain. [02:59:17] And that was a violation. [02:59:19] So simple example. [02:59:21] Another one, this one's a hard one to relate to [02:59:23] because it involves a phone card. [02:59:24] And I was unaware of what that was, [02:59:26] but I had it explained to me. [02:59:27] It's a little magical card that you can use [02:59:30] to make phone calls with. [02:59:31] And this county commissioner was, [02:59:33] nevermind, joke did not land. [02:59:36] This, this, this, [02:59:39] you're young. [02:59:40] I, anyway, this, this county commissioner, [02:59:44] she was issued a phone card as part of her, you know, [02:59:48] her job and she racked up some insane phone bill on it, [02:59:52] calling just everybody. [02:59:54] And, and of course this was a misuse of public position [02:59:57] for another very obvious reason. [02:59:59] She would never got. [03:00:00] the phone card paid for by the county, [03:00:01] unless of course she was a county commissioner. [03:00:03] So those are very simple examples. [03:00:05] Let's get into... [03:00:07] That's no worse than a sheriff calling his girlfriend [03:00:10] on his county phone. [03:00:14] Right, and I think the, I agree. [03:00:20] We had that happen here in Pasco. [03:00:25] Yeah, but do you remember, I think this goes back [03:00:27] to the time when you purchased your thing [03:00:29] and it was your minutes and it racked up and all that. [03:00:31] Now it's a whole different world. [03:00:32] But I think technically, even if it's unlimited minutes, [03:00:35] you were using county resources. [03:00:38] And so it's not a matter of, but in that case, [03:00:41] what's the damage? [03:00:42] I don't know if there's damage, but here it was very easy [03:00:45] because they were able to determine, [03:00:47] they had to pay by the minute [03:00:48] and she used quite a good number of them. [03:00:50] So it was very easy here. [03:00:53] So this is kind of a hard one here. [03:00:55] So I'm gonna give you the background here. [03:00:56] We have a public official and he was not involved [03:01:04] with Hospice of Citrus County, but they had asked him [03:01:08] for a letter, sort of endorsing them [03:01:11] to get a certificate of need. [03:01:15] And so he wrote the letter and he put it on his letterhead [03:01:18] as a public official and that came before the commission. [03:01:22] And the question was, would these letters of support [03:01:25] violate this misuse of public position [03:01:28] because they were written on an official stationary? [03:01:33] Any thoughts on how this one shakes out? [03:01:36] He's not getting anything for his letter, right? [03:01:41] He's helping somebody else. [03:01:49] So I put this one in here because I'm not so sure [03:01:54] the commission got this one right. [03:01:56] They say it was not, this is not a problem. [03:01:58] And they based their decision based on the idea [03:02:00] that he's not getting anything. [03:02:02] But as we saw in the statute, it says, [03:02:05] for the benefit of himself, herself, or others. [03:02:08] I think, and I've read this a couple times [03:02:12] and it just seems kind of interesting. [03:02:14] They claim that the only benefit here, [03:02:15] there's an incidental political benefit [03:02:17] of goodwill to the constituents. [03:02:17] It's a hospice? [03:02:19] Yeah. [03:02:20] So it's a non-profit, it's a non-profit. [03:02:22] Yeah, any, and it was a non-profit. [03:02:24] But that's not really what, that's not what that says. [03:02:26] It might have helped, it might well have helped [03:02:28] his community if they were able to expand. [03:02:32] I don't know, I probably would have done the thing. [03:02:35] I think I would have written him the recommendation [03:02:37] but I think I would have done it on my, [03:02:38] I don't think I would have done it on City Leverhead. [03:02:41] He's never given me a City Leverhead, so I don't know. [03:02:45] I don't have neither of those. [03:02:47] Well, we're on the other side of the room. [03:02:50] So we'll now move on to the next rule. [03:02:53] Disclosure or use of certain information. [03:02:55] This one, I think this one is pretty intuitive here. [03:02:59] We have current and former, and this is the first time [03:03:03] we've seen this in a rule of former. [03:03:05] So, and this, we'll talk about this again in another rule [03:03:08] but this is the first time. [03:03:09] A current or former officer may not disclose [03:03:11] or use information not available to members [03:03:13] of the general public and gain by reason [03:03:16] of his or her official position. [03:03:18] Except for information exclusively to governmental [03:03:20] practices for his or her personal gain or benefit [03:03:25] or for the personal gain or benefit of any other person [03:03:28] or business entity. [03:03:30] And so after having sat through this massive [03:03:33] public records conversation, I'm sure you're thinking [03:03:35] what do I know that no one else knows? [03:03:37] But there are things, especially if you were to get [03:03:41] involved in any litigation and there'd be a shade meeting [03:03:43] or something along these lines. [03:03:45] There is information that you get. [03:03:47] It's almost like insider trading. [03:03:48] Yeah, it is sort of like that. [03:03:51] It's getting a benefit with information [03:03:52] that's not publicly available. [03:03:53] Well more often too, what I see is I see situations [03:03:55] where someone is on the losing end of a particular vote [03:03:59] and wants to disclose certain information that they have [03:04:02] to sort of get the other side energized [03:04:06] to maybe change the vote. [03:04:08] That's where it can get kind of dicey [03:04:10] because even if, when there's a vote of the council [03:04:13] and that's the position of the city officially [03:04:15] because that's the majority vote, [03:04:17] you have to honor that decision [03:04:21] and you can't use information that you've gained [03:04:23] because of your office to subvert that. [03:04:26] So that's where I think that more comes into play. [03:04:30] Do you have an example? [03:04:31] Well I can't think of anything in particular, [03:04:33] but I mean sometimes it can be a development issue [03:04:36] or something. [03:04:36] If you might gain information about a particular [03:04:40] development through the course of being a city council [03:04:43] person and you might think that it's just wise [03:04:46] for you to give this information [03:04:48] or you may just know something that the general public [03:04:50] wouldn't necessarily know that you got [03:04:53] because of your office. [03:04:54] You've attended a meeting and you've got some information [03:04:56] and all of a sudden you see the path [03:04:57] and you tell your buddy to go buy this piece of property [03:05:00] because in the year something's coming [03:05:03] and it's not public knowledge. [03:05:05] It's you were there and from the information [03:05:08] and or it was shared from you from somebody at the meeting. [03:05:11] So that's that true insider trading [03:05:14] you give to someone else. [03:05:15] I have some questions about this former, [03:05:17] like how long is former? [03:05:19] The former in this rule in particular [03:05:21] is until it's publicly available. [03:05:24] In perpetuity until somebody breaks it. [03:05:25] This rule is pretty brutal. [03:05:27] There's a later one that has a two year cut off, [03:05:29] but this one is until it's generally available [03:05:33] and if it never becomes generally available then. [03:05:36] That's one of the problems with a lot of these rules [03:05:37] is that you saw in the one they use the term others [03:05:40] and this one they say other person or business entity. [03:05:43] There's not a lot of consistency [03:05:44] in the drafting by the legislature. [03:05:46] It's like he says, there's some that has a two year [03:05:49] prohibition on what you can do as a former elected official [03:05:53] and then there's this one that's just apparently unlimited. [03:05:55] So there's a lot of inconsistency throughout. [03:06:03] I might see this I think of the fact that [03:06:11] it's very important, right, what their bidding rates are. [03:06:18] I could see somebody providing it to their buddy [03:06:21] as to so and so is bidding at this particular time. [03:06:28] That's a great example. [03:06:29] That's what it is, right? [03:06:30] And so I see that and that has always bothered me. [03:06:34] It's nice to see that that inclusion was added [03:06:37] about trade secret information because it does protect [03:06:41] the private and small business and the giant community. [03:06:51] Each and each