MEMBERS PRESENT: Suzanne Gunzburger, Chair Larry S. Davis H. Collins Forman, Jr. Roslyn Greenberg Tom McDonald Marilyn Moskowitz Grant Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: James Gray Kane Joe Wells 1
Also Present: Carlos Verney, Executive Director, Charter Review Commission Madison Cerniglia, Assistant Executive Director, Charter Review Commission Melissa Kucinskas, Administrative Staff, Charter Review Commission Jacob Horowitz, Esquire, Goren, Cherof Doody & Ezrol, P.A., Ethics Subcommittee Legal Counsel Edward Dion, Esquire, Nabors, Giblin, and Nickerson, Ethics Subcommittee Special Counsel Daniel Stermer, Mayor, City of Weston Mary Lou Tighe, Broward League of Cities Jodie Breece, Broward County Inspector General s Office Eve Lewis Mayor Becky Tooley Nancy Cavender, The Laws Group 2
A meeting of the Broward County Charter Review Commission Ethics Subcommittee was held at Broward County Governmental Center, Room 430, 115 S. Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida on Monday, August 14, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. (The following is a near-verbatim transcript of the meeting.) 3
AGENDA ITEM I - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. It being 1:30, and I know that we all want to get back out into the 94 degree temperature as soon as possible, which will feel like 101, but I m calling the meeting to order. And I d ask Nancy to please call the roll. And there s one in the doorway. THE REPORTER: Larry Davis. MR. DAVIS: Present. THE REPORTER: James Gray Kane. Roslyn Greenberg. MS. GREENBERG: Here. THE REPORTER: Tom McDonald. MR. MCDONALD: Here. THE REPORTER: Grant Smith. MR. SMITH: Here. THE REPORTER: H. Collins Forman, Jr. Marilyn Moskowitz. MS. MOSKOWITZ: Here. THE REPORTER: Joe Wells. 4
Suzanne Gunzburger, Chair. MS. GUNZBURGER: Present. Thank you. AGENDA ITEM II - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MS. GUNZBURGER: Let s stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. (THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.) MS. MOSKOWITZ: That was the quick version. MS. GUNZBURGER: Well, I m trying to help us not -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MS. GUNZBURGER: -- take too long so that you all will be happy. AGENDA ITEM III - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SUMMARY MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 2017 ETHICS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MS. GUNZBURGER: I d like someone to move the approval of the minutes. MR. DAVIS: I ll move. MR. MCDONALD: I ll second the -- Larry s motion. MR. DAVIS: No. I ll second, Tom. 5
MS. GUNZBURGER: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. There being no objections, it passes. VOTE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AGENDA ITEM IV - SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION REGARDING FOLLOW-UP TO ATTORNEY GENERAL REQUEST MS. GUNZBURGER: We will follow up on the meeting from last Wednesday. As you know, the first -- well, really, it was the second one that we passed that changed -- did a tremendous change to change the word shall to may. And that passed unanimously. It was just amazing. And -- I m a little sarcastic -- the other one went down in flames. And that s what happened on Wednesday. I think everyone here was there except for Mr. Dion, who missed that fun meeting. MS. GREENBERG: No. There was another person who wasn t here. I forgot his name. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Joe? Collins? 6
MS. GREENBERG: Joe. (Inaudible). MS. GUNZBURGER: No. I m talking about the people who are sitting here. MS. GREENBERG: Oh, okay. All right. But he wasn t at the last meeting. MS. GUNZBURGER: Right. No, I understand. Thank you, Roz.. And I d like to know if there is any other thing that we need to discuss with the Attorney General s requests at this time. MR. HOROWITZ: If I may -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes. MR. HOROWITZ: -- Madam Chair, on the item regarding the Attorney General s request, you may recall, at the request of the full board, this is back in April, our office sent a request for an Attorney General opinion to Pam Bondi s office. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. HOROWITZ: Subsequent to our submittal, we received a follow up inquiry on May 8th, and the 7
Attorney General has asked the CRC to provide some additional information with regards to their review of that request. You may recall, the request itself pertained to the potential expansion of the Inspector General s jurisdiction to cover certain special districts or independent districts, taxing districts, within Broward County. There were a number of types of districts identified in the request itself, whether it s a 189 district, be it dependent or independent. The School Board, the school district, which is a constitutional district, was also referenced. There were not any specific districts identified that the CRC might have been looking at at the time, but the opinion request did go to the CRC s general authority to expand the IG s jurisdiction to those types of districts within Broward. The AG s Office has asked the CRC to provide some additional clarification as to what districts it might 8
