CALL TO ORDER, INVOCATION, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

  Chair Holt called the meeting to order at 4:04pm.

CITIZENS REQUESTING TO BE HEARD (3-Minute Limit)

Anyone wishing to speak on agenda items or non-agenda items should schedule or notify the County Administrator's Office before attending the meeting and will be asked to follow the Gadsden County Public Meetings Citizens Access Guidelines. Also, Public comment for Commission meetings can be submitted via email to CitizensToBeHeard@gadsdencountyfl.gov until 11:00 a.m. August 30, 2021. Comments submitted after the deadline but prior to the meeting will be added to the official record, but the County cannot guarantee that Commissioners and staff will have adequate time to review comments prior to the meeting.

  County Attorney Clayton Knowles read the above.

PUBLIC HEARING:

GENERAL BUSINESS

1.

Review and Discuss Rules of Procedure for Meetings of the Gadsden County Board of County Commissioners (Edward J. Dixon, County Administrator)

  Chair Holt asked the County Administrator Ed Dixon to introduce the topic. County Administrator Dixon said the presentation coming from County Attorney Knowles today. County Attorney Knowles introduced the ordinance as a combination of previous rules and current corrections based off previous suggestions from other workshops. He said the main change is on page 6 of 14, Rules of Decorum and Civility.

  County Attorney Knowles begin reading Section V. RULES OF DECORUM AND CIVILITY BOARD TO PROMOTE AND PRESERVE DECORUM AND CIVILITY on page 6 of 14.

Hinson entered workshop at 4:10PM.

  County Administrator Knowles requests direction from the Board in regards to section V. and length of speaking time per commissioner. Commissioner shall limit themselves to 5 minutes, can be any number of minutes but County Attorney Knowles suggests 5. He says the Board can up the limit to 10 minutes but doesn’t want to lower it. He also mentions the Board can have a running clock if that would help.

  Commissioner Green asks if the Board needs to vote on having a clock/timer? County Attorney Knowles says it needs to advertised for public hearing as it is an ordinance.  Commissioner Green wants a clock because a lot of the time people repeat themselves to prove a point. He suggests saying what you need to say and be done. He explains he doesn’t have a problem with a shut-in as long as there is a purpose to the meeting and business is being done.

  Commissioner NeSmith agrees with Commissioner Green. Commissioner NeSmith asks if there has been a timeframe in the past? He states being passionate is okay but repeating it over and over isn’t. Chair Holt says there was a time limit but it got narrowed because a previous commissioner said “we need to be more civil”. Chair Holt agrees the clock is good and can help to get the skills to limit yourself. She says the clock can always be put away.

  Commissioner NeSmith asks what’s the best practice of time limits? County Attorney Knowles says citizens comments are three (3) mins and commissioners are five (5) to ten (10) minutes. Ten (10) minutes should be the limit for public hearings. He says there are no statutes that limits time.

 Commissioner NeSmith asked if additional time is needed, can the speaking commissioner ask the chair and go to vote for more time. County Attorney Knowles responded the Board would need to give itself more time of an item and not just the speaking commissioner. Items can take longer than 10 mins so a vote can be done on them. The Board can also have it the other way. Commissioner NeSmith asks, if I need more time how does that work? County Attorney Knowles answers that the commissioner would need to ask the chair to call a vote to extend the meeting.

  Chair Holt explains that commissioners will not be yielding time and giving away minutes. Who’s keeping up with that? She says commissioners should make our point and say what you need to say.

  Commissioner NeSmith asks do commissioners ever yield our time? Chair Holt responds with you always do. Commissioner NeSmith asks if yielding time is addressed in rules, Chair Holt responds no.

  Clayton- if we’re not yielding time do we need something that says yielding of time is not permitted?  (listen back for actual answer)

  Green- once a commissioner is done then there is no yielding.  Suggests change time from 5 to 7. Holt- if you look at the clock that’s a long time to speak, went from 5 to 3 and 10 to 7.

    Clayton- need clarification how long we’re giving the commissioners?  Holt- brought up once that at the podium they have a set time but they also have the right to bring up other items.

  NeSmith- is the time total or per item? Clayton- (listen) NeSmith- what is the marketplace doing for this? Clayton- there aren’t any rules but you want to be able to be heard, give due process, hear other commissioners because they represent the public, so within 4-5 mins, should be able to get through it. Holt- rebuttal time?

  NeSmith- concerned that someone’s going to have to keep up with the time. Holt- Everyone would have 2 mins to rebuttal after 3 initial minutes. NeSmith- how much additional time if board approves? Holt- 2 minutes. Clayton- leave it open so commissioner can leave it open and add in “I only need 5 mins more”. Whatever the commissioner puts in motion.

  Green- should have it in written that 5 to start per start shouldn’t give another beyond 5. 2 or 3 would work. Suggests 3 minutes max. Holt- Per commissioner? Green- Per commissioner.  