time. [03:06:54] And I will not defend the legislature too much [03:06:56] but I will say that, so I do agree that this other person. [03:07:00] We got that on tape here. [03:07:01] Is it really annoying because later then they start [03:07:04] defining it based on family and then they start [03:07:06] defining family differently and it gets very frustrating. [03:07:08] But as far as this one being forever [03:07:10] and that one being two years. [03:07:11] The other one as we'll see is about basically coming back [03:07:15] before the agency you just served on. [03:07:17] And so that one I think does make sense to limit it [03:07:21] because it would seem extremely, I guess, draconian [03:07:26] to make it so that you can never come before the commission [03:07:29] if you were on it. [03:07:30] And so that one and this one I think are distinguishable. [03:07:34] And I think that's a really good example [03:07:35] as far as information that you might have access to [03:07:38] which is bid packets. [03:07:39] That would be powerful information if you knew it. [03:07:43] Especially if it's a big job. [03:07:44] Yeah, absolutely. [03:07:45] And remember these rules apply, excluding the legislature, [03:07:50] all the way up to, so for example, people who work at FDOT [03:07:53] and these guys are working on $2 billion jobs. [03:07:55] These are huge, huge information that they're receiving. [03:08:01] So this is the last in this section of prohibited conduct [03:08:05] and it's honoraria, which we already discussed. [03:08:08] I believe, but I did not tell you, the score is 12. [03:08:12] So what is an honoraria? [03:08:14] This is things that you receive for speaking. [03:08:18] And we have an example here. [03:08:21] This, and so this is distinguished from the gift thing. [03:08:23] So in the gift and the bribe one, it was I'm giving you [03:08:27] whatever this collector's Tickle Me Elmo [03:08:30] and then you're going to vote in my favor. [03:08:33] I'm giving you the collector's Tickle Me Elmo [03:08:35] because you're going to come speak [03:08:36] at the Tickle Me Elmo convention. [03:08:38] And so we've got an example here. [03:08:42] We have a mayor, he's actually the mayor of Jacksonville [03:08:46] and in part of his role, he travels around [03:08:48] and he pitches Jacksonville and says how awesome it is [03:08:51] to live there and no one believes him, [03:08:52] but he keeps doing it. [03:08:53] And one of the times when he's out there pitching [03:08:56] how awesome Jacksonville is, his travel costs get paid for [03:09:01] by the organization that he is speaking to. [03:09:03] And the question is, is that a violation of this? [03:09:07] And this being a reporting individual, [03:09:10] which back to the inconsistencies, read that public officer. [03:09:13] A public officer is prohibited from soliciting honorarium [03:09:18] related to his office's duties. [03:09:20] And so the question was, is it a violation for him [03:09:24] to accept travel expenses covered [03:09:27] for speaking about how awesome Jacksonville is? [03:09:32] Hmm, let's see here. [03:09:35] I would say no, because I get paid to go over to Dade City [03:09:38] to be in another committee with the county. [03:09:42] So I think that's distinguishable [03:09:44] and I will distinguish it for you [03:09:46] because the answer to this question is yes. [03:09:48] It was a problem. [03:09:51] And so in that situation, you are participating in a, [03:09:55] he's not participating in a committee. [03:09:57] He's showing up and he's sort of the keynote speaker [03:10:00] of an event. [03:10:01] And what he's being paid for is speaking. [03:10:04] And so what they're trying to avoid here is, [03:10:07] in this, going, you get. [03:10:08] He just got his expenses paid, right? [03:10:11] Right, so that's the sort of, [03:10:14] the nice and the great thing about this opinion [03:10:15] is that includes, that's money. [03:10:18] He would've had to spend that money. [03:10:19] He's getting remuneration for it. [03:10:22] And it comes back to that really basic question [03:10:25] that underlines this entire presentation, [03:10:27] which is he would not have received that [03:10:29] if he wasn't mayor of the city of Jacksonville. [03:10:30] What if the city of Jacksonville? [03:10:31] They'd ask him to come though. [03:10:31] They wouldn't have, yeah, he would've come [03:10:33] and he wouldn't have been. [03:10:34] Right, right, right, right. [03:10:34] What if the city of Jacksonville normally pays [03:10:36] his expenses to travel to pitch the city, [03:10:38] rather than his own personal expenses? [03:10:40] How would that change it? [03:10:42] So the city pays it and then now someone else pays, [03:10:45] gives him the money. [03:10:46] So they're actually reimbursing or paying the city, [03:10:48] not him individually, [03:10:49] because the city normally pays his travel expenses. [03:10:51] I think if the money actually went to the city, [03:10:55] I'm not sure how it would come out [03:10:55] if the money went to the city. [03:10:56] I know if the money went to him, [03:10:57] it would be an even more clear case. [03:10:59] But if it goes to the city itself, I imagine, [03:11:05] well, it certainly wouldn't be an ethics violation for him [03:11:06] because it's never going into his pocket. [03:11:08] It's just that he's paying his own expenses [03:11:11] to travel to pitch the city. [03:11:13] I'm not sure why the city's not paying [03:11:15] his travel expenses anyway. [03:11:16] Yeah, and I think, I wouldn't distinguish it [03:11:20] based on whether he's paying or the city's paying. [03:11:21] I would distinguish it based on, [03:11:22] is it going into his pocket? [03:11:25] That he was given the money for the travel expenses. [03:11:27] So regardless of whether he normally pays. [03:11:29] But he's coming out of his other pocket to get there. [03:11:32] Maybe. [03:11:33] He may be. [03:11:34] I don't know, maybe. [03:11:35] Well, I mean, let's see here. [03:11:36] It may be, that's not provided in the facts. [03:11:39] It may be the case that the city usually pays for it. [03:11:41] Well, I'm just saying, if it goes in one pocket [03:11:44] and out the other, and it's washed, [03:11:46] I don't really see where it, you know. [03:11:50] Seems he should have never gotten in that position. [03:11:52] The city should have just been paying his travel. [03:11:54] Right. [03:11:55] Yeah, well, and then the city could charge, [03:11:57] the city could charge to send him. [03:12:00] Could the city charge to send him? [03:12:03] Zoom, the city could do that, [03:12:04] because it's not going into it. [03:12:06] It's liable if you kill someone in a car accident [03:12:08] while he's driving in there. [03:12:10] Probably. [03:12:11] I guess the moral of the story is, [03:12:12] if I want to get $100,000 a speech [03:12:15] to talk to Morgan Stanley or Chase, [03:12:17] I need to wait until after I'm off city council. [03:12:19] Yes, because you'll notice this rule [03:12:20] does not have the forever prohibition. [03:12:22] So, yeah, this is how all former elected officials [03:12:26] pad their pockets, but former elected officials. [03:12:30] So, this concludes the prohibited actions section. [03:12:36] We have this nice picture of New Port Richey here. [03:12:38] Don't look, Cliff, this isn't about you. [03:12:40] That's all right. [03:12:41] It's beautiful. [03:12:43] We will now be moving on to the next section, [03:12:46] which is sort of like the conflict of interest section here. [03:12:50] And this is, there's a lot of wonderful examples in here, [03:12:55] but the primary rule in the conflict of interest section [03:12:59] is the prohibition on doing business with one's own agency. [03:13:03] So, the rule is that no public officer [03:13:07] acting in his or her official capacity [03:13:09] shall either directly or indirectly, [03:13:12] and here comes the list, purchase, rent, or lease [03:13:15] any realty goods or services for his or her own agency [03:13:19] from any business entity of which the officer or employee, [03:13:23] or the officer or employee's spouse or child [03:13:25] is an officer, partner, director, or proprietor, [03:13:28] or in which such officer, employee, [03:13:29] or the officer or employee's spouse or child, [03:13:32] or any combination of them has a material interest. [03:13:34] Now, there are exceptions here that we will talk about, [03:13:37] but that's a pretty broad sweeping rule. [03:13:39] And this is now where we've moved into away from others [03:13:41] and are focusing on the family, [03:13:43] but the family defined as spouse and children specifically. [03:13:49] But wait, there's more, the rule continues. [03:13:51] Nor