be focused on. You may recall, at not this past Wednesday s board meeting, but the prior board meeting, the CRC looked at the AG s follow-up request and referred the matter back to this committee for some additional discussion and review. We do -- we, as our office, on behalf of the CRC, do need to submit a response to the Attorney General s inquiry. We ve advised them that there was the summer break, and there was some scheduling in the context of meetings, which is the only reason they have not received a substantive response thus far. But they are waiting for some follow up from the CRC as it relates to that request and which specific districts the CRC may be interested in. So, with that, I ll turn it back over to you, Madam Chair. MS. GUNZBURGER: Thank you. Are there any specific districts that the board 9
would like to get an answer on? I believe we really felt that, much as we may have liked to have done it, either the School Board or -- or the hospital districts, they re really out of our purview. Commissioner Davis. MR. DAVIS: I thought that the issue that we were most concerned about was whether or not the IG had jurisdiction over the CRAs, because, remember, the CRAs are -- MS. GUNZBURGER: They re -- they re quasigovernmental, and most of the CRAs have elected officials as their board of directors. MR. DAVIS: Right. Some of the CRAs are the boards themselves. MS. GUNZBURGER: That s exactly the way it is in -- MR. DAVIS: So -- MS. GUNZBURGER: -- in your and my hometown. It s the way it is at the County. I can t speak for the rest of the cities. 10
MR. DAVIS: -- well, my -- just my understanding, Sue, was that we were trying -- we were going to ask the Attorney General for an opinion in regard to whether or not the IG had jurisdiction over the CRAs, because there seems to be some disagreement between the IG and the -- some of the staff on the -- and the attorneys for the CRA. I don t know. I thought that s what was our -- what the concern was. I mean -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Okay. Because I -- MR. DAVIS: I mean, I -- MS. GUNZBURGER: -- believe -- I believe the IG has done work on CRAs, in the past. I can think of one specifically, the city to the south of us. MR. DAVIS: Right, in Hallandale Beach. I m -- I m well aware of that. But, I mean, because I don t think there s any way for the IG to get jurisdiction over the School Board without an agreement -- MS. GUNZBURGER: I agree. 11
MR. DAVIS: -- or the hospital districts. So I don t know what else we re talking here. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. So is there a feeling that we need to get the Attorney General s opinion on the CRAs? Mr. Horowitz, what is your -- MR. HOROWITZ: Yes, ma'am. MS. GUNZBURGER: -- feeling? MR. HOROWITZ: Well, you -- the opinion request itself was fairly broadly drafted. As the board requested, it covered the school district, which is a constitutional district; it covered 189 districts, which are dependent and independent districts. The opinion itself did not actually reference CRAs. Although we had previously prepared a legal memorandum which did highlight a potential disagreement as it relates to the OIG s authority as it relates to CRAs, we were not asked to focus specifically on those types of districts in the opinion request itself. But if it s the will of the committee and then 12
subsequently the board, we can certainly clarify the request to cover that particular issue, should that be the direction. MS. GUNZBURGER: Has -- was it challenged when the IG went into the City of Hallandale Beach? MR. HOROWITZ: I know that there was some question as to the IG s jurisdiction at the time. When we were researching the issue for our legal memorandum, which was a predicate to the AG request, there was a legal opinion from counsel for Hallandale Beach, at the time, that did question that jurisdiction. But our office ultimately has no opinion on whether the IG, in fact, has jurisdiction over CRAs. We have not looked into that issue independently. MS. GUNZBURGER: What is the will of this board? I really -- Ms. Breece, did you want to say something? You look like you were ready to jump out of your chair. MS. BREECE: Good afternoon. Jodie Breece, General Counsel for the Broward Inspector General. I -- I was only prepared to answer if I want -- if a 13