  Clayton- thinking that it would be for everyone. What happens when next commissioner wants additional time? Holt- a vote. Can sink any commissioner with negative comments bc the commissioner wouldn’t have time to respond. Give each commissioner opportunity to have one more minute.  Green- want to have fairness. Holt- no more than a minute for closing statements.

   Clayton- on the same page. Example- Hinson talks and has 5 mins, every other commissioner gets 5 mins to speak, no other wants to speak then you vote. Holt- every commissioner has the same amount of time to speak. 3 mins for discussion, 2 for rebuttal. Up to board if they get extra time after the overall 5 is over. Then commissioners rebuttal/respond.

  NeSmith- One extra minute for closing sounds good. Clayton- total of 6. Everyone-yes.

  Discussion over availability of agendas ready 2 weeks prior.

  Clayton- (listen back for breakdown of time/clarity)

  Moved to item 6

  Clayton- bc elected, doesn’t advise dismissing a commissioner outside of imminent threat of violence to the Board. Can see getting in trouble for it. Holt- we should be held by the same standards as audience. Clayton- audience is constitutionally held. Holt- doesn’t matter. What if commissioner won’t let meeting continue.

  Green- all mature adults, should be. Green would rather excuse himself from the conversation than sit through a personal issue argument due to immaturity of the conversation. Should not sit here and tolerate any backlash or derogatory behavior.  

   NeSmith- Been a question at the board regarding removal of commissioner? Clayton- yes at a workshop. NeSmith- what are the steps that need to be taken to remedy/not continue? Clayton- Probably adjourn meeting for a cool down then come back. All are professional persons voted to be here, we shouldn’t be removed. Adjourn meeting temporarily sounds good to keep decorum. Clayton suggests a 5-minute recess in that situation.

Dr. V entered at 4:49.

Clayton couldn’t find anything that would give the Board authority to remove a member.    

NeSmith- All questions have a vote. Clayton-yes.

  Dixon- a recess is always in order. The idea is to use tools that are available to this body (current Board). If goal is decorum, then decorum must always lead.

  Hinson- should commissioners be removed from board based on what you’re saying? Dixon- never. Point was, a recess is always a good tool to use.   

  Dr. V- you cannot legislate morality. Removing a commissioner shouldn’t even be a discussion as they are elected officials elected to run local government. We’re all adults. Unless the person is getting to the point of being belligerent.

  Holt- civility should work, doesn’t think it should ever come that far. Speak so possible businesses can come to the community. Can strike out anything for point 7 on 7 of 14.

  Hinson- defends his passion/comments.  

   Holt- strike number 7 out?

  NeSmith- this is for the public not for the commissioner so this is fine. If wording points back to Board, then remove it. Clayton- member of the public, then remove that particular wording.

  Dr. V- anyone can be passionate. What do you do if one person is targeted by the passion?

    Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree but disagree agreeable. Thinks they should strike it completely.

  Green- being passionate doesn’t require you to be disrespectful.

  NeSmith- is the language of disruption of meeting part of previous code? Clayton- it’s been added since previous 2 or 3 workshops. Holt- always have wording for public disruption. NeSmith is confused.  

    Dr. V- asks for Dixon to share what he knows about the document as his hand was up in regards to NeSmith’s question. Dixon- agrees with removal of the statement that begins with “such removal may be”. Goal is not to take away someone’s right to assemble but if the decorum is being threatened then yes.

Dixon stepped out at 5:16

  Hinson- noticed now we’re getting things day of the meeting. Do a little research before the meeting. Not knowing anything prior to votes.

Dixon returned at 5:18.

Anything over $25k should be seen prior to voting

  Dr. V- have not experienced where agenda preparation is something that’s discussed between Co. Ad, chair, and vice chair. I am a strong opposition of an item to be added because the public doesn’t have time to research and voice their opinion. Transparency and accountability. If it’s an item that’s within the financial/admin within the realm of $25k then that’s something that need to be done as an emergency then yes. Otherwise, need preparation. Procrastination of an individual does not constitute as an emergency. So public can come and speak on it.

Clayton- will consult with chair for emergency meetings, special meetings, etc. Page 10/14. Best practice is category 2 or below.

  Holt- scared if Dr. V doesn’t want 2 looking at the agenda. It’s a safety mechanism. Dr. V- That was not what I said. When I was chair and vice chair, there was never a time where the chair and the administrator discussed the items going on the agenda with the sit-in vice-chair.

  Hinson- Most important thing, things should never go out without the attorney’s blessings. Make sure the attorney looks at all documents. Holt- isn’t that in your contract? Used to be part of the attorney’s assignment. Clayton- look at the ones we get in advance, sometimes we don’t get any in advance.

  Dixon- tries to have things to the Board within 14 days so they can advertise. NeSmith- asks if Clayton gets agenda in advance. Clayton says yes.

  Dr. V- NeSmith- times before he and green were there, when he was the newest and youngest, there has not been a time when the attorney didn’t have time to review the item and the item has been pulled. Trusts the law firm to be our protector so they always look at the items.  