shall a public officer acting in a private capacity [03:13:56] rent, lease, or sell any realty goods or services [03:13:58] to the officer's agency if he or she, let's see here, [03:14:05] is a state officer or employee [03:14:06] or to any political subdivision or any agency thereof [03:14:09] if he or she is serving as an officer or employee [03:14:12] of that political subdivision. [03:14:15] So, and then of course there's a carve out [03:14:17] for the legislature. [03:14:18] And then the first broad exception [03:14:20] to doing business with your own agency [03:14:21] is pre-existing contracts. [03:14:24] So if it was already the case that the city [03:14:26] was going to your whatever business, [03:14:31] at least until that contract was. [03:14:31] You mean like you rented a floor in Trump Tower? [03:14:33] Right, if you're the flooring guy [03:14:38] and the contract was pre-existing. [03:14:40] No, I meant rented a floor in Trump Tower, [03:14:43] because there's some. [03:14:45] Right, which again, yeah. [03:14:48] Not following it too closely, I guess. [03:14:52] So, let's see, was there an example there? [03:15:00] So, let's see here. [03:15:10] So the first one we're saying, you can't do business with the agency if you own the company, [03:15:19] your child or your spouse own the company. [03:15:22] And then we're saying, additionally, you can't hold a contractual relationship [03:15:28] if there's going to be a frequently recurring conflict [03:15:32] between the private interests and the performance of your public duties [03:15:36] that would impede the full and faithful discharge of the public duties. [03:15:41] So this rule is pretty brutal. [03:15:44] It doesn't really have a lot of choice in some situations as far as getting around it, [03:15:51] but there are exceptions. [03:15:54] So the main exceptions are if sometimes there's a rotation system, [03:15:59] you'll have multiple contractors. [03:16:03] Towing in town. [03:16:05] Right, and the city will just go between each one. [03:16:07] If your business is in that rotation, that's an exception, [03:16:11] because I guess the general idea is it's not like you're selecting that one. [03:16:17] It's going to be you, and then it's going to be towing company X, then Y. [03:16:21] Competitive bidding. [03:16:23] You can still competitively bid, [03:16:25] but there are certain disclosures and filings that are going to be made with that. [03:16:32] Legal advertising. [03:16:33] Utility service passes on a common carrier. [03:16:35] Those exceptions are clearly the result of very good lobbying. [03:16:39] I'm not sure why those are exceptions as opposed to anything else, [03:16:42] but it may be the case because, especially with legal advertising, [03:16:45] there usually aren't a lot of newspapers in each jurisdiction, [03:16:48] and so if they said that you could never contract with a newspaper, [03:16:54] if you were an owner of the newspaper, [03:16:56] they would never be able to hold public office, [03:16:58] because sometimes there's just not a lot of options. [03:17:00] Emergency purchases can sometimes be made sole source. [03:17:05] If this is the only fence repair company in town, [03:17:09] as long as disclosures are made, the purchase can be made. [03:17:12] Very small amounts of purchases. [03:17:16] If the total is less than $500 in a calendar year, that's fine. [03:17:23] Banks. [03:17:24] Again, this is a nice lobbying move here. [03:17:28] Private purchases. [03:17:29] If the terms are available to the public, that's fine. [03:17:37] But the most important one here, we have the 501c3 exemption. [03:17:43] Here this is if they are doing business with the city as opposed to, [03:17:49] I think it's as opposed to entering into, [03:17:57] if you're selling goods and services to the city as opposed to providing a long-term. [03:18:02] I'm not sure exactly what the line there is, [03:18:04] but we'll get into these examples, and I think it will clear it up. [03:18:12] The first one, we have a, [03:18:15] and this is going to kind of explore the family connections here. [03:18:19] We have the executive director of a water management district, [03:18:22] and his spouse is a member of a law firm who represents clients before the district. [03:18:28] And the question is, is this a conflict of interest as far as doing business [03:18:32] with the agency and these sort of things? [03:18:35] Were they already dealing with her beforehand? [03:18:40] It doesn't say because it's not really the main issue here, [03:18:45] and I feel the lean towards this is a problem. [03:18:49] If the guy's wife is coming before the board and saying, [03:18:53] honey, my client needs a break, that just reeks. [03:18:58] It does reek, and yet they say that it's not a conflict of interest, [03:19:02] and the reason they say that is because the firm isn't engaging in business [03:19:06] with the district, it's representing people before the district, [03:19:09] which seems kind of like splitting hairs, [03:19:14] but it's driving at the point that it's about doing business with the agency [03:19:17] as opposed to performing before the agency. [03:19:20] It's representing. [03:19:21] Right. [03:19:24] However... [03:19:26] What's your wife do, Tim? [03:19:28] Just checking. [03:19:31] We've got another one here where a county employee is a private landlord, [03:19:38] and he wants to rent to the county housing space for Section 8 housing. [03:19:45] Thoughts on this one? [03:19:47] That's very direct. [03:19:48] That's about as dry as possible, and that one is obviously a violation. [03:19:58] This one is interesting. [03:20:00] A county employee wanted to enter into an agreement with the county. [03:20:04] He was about to go into the drop program with the Florida retirement system. [03:20:09] He wanted to enter into an agreement to provide consulting services to the county [03:20:13] after his employment with the county came to a close. [03:20:18] So the question is, is that doing business with one's agency [03:20:22] if he is an independent contractor to the agency that he was just with? [03:20:26] You said he's in the drop program? [03:20:28] He's about to be in the drop program, [03:20:29] and so he's negotiating a contract for that period. [03:20:32] During one he's in drop. [03:20:34] He's still working for them. [03:20:35] He's working for them, but the contract itself will be for the period after. [03:20:41] Is there a set time frame where he has to disengage from his relationship [03:20:47] before he could be hired, or is there no... [03:20:50] There's no conflict. [03:20:53] He's got the inside track. [03:20:56] So they held that this was not a conflict, [03:20:59] and I think it turns along what Bill was driving at, [03:21:01] which is there's not a line there. [03:21:04] As soon as you are outside of office, you can engage in business with the entity, [03:21:10] as opposed to now this is not lobbying before the entity, which we'll talk about, [03:21:15] but as far as... [03:21:17] Providing a contractual service. [03:21:19] Right. [03:21:20] The strange thing about that case is he contracted with them while he was still employed, [03:21:24] and that wasn't to take effect until after. [03:21:26] So to me, I would be very leery of that. [03:21:29] That's the inside trader thing. [03:21:31] It doesn't pass the sniff test. [03:21:34] It walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. [03:21:36] Which is why it's hard to find... [03:21:38] I think with every one of these opinions you can see that that could go either way [03:21:41] almost every time. [03:21:43] Except for the Section 8 housing case. [03:21:45] Yeah, that was pretty... [03:21:47] That was a rare find, because a lot of these... [03:21:49] By the time they're asking the Ethics Commission, it's a hard question. [03:21:53] So it can go either way. [03:21:55] Usually people don't ask questions that are just so painfully obvious, [03:21:58] so it's hard to get really great examples of this is clearly wrong, [03:22:02] except for the Section 8 housing case. [03:22:04] You probably don't know this, but I'm just thinking out loud here. [03:22:07] In these examples, do they just engage in doing this and then worry about after the fact? [03:22:12] Do they get legal counsel or an opinion prior to, [03:22:15] and their counsel says, I think you're good, okay, I'll go ahead and do it, [03:22:18] and then it goes through Ethics Commission, [03:22:20] and then most of these people just do it and hope for the best. [03:22:22] I think it goes both ways. [03:22:24] Some of these are clearly they're asking about an opinion they would like to do this, [03:22:28] and they want to know ahead of