question was posed, but I will offer that the Inspector General believes that it already has -- that this -- our office already has jurisdiction over the CRAs inasmuch as they are, in all of the municipalities that we are -- we re aware, and in the County, they are controlled and governed by elected officials over whom we already have jurisdiction according to the Charter as it s written today. There was a challenge that was raised -- not exactly a challenge. It wasn t a legal challenge. It was a letter raising the issue. But, ultimately, we did issue the -- we did conduct and complete our investigation, we did issue a report, and, ultimately, the city did acquiesce to our authority in investigating -- in conducting that investigation. We believe that we don t need additional authority or clarity on CRAs, specifically, in order for us to investigate CRAs. MS. GUNZBURGER: Okay. Further discussion? Commissioner -- 14
MR. MCDONALD: Can I ask -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes, absolutely. MR. MCDONALD: -- Ms. Breece a question? Do you feel that you have authority over elected officials of special districts, such as Community Development District, if they re elected by the -- MS. BREECE: No. The elected officials over whom we have authority are the elected officials of the -- of the Charter County and of the municipality -- municipalities. MR. MCDONALD: Okay. MS. BREECE: No, not with regards to the special districts, without further legal authority provided to us. MS. GUNZBURGER: Anyone else? MR. DAVIS: I mean, so bottom line is, if I m hearing you correctly, and I don t really have a strong position either way, is that if -- you d just as soon wait for a -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Challenge? 15
MR. DAVIS: -- challenge -- thank you, Sue -- from the CRA -- MS. BREECE: Sure. MR. DAVIS: -- or a member of the CRA or an attorney for the CRA -- MS. BREECE: Sure. MR. DAVIS: -- as opposed to asking -- MS. BREECE: We -- we re -- MR. DAVIS: -- up front -- MS. BREECE: Yes. MR. DAVIS: -- whether you have jurisdiction; is that -- MS. BREECE: Yes. We re very, very confident in our position. MS. GUNZBURGER: Is there any more discussion? Mr. Stermer, you are not a member of this board, and -- but I thank you for trying. Would you like to -- MR. DAVIS: I mean, just -- I don t -- if -- if they don t think they need it and they d rather deal with it in a -- 16
MS. GUNZBURGER: Yeah, I don t see why -- MR. DAVIS: -- (inaudible). MS. GUNZBURGER: -- we should go any further. MR. MCDONALD: I move -- I move we do nothing with it. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I don t care. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. That s the feeling of this board? MR. HOROWITZ: It -- just to be clear, if I may. Because the request came to the full board and it was the full board that sent the matter back here, during the next report we ll raise the issue, relate the discussion of this board, and if the intent is to withdraw our request for an opinion, we ll follow up with a letter to the Attorney General that represents that direction. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. And that -- that disposes of that item. Thank you for your interest. AGENDA ITEM V - SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION ON ETHICS CODE 17
MS. GUNZBURGER: The next discussion is on the Ethics Code. I reviewed it again, and I think that there are some things within the -- since the Ethics Code, since I ve left the Commission, has been changed and the opportunity, because it s an ordinance rather than in the Charter, it leaves it open to being changed again. And that s why I thought it might be better to be codified within the Charter. And I d like to hear from the committee members whether they feel the same as I do, or differ. MR. MCDONALD: But -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Commissioner Tom -- MR. MCDONALD: -- I have a question. I just -- MS. GUNZBURGER: -- Tom McDonald. MR. MCDONALD: -- have a question on -- to change it, is it a super majority by the Commission? Or is it just a majority? Does anybody know that? MS. GUNZBURGER: I don t remember. I m sorry. MR. HOROWITZ: To weaken the request, through the -- 18
MR. MCDONALD: Right. MR. HOROWITZ: -- the Code would require a referendum or a super majority, as I recall. I defer to -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Mr. -- MR. HOROWITZ: -- special counsel. MR. DION: Yeah, it s by citizen initiative or super majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners. MR. MCDONALD: A super majority would be six out of the nine, that -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Correct. MR. DION: Correct. MR. MCDONALD: So they weakened it the one time where they allowed the water bottle or the -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Yeah, they allowed the five -- MR. MCDONALD: -- but that was a -- MS. GUNZBURGER: -- and they allowed the food as long as they repaid the cost of the food to an event. MR. MCDONALD: Okay. MS. GUNZBURGER: I read it again this morning. It was really great reading. 19
