Next City Council Mtg on Thursday, May 3rd at 7PM

• State Senator Bobby Powell – Legislative Update
• Fiscal Year 2017 Audit Report by Marcum LLP

• Resolution 22, 2018 – Approving plat for Nuvo Business Center 
• Resolution 23, 2018 – Project Knight – In February Council Meeting Resolution 7, 2018 appproved $70K in economic incentives.  This would provide another $140K ($1400/job for 100 jobs) to the company.
• Resolution 25, 2018 – Request that the SOE conduct the City’s Special Election in August.  Costs are listed as TBD.
• Purchase Award – Piggyback/Access contract for Real Estate Brokerage Services for sale of property at 9290 Park Lane listed to be above $65K
• Purchase Award – Openly competed for Replacement of Irrigation Pump Stations –  $136K
• Purchase Award – Openly competed for School Crossing Guard Services for 5 years – $1.5 Million

City Manager Report  – no details listed

• Resolution 19, 2018 – Request from Frenchman’s Reserve Country Club for approval for installation of 50′ Flag Pole at the Country Club
• Ordinance 6, 2018 –  first reading – Repeal and replace of Chapter 26 (Elections) in the City’s Code of Ordinances – rationale given is SOE request to make qualification dates earlier – however there are other significant changes throughout the document!
• 2nd Reading and Adoption of Ordinances 7-9, 2018  – Referendum Questions 1,2 and 3 which will appear on the August 28, 2018 Primary Election – pertaining to Term Limits, Repeal/Replace of the Charter, City Manager Residence.
• Ordinance 10,2018 – Voluntary Annexation 14+ Acre Seacoast Utility Authority Parcel 
• Resolution 24, 2018 – Supporting the Steeplechase community for the installation of a noise wall for the planned future State Road 710 (Beeline Highway)/ Northlake Boulevard roadway expansion project

Items for Council Action/Discussion:   

• Resolution 26, 2018 – Firearm Control….Calling on the State of Florida and the Federal Government to reduce gun violence in America and help prevent future occurrences by enacting common sense gun control legislation, enhancing mental health programs, and increasing school security measures.

Check the agenda to see if any additional items have been added before the meeting here.

First Reading Completed on Three Charter Questions

The Council had a relatively brief and lightly attended Special Meeting on Thursday April 19 to review the proposed language for the August 28th ballot.  City Clerk Snider read all of the required ordinance language for Ordinances 7-9, displayed the ballot language and then the Council proceeded to discuss the 3 questions individually.

Ordinance 7, 2018 passed 4:1 with Council Member Lane objecting.   He restated his position that 2 4-year terms would be better.  Council Member Marciano appreciated the position however 3 3-year terms is what was going on the ballot.  The question reads:

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 1

SHALL THE PALM BEACH GARDENS CHARTER BE AMENDED TO
CHANGE FROM THE EXISTING TERM LIMIT WHICH PROHIBITS A
COUNCIL MEMBER FROM BEING ELECTED TO MORE THAN TWO
CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS TO A TERM LIMIT THAT PROHIBITS A
COUNCIL MEMBER FROM SERVING FOR MORE THAN THREE
CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS AND MAKING THE CHANGE APPLY TO ALL
SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 1 BE ADOPTED?

Ordinance 8, 2018 – the repeal and replace of the base charter, passed 5:0.  Council Member Lane asked for a few changes in the wording of the Ordinance to ensure that the items already passed in the March 13, 2018 election were preserved.  City Attorney Lohman agreed to make the changes.  The language is considerably different than that voided in March (formerly Question 1) and specifies a list of modifications present in the new charter.  Exhibit A also clearly shows what former wording, new wording, removed and new reorganization of the sections will be so that the voter can understand the modifications.  Left in the charter are the requirement for charter reviews, as well as the requirement to annually review the City Manager.   Scroll down to page 9 of this link to the beginning of exhibit A.  The question reads:

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 2

SHALL THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REMOVE
PROVISIONS THAT ARE OUTDATED, UNNECESSARY OR CONFLICT
WITH STATE LAW INCLUDING MUNICIPALITY, CITY CLERK, AND
CITY TREASURER SPECIFIC POWERS/DUTIES; OATH OF OFFICE;
MERIT SYSTEM; PROCEDURE REMOVING COUNCILMEN,
QUALIFICATION OF ELECTORS, COUNCIL MEETING AND
PROCEDURE, AND OTHER PROVISIONS; REVISE COUNCILMANAGER
RELATIONSHIP; CHANGE FILLING OF VACANCIES;
LIMIT INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM; DEFINE “FULL TERM”; REMOVE
COUNCIL CONFIRMATION OF EMPLOYEES AND OTHER CHANGES;
AS PROVIDED IN EXHIBIT A, ORDINANCE 8?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 2 BE ADOPTED?