time. [03:22:30] These people are prudent enough to ask prior. [03:22:32] Right, and you can ask. [03:22:34] The idea is that you can ask for advice. [03:22:36] So why don't you ask? [03:22:38] Yeah, but sometimes the way these are written, you can tell that whatever the question is, [03:22:43] they're already doing this, or they've already done it, and so in which case... [03:22:49] They didn't ask for permission? [03:22:51] Right, right, they're just trying to make sure that it's okay, [03:22:53] now that we've already sort of engaged in whatever the nature is. [03:22:57] Dad, I took the car, but I also wrecked it. [03:23:00] One of those things. [03:23:02] This one is another pretty easy one here. [03:23:06] We've got a city police officer, [03:23:09] and they wanted to contract with the city to be a receiver of residential properties [03:23:15] for code enforcement liens. [03:23:18] Oh, he's got the inside driver. [03:23:21] Right, and so he's a city employee. [03:23:23] So this is absolutely a conflict of interest. [03:23:25] He is a city employee, and it's a contract with the city to provide city service. [03:23:29] So that's another one. [03:23:30] That one's sort of like the Section 8 housing policy. [03:23:32] It's not publicly bid either. [03:23:34] No. [03:23:35] And, you know, it may come underneath a threshold, [03:23:39] but it just doesn't stand up to the eye test. [03:23:47] Doesn't do it, not your way. [03:23:53] So this is kind of a relatively easy rule here. [03:23:57] This one is a rule prohibiting employees of the entity [03:24:00] from serving on the board of the entity. [03:24:03] So city employees can't be council members. [03:24:07] There's not really – I believe that actually – [03:24:11] It would be a strange operational to have a rank and file be on the board [03:24:21] and deal with the – [03:24:23] As we just discussed, he wouldn't be able to order himself to do anything. [03:24:27] Well, it's not Chicago. [03:24:33] So let's see here. [03:24:35] Debbie talked to her boss and then put her boss to work. [03:24:42] This is a specific rule for procurement. [03:24:48] So I don't know if that one is going to be – [03:24:50] sometimes when we do these presentations, we have a lot of staff members [03:24:53] who are also regulated. [03:25:00] So this kind of goes back to the bribery stuff, [03:25:04] except what you're being bribed with is employment. [03:25:07] And so a public officer may not accept public employment [03:25:13] if they know the position is being offered for the purpose of gaining influence [03:25:17] or other advantage based on the public officer's office or candidacy. [03:25:21] So if you receive a very sweet job offer during your tenure, [03:25:26] this is something that would trigger this rule. [03:25:31] Sure, as long as the legislature doesn't have to operate by that. [03:25:34] Yeah, and this is all very important for them to maintain their retirement system [03:25:38] is that they do not have to follow these. [03:25:42] Critical, actually. [03:25:47] That one has some exceptions, including public advertisement [03:25:52] and various qualifications if you are the truly exceptional candidate for the job. [03:26:00] We don't want to stop you from achieving your excellence. [03:26:05] That didn't help the lady down in St. Pete, did it? [03:26:08] She was qualified. [03:26:10] She was the regulatory thing. [03:26:12] I think it was too close to the decision time, [03:26:15] but obviously she's got qualifications and could be, but, you know. [03:26:21] There's a perception. [03:26:29] This would be like a city council member. [03:26:36] It's public positions. [03:26:41] Yeah, that's right. [03:26:42] Well, we've had city and county commissioners who have been adjunct professors [03:26:48] or professors at the local community college [03:26:51] and never thought the system could work so well. [03:26:58] That, plus what they did when it flows into the retirement pool, [03:27:04] there was nothing illegal about it. [03:27:06] It's just that that's put them together. [03:27:08] And as long as they didn't cross somewhere, [03:27:10] and if there was a conflict with the college coming in front of them [03:27:13] with a direct benefit, you have to go through that. [03:27:16] But, yeah, your example is the right one. [03:27:24] All right, so that was the section on the conflict of interests. [03:27:30] And then we're moving. [03:27:33] Where did I get that? [03:27:35] That's Gulf Harbors looking at Green Bay. [03:27:39] Is it not? [03:27:40] No. [03:27:41] Damn. [03:27:42] Actually, there's some city property in the background there. [03:27:44] See, I knew. [03:27:45] And that's exactly what I thought when I put this on the slide. [03:27:48] All those million-dollar homes, no. [03:27:50] With a turning eye, we'll know that there is city property. [03:27:54] Right. [03:27:56] We can't live there. [03:27:57] We have to live in the city. [03:27:59] That's right. [03:28:00] I just wanted to show you what's outside of the lines. [03:28:03] This is a great section because the word nepotism is fun to say. [03:28:07] A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, or advance [03:28:11] or advocate for employment, promotion, or advancement [03:28:14] in or to a position in the agency in which the official is serving [03:28:17] or over which the official exercises jurisdiction or control. [03:28:20] Any individual who is a relative of the public official. [03:28:23] So here we used the word relative, which will cause some problems, [03:28:26] as we'll see in the example. [03:28:29] An individual may not be appointed, employed, promoted, [03:28:32] or advanced in or to a position in an agency if such appointment, [03:28:36] employment, promotion, or advancement has been advocated by a public official [03:28:40] serving in or exercising jurisdiction or control over the agency who is a [03:28:45] relative of the individual or whose appointment, employment, promotion, [03:28:48] or advancement is made by a collegial body of which a relative of the individual [03:28:52] is a member, the collegial body being the city council. [03:28:56] So this is a very thorough ban on having anything to do with the hiring, [03:29:06] promotion, advancement of a relative. [03:29:09] And now, of course, we have an exception that you actually, [03:29:17] I think you do fall into, which is that it does not apply to appointments [03:29:23] to boards except for land planning and zoning boards in cities [03:29:29] that have less than 35,000 people. [03:29:31] And I believe New Port Rochey is less than 35,000 people. [03:29:33] I think it's like 14,000 or 15,000. [03:29:36] And so in the smaller cities, such as New Port Rochey, [03:29:41] you could actually appoint someone to a board. [03:29:44] However, that board cannot have a land planning function. [03:29:48] So I'm just really excited about this because I've given this presentation before [03:29:51] and this doesn't apply, and here it applies. [03:29:54] So I'm pretty excited. [03:29:57] We can get started. [03:30:00] Somebody on the Parks and Recreation. [03:30:03] As long as there's no. [03:30:04] Two of us routinely abstain when our wife comes up for renewal. [03:30:09] There we go. [03:30:10] The. [03:30:12] We're held to high esteem before the meeting, [03:30:16] and even higher esteem after the meeting. [03:30:18] Yeah, I was just going to go there on that, you know. [03:30:20] It's worse at home than at school. [03:30:23] So a couple of notes on here. [03:30:25] It applies to both. [03:30:27] The rule is actually written to, it [03:30:29] prohibits both the public officials' actions [03:30:31] and the employees' actions. [03:30:32] So this is actually a two-way street. [03:30:34] Two people can be in trouble here. [03:30:37] And it's paid or unpaid. [03:30:41] And then it makes a note that it doesn't [03:30:44] say that there can't be two relatives working together. [03:30:46] It's not that they're working together. [03:30:48] It's whether they are involved in hiring or promoting [03:30:51] or advancing each other. [03:30:52] Although, depending on how it's structured, [03:30:54] it might be hard to be on the same group, [03:30:58] because it's a very broad-based limitation. [03:31:00] But the general rule is just simply [03:31:04] that you can't move the other person upward [03:31:07] if they're related to them. [03:31:08] As far as relatives go, this is broader than voting conflicts, [03:31:12] but narrower than gift laws. [03:31:14] We haven't talked about voting conflicts yet. [03:31:15] But in the gift laws, we saw that a lot of others, anybody, [03:31:22] and then in voting conflicts, we'll [03:31:24] see that it's very narrow to maybe spouse and