Voters had better be ready to read

Tarpon Springs residents will wade through 12 referendums tinkering with the city charter at Tuesday's election.

By DIANE STEINLE

© St. Petersburg Times, published March 12, 2000

TARPON SPRINGS -- City voters should expect to be dazzled when they step up to the voting machine Tuesday during Florida's presidential preference primary.

Oh, not by George W. Bush or Al Gore. Their names will be there on the ballot.

But keep reading.

And reading.

And reading.

The portion of the ballot devoted to choosing preferred presidential candidates will be dwarfed by 12 referendum questions seeking specific changes to the Tarpon Springs city charter.

The questions are long. They are virtually indecipherable. Start reading them and your eyes will cross.

Part of the problem is that the state allows no more than 75 words per ballot question, no matter how complex the issue.

And part of it is that city charters, important as they are because they determine how city government operates, don't make scintillating reading.

The city recognized that voters might have trouble figuring out what the ballot questions mean. So it mailed to every household a question-by-question explanation.

The explanation is five typed, single-spaced pages. Read it and weep.

A committee of local residents is appointed to review the city charter every five years. This committee met for four months, held public hearings and came up with 12 possible changes for the voters to consider. The city charter can't be amended unless voters approve.

For those who threw away or misplaced the city's explanation, here is a brief description of each question.

The good news, voters, is that the answers to these questions don't have to be in essay form. Just a yes or no will do. How wrong can you be?

Question 1

Unfortunately, the city put the most densely worded question first.

The city charter now says that the city first must ask voters' permission to buy or sell real estate property or lease it for more than five years.

But the charter doesn't say the city must tell the voters the terms of those deals beforehand.

Some people in the city thought that was asking voters to buy a pig in a poke. So this question asks if you would like the charter to require the city to reveal the detailed terms of a deal when it asks permission.

The possible downside to this amendment is that if the voters say no to a deal, the city could wind up losing "earnest money" or funds it spent to hire lawyers or appraisers to prepare the deal.

There are a few exceptions to this referendum requirement in the city charter, and those exceptions would be expanded by two if voters approve Question 1.

One of those exceptions would eliminate the current requirement for a referendum on cable television franchises, since federal law virtually requires the city to grant them, said City Attorney John Hubbard.

The other new exception would be city leases of personal property such as vehicles for less than 10 years.

Question 2

With this question, the city wants to know if it would be okay to have fewer of those referendums referred to in Question 1.

Right now, the city charter says the city must have a referendum virtually every time it wants to buy or sell land, whether it is a cheap, postage stamp-sized lot or a big hunk of property.

But if voters approve this amendment, the city would have to hold a referendum only if it wanted to spend more than $250,000. Lesser purchases would have to be approved by at least four of the five city commissioners to avoid a referendum.

Some city officials have acknowledged that is a big leap from no threshold to a quarter-million dollars.

But Hubbard said $250,000 "just isn't that much money anymore." He noted that one fire engine can cost around $300,000.

Question 3

Term limits are pretty popular in the United States. But some members of the Charter Revision Commission thought you might want the chance to rethink term limits for city offices.

This question, if approved, would eliminate the current limit of two three-year terms for commissioners.

It also would have city commissioners and the mayor take office within seven days of their election rather than the next month.

Question 4

Ah, a question that is easy to read. Approval of this question would allow the city's Board of Adjustment to have two alternates instead of one. The board wants a little more flexibility.

Question 5

At present, the city has no internal auditor who reports to the City Commission.

But the position is open, and before previous internal auditor Bill Kucera left the job, he suggested some minor changes in the job description in the city charter.

If voters approve this question, those minor changes will be made.

Question 6

If the city attorney is awakened by a 6 a.m. phone call in which he learns the city has been sued, he wants to be able to start work on the city's defense right away.

He doesn't want to have to call a meeting of the City Commission, wait for them to get together, and then start working on the case. That's what the city charter requires now.

If voters approve Question 6, the city attorney will be able to start working on the city's defense immediately, as long as he tells commissioners as soon as possible and as long as he has no conflict of interest.

Question 7

Tarpon Springs' Civil Service Board, made up of resident appointees, has been involved in more than one controversy over the years.

But this question, which would slightly change the duties of the board, does not grow out of any of those past controversies, Hubbard said. Instead, it comes from his and others' concern that because board members are "just folks," not trained in human resources, they might say something inappropriate or illegal to job applicants that could get the city sued.

The city charter currently allows the Civil Service Board members to "administer" exams to job applicants, which could open the door to those kinds of risky questions or comments.

If Question 7 is approved, the charter would say that the board could only "observe" exams, which would then be administered by human resource professionals.

Question 8

In 1995, city residents decided in a referendum that it would be a good idea for the city's key appointed decisionmakers -- the city manager, city clerk and all department heads -- to be required to live in the city limits.

That requirement sometimes has discouraged would-be applicants for city posts, so the Charter Revision Commission thought you might want to consider limiting that requirement to only those officials who need to know the city "intimately."

If this question is approved, the city manager, city clerk, administrative services director, fire chief, police chief, public services director and planning and zoning director would have to establish residency in the city within a year of being hired. People like the purchasing director and the finance director would be excused.

Also, new department head positions established in the future would be excluded from the residency rule.

Question 9

The city charter now says that except in an emergency, all purchases over $5,000 must be submitted for competitive bids.

Approval of this question would raise the threshold to $10,000. It is, says Hubbard, a recognition of the rising cost of doing routine city business.

Question 10

People who have seen the damage done by natural disasters, whether floods or storms or sinkholes, might be surprised to learn that in Tarpon Springs, the city manager can spend no more than $25,000 for goods and services in an emergency.

The city wants to know if that ceiling can be raised to $50,000 in recognition of inflation and how great the immediate needs can be in an emergency.

Question 11

You know how sometimes the mood just strikes you to tidy up?

That's what this question is about. The city charter now defines the fiscal year and requires an annual audit by an independent auditor.

But state law already does both, and that supersedes city law anyway. So the city wants to just eliminate these unneeded words.

Question 12

Right now, if there is a dispute about what a section of the city charter really means, the only person who can give a formal opinion is the city attorney.

Some members of the charter commission thought it would be a good idea to provide the city attorney some additional input and support in such disputes.

If this question is approved, the city attorney may demand that the City Commission appoint a Charter Review Commission to review the issue and give an advisory opinion to the city attorney.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.