So what is the wish of the board? Do we want to put it into the Charter? Do you want to re-read the Code? Is that included n our backup? MR. VERNEY: Yes. MS. GUNZBURGER: Oh, other than me having read it? All right. Which tab color is it? MS. CERNIGLIA: Green. MS. GUNZBURGER: The green one that says -- no, 2010 is not the most -- 2015. The green tab 2015 is the newest. Now, I ll wait five minutes for everyone to read it, unless there have -- you ve read it -- MR. SMITH: Well, I don t think that was the essence of your question, but I d like to say something. MS. GUNZBURGER: Sure. MR. SMITH: I think the essence of your question doesn t necessarily have to be is it -- have you read what s in here. MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes. 20
MR. SMITH: I think the essence of your question is should it be moved from one body of law -- MS. GUNZBURGER: From the ordinance -- MR. SMITH: -- to another body of law. MS. GUNZBURGER: Right. Exactly. MR. SMITH: So I think I can opine on that without having read whatever s here. In my opinion, I think the Commission needs the flexibility to do it. There is some extra hurdle that requires them, if they re going to weak it -- weaken it, it ll either be by citizen initiative or -- vote or a super majority. But I think, as with other items we ve discussed, whether ethics or otherwise, we have constantly talked about the ability to be reactive to what is happening in the community at the time. I think if we move it to the Charter, it becomes more difficult to -- to change it -- MS. GUNZBURGER: That s -- MR. SMITH: -- with the times. 21
And you re -- I m saying change; you re hearing weaken, but it could be strengthened, too. So that s why I don t -- well, you re laughing, but, again, I think it s kind of what we were talking about the other day of siting facilities. I m saying parks and people are hearing sexual, you know, molester facilities where they re going to keep -- so you re hearing what you want to hear. You re hearing -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Right. MR. SMITH: -- weaken. I didn t say weaken. I wasn t insinuating weaken. It could go either way. So I think it -- you do need the flexibility in the ordinance to be able to -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Rather than in the Charter? MR. SMITH: Yeah, we re talking about a decennial thing here. I mean, this isn t something that s -- that -- MS. GUNZBURGER: I understand. MR. SMITH: -- we do every year. So -- so if it s a 22
decennial, yes, I do believe it needs to stay in the -- the -- MS. GUNZBURGER: As an ordinance. MR. SMITH: Well, look at our state. I mean, it s not -- it s in the -- it s not in the statutes. I mean -- I mean, it s in the statutes -- MS. GUNZBURGER: There are -- MR. SMITH: -- in the statutes -- MS. GUNZBURGER: -- it is in the statutes. MR. SMITH: -- but it s not -- but it s not in the Constitution. MS. GUNZBURGER: Is it -- is it not in the Constitution? MR. SMITH: It is not in the Constitution. MR. DION: No, it s only the requirement for it. MR. SMITH: Correct. Which is what s in our Charter, sort of. I mean -- MR. DION: But it s -- it s relatively the same deal. MR. SMITH: -- (inaudible). 23
MR. DION: In the state, there s a requirement for a Code of Ethics, and the Legislature has enacted that. Same in your Charter is that it requires a Code of Ethics, and the legislative body of this organization has adopted it. MR. SMITH: I believe we should be consistent. MS. GUNZBURGER: Mr. Dion, has -- have they put the rules and regs into the State Constitution? MR. DION: No. MS. GUNZBURGER: Okay. MR. DION: No. And I m not -- I m not aware of any municipal or County organization in the State of Florida that does that. We ve -- and I think Jacob s looked at that as well. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. DION: Has it in their Charter. MR. HOROWITZ: We have. There s some municipalities that embrace Chapter 112 in their Charter as a -- as a Code of Ethics, but that s the extent of it. MS. GUNZBURGER: Mr. McDonald. 24
MR. MCDONALD: Just ask the attorneys, if we put that on the ballot, it would affect the cities also; right? MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes. MR. MCDONALD: Well, I mean -- MS. GUNZBURGER: But it -- the vote originally affected the cities. MR. MCDONALD: I understand. I just wanted to make sure. MS. GUNZBURGER: Any further discussion? Mr. Davis. MR. DAVIS: I -- I m - I kind of go along with what Grant is saying. MS. CERNIGLIA: Can you turn your mic on? MS. GUNZBURGER: Microphone, Mr. Davis. The face. Good. MR. DAVIS: Okay. I -- I kind of concur with what Grant Smith is saying. It seems to me that it s -- it s here now, and I don t know if it really needs to be put into the constitutional -- 25
MS. GUNZBURGER: Into the Charter. MR. DAVIS: -- Charter. Yeah, well -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Yeah. MR. DAVIS: -- which is our -- which is our Constitution. And I think we ve heard from a lot of people to leave things as general as possible in -- in some areas, and I think this is a good area to leave well enough alone. We have the Code, and I don t think we need to put it in the Charter. So I would -- if Grant has a motion not to move it, I would second that. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I don t even know if there s a motion on the floor. MS. GUNZBURGER: There isn t. MR. SMITH: There s nothing. This is just discussion. MS. GUNZBURGER: This -- this was discussion, so that there need -- I will not bring it back if I don t 26