children. [03:31:29] Here, basically, it is any legal relative. [03:31:35] So the example here that is just wonderful. [03:31:44] We had a property appraiser. [03:31:47] He has an ex-wife. [03:31:49] She has a daughter who, when they were married, [03:31:54] was his stepdaughter. [03:31:57] And this daughter applies to work in the property appraiser's [03:32:01] office. [03:32:02] And the question was, are we violating the advocate's rules? [03:32:06] And if we can get out the family trees, we can answer this. [03:32:10] And it's, you're shaking your head no? [03:32:12] No, I'm just thinking of the family tree. [03:32:14] Oh, yeah. [03:32:14] All those branches. [03:32:15] This is kind of an interesting one. [03:32:17] Very tangled. [03:32:19] So the definition is father, mother, son, daughter, [03:32:25] brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, [03:32:28] husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, [03:32:29] daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, [03:32:31] stepmom, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, [03:32:34] half-brother, or half-sister. [03:32:35] They're not married anymore. [03:32:36] They're not married anymore. [03:32:37] So it's done. [03:32:39] They're not related. [03:32:40] That's right, yep. [03:32:41] And so it needs to be a legal relative. [03:32:44] When they were married, she was a stepdaughter. [03:32:47] She couldn't work for him at that point. [03:32:48] But once they, once it's a double X, she can work. [03:32:55] That's right. [03:32:56] And I believe that's what they said, in the opinion. [03:32:58] She was a double X. [03:32:59] So, OK. [03:33:05] So, oh, we already talked about dual public employment. [03:33:07] But so that's a pretty cut and dry situation. [03:33:16] That's New Port Richey. [03:33:17] I was pretty sure this was in city limits. [03:33:19] But I can never be too sure. [03:33:23] We do a little bit of trimming, but it's otherwise. [03:33:26] This is the rule that we had alluded to earlier. [03:33:28] This is the two-year rule about lobbying. [03:33:30] So a person who has been elected to public office [03:33:36] may not personally represent another person [03:33:39] before the government body for a two-year period. [03:33:45] Isn't the incoming Speaker of the House [03:33:47] trying to bump, Speaker of the House in Florida, [03:33:50] isn't he trying to increase this? [03:33:53] That's what I hear. [03:33:54] From two to? [03:33:57] I've not heard that. [03:33:58] I'm not sure. [03:33:59] Yeah, he's talking about it for legislators. [03:34:02] Yeah. [03:34:03] They have a distinct regulation on that. [03:34:06] Because you'll see here, it's county, municipal, special [03:34:09] district, school district. [03:34:11] Because in the city, we have an ordinance in the charter [03:34:15] that says you have to be out of the body for a year [03:34:21] before any consideration. [03:34:24] So are we not in compliance, so we [03:34:26] have to go back and look at our charter? [03:34:28] State law is going to trump it. [03:34:30] And there may be some other, I'm not [03:34:33] sure what exactly, when you say one year to do what. [03:34:37] Because that may be one year for doing business, in which case [03:34:40] you're putting on a more onerous requirement than the state. [03:34:42] Because when we talk about doing business, [03:34:44] once you're off the commission, you [03:34:45] can immediately enter into a contract with the city. [03:34:48] So the ordinance you may be talking to [03:34:50] may say you need to wait a year, in which case [03:34:52] the ordinance is taking a more conservative position [03:34:58] than the state. [03:34:58] This is talking about someone comes to you and says, [03:35:02] I need you to go before code enforcement board for me, [03:35:05] and I'm going to pay you to do it. [03:35:07] Or I need you to, I really want this ordinance to pass, [03:35:11] and I'd like you to go in front of council [03:35:13] and speak on its behalf. [03:35:14] That's what lobbying is. [03:35:16] And so it's not that you can never do it, [03:35:18] it's that you need to wait two years before you can do it. [03:35:21] And it's from the body you served on. [03:35:24] From the body you served on. [03:35:25] Not all collective bodies, just the one you served on. [03:35:31] You couldn't come back and lobby in front of the city council [03:35:34] in New Port Richey if you served the city. [03:35:36] But you could go to New Port Richey, or the county, [03:35:38] or something like that. [03:35:39] So it's not very narrow in its limitations. [03:35:45] And that makes sense. [03:35:46] The whole idea is you were just on this board. [03:35:49] Presumably there are still members [03:35:50] that were serving with you. [03:35:51] And you might be trying to curry favor. [03:35:56] The prohibition in our charter is [03:35:57] that you can't hold any city office [03:35:59] until one year after the expiration of your term. [03:36:02] So that is different from this, if that's [03:36:03] what you're referring to. [03:36:05] Yeah. [03:36:06] So are you saying this two years from now, one year? [03:36:08] But the lobbying state entity, we don't address lobbying. [03:36:11] I don't think we have it in our charter. [03:36:12] There's nothing in the charter. [03:36:13] So state would just, so for example, you come off, [03:36:18] you wouldn't be able to come back [03:36:19] and lobby in front of the board for a two year time [03:36:22] period from the date that you leave office. [03:36:25] So I want to lobby in front of that land development review [03:36:28] board. [03:36:29] Nope. [03:36:30] That's an internal committee within the city. [03:36:32] Not just city council. [03:36:33] Yeah, it's got to be. [03:36:35] Should we change our charter to two years to match the cap? [03:36:38] No, because these are two different regulations. [03:36:40] This is prohibiting you from holding office. [03:36:43] You can't come back and be a city employee. [03:36:47] This is just, this is the representation. [03:36:49] This is very specific. [03:36:50] Yeah. [03:36:54] Yeah, and this gets, and there are more. [03:36:57] See, I think that's broader than just before the city council. [03:36:59] Because I really read that to say, [03:37:02] before the government body or agency of which [03:37:05] the person was an officer. [03:37:06] I agree. [03:37:06] I think that would be anything in the agency. [03:37:08] Yeah, that's why I read it. [03:37:09] Yeah, I think it applies to all the boards. [03:37:12] You can't come and complain or give [03:37:14] your thoughtful consideration. [03:37:16] You have three minutes, man. [03:37:17] Vox Pop, baby, that's all we're giving you. [03:37:19] Well, that, just to be clear, this [03:37:21] is about representing other people. [03:37:22] Correct. [03:37:23] You can always represent yourself. [03:37:24] If you have, if you want to come and tell them [03:37:27] how terrible you think this ordinance is, that's totally. [03:37:31] That could fall into, let's say, a variance, right? [03:37:34] So let's say my next door neighbor wants to extend a dock. [03:37:39] At Cross Street, my house wants to extend a dock out. [03:37:41] And I think it'd be great, and everyone else is doing it. [03:37:43] And I just come and say, I'm off council at this point. [03:37:46] It's six months later. [03:37:47] Am I not allowed to come and say, hey, [03:37:48] I think this guy deserves to have an extended dock. [03:37:51] We've seen him throughout the river. [03:37:52] And it's not harming anybody. [03:37:53] As a private citizen, if you're not compensated, [03:37:58] does it buy you a bottle of scotch or something like that? [03:38:00] If they give you $20 to do it, then I'm in trouble. [03:38:02] I think, and I think, regardless, yeah, what? [03:38:05] Yeah, because you charge too low. [03:38:06] But the question, you know, is exactly what I'm saying. [03:38:10] If they keep going out there for three minutes, here's a beer. [03:38:13] Or better yet, some green, what is that stuff? [03:38:15] Iguana? [03:38:16] Yeah. [03:38:17] Salty iguana. [03:38:18] Let's be quiller. [03:38:20] Green iguana. [03:38:21] Any more questions on the lobbying? [03:38:26] No. [03:38:27] Is this the city limits? [03:38:28] Yes. [03:38:29] All right. [03:38:30] I nailed it. [03:38:32] Voting conflicts. [03:38:33] We can get you a tour of it. [03:38:36] Get you a good room there. [03:38:39] So let's see here. [03:38:43] No county, municipal, or other local public officer [03:38:46] shall vote in official capacity upon any measure which [03:38:49] would inure, which is sort of a frustrating word, [03:38:52] to his or her special private gain or loss which [03:38:54] would benefit