   Hinson- think you must put a time or date on this so attorney has time to review the item. 24-48 hours is too late.  When the chair looks at it, the attorney looks at it. Actually, the attorney should look at it prior.

  NeSmith- Hinson, is the recommendation that the attorney gets the agenda the night of the prior meeting? Hinson- Every decision has to be thought through. Should be 14-15 days prior to meeting.

  Dixon- procedure, we call it 14 days because they’re moving to 10 days.  (listen for entire time frame)

  NeSmith- 10 days includes the weekend? Dixon- business days. Holt- but you have the weekend.

  Green- you’re not sending the attorney a whole package at once? Sending individual items? Dixon- yes real time.

  Clayton- gets things 3 weeks before the meetings. Usually about 3-4 weeks in advance. When do we want agenda items and supporting documents deadline to be given to Clayton separately or together? Dixon- attorney needs to work his magic before it’s sent to commissioners.

  Hinson- be consistent. Should be given to commissioners 7-10 days prior to meeting. Holt- hired a firm to do the research. Which do we want and how do we pay for it? Hinson- do both. Holt- don’t think it’s needed.

  NeSmith- did all he could in previous meetings to bring in all the income into the county.

  Dixon- brings up Laurel and asks how we can improve process? Laurel says process is working. By the time they get the items 90% of them are working. Clayton-staff will send items to clayton. They’re usually 2-3 weeks ahead. 95-98% of items they are well in advance of.

Green stepped out at 5:50PM.

 Dixon- the add-ons they’ve tried to limit, there’s no way around it because of the time they get them and that they’re due. Keenly aware of what commissioners say about adding things to the agenda.

  Hinson- asks about item 11. Dr. V- Discretionary maximum limit is $25k unless it’s an emergency. Clayton- Item 11 is not in regards to discretionary limit. This is items that are brought to you at the last minute. Not changing the administrator’s limit.

Green returned at 5:55PM.

NeSmith- confused. Has up to $25k to spend without the board voting on it. Clayton says yes. NeSmith asks why would it would be on the agenda if he has the authority to spend that. Holt- it wouldn’t be.

  Dr. V- if the admin has discretionary authority of $25k and there is something that needs to be done, why isn’t the $10k part of the $25k, then why isn’t the expenditure brought before the board.  Doesn’t think item 11 needs to be within the policy (page 10 of 14).

  Hinson- explains the $10k is for extra funds that need to be found. Thinks it should stay.

  Dr. V- page 6 of 14. Election and removal of chairperson. Based on what I’m reading election of the chair is every November. Not only in election year. Suggests taking out “after an election year”. Dixon mentions super majority.

  Hinson- chair is abusing their power? Why supermajority? Suggests the board is contradicting itself.

  Dr. V- supermajority is for removal because it’s not what’s for election. Moves to vice chair point. If the chair is running late? Meeting should be held? By law, the meeting starts at 6. When the meeting is to be called to order then the vice chair should call it to order. Dixon- should only be inability to serve.

   Dr. V- when the vice chair calls the meeting to order that’s when the meeting starts not when the Chair walks in. Refers to “recording has started”. 

  Hinson- want to start at 6 as a show of respect to the citizens. Chair should pass the gavel to the vice chair when needed.

  NeSmith- wants to make sure that vice chair takes over when Chair is not available. Do you have the language for this, Mr. Knowles. Clayton- yes it was. Do we want something affirmative that states the meeting shall begin promptly at 6 pm period? Everyone- yes. Holt- Chair, Vice Chair, next Senior commissioner. NeSmith- if abiding by the practice then it needs to be written.

  Dr. V- The “senior commissioner” portion is not written anywhere.

  Dixon- on page 9 of 14. Wants to change to 6pm or set by BOCC. Was trying to have an emergency meeting but couldn’t because of BOCC’s own policy. Clayton- public hearings have to be after 6pm. Dixon- wants the board to change for the option to hold a meeting, couldn’t facilitate a meeting because of BOCC’s own policy, wants to make sure this doesn’t happen.

Dr. V stepped out at 6:18

 Dr. V returned at 6:21PM.

  Commissioner Green- make leeway to make that happen? Dixon- yes. Holt- you’re scaring me, public is used to 6pm as other commissioners changed meetings to the morning so public wouldn’t come.

  Hinson- we have zoom, FB live, and they’re recorded so there’s access to the meetings.

  Green- Not going to do it on a regular basis, but have the ability to do it.

   Holt- this is to better the commission to deliver their duties. If we don’t know how to curb what we’re saying then the community/business community doesn’t look good on us.

  Dr. V- That’s the point I was making early. This document isn’t about any one commissioner in particular. This is about the county. Should be what everyone thinks the county will run smoothly.  

  NeSmith- we need to always be reviewing and revising our procedures. Annually.

MOTION TO ADJOURN

Holt adjourned meeting at 6:27