see support. I go down once, I don t need to go down twice. AGENDA ITEM VI - SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION REGARDING ANY ADDITIONAL TOPICS FROM MEMBERS MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. Are there any additional topics that the Ethics Committee would like us to address, or is this going to be our last subcommittee meeting? MR. DAVIS: I d like to bring up something that -- and it was brought up last Wednesday, and I -- I know Collins wasn t here, and I read, and we read into the record your letter. And here s what I wasn t sure of as to where we were going, because we voted down the -- the Number 7, whatever that was, that -- which -- which dealt with both -- I think that -- both -- that was mostly dealing lobbyists. And then -- and then -- MR. SMITH: And non-profits. MR. DAVIS: Huh? 27
MS. GUNZBURGER: And non-profits. MR. DAVIS: And non-profits. And the -- my question was -- and I -- and I don t know the -- is whether or not there is any thought about dealing with either one of them separately. In other words, if there is -- there seemed to be a very strong feeling that lobbyists should not be under the way it was written, and I don t know if it s -- if the same feeling is on our board regarding the nonprofits that are doing governmental services. And I would like to bring that up just for discussion, and -- and -- MS. GUNZBURGER: I appreciate that. MR. DAVIS: -- and if there is, I mean, I mean, I see the difference in the two areas. MS. GUNZBURGER: I happen to be very much in favor of that, that when you get government money to X, Y, Z, you don t do A, B, C. Mr. Smith. MR. SMITH: Yeah, I was -- I was disappointed that 28
-- that the initiative was voted down the other day. I think -- and maybe in part because of what I brought up, I believe that the process got in the way of a substantive discussion of -- of the matters. And what I brought up I felt strongly about, because I do believe that at some level the Inspector General s Office was asking for changes at the very last minute that I agreed with -- with Jacob s assessment that nine out of ten of them were scrivener s type things. MS. GUNZBURGER: Uh-huh. MR. SMITH: One of them, to me, at least, and I think I heard from -- from others on the committee, were substantive -- was substantive. And I -- I did not particularly agree with that. We got bogged down into the process and never really got to the heart of the matter. I believe that maybe this subcommittee or the full board should revisit that. I have read the rules of reconsideration, and 29
reconsideration for a matter -- under Rule 8, reconsideration of a matter that was voted down for which 13 was required to pass can be -- a motion for reconsideration can be brought by anybody, not just somebody on the prevailing side. It s -- it s different than Robert s Rules of Order. So that s what our -- that s what our Charter rules say. So I am prepared to bring this up again at the full -- full committee. That s -- that s my -- that s my prerogative to do if I choose -- MS. GUNZBURGER: I -- I would -- MR. SMITH: -- to do it. MS. GUNZBURGER: -- welcome that, but I d like to know, before you go on, is there no reason why we could not take a stand on that issue at our own subcommittee? MR. SMITH: Well, may I finish? MS. GUNZBURGER: Sure. MR. SMITH: I m sorry this is lengthy, but I ve 30
been thinking about this ever since Wednesday. I believe we should. And I also believe that, procedurally, as I started thinking about the procedure of what happened, interestingly enough, we actually never took up at the full board the one that we passed out of here, because the motion that I made was just to accept the AG s -- I m sorry, the IG s form. And it was not what we passed. And so I believe that we could legitimately, even without a motion for reconsideration, pass ours again, if we had to, and then just have ours considered. In my opinion, and I agree with -- with you, Madam Chair, I believe that we, as a full board, did not get into the substance, and it is shortsighted for us not to include -- yes, it s -- it s well known that from time to time I lobby. I couldn t care less that lobbyists are included. I think it s great for the profession. Not an issue for me. But I believe that anybody -- I strongly believe this, anybody who is getting public funds to do whatever 31