them, which he or she knows [03:38:58] would inure to the special private gain or loss [03:39:00] of any principal by whom he or she has retained employers, [03:39:06] or to the parent organization or subsidiary [03:39:08] of a corporate principal by which he or she has retained. [03:39:11] You can tell by all of this writing [03:39:12] that they had some serious issues with this. [03:39:14] Or the agency, we don't have to get into that part, [03:39:19] which he or she knows would inure [03:39:21] to the special private gain or loss [03:39:22] of a relative or business associate [03:39:24] of the public officer. [03:39:27] I find it interesting that they went [03:39:28] to the point of why somebody would do something that would [03:39:33] not gain them, but get them a loss. [03:39:35] I guess if there's an IRS advantage to it. [03:39:39] It's not enough to take intentional losses. [03:39:41] Yeah, well, it needs a write off for the next 20 years [03:39:44] or something. [03:39:45] I don't know. [03:39:45] I'm just trying to understand it. [03:39:47] That's a good point. [03:39:48] The loss is kind of confounding. [03:39:50] But I guess you had to cover both sides in case. [03:39:53] Well, yeah, I didn't make any money off of it. [03:39:55] I lost. [03:39:56] And then you've got to go prove it. [03:39:57] So it's covering both sides, I understand. [03:39:59] It's just a loss of a relative. [03:40:02] And why does it say there's an exception for CRA? [03:40:07] That's on the disclosure you're talking about. [03:40:09] On the disclose, OK. [03:40:11] How you disclose. [03:40:12] OK. [03:40:13] You know, the one thing I'd like to point out about this [03:40:15] is where it talks about being retained by. [03:40:17] Right now, the Ethics Commission is interpreting that [03:40:20] to being basically compensated, employed by. [03:40:24] So that's how that's being interpreted. [03:40:27] I don't know if that's, I can't remember if that's statutory [03:40:30] or not. [03:40:30] But I've just recently looked at that. [03:40:32] So that's something that is something [03:40:34] you want to keep an eye on, that it may change. [03:40:36] And they may change their definition [03:40:39] of what that term means. [03:40:41] The other thing I'd like to point out on this particular one [03:40:43] is, as a city attorney, these often come up. [03:40:46] And typically, the advice that we give on these questions [03:40:51] is only as good as the question you ask, [03:40:53] and the information that we're provided. [03:40:55] So if you assume that I know something about your situation [03:40:59] that you haven't told me, then you're [03:41:01] probably making a very dangerous assumption. [03:41:03] Because ultimately, it's not up to me [03:41:05] to decide whether or not there's an ethical voting conflict. [03:41:08] It's going to be up to the Commission on Ethics to decide. [03:41:12] And so the one thing I like to encourage [03:41:14] council people is, if you see something coming, [03:41:17] please, by all means, try to get a hold of me [03:41:20] well in advance of the meeting. [03:41:22] Give me the facts. [03:41:22] And actually, allow me to investigate further [03:41:25] to see if I can get some other facts that [03:41:27] might be important, so that I can give you [03:41:30] a reasonable opinion about whether you should or should not [03:41:32] vote. [03:41:33] It's real important. [03:41:33] Because if it comes up at the meeting, [03:41:35] I can only give you the best advice [03:41:36] I can give you at that moment. [03:41:38] And as we talked about at a recent meeting, [03:41:41] the law right now says that the areas in which you [03:41:45] have to abstain. [03:41:46] I just had this conversation with somebody, [03:41:48] an ethics attorney at the Commission on Ethics. [03:41:51] The universe of cases in which you have to abstain [03:41:56] is much smaller than the universe of cases [03:41:58] in which you may abstain. [03:42:00] And that's been a recent change in the law. [03:42:02] Well, not real recent, but in the last few years, [03:42:05] where it used to be an either or. [03:42:07] You either had to vote or you had to abstain. [03:42:09] There was no middle ground. [03:42:10] You couldn't decide, I didn't want to vote [03:42:12] because I know this guy, or this guy lives near me, [03:42:15] or anything like that. [03:42:16] You had to vote. [03:42:17] Because people elected you to do a job, [03:42:19] and that is to vote on these things. [03:42:21] And if you keep abstaining, you're not doing your job. [03:42:23] Now they've opened that up more, so [03:42:27] that you can abstain if you have an appearance of a conflict [03:42:31] or some concerns, especially with quasi-judicial issues, [03:42:34] if you think that you've been improperly influenced [03:42:37] through a quasi-judicial proceeding. [03:42:39] So you can abstain more, but the main thing [03:42:41] I want to get across to you is that if you [03:42:43] feel like one of these is coming, [03:42:45] please get with me as early as possible in the process [03:42:48] so we can figure out if it's something real [03:42:50] or if it's imagined. [03:42:51] And it's sometimes, it's almost bizarre the way [03:42:55] they come out with it. [03:42:57] We had a situation where I had a de minimis relationship [03:43:02] with somebody that was coming out for a zoning change. [03:43:07] A regular customer of my company, of which I made $1.4 million, [03:43:15] they represented something well below one-tenth of 1% [03:43:20] of our income for the company. [03:43:24] And we got an opinion from the Ethics Commission, [03:43:26] and they told me I needed to abstain, which is just bizarre. [03:43:31] So if we limit, and giving you the information, [03:43:34] if we limit both the depth and the width of the information, [03:43:38] then we're limiting you on giving us the right answer to that. [03:43:41] You are doing a disservice to yourself, [03:43:44] because I need all the information I can possibly [03:43:47] get on the situation to be able to properly advise you. [03:43:50] Because what looks like it might be totally reasonable, [03:43:53] and our attorney at the time didn't think I had a problem, [03:43:56] but said in an abundance of caution, let's send the letter in. [03:44:01] And we were both absolutely shocked when it came back. [03:44:04] Well, I can tell you that my advice in the past, [03:44:07] before the law was opened up on when you could abstain, [03:44:10] was always, you need to vote. [03:44:12] And I actually had to tell people you have [03:44:14] to vote when they thought they were perfectly [03:44:17] within their rights to abstain. [03:44:19] I would tell them, you have to vote. [03:44:20] You don't have a voting conflict here. [03:44:23] Now, with the way it's written, you have a little much more leeway. [03:44:26] So if it is close, and you want to call it and say, [03:44:28] you know, I'm not going to take the chance on this, [03:44:31] then you can say it. [03:44:32] You can't do that in larger bodies where the vote comes up [03:44:36] and automatically you're absent from the room. [03:44:38] That's a different scenario. [03:44:40] But as you said, and basically it's [03:44:43] because of the way people use votes during the time. [03:44:47] But either you vote or you don't vote. [03:44:49] So you're basically saying they've [03:44:51] added a gray area instead of taking out a gray area? [03:44:54] Well, what they've done is they've opened it up [03:44:56] to allow you to abstain more. [03:44:58] So like I said, the universe. [03:45:00] cases in which you can abstain is much larger than the universe of cases in which you have [03:45:05] to abstain. [03:45:06] If that makes any sense. [03:45:07] The one that upset me, Judy's on a lot of boards and you know, honestly, she chooses [03:45:12] to be and I give you credit for that. [03:45:14] I choose not to be because I think it prohibits on what I could vote on, but remember we were [03:45:19] going to have that little festival in the park and your Holiday Rotary was going to [03:45:22] and you couldn't vote on that and that drove me nuts just because you're in Holiday Rotary [03:45:26] and they're the non-profit. [03:45:28] Well, I think that was what drove the whole question to the ethics committee because I [03:45:33] think that may or may not be true. [03:45:37] Because you're on the board, not just on Rotary. [03:45:40] But still, you're not on the board. [03:45:41] I voted it and then somebody raised the question and then we had to do an emergency meeting [03:45:46] two days later on the fly and re-vote. [03:45:49] But it also then brought up the... [03:45:50] Well, what was the problem? [03:45:51] I'm trying to, it's