Ordinance 9, 2018 – City Manager Residence also passed 5:0 after some discussion.  Resident David Parks made public comment praising the Council and City Attorney Lohman for getting it right, thanking City Manager Ferris for a well run city, thanking City Clerk Snider for accomodating his numerous records requests, and thanking City Council Member Litt for assisting on 5 year charter reviews staying in the Charter.  The question reads:

CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS REFERENDUM QUESTION NO. 3

SHALL THE PALM BEACH GARDENS CHARTER BE AMENDED TO
REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE A
RESIDENT WITHIN ONE YEAR OF APPOINTMENT AND INSTEAD
PROVIDE THAT ANY RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY
MANAGER BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE CITY
MANAGER’S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT?

SHALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED QUESTION NO. 3 BE ADOPTED?

All 3 ordinances will be on the agenda for 2nd reading and final vote on the May 3rd City Council Meeting.

 

Updated – City Council Special Mtg on April 19 at 6PM to Discuss Charter Questions

Updated 4/18 – City posted agenda and ordinances

• Ordinance 7, 2018 – Changing term limits from 2 3-year terms to 3 3-year terms
• Ordinance 8, 2018 – Repeal and Replace of the Charter with Exhibit A – the ‘New’ Charter
• Ordinance 9, 2018 – Removing the Residency Requirement for City Manager and making it a contract item as determined by Council

Here are the proposed ballot questions:

Check for an agenda here to see the details of the meeting.  I will post more information on the PBGWatch website and facebook page as it becomes available.

Please read The Face of the City and Imperious City Staff Publicly Bullies Two Gardens’ Residents covering the April 5th City Council Meeting.  Also checkout the latest Martino Minute entitled City… Intimidation, Humiliation, or Bullying!

We get the government we deserve – and it’s up to us to watch what they do.  Hope you can make it. If you can’t make the meeting try and watch live-streaming or on-demand.

The Face of the City

Council members demonstrated different sensitivities at the beginning of April’s City Council meeting. Mayor Marino wanted to alter the agenda to bring forward Presentations.  Council Member Lane requested that the Reorganization be brought forward since he had to leave in observation of Passover.  Council Member Marciano was in support of Lane’s request.  Council Member Woods was quick to reply that he felt the Presentations should be remain as Marino suggested – which would have explicitly disenfranchized Lane from the Reorganization vote.   Council Member Litt was concerned about how long the reorganization might take. All were deferring to the Mayor. Before she could decide, State Representative Roth, who was part of the presentation agenda, piped in and broke up the hesitation by saying that he had no problem waiting and the issue was resolved to allow the Reorganization to occur first.

Marciano nominated Mayor Marino as Mayor, Litt seconded it – both citing stability for the City. Woods spoke in support of the choice describing Ms. Marino as the ‘Face of the City’ over the last year. The vote was unanimous, and Council Member Marino was ‘re-elected’ as Mayor.  Lane nominated Marciano for Vice Mayor; Marino countered with Woods. The issue was resolved when Council Member Marciano withdrew his name from consideration and Carl Woods was ‘elected’ Vice-Mayor.

Both State Representative Rick Roth and Mat Forrest gave summaries of the legislative session, and City Manager Ferris, along with Forrest and Roth praised Elicia Sanders, Assistant to the City Manager for her involvement in the process. Renee Gold, a Manager at Publix on Northlake, and Kamilla Soares, Paramedic saved the life of a woman who had passed out in the Publix with CPR. For their quick response and action, the two were awarded the City’s Citizen Lifesaving Award. Also recommended was the PulsePoint medical app that monitors and alerts to emergencies. Residents were encouraged to learn hands-free CPR; classes are offered at Fire/Rescue on the third Thursday of every month. See the Palm Beach Posts coverage of the presentation.

The March 13 Elections results were declared and approved 4:0.