those public funds are asked to be spent on needs to be held accountable. And right now -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. SMITH: -- there is a big gap in -- in who looks at what. Certainly, the Broward County Auditor can look at those things, if the Broward County Auditor was so inclined. But the Inspector General does not have the authority to do that now. And, at the city level, everything that I ve investigated on my own basically says to me that there s not a lot of auditors at the city level. Every city is required by state law to have an auditor to do their financial audit annually. And all of them engage outside auditors and -- whoever those auditors are. And the -- but they don t look at the use of funds as much as does the budget balance and -- and, you know, was money spent from the right account for the right 32
thing. You know, it wasn t -- it s not the use of funds. They re not going out to those -- to those 501(c)(3)s or other organizations that are getting public funding. And I do not know if there s a problem. You know, you never know if there s a problem until there s a problem. But right now, I think there s a dearth of -- of authority by anybody to look at that. And I believe that we did not have the right discussion. We got bogged down in the process, and it was driving me crazy. So whether we take a stand at this subcommittee or if I have to bring it up again at the full committee, I m prepared to do it, because I think it s the right thing to do. MS. GUNZBURGER: Thank you. I m going to ask the attorneys, even though it was not on the agenda, do we have -- can we -- can motions be made to support the positions that I ve just heard at 33
this meeting, or would it have to be at a subsequent meeting? MR. HOROWITZ: Before you would take a motion to that effect, I would ask that you move to amend the agenda to include the item. If the agenda were amended, you could then consider the item that Commissioner Smith is referring to. MS. GUNZBURGER: Would somebody make the motion? I m the Chair, I cannot. MR. SMITH: I make the motion to -- to -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Amend -- MR. SMITH: -- amend or expand the current agenda of the subcommittee for today to include the discussion of the item that did not pass regarding -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Non-profit -- MR. SMITH: -- non-profit authority. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. Is there a second? MR. DAVIS: I ll second it for discussion purposes. MS. GUNZBURGER: Is there any discussion? All right. Then we will take a vote. 34
All those in favor, signify by saying aye. All those opposed? MR. MCDONALD: No. MR. FORMAN: No. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No. MR. MCDONALD: Better take a roll call. MR. DAVIS: It went down. MS. GUNZBURGER: It went down. It was a tie, 3 to 3. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, no. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Four -- four to -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Four to three. MS. GUNZBURGER: Oh. MR. MCDONALD: You better take the roll call. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. Would -- call the roll, please, Nancy. THE REPORTER: Larry Davis. MR. DAVIS: Yes. THE REPORTER: James Gray Kane. Roslyn Greenberg. 35
MS. GREENBERG: No. THE REPORTER: Tom McDonald. MR. MCDONALD: No. THE REPORTER: Grant Smith. MR. SMITH: Yes. THE REPORTER: H. Collins Forman, Jr. MR. FORMAN: No. THE REPORTER: Marilyn Moskowitz. MS. MOSKOWITZ: No. THE REPORTER: Joe Wells. Suzanne Gunzburger, Chair. MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes. It loses. VOTE DOES NOT PASS. MS. GUNZBURGER: So you still have the ability at the next meeting of the whole board to bring it back. MR. HOROWITZ: I was just going to reaffirm Commissioner Smith s comments. His recitation of that particular rule is, in fact, correct, and any member of the -- of the full board has 36
the prerogative to move to have it reconsidered at that level. MS. GUNZBURGER: I know -- MR. MCDONALD: Can you repeat that? MR. HOROWITZ: Just that Grant s recitation of the rules regarding reconsideration is accurate, and that any member of the full board, irrespective of which side they were on during last Wednesday s vote, has the prerogative to ask that the item be reconsidered at a subsequent board meeting. MS. GUNZBURGER: I know I don t have -- MR. MCDONALD: Well, are you saying you have to research that? Are you -- MR. HOROWITZ: No, I m saying that is the answer. MR. MCDONALD: That is the answer. MR. HOROWITZ: Yes. MS. GUNZBURGER: I know this is irregular, but I m really curious, if any of you who voted no could explain your position. You don t have to, but I would like to know why you would not want an NPO to be audited. 37
