The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution is 52 words. The Preamble Michael Martin is proposing to add to the Palm Coast City Charter is more than twice as long.
The Bill of Rights–the first 10 amendments to the Constitution–is 462 words. The 12 Bill of Rights amendments Martin proposes adding to the charter are 878 words. Most–accessing public records, public notice requirements, addressing the council–are already enshrined in Florida law. Some, like a “right to public hearing” and “Notice of Action and Reason,” could add considerable new burdens on the city administration.
The Preamble and the Bill of Rights are among the more elaborate proposals the Palm Coast Charter Review Committee is taking on as part of its responsibility to review the charter and submit proposed amendments to the City Council by March. Martin wrote them after former Mayor David Alfin three years ago apparently asked him, without the council’s approval–it was never discussed publicly–to review the charter and “examine what areas need to be amended.” Martin did, though the work he accomplished went nowhere until Council member Ty Miller picked him to be on the Charter Review Committee.
Martin distributed his Preamble, the Bill of Rights and his full proposals addressing many parts of the charter at the second meeting of the committee (see below), then the group’s facilitator, Georgette Dumond, applied the brakes: “I suggest that we review and discuss that after the town halls,” she said, referring to the four public town halls, or workshops, the city was hosting to hear from residents about the changes they want to see in the charter.
There have been three such meetings so far. They’ve drawn a combined two dozen or so people, some of them repeat attendees. One of them drew just two people who weren’t affiliated with the process, suggesting that for most of the city’s 100,000 or so residents, the charter is not top of mind.
The five-member committee–chaired by Donald O’Brien, with members Patrick Miller, Ramon Marrero, Perry Mitrano, and Martin–has met four times so far, and is meeting again this evening, with three more meetings this year and several more before it is due to turn in its recommendations to the council in March. Its evening meetings last about three hours each.
Though Dumont is keeping a running tally of the committee’s work, she said she would not make it public before the end of November or early December, after input from the public workshops is incorporated. That, of course, limits the public’s ability to keep up with the committee, especially since committee meetings are not available on YouTube (though audio recordings are made available) and even fewer people turn up to those meetings, and even though committee members and council members say the charter review is one of the most important efforts for the city’s future.
Here, in brief summary, are the main proposals the committee has discussed so far. None have been formulated into ballot proposals. If and when the committee takes that step, the proposals will be reviewed by the council, and only th council would have the authority, by majority vote, to place them on the 2026 ballot. The council may discard the recommendations, amend them, accept them in whole, or place its own proposals on the ballot.
All references below to the council and council members include the mayor.
Council Pay: The committee would tie council members’ pay to inflation. Any pay increase above the rate of inflation would have to be approved at a referendum. “personally, I just do not believe any elected official should have the power to set their own compensation,” Martin said.
Council members could submit expenses, but anything exceeding 2 percent of the council member’s salary would have to be approved by the council. Health benefits, which they now receive, would be eliminated from their compensation.
Council responsibilities: Allowable absences by council members would be limited to six in any 12-month period. The committee has discussed fines and penalties levied against council members who do not fulfil their office’s obligations. A supermajority of the council would be required to levy a fine against a fellow-member. That proposal is clearly directed at Mike Norris, the current mayor, who has abandoned all but one of his committee assignments, among other responsibilities he has not fulfilled. But the legality of the approach is not clear. The committee has asked for a legal opinion from the city attorney.
The committee also sought a legal opinion about the power of the council to take away benefits from a council member, and what the process should be to remove a council member from office.
Norris appears to be the muse for a few more changes: Another proposal targeting him would be an explicit prohibition on the mayor interfering with city staff, to “hammer home” the message, in Martin’s words, that there is to be a firewall between council members and the administration.
Vacancies, appointments and elections: Vacancies within six months of an election would have to be left open, with no option for an appointment. If a person is appointed with more than a year left in that term–in other words, if there’s no scheduled election within a year–a special election will be required to fill that seat.
Those clauses are of particular concern to the committee, given the fallout of the previous council’s appointment of Charles Gambaro. “That was a big bone of contention. It caused a lot of issues, a lot of accusations, a lot of discontent amongst the council,” Committee member Perry Mitrano said. “Really bad. I mean, at one point, our mayor had a suit to make that point. So this particular one, the lawyer has to do a very–or you perhaps,” he told Dumont, the facilitator, “a very, very good job to simplify it.”
“The bottom line is that the city council violated the charter,” Martin said, “because when there’s more than two years, that’s what it says, more than half term, then that must be filled at the next available election. It doesn’t provide any excuses.” Circuit Judge Chris France disagreed when he ruled against that very claim in Norris’s suit.
To ensure that an appointee does not serve past an election as an appointee, the charter would spell out that any person appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve “only until the next possible scheduled election,” whether primary, general or special.
The committee discussed reducing or waiving the qualifying fee for certain elections, noting that by raising salaries–as a previous council did–the qualification fees for the office also jumped prohibitively.
Voting districts: The city has four electoral districts. One council member is appointed from each, though voters across the city get to vote for all members. The committee is not interested in changing the districts, eliminating them or adding to them, and to the council’s membership. At least not yet. Only when the city grows, committee members say, might there be a need to expand the council. But the committee is considering a minimum residency requirement, like six months, before a candidate may run for office from that district.
Strong mayor: There’s been some discussion about transforming the mayor’s position into a so-called “strong mayor,” which is the accepted term for when a mayor fills the role of city manager.
“Personally, I think that is a political discussion,” Martin said. “I’m not sure it’s appropriate for charter review committee to get into political discussions, but I do know that there are people who would very much like to see a change. It may be a moot point at this point in time, because we all know that there is quite a disagreement between the mayor and the other four members of the city council, and I do not believe that the current city council would ever approve a change of the form of government.”
“I think it’s getting out there further than what we’re supposed to be discussing here,” Miller said. “That’s a big, big big item.” It is, however, precisely what charters spell out: the council could not make that choice on its own.
Dumont, the facilitator, cautioned: “When you look at a strong mayor, council form of government you have every time a new mayor gets elected, you have a full changeover of that administration? So if you’re a business looking to go somewhere, you don’t have that continuity.”
This is not an exhaustive list. The work is ongoing. The committee has also discussed minor matters, like the language regarding municipal powers, changing such terms as “electors” to “voters,” and other textual changes.
Leave a Reply