Comments From the Public included:

• Tom DeRita, representing Steeplechase, spoke about the community’s concerns regarding FDOT plans
• Maxine Cheesman introduced herself as candidate for Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge
• Paula Magnuson handed in letters to the Council, to the Clerk – expressing concerns about her censorship by the City (which was confirmed by the City Manager later)

City Manager Ferris began his report by saying that the previously proposed meeting with FDOT and the Steeplechase Community would be moved until June 7th at 6pm. He then, claiming reluctance, started a disturbing 35 minute presentation entitled “Council Directive From February 2018 Council Meeting”.  Residents should read “Imperious Staff Publicly Bullies Two Gardens Residents” to see how staff considers residents who are dissatisfied with their treatment.

The Consent Agenda and Ordinance 2, 2018 regarding regulations for Home Solitication Sales Passed 4:0.   Nuvo Business Center’s proposed AIPP (Art in Public Places) statue by Mark Fuller raised concerns by the Council that it would be magnet for children attempting to scale the statue  . Staff and Fuller agreed to work together to come up with a satisfactory solution with statue and landscaping modifications.

Charter Questions will once again be on the Ballot during the August 28th Primary.  Resident Jane Feinstein spoke in favor of extending the term limits from two to three consecutive terms.  Both Council Members Litt and Marciano suggested that the questions related to the base Charter be broken out into a few separate questions, and that Charter Reviews remain in the Charter. City Attorney Lohman said that he’d already decided to do the latter and planned to create questions that would be immune to those who ‘litigate for sport’. Question 2 would be re-drafted as well. While SOE Bucher at first rejected the City’s request, two other municipalities – Lake Worth and Boca Raton were also going to require ballot questions, so she relented.

The schedule is as follows:

• April 19 – City Council Special Meeting at 6PM to review and vote on First Reading of proposed referendum questions
• May 3 – City Council Meeting – 2nd Reading and Adoption of proposed referendum questions
• May 11 – Deadline to transmit the ballot language to the Supervisor of Elections for inclusion on the August 28, 2018 ballot

Items for Council Action and Discussion included a few adjustments to external boards and committees, as well as discussion of a resolution to be sent to FDOT regarding issues related to Steeplechase.  But of additional resident interest were two topics that will be on future agendas:

• Council Member Litt suggested that the City prepare a resolution, as have other municipalities in Florida, regarding regulation of assault weapons. Council Member Marciano was in support of the preliminary steps the legislature and Governor had taken, was proud of the Parkland students actions, seconded his opposition to assult weapons, and voiced his concerns about safety not just in the schools but in other public places. City Manager Ferris felt that this should be a future agenda item with full Council attendance and the opportunity for public comment and development of a clear directive.  Council agreed.
• Council Member Marciano suggested that sometime in the next few months the Council should discuss a succession/transition plan, to be worked out prior to the following April reorganization meeting.  Council Member Woods liked the idea and suggested that there be public input into who should be Mayor and Vice Mayor.

Next City Council Meeting on April 5th at 7PM

• State Representative Rick Roth – Legislative Update
• Mat Forrest, Ballard Partners – Legislative Session Summary
• Recognition of Kamilla Soares and Renee Gold for Emergency Response

• Resolution 15, 2018: Lease of Two 2018 Braun Super Chief Type 1 Medium Duty Ambulances from Ten-8 Equipment, Inc. and financed through Leasing 2, Inc. in the amount not to exceed $680K
• Resolution 17, 2018:  Approving the Alton Planned Community Development (PCD) Neighborhood 3 (Parcel E) Plat. 
• Resolution 18, 2018:  Approving the Alton Planned Community Development (PCD) Neighborhood 4 (Parcel F) Plat. 
• Purchase Award:  Prefabricated Metal Building Shell for Golf Maintenance Facility, openly competed, in the amount of $316K
• Purchase Award:  Landscaping Services – Alternate AlA Beautification Project– Piggyback/Access Contract – $320K (The City applied for and was awarded a grant in the amount of $100,000.00 from the Florida Department of Transportation through the Florida Highway Beautification Council to install landscaping along Alternate AlA from Burns Road to the City’s southern limit. The project includes installing plantings along the western road shoulder and center medians, as well as upgrading the existing irrigation pump station north of Burns Road.)
• Purchase Award: Contract Labor Services for Golf Course – exercising option to renew for two years – $240K
• Purchase Award: Special Magistrate Agreement – Independent Contractor Agreement – re-appointing Kevin M. Wagner as Code Enforcement Special Magistrate (served as such since Dec. 7, 2000), 3-year contract estimated at $17K/year.

