City Election Called for November 1

Sarasota voters will be called to the polls on the first day in November – a Tuesday – to pass judgment on 23 proposed changes to the city’s charter. City commissioners approved the measures at their July 5 meeting, and set them for balloting. Unless noted, all the measures passed with unanimous city commission support.

The proposals came from a once-every-ten-year Charter Review Committee, which examined the entire document and proposed changes. City commissioners can also propose charter changes, as can citizens with a petition drive.

Voters have the final say in any changes to the make-up of the city’s charter, a mini-constitution establishing the municipality’s relationship with its people. The charter must conform to state and federal law, but can be tailored to local desires.

The charter can be changed by a citizen petition drive, for example, if enough signatures are be obtained within a certain amount of time. One of the proposals coming up in November would extend the time-span to 180 days from the current 90-day period.

Another proposal would chop out seven pages of the charter installed after a petition drive in 2006-2007. When a WalMart was proposed on the north side of town, voters wanted workers to receive about $3 more per hour than the minimum wage. Because the store was offered a public subsidy, the issue became political and then the subject of a charter vote.

After the passage of the $3/hour referendum, WalMart backed out of the deal. In today’s climate when economic development is “job one,” the Charter Review Committee and city commission agreed to drop the provision. But voters will have the final say.

Another proposed change involves “certificates of participation.” Doesn’t sound familiar? It is a financial device used by governments to avoid an election on general-obligation bond issues, which are required by state law. However the Sarasota County School Board found issuing “certificates of participation” could achieve the same ends as a bond issue without asking voter approval. The charter change would ban the City of Sarasota from issuing such a certificate.

Another financial instrument would be banned under the proposed charter changes. The city could not participating in a Wall Street vehicle called “derivatives.” These complicated plans can be very lucrative, or extremely costly. “It is among the most dangerous instruments in the marketplace,” said Commissioner Terry Turner, a former professor of finance. The measure passed 4-1, with Mayor Suzanne Atwell the lone vote against it.

A proposal requiring a supermajority of four votes to pass any lease or contract longer than 10 years was approved unanimously. It came from the extension of the Marina Jack lease to 2049, and would apply to any form of lease or contract. If an lease or contract extension would push the original terms beyond a decade, a supermajority would be required for approval.

What may prove the most controversial item was approved by 4-1 vote (with Commissioner Paul Caraguilo in the minority) concerns a possible pay raise for city commissioners. The charter caps their compensation at two-thirds the amount a county commissioner makes in a county the size of the city (roughly 50,000 people). State law sets county commissioner salaries.

For many years, city commissioners were volunteers and received no pay. That was later changed to provide the two-thirds provision. The charter committee expressed concern about the pool of potential city commission candidates for what is now virtually a full-time job. The current salary of $22,000 was not thought sufficient to attract a bread-winner with a family, leaving a city commission composed of retirees and wealthy dilettantes.

The proposal would raise the rate to 100 percent of a similar-sized county, but only if a supermajority of the commission approved. So even if voters go along on November 1, it is not an automatic raise. Look for “disinformation” on this issue in the coming months.

And the city commission approved charter committee proposals to expand the election cycle by six weeks, as demanded by recent state law to allow overseas veterans the opportunity to fully participate in local elections. The qualification period for candidates would be moved back two weeks to the first week in January. And the date of the run-off would be pushed back a month to the second Tuesday in May.

The final ballot question is actually an “omnibus” of 15 small but separate issues the charter committee believed important. Some are clerical changes, others are tiny tweaks. City Commissioners amended one to allow any two of them to call a special or emergency meeting; the proposed change needed the mayor or two city commissioners.

These proposals will come back, but not in a public hearing, for a second reading later this month where further changes are possible but not likely.