because you were on the board or because you're on Rotary. [03:45:53] And then it went down so, you know, it created a lot of confusion in the public eye. [03:45:57] So if you weren't on the board, you were good. [03:45:59] Well, what then, what brought that to mind to me then was I serve on the board of trustees [03:46:04] for the hospital. [03:46:05] Both positions I was on prior to being elected. [03:46:11] That's when I said to the group when a vote came up about the hospital that until, because [03:46:19] the question had been sent up to the ethics commission and we had not gotten a response yet. [03:46:24] So of two votes, I abstained. [03:46:27] And since we had received a letter back, I handed it off to, if you'd like to share what... [03:46:33] Yeah, he in turn passed it to me and I will pass it along to all the city council and [03:46:39] the city manager's report this week. [03:46:41] What's it basically say? [03:46:42] It says there was no voting conflict for her. [03:46:45] Both cases or the hospital case? [03:46:47] For both. [03:46:48] For the hospital and Rotary. [03:46:49] Which is bizarre because two years ago when we had this same session at Sunken Gardens, [03:46:55] Nikki Nate sat right there and gave us an example that was almost verbatim what Judy's [03:47:02] situation was and said that is a clear conflict of interest. [03:47:08] Just like watching a football play. [03:47:10] Yeah. [03:47:11] That's the call. [03:47:12] That's the call. [03:47:13] I think that is one of the warnings here is that you see these opinions and you can see [03:47:17] how they can be on any given day... [03:47:20] They can flip again tomorrow. [03:47:22] I'm glad there's some leeway in whether or not we have to vote on it. [03:47:26] Yes. [03:47:27] And that has really opened up the possibility of avoiding these situations much more so. [03:47:32] Absolutely. [03:47:33] Yeah, these laws aren't... [03:47:35] But you still have to do the disclosure if you're going to abstain. [03:47:37] You've got to do them. [03:47:38] And that's the main thing. [03:47:39] You've got to announce publicly. [03:47:40] And I guess Zach was going to go into that next. [03:47:43] But announce publicly and file your disclosure form. [03:47:46] Like I said, they're in force for a very good reason. [03:47:49] I understand that. [03:47:50] But the fact that she's a board member on a rotary club that's sole purpose is to raise [03:47:55] money for charitable events for the city, that just because they're the non-profit applying [03:48:00] for the permit that she couldn't vote, I just had a problem with that one. [03:48:04] I still think we need to do that. [03:48:07] And I agree with the opinion that we got from ethics. [03:48:09] And that's what was borne out by my discussions with the attorney up there as well. [03:48:13] So all of that's consistent. [03:48:15] Yeah, it's in the past now. [03:48:16] I just couldn't get a grip on that one. [03:48:20] That's what the problem was. [03:48:21] Based on what we had heard two years ago, it wasn't allowed. [03:48:25] But the ethics commission changes membership too over time. [03:48:28] And that's the scary part. [03:48:29] It could just be how they're interpreting it. [03:48:32] They could switch back again next year. [03:48:35] Well, like I said, for me, that word retained is the one that I would keep an eye on. [03:48:39] Well, because one of your statements... [03:48:41] You say approaching as soon as we think we have a conflict. [03:48:44] Yes. [03:48:45] How long do you think it was from, let's say the hospital? [03:48:48] Were there two different letters or one or just one letter? [03:48:50] One letter. [03:48:51] Okay, so they both came after the hospital one then? [03:48:55] Yeah, we sent it up with both issues. [03:48:58] Okay, so the hospital, how much time were we talking about from when that letter came back? [03:49:03] Well, I'm not suggesting that you need to go get an ethics opinion, an advisory opinion. [03:49:06] No, but I was just curious, like, you know, if we have one that's a real close call. [03:49:10] I mean, how long did it take? [03:49:11] How long did it take? [03:49:13] Several months. [03:49:14] Yeah, I don't know. [03:49:16] The public was our attorney. [03:49:18] How long was it? [03:49:20] It can take some time. [03:49:22] But, again, you know, you can't always rely on them. [03:49:26] I mean, there is a hotline, I think. [03:49:28] Don't they have a hotline I think you can call? [03:49:30] But I can always call them, get a hold of one of their staff attorneys. [03:49:33] That's usually helpful. [03:49:35] Those guys are very familiar with all of these opinions. [03:49:38] But the main thing is to give me an opportunity to give you some sound legal advice. [03:49:42] The sooner you can let me know. [03:49:44] If you see something coming up on an agenda, you should know. [03:49:46] Sometimes they're going to blindside you. [03:49:48] Maybe someone's going to walk in the door that you realize is someone that you have a close affiliation with. [03:49:53] Oh, I didn't know that they were, you know, part of this project. [03:49:57] So we may have to make some calls on the fly. [03:50:00] But the more advance notice I get, the better advice I can give you, the less likely you're going to have an ethical issue. [03:50:06] You have the right person in place to make those calls on the fly, right? [03:50:09] Yes, sir, absolutely. [03:50:11] I've been doing it for 30 years. [03:50:13] Wealth of information here. [03:50:14] 30 years of information. [03:50:16] And I'll supplement this procedure here to as soon as you think about this, contact him. [03:50:23] At the meeting, announce, abstain, disclose, and file. [03:50:27] And then put this note on here that you should probably get off the dais entirely [03:50:32] and not just sit there just to remove any doubt. [03:50:36] As far as determining do you have a conflict, it is a special private gain or loss. [03:50:41] And so it needs to be, it can't be something that it affects you, but it also affects several thousand people. [03:50:51] But in all positivity. [03:50:53] That's not a special private gain. [03:50:54] That's just a general gain. [03:50:57] So try to think of it, if you're in the 1%, and also it needs to be something that isn't remote and speculative. [03:51:04] It needs to be something that's going to actually happen. [03:51:06] So maybe this will benefit you. [03:51:08] So I can vote for my neighborhood to get recycled water or reclaimed water. [03:51:13] Well, that's the thing. [03:51:16] This 1% test is not anywhere codified in the statutes. [03:51:19] This is just something that the Ethics Commission came up with. [03:51:22] And this could be a potential problem. [03:51:24] So, you know, it's 1% of whatever the group is. [03:51:28] So you can look. [03:51:30] So, like, if you're talking about, that's a great example. [03:51:32] We want to have, I'm going to vote on whether we have reclaimed water for 300 homes. [03:51:38] How do I determine what my percentage of that is? [03:51:40] Is it based on acreage? [03:51:41] Is it based on number of residents? [03:51:44] Is it based on the number of homes? [03:51:46] How many people come out and vote that day? [03:51:47] You know, so, again, those are the kinds of things. [03:51:50] If you see that come and say, well, I'm in that district, do I vote or can I vote? [03:51:54] You know, in that group, let's do some calculations and see what we got and see which way. [03:51:59] I mean, my advice would be if it doesn't pass every 1% that you could possibly come up with, then don't vote. [03:52:05] If anyone's going to argue that you're in that 1% somewhere. [03:52:09] That's a good point. [03:52:10] And that's something that's fairly likely to happen as we go through and talk about things like paving assessments. [03:52:17] Happens in small cities all the time. [03:52:18] Yeah. [03:52:19] Especially these geographical things. [03:52:22] And so, yeah, just kind of keep an eye on that. [03:52:26] And like I said, that's a test that they just came up with just to determine whether or not that was special or not. [03:52:31] That's your special gain because of the 1%. [03:52:38] That's right. [03:52:40] I wish. [03:52:42] I think that is a compliment. [03:52:48] You can apply even if it's a class of people, which is what we're sort of just talking about here. [03:52:55] There is a de minimis exception here if it's sort of these various errors are forgiven in filings if it's a very small issue. [03:53:09] De minimis means inconsequential. [03:53:12] There is a 20-year statute of limitation on the collection of fines here, which is an extremely long statute of limitations. [03:53:17] Usually