City Manager Report  – no details listed

• Ordinance 2, 2018 – 2nd Reading and Adoption:  Amending Chapter 18. Businesses. at Article II. Peddlers and Solicitors. in order to adopt the regulations pertaining to Home Solicitation Sales
• Resolution 16, 2018 – A request from Nuvo Riverside, LLC to approve proposed on-site artwork to meet the AIPP requirement for the Nuvo Business Center at the Gardens, located on the northeast corner of Riverside Drive and Buckeye Street, south of Burns Road, in the Business Center at the Gardens PUD
• Resolution 21, 2018 –  Resolution seeking direction to draft Charter Ballot Language, call for a Special Referendum Election, and enter into an Agreement with the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections to conduct the Special Election. 
  • Timeline for the August 28, 2018 Primary Election:  
    • April 5, 2018 – direct the City Attorney to develop ballot question(s)
    • May 3, 2018 – first reading of Ordinance(s) with question(s) for the ballot
    • May 17, 2018- Proposed date for a Special City Council meeting for second reading and adoption of Ordinance(s) with question(s) for the ballot
    • May 30, 2018- deadline to receive approval from the SOE to enter into a separate Agreement to conduct a Special Election. 

Items for Council Action/Discussion:   Appointments to External Board and Committees

Check the agenda to see if any additional items have been added before the meeting here.

An Analysis of the Charter Vote

The March 13 municipal election asked 2 questions of the voters regarding the charter. The ballot actually had 4 questions, but the first two were thrown out by a judge for being misleading, and were not counted.

Question 3 asked if term limited council members should be allowed to run again after sitting out 3 years, and question 4 would replace our “majority wins” system with a plurality – “highest vote total wins” system.

The results by precinct are shown on the maps below – click on the precinct for the individual results.

For a March election without candidates, the turnout was substantial, with about 4700 casting their votes. There were a couple of interesing anomolies about this election though – absentee ballot totals were much higher than normal, and at the polls, the number of “Under-Votes” was an excessive 3.4%.

We have a theory about the undervotes. (It is somewhat technical, so bear with me.)

An “under-vote” is when someone votes a ballot with nothing filled in. At the precinct, the optical scanners are supposed to only flag this as an error if NOTHING on the ballot is filled in – skipping a single question will be reported as an under-vote by the SOE in the results, but the scanner doesn’t flag it and the poll workers wouldn’t know about it.

In this case though, both questions had the same number of under-votes, implying that the ballots were blank and should have been flagged. When the scanner detects this condition, it beeps and prints on the tape “UNDER-VOTE” and spits the ballot back out. The inspector working the scanner is then expected to ask the voter if they intended to submit a blank ballot. If it was a mistake, the voter takes their ballot back and marks it. If the voter intended to submit it blank, then the inspector pokes a key in a hole on the back of the scanner to “OVERRIDE” the error and accept the ballot. We asked an inspector at one of the precincts with a number of under-votes if there were any overrides – and they couldn’t recall any.

Our theory is this:

Because of the short time to react after the lawsuit, the Supervisor of Elections did not have time to program the scanners to ignore the front page of the ballot (questions 1 and 2). Therefore, since 1&2 were on page 1 and 3&4 were on page 2, it is likely many people, knowing there were only 2 questions to answer, filled in the front page (1&2) and did not notice there was a back page. The scanners should have caught this but apparently accepted 1&2 as constituting a “non-blank” ballot, and did not flag it. As a result, about 160 people (enough to change the results on question 4), were possibly disenfranchised and not afforded the option to fix the error.

This is a “hanging chad” situation regarding the “intention of the voter”, particularly since it may have affected the outcome. There is a paper trail if this is the case – the tapes for each of the optical scanners are supposed to be saved (although I don’t know for how long). The tapes would show whether any “undervotes” were flagged and if that count equaled the 161 reported under-votes in Palm Beach Gardens.

The absentee ballots numbers were also interesting as 46% of the voters cast their ballots that way. This is significant because the absentee “YES” margin was 9 points higher on question 3 and 7 points higher on question 4. Without the absentee votes, question 4 would have lost handily.

Why do I mention this? Because all the questions were misleading and until the lawsuit and the little bit of campaigning that was done, most people were naturally drawn to the the “YES” answer. The absentee ballots of course went out before either of those things occurred.

