Pensacola Independent News

COVER STORY | Vol. 11, No. 24, July 2, 2009
(Welcome to the 21st Century)
E-mail this to a friend

Welcome to the 21st Century

by Sean Boone

New Charter Could Change Pensacola Government

Change comes slowly to Pensacola. Maybe it's because the city spent so much time during its first 300 years changing its flags from Spanish, French, British, Confederate and American. Maybe the people just were too tired when the 20th century rolled around to think about ever changing or reviewing their city charter.

Maybe Pensacola is just lazy.

In May 1999, Pensacola voters passed by a thin margin of 92 votes a referendum that gave the public the opportunity to elect its mayor rather than have the position appointed by the City Council. Two years later, John Fogg was elected mayor. However, his powers weren't much different than his fellow council members.

In 2006, a group of citizens began meeting to build support for a strong mayor form of government. Under the strong mayor government, the mayor has the power to manage daily operations, make appointments, prepare budgets, and hire and fire department heads without council approval. Local businessman John Peacock went before the City Council in June 2007 to ask for a referendum on strong mayor.

To say the council response was lukewarm would be kind. No one appeared willing to make a motion for the referendum. So Peacock offered Plan B, a city charter review commission. In August 2007, the City Council approved the review and three months later appointed the commission.

A TIME FOR CHANGE

Since 1931, the city has been running under the same government charter, which provides for council-manager form of government. The city manager runs the day-to-day operations. The council approves policy and the budget and hires the city manager and city attorney. The mayor chairs the council meetings, appoints council committees, votes on issues as any other council member and acts as a ceremonial representative.

The Charter Review Commission (CRC) was charged to do the first full review of the city's charter in its history. Now, after 18 months of scheduled meetings, discussions and expert opinions, the 10-member CRC will vote on its final document on July 8. That charter proposal will then be submitted to the City Council, which will vote on whether to allow it to be placed on a ballot for public approval.

The CRC proposal calls for a strong mayor and eliminates the two at-large council seats-leaving seven members that represent their designated districts for a maximum of 12 years. The current at-large council members are Diane Mack and Megan Pratt.

If the CRC approves it, the charter proposal will go before the City Council on July 20 for approval. Council would then hold three hearings and put the decision on the new charter in the hands of voters-possibly as early as September.

MAYORAL AWAKENING

CRC Chairman Crystal Spencer says the biggest concern from citizens and commission members with the new charter has been the executive power that the mayor would hold under a pure form of strong mayor. However, she contends that the CRC recommendations on the powers of the mayor alleviate those fears.

"This is not the purest form of strong mayor," she says. "The proposed mayor form of government has checks and balances."

Spencer says under this "hybrid" form of strong mayor government, the city would hire an administrator that would help run day-to-day operations, but the mayor would be acknowledged as the chief executive officer and would have the authority to execute line-item vetoes on council votes.

"The mayor could then be the visionary of the city," she says. "The city still provides an administrator, but the mayor would be full time and not just ceremonial."

One of the more vocal organizations during CRC meetings has been the League of Women's Voters, who recently raised concerns over the role of the administrator if the mayor's position becomes vacant.

Spencer admits there will be no perfect system or way to please everyone but feels having a stronger mayor will make the city more formidable.

"No one person right now is accountable," she says. "This (government) allows for that kind of thinking and that progressive thinking that we have not had. We have lost a number of (economic) opportunities because we did not have the person to go to about the issues."

A MODEL TO FOLLOW

To piece together its charter proposal, the CRC called on the expertise of several outside sources.

The commission thoroughly examined charters from the cities of Tampa, Jacksonville, Saint Petersburg, Hialeah, Fla. and San Diego. It also hosted Charleston, S.C. mayor Joe Riley, former Mobile mayor Mike Dow as well as government experts such as Dr. Robert Lee of the Florida State University Askew School and Hialeah City Attorney William Grodnick.

"When we were first appointed to the commission, we asked the members to provide a list of who they would like to hear from," Spencer says. "Not all were heard from, but a lot were."

Spencer says the experts recommended the charter have provisions that require review once every 10 years, but to ultimately leave the decision to the council if they wish to make changes beforehand.

One of the most thoroughly reviewed charters by the CRC was that of St. Petersburg, which revised its government in 1991 to a strong mayor structure. The city has an eight-district council with four-year term limits and no at-large seat, and an administrator that reports to the mayor. The city is required to form a citizen committee every decade to review the charter.

According to St. Petersburg City Attorney John Wolfe, the current government system was actually created through a citizen-led petition.

"The actual change to the strong mayor form of government was the result of a citizens' petition," he says. "It was through the petition process that our form of government was put to voters in a referendum and was changed from a council-city manager form to a strong mayor-council form."

Most of the experts who reviewed the 78-year-old Pensacola charter found it in need of revision. They particularly felt the council committee structure held the city back, describing it as "the most prehistoric."