they're sort of two or three or four years. [03:53:20] Sometimes they're six months. [03:53:24] And the commission can also get rid of this if they think it's a de minimis issue. [03:53:31] And they can receive the impetus to investigate this from various different sources. [03:53:40] We were just sort of talking about this, so it's kind of been loosened up here. [03:53:46] But in general, you have to vote unless you have a conflict. [03:53:49] Well, you do have to vote unless you have a conflict. [03:53:51] The question is the standard for whether you have a conflict is a fluid standard [03:53:57] and is apparently now more possible that you have a conflict than before as far as being able to abstain. [03:54:04] So if you do not have a conflict, you have to vote is what this sort of comes down to. [03:54:10] For an extra neighbor of a variance, we have to vote. [03:54:16] Yeah. [03:54:17] Other than pissing off the other neighbor that doesn't want the variance. [03:54:20] There's not a conflict just, I guess, in sort of like the goodwill between you and your neighbor. [03:54:25] I think that's one I would be very circumspect about. [03:54:28] If you're talking about, say, a direct neighbor. [03:54:31] I had to vote on it. [03:54:33] I didn't check the ethics committee, but we had a variance for someone right across the street from me. [03:54:38] At his house, and his house was set up a different way than any other house in the river. [03:54:43] Basically, the side of the house faces the river, and the back of it faces an empty lot. [03:54:47] And he wanted to put a screen enclosure on there. [03:54:50] I was under the assumption that I had to vote, whether he was a neighbor or not. [03:54:55] And I knew the other party as well my whole life. [03:54:58] And I was just stuck in the middle. [03:54:59] I didn't want to vote on it. [03:55:02] And that may be accurate. [03:55:05] Maybe the change would affect the property value. [03:55:09] I guess here's what I would do. [03:55:11] If you're in the notice area for any kind of zoning action, you ought to at least check with me to make sure that that's okay. [03:55:18] Because if you get notice, that means that you've already been determined to be an affected person. [03:55:24] And to be an affected person means that you may have some special benefit related to whether that's approved or denied. [03:55:30] So I think if you're in the notice area and you get the notice, then let's make sure of that before you vote. [03:55:37] Okay. [03:55:38] Okay. [03:55:40] Yeah. [03:55:41] And that would be a – yeah. [03:55:42] That's why I asked if it's, like, right next to you. [03:55:44] That's a little too close to call for me. [03:55:46] That makes me uncomfortable. [03:55:54] So now we are rounding out into the – this is here, right? [03:55:57] It is also here. [03:55:58] To the final – let's see here. [03:56:01] Before you get started, my car is in jail, and the place closes at 5. [03:56:07] So I have him stay there until I get there. [03:56:13] So this is the last thing. [03:56:15] No, it's in. [03:56:16] He's on his last slide. [03:56:17] Let the man finish. [03:56:19] Technically there are three slides, but they're fluff slides. [03:56:22] This is really the last substantive slide. [03:56:25] As you know, there's – [03:56:26] Plus I have to ride my bike to get it. [03:56:28] So many things. [03:56:31] You should have disclosed that earlier. [03:56:36] He's a slow bike rider. [03:56:38] I've got training wheels on. [03:56:39] Safety first. [03:56:41] That's true. [03:56:42] So the disclosure is due July 1. [03:56:46] It's each asset in the library worth more than $1,000. [03:56:52] This is the only thing I disagree with you about. [03:56:56] This is – depending on who you know, this is not enforced, in my mind, [03:57:03] to any part of how it ought to be. [03:57:07] And we've got prime examples in our own county. [03:57:11] Two years of underreporting, $15,000 to $20,000, and he gets a, [03:57:17] oh, yeah, you made an honest mistake. [03:57:20] Crap. [03:57:21] That's not even it. [03:57:23] It's not right. [03:57:25] And to have it just kind of fluff over. [03:57:27] So I understand. [03:57:29] And if you don't file this, and then you've got to do the addendums on top of it [03:57:34] if you've got these other entities and all that, and the way that they write the form, [03:57:38] trying to understand exactly what you're reporting and how it breaks out. [03:57:43] I mean, for $3,600 a year, it's a lot of time. [03:57:48] It's a lot of time. [03:57:49] And now it's flowing down to all these other committee people and stuff. [03:57:52] So you've got people who won't even serve on committees now [03:57:55] because they've got to file financial disclosures. [03:57:57] They've got major developers that could be great people that would serve on boards, [03:58:01] but they go, I don't have time for this. [03:58:04] I don't mind giving you my time, but I've got to disclose all of my personal, [03:58:08] you know, I've got to show you what socks I'm wearing tomorrow. [03:58:12] But they don't have to do it, which is not. [03:58:16] The county commissioners, is it the same disclosures? [03:58:18] Absolutely. [03:58:19] Like I said earlier, we don't have to disclose the amount that we make per year, [03:58:22] just where our income comes from, correct? [03:58:24] Yeah, exactly, sources. [03:58:26] And is this sent to us automatically? [03:58:27] I don't remember doing this. [03:58:28] I'm sure I did, but it's sent to us automatically, right? [03:58:31] The supervisor should be sending it to you. [03:58:33] Oh, yeah, you get them, and you get timelines and all that. [03:58:36] And Tim, what you were saying, they're considering [03:58:38] or they have considered making full disclosures. [03:58:40] Why do I have to tell everybody what I make per year and what assets and liabilities I have? [03:58:45] That's what Nikki was saying. [03:58:46] I wasn't aware of that. [03:58:47] But I think that the League of Cities will oppose that pretty vehemently. [03:58:50] Apparently it's something they just did with the special districts, [03:58:52] and I guess there's some scuttlebutt that maybe they're considering doing that with municipalities. [03:58:57] They've got a pretty powerful lobby. [03:58:59] I think they'll probably be able to block that. [03:59:00] Just so I'm clear, the only full disclosures are for state legislators, correct? [03:59:04] As far as income, things like that? [03:59:06] I think that's true. [03:59:07] Don't forget your helmet. [03:59:08] I think that's true. [03:59:10] Sorry to interrupt. [03:59:11] Go ahead. [03:59:12] No, that's pretty much the end of the— [03:59:15] What is it, a $25 a day or something, the fine? [03:59:18] Oh, it's— [03:59:19] Non-filing or something? [03:59:20] I forget what it is. [03:59:21] Something. [03:59:22] Yeah. [03:59:23] It can build up on you quickly. [03:59:25] That's quick. [03:59:26] Don't ever forget to file with Sunbiz if you own your own corporation. [03:59:29] I missed that by my birthday last year, and it's a $400 fine. [03:59:31] That's very expensive. [03:59:32] Non-negotiable. [03:59:33] Yeah, very expensive. [03:59:34] Daily builder or— [03:59:35] No, just slap $400 if you forget to file with Sunbiz. [03:59:38] It's cheaper to close it. [03:59:39] Restart, yes. [03:59:40] Yeah. [03:59:42] The presentation is now five. [03:59:45] I assume you guys have the presentation. [03:59:48] There are a bunch of links to useful things, including the advisory opinions, which you can search. [03:59:53] I think the most useful thing out of all of it, though, is they have a guide. [04:00:00] the commission has a guide. It's pretty plain text and it just goes through [04:00:04] everything. I think this is the easiest way to, if you had a question for [04:00:07] yourself, you could just look at this. And it's annual. It's within the calendar [04:00:11] year of every year, right? You have to attend one of these. Yes, and you do [04:00:17] not have to attend the calendar year that you are leaving. There's an opinion [04:00:22] on that. So if you were leaving in 18, you wouldn't have to attend [04:00:28] whatever time frame it is before you would leave. Well, yeah, if you got [04:00:34] reelected, then you have to do it before the end of that calendar year. But if we [04:00:38] schedule one for three weeks from now, we can get it over for seven. That's [04:00:41] exactly right. You guys could double up. Do we have a copy of that? You probably [04:00:44] sent us one. I have no idea. I did mine last year at the library. It's like a [04:00:54] pretty easy reference. It's super easy. Yes. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 3Adjournment