The following table shows how the absentee ballot counts and under-votes fell during the last few elections.  Note that the high under-vote count in 2016 was because the municipal candidates appeared on the same ballot as the presidential primary candidates and many people only vote for President, ignoring the rest.

 

Year	Votes Cast	At polls	Absentee	% absentee	Undervotes	%Undervotes
2018	4731	2569	2164	45.7%	167	3.5%
2017	5240	3486	1754	33.5%	0	0.0%
2016	15257	12465	2802	18.4%	1958	12.8%
2014	7167	5556	1611	22.5%	79	1.1%
2013	4217	3390	827	19.6%	1	0.0%

Question 3 – Run Again?

---

Question 3
Strong Yes	Weak Yes	Very Close	Weak No	Strong No
Click the precinct on the map for vote totals.

Precinct	Registered	Cast	Turnout	YES	NO	YES %
1186	1457	163	11	78	79	50
1188	897	63	7	34	25	58
1189	96	11	11	9	2	82
1190	3391	245	7	159	83	66
1192	1454	124	9	78	40	66
1194	2029	401	20	315	74	81
1228	446	65	15	38	26	59
1238	1680	301	18	148	146	50
1240	2506	301	12	197	97	67
1242	2559	400	16	266	113	70
1244	1567	206	13	125	76	62
1246	2397	275	11	115	153	43
1247	228	32	14	27	5	84
1248	1495	204	14	103	95	52
1250	62	7	11	1	5	17
1252	2320	500	22	272	197	58
1254	455	32	7	15	17	47
1260	1293	172	13	70	98	42
1266	463	3	1	1	2	33
1268	295	8	3	6	2	75
1272	1911	189	10	88	94	48
1274	1585	145	9	49	88	36
1280	399	30	8	19	10	66
1284	2219	153	7	117	30	80
1288	40	5	13	3	1	75
1290	2130	224	11	127	88	59
1292	71	17	24	13	4	76
1296	713	34	5	24	9	73
1324	1282	73	6	42	29	59
1326	553	68	12	32	31	51
1340	12	3	25	3	0	100
1352	2210	161	7	91	68	57
1360	891	114	13	71	40	64
1372	153	2	1	1	0	100
TOTAL	41280	4731	11	2737	1827	60

Question 4 – Plurality or Majority?

---

Question 4
Strong Yes	Weak Yes	Very Close	Weak No	Strong No
Click the precinct on the map for vote totals.

Precinct	Registered	Cast	Turnout	YES	NO	Yes %
1186	1457	163	11	75	82	48
1188	897	63	7	25	34	42
1189	96	11	11	9	2	82
1190	3391	245	7	134	107	56
1192	1454	124	9	71	45	61
1194	2029	401	20	260	128	67
1228	446	65	15	33	31	52
1238	1680	301	18	115	178	39
1240	2506	301	12	163	131	55
1242	2559	400	16	215	161	57
1244	1567	206	13	111	89	56
1246	2397	275	11	87	179	33
1247	228	32	14	18	14	56
1248	1495	204	14	75	122	38
1250	62	7	11	2	4	33
1252	2320	500	22	234	230	50
1254	455	32	7	16	16	50
1260	1293	172	13	58	110	35
1266	463	3	1	0	3	0
1268	295	8	3	5	3	63
1272	1911	189	10	79	104	43
1274	1585	145	9	51	86	37
1280	399	30	8	18	11	62
1284	2219	153	7	106	42	72
1288	40	5	13	0	4	0
1290	2130	224	11	109	106	51
1292	71	17	24	11	5	69
1296	713	34	5	23	10	70
1324	1282	73	6	41	30	58
1326	553	68	12	23	40	37
1340	12	3	25	3	0	100
1352	2210	161	7	71	87	45
1360	891	114	13	55	56	50
1372	153	2	1	1	0	100
TOTAL	41280	4731	11	2297	2250	51

Please Vote NO on 3/13 – Palm Beach Gardens Election

• A Yes vote on Question 3 means that term-limited Council members can serve again with a 3 year sit-out between each 6 years in office.  There is no limit to the number of cycles that can be repeated.
• A Yes vote on Question 4, switches from Majority Wins (50%+1) to Plurality wins.  In a 2-candidate race there is no difference.  However in a multi candidate race, an incumbent can encourage other candidates to enter the race, thus diluting the votes and allowing the candidate with the most name recognition to win with a small percentage of the vote.

 

Contentious Emergency City Council Mtg Decision No Appeal

An emergency  City Council meeting was called sometime on March 5th for the following morning, March 6 at 8am to decide whether or not to appeal the decision on the ruling by Judge J. Joseph Curley, Jr. finding ballot Questions 1 and 2 invalid, last Friday March 3rd.

The meeting had a lot of fireworks and should be seen to be appreciated – however the outcome was that the City will not appeal, but should the plaintiff, Sid Dinerstein appeal the results on Questions 3 and 4, City Attorney Lohman was given the authorization to cross-appeal (thus re-challeging Questions 1 and 2).  The vote was 3:1 with Council Member Lane voting NO and Council Member Litt not present.

Martino: Charter questions… information is missing

I have authored several Martino Minute opinion articles concerning the City of Palm Beach Gardens City Charter Amendments referendum scheduled for election on March 13, 2018. The City Council is pitching four Charter amendment questions on which they are asking Gardens registered voters to cast a “Yes” or “No” vote. After listening carefully to the City Council’s reasons for and discussion of these four questions, and after gathering my own information to examine these questions, I am voting “No” on each question.

It is incumbent upon each of us residents that we understand what the City Charter is. It is the City’s constitution. I would confidently say that it belongs to the residents, not an appointed committee, not the City Council, not the City Manager, and not the City Attorney. In my opinion, it’s will and words ensure that the governing of the City will be by and for the residents. It spells out how the City government should function for the good of the residents. The Charter contains a fair amount of specificity, as it should.  The amending process must be specific to subject and residents must be informed in exacting terms and nothing less. That’s the law talking, not me.

Let us exam the PBG Referendum Questions #1 & #2 for specificity and information…

From my perspective this question is as ambiguous and non-specific as a question can be. What are the recommendations of the CRC? Eliminate what internal inconsistencies? Remove what conflicts with State Law and Council Manager form of government? How is the Charter to be reorganized? Where is Ordinance 26 2017 Exhibit “A”? Also, it does not contain information so the voter can cast an educated ballot. For instance, it does not inform the voter that a “Yes” vote removes the requirement for a Charter review, changes how a City Council vacancy is filled, deletes the requirement for the City Manager to live in the City, erases the requirement for the City Manager Annual Performance Review, and crosses out the Employee Merit System, as just a few examples of what the voter is not informed of.

I would offer that Question 2 lacks the information necessary for the voter to make an informed vote. It is deceptive in its wording because it suggests that the voter is casting a ballot to amend the Charter to institute term limits for three full consecutive terms. It fails to inform the voter that term limits already are in place for maximum of two consecutive three year terms.  A “Yes” vote for Question #2 and a “Yes” vote for Question #3 which allows for a 3-year sit-out and return could allow a Council member to conceivably serve indefinitely.

Another issue that has merit without a satisfactory answer from the City Council is, “Why March 13, 2018?” There is no City Council member election, as this is an off year. Turn out will be minimal. It seems less than considerate of the 20,000 voters who participated in the November 2014 election that considered the need for term limits, and more particularly, the 16,000 that voted to approve of them. The August 2018 primary election or the November 2018 general election is a more appropriate choice but the City Council announced publicly that November was not available per the Supervisor of Elections office. On February 13, 2018 in the courtroom of a Circuit Court Judge the Lawyers for the Supervisor of Elections said there is no legal prohibition to those dates as long as the legalities are met. Hmmm.

Referendum elections offer choices for the registered voter. The voter should be adequately provided with accurate, true and specific information in order to make an informed choice.  It is my considered opinion that the Council could have done more to educate themselves and us. Acknowledging the word and space limitations of the ballot, it is still my contention that more exacting ballot questions could have and should have been approved and offered.

The choice of “No” on these four Charter Amendment questions is obvious.

Rebuttal to City’s Misleading FAQs

The City of Palm Beach Gardens spent $60,000 of tax-payer dollars to hire a consultant to produce a campaign for the March 13 Election.  The flyer, robo-call and website have the theme “help fix our charter” and much of what is in this purportedly neutral campaign is misleading at best.  Here is a rebuttal for each of the most egregious statements found on the ‘Fix Our Charter’* website.

What is the Charter Review Committee?

« Previous Page — Next Page »