"It's very hard to participate in government when you have a committee meeting at 9 a.m. on a Monday," says Spencer. "Everyone who has looked at it says it is antiquated and creates a situation where some members make more of a contribution than others."

The CRC has not written a clause in the revised charter to abolish the committee structure, but it has made a recommendation for council to do so.

TERM LIMIT DEBATE

The charter review process hasn't been without controversy. There have been several issues that have remained at the forefront of the CRC and the public eye.

Term limits have been vigorously debated over the past few months by the commission. Initially the CRC agreed upon no limits for the council or mayor. However, after more public input, the board rethought its decision and voted for four-year terms for council members and the mayor-that cannot exceed three terms.

Term limits is an issue that even current elected officials disagree upon.

"I think it gives an opportunity for new blood and ideas," says Pensacola council member Larry Johnson. "Some people say you have an opportunity to vote a council person out, but in past councils we had some people that sat on there for an excessive amount of time."

Mayor Mike Wiggins, on the other hand, believes it's the role of the citizen to remove a person from public office.

"I've never been a fan of term limits," he says. "I think the electorate gives you term limits, but I do believe we need to look at this as a package in the charter review."

Wiggins served for 13 years as a council member before being elected mayor last year. Johnson is serving in his first year on council.

Another issue that has been hotly debated is the at-large council seats.

Both Johnson and Wiggins say they are looking forward to discussing the issue when the charter comes before them later this month.

Wiggins says it's too early for him to come out for or against having the seats. Johnson says he'd prefer a smaller council to get more work done.

"I support a somewhat smaller council," Johnson says. "I will keep an open mind if it needs to be tweaked back (to more council members). I would hope that the community would continue to grow and prosper either way.

"We should be able to look at it every four or five years to see if it is working to serve the citizens."

MORE PAY=BETTER COUNCIL?

Currently both council and the mayor are part-time positions for the city of Pensacola.

Council members make an annual salary of roughly $14,000, while the mayor earns in the ballpark of $23,000.

At the June 17 CRC meeting, progressivepensacola.com blogger Derek Cosson brought up the issue of creating a full-time council to attract younger and less "well-to-do" individuals to run for public office.

"I'd like to see a clause added (to section 4.02) that creates a full-time city council," he told the commission. "Right now it eliminates the middle class from council."

But would a salary clause be the right move for the charter, and should it be at the discretion of the CRC?

Spencer says she isn't sure if salaries should be adjusted but feels it should be a decision left for the council to make.

"It's not something the commission has studied," she says. "The salaries should not go into the charter and that is the consensus of everyone who has studied the charter."

For comparison, the city of Mobile-which has a strong mayor government- pays its council members $19,800 and $175 for each regular and special meeting they attend. They also receive a flat expense account of $325 a month. According to the city's Web site, a council member has the ability of making $32,800 if he or she attends all of the meetings. The mayor makes a set salary of $89,000 a year.

A city more comparable to Pensacola is Augusta, Ga., which also has a ceremonial mayor. The city pays $75,845 for the mayor's position-even with a city manager that operates as an executive.

Johnson says offering salaries lower than other cities is a major deterrent for Pensacola's government leaders.

"You really have to look at who it is excluding (when the salaries are low)," he says. "It really is hindering when bringing in talent. When you look at a $213 million budget it's like the city council is the board of directors for a large corporation."

The CRC has made a recommendation that the mayor be paid the current salary of City Manager Al Coby, which is $149,000 (without benefits). It has not made a suggestion to review the council salaries or benefits.

WHAT'S NEXT

If the CRC approves its charter and the City Council makes its changes, holds three hearings and also approves it, then what?

According to the CRC charter recommendation, the City Council will have between 30 and 60 days to either mail out ballots to registered city voters or hold a polling day for the referendum. Of course, the council can move that timeline as it sees fit.

There is some concern that if the charter referendum vote is moved to 2010 it might be confused with the Escambia County consolidation efforts that would unite the government bodies of Century, Pensacola and Escambia County.

Mayor Wiggins says the most important thing that needs to be expressed over the next few months is voter education.

"We need to offer an enormous amount of education to the public," he says. "These two votes in 12 months would radically change our form of government."

Wiggins says the city will need to bring the issue to the public through civic groups, churches, clubs and other outlets to make sure they are aware of how important the issue is.

"I think at this point in time the public isn't tuned into these issues," he says.

Spencer, too, agrees that the only way to make the charter and/or consolidated government a reality is through a proactive approach.

"We've spent 18 months developing this document," she says. "I will be out in front of any group that will want to have me. Yes, there will be involvement (after the CRC)."

The CRC is scheduled to hold two more meetings following its July 10 vote-July 15 and July 29. Consolidation could be decided on the November 2010 general election ballot.

sean@inweekly.net

InWeekly

Welcome to the 21st Century