MR. MCDONALD: The -- I ll explain my vote. I -- I heard testimony at the last meeting that made me feel uncomfortable expanding that. And I don t want to bring it up again. So if you want to bring it up, go ahead and vote for it. But I voted no for both. MS. GUNZBURGER: All right. I m still in the dark. Thank you. There being no more business before -- MR. VERNEY: Madam Chair? MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes? MR. VERNEY: I believe there s one additional item, and this was a referral from the full CRC for the consideration of the Ethics Code and its applicability to constitutional officers. That occurred at the meeting where the constitutional officers were invited to speak to the full CRC, and that item was referred back to the Ethics Subcommittee for consideration. MS. GUNZBURGER: I think, based on the information 38
that we ve gotten from Mr. Horowitz, that that doesn t play at all. MR. HOROWITZ: Let me just offer this very briefly on that point. In August, I believe it was August of 2010, there were three items put on the ballot at the direction and initiative of the Broward County Commission. One of the three was to impose the Code of Ethics on the constitutional officers in Broward County. The item passed. It s currently included within the Charter. To the best of our knowledge, it has not been ever enforced. I m not aware that the County Commission has adopted an ordinance implementing that provision. And, based on some of the testimony we heard from constitutional officers at the full board level, I m not aware that any of them are currently complying with any Code of Ethics imposed by Broward County. We d be happy to research that issue if it s the will of this subcommittee. 39
As Mr. Verney said, apparently the item was sent back here for some discussion and consideration. We do have some initial reservations about the County imposing a Code of Ethics on the constitutional officers, but if it s the will of the committee, we d be happy to do some further research. MS. GUNZBURGER: Mr. Smith. MR. SMITH: Can that be part of the question to the Attorney General? I mean, it s -- it s still in the same general genre of what we re asking. MR. HOROWITZ: Well, it would be a little different, because that specific issue goes to the jurisdiction of the OIG. I think the issue that the Executive Director s referring to is whether the County Commission can adopt a Code of Ethics that would apply to the constitutional officers. Now, whether that would be enforced by the IG, if there was a legal mechanism to do that, I think would be the second part of that discussion. The first question that I m hearing is whether the 40
County Commission can, in fact, adopt a code that they would then be subject to. And there is current language in our Charter to that effect, but, again, I m not aware of it ever being implemented or enforced. MS. GUNZBURGER: Well, we can ask for that opinion. MR. HOROWITZ: If you d like us to do some additional research on that issue, we d be happy to do it. MS. GUNZBURGER: Certainly. And if you get an answer, then we d call a meeting. If you never get -- if you get the answers that you ve been getting, there wouldn t be much reason to have a meeting. MR. HOROWITZ: Okay. And we can also present that as part of a general counsel report at the full board. That -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Okay. MR. HOROWITZ: -- that would also -- MS. GUNZBURGER: Thank you. AGENDA ITEM VIII - ADJOURNMENT 41
MS. GUNZBURGER: There being no further business to come before this subcommittee, we stand in adjournment until we find out if we get any answers from the Attorney General. (The meeting recessed at 2:01 p.m. and reconvened at 2:02 p.m.) MR. FORMAN: Then the meeting on September 11th is canceled? MS. GUNZBURGER: Yes. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: (Inaudible.) MS. GUNZBURGER: Unless we have an opinion, there s no reason. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: (Inaudible.) AGENDA ITEM VII - PUBLIC COMMENT MS. GUNZBURGER: Oh, yes. Is there anybody from the public that would like to comment? I m sorry. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: (Inaudible.) MS. GUNZBURGER: Mr. Stermer? It s your time now. 42
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: (Inaudible.) MS. GUNZBURGER: Or Mayor Stermer, rather. MAYOR STERMER: Thank you, Madam Chair. I -- on behalf of the Broward League of Cities and the Broward County Commission, I just want to thank you all for your attentiveness during these meetings. While we sometimes disagree with the -- with the Office of the Inspector General on positions taken, Ms. Breece and I can stand here jointly and tell you that whenever we ve worked on Code changes, we ve done it collaboratively. And my presumption is we will continue to do it collaboratively. It has been, from day one, a process that 32 local governments and the Inspector General s Office have tried our hardest to come to agreement on language. Whether that always happens, it doesn t. But we try our hardest to collaboratively make that happen. And on behalf of the cities and the County, we just want to thank you for your attentiveness. Thank you. 43
MS. GUNZBURGER: Thank you for your kind words. AGENDA ITEM VIII - ADJOURNMENT (The meeting concluded at 2:03 p.m.) 44