2. Article II Organization of County Government, Section 2.2: Legislative Branch, C. Salaries and Other Compensation Discussion continued from December 15, 2025 and January 12, 2026 meetings.

[2. Article II Organization of County Government, Section 2.2: Legislative Branch, C. Salaries and Other Compensation Discussion continued from December 15, 2025 and January 12, 2026 meetings.]

MOVING ON TO ITEM 2 UNDER OLD BUSINESS, THAT IS ARTICLE II, ORGANIZATION OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT, SECTION 2.2, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, C. SALARY AND IS OTHER COMPENSATION. WE SENT IT OVER TO OUR COUNCIL TO -- COUNSEL TO LOOK AT AMENDED LAMING WANL TO REVIEW. I KNOW WE HAVE SOMETHING ON OUR -- THAT WAS GIVEN TO US IN OUR PACKETS SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR ATTORNEY, GLEN TAYLOR AND WALK US THROUGH THE

PROCESS WE HAVE AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN FRONT OF US. >> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN CONNOR.

THIS IS A PROPOSED DRAFT OF BALLOT IN CHARTER LANGUAGE FOR REVISIONS TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER SALARY PROVISIONS AND WHAT IT'S COMPRISED OF, YOU HAVE THE TILING AND THERE'S A 15 WORD LIMIT ON THAT, THEN YOU HAVE THE LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT WHICH THERE'S A 75 WHICH THIS IS 66 WORDS HERE AND THEN IT SAYS YES OR NO AND THEN THE TEXT REVISIONS BELOW WITH THE CHANGES TO THE THAT PROVISION IN THE CHARTER WHICH HAS THE IN ADDITION LANG -- LANGUAGE AND THE STRIKE THROUGH ON THAT. IF IS AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED BY THE VOTERS SO., SEVERAL POINTS ON THAT, ONE, PROBABLY THE EASIEST PLACE TO START IS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT ABOUT HOW MUCH THESE SALARIES WOULD BE, 70% OF WHAT, THAT IS A DIFFICULT NUMBER TO SET BECAUSE THERE ARE VARIOUS FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT CALCULATION. THERE IS -- THE GUIDELINE WE'RE REFERENCING HERE IN THIS LANGUAGE FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS PURSUANT TO -- THERE'S A PUBLICATION BY THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE'S OFFICE OF EK 234078 I CAN AND DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH FOR SALARIES OF CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER AND IS SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIALS, THEY DO IT YEARLY. IT COMES NOUT SEPTEMBER, PUBLISH INED OCTOBER.

IN THAT, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TENSES THAT THEY USED FOR A SAMPLE COMPUTATION OF SALARY.

THERE'S AN ANNUAL FACTOR IN THAT AND A CUMULATIVE FACTOR, AND WE WILL NOT KNOW WHAT THAT FACTOR IS BECAUSE THAT FACTOR IS NOT RELEASED UNTIL AGAIN SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER.

SO, I CAN'T SAY 70% OF 96 THOUSAND BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO BE 96 THOUSAND, BUT WE RAN THE ROUGH CALCULATION AND IT'S AROUND -- I WANT TO SAY 66 THOUSAND 750 OR WHATEVER, BUT -- SO, HENCE, THAT'S WHY THE LANGUAGE IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSAL.

[00:15:05]

THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 1 IF YOU WILL FOR YOUR REVIEW, REALLY THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF CHOICE INS A LOT OF THIS, LET ME GO TROUGH THE REASONS FOR THAT FOR YOU ANYWAY.

THE SECOND ONE, YOU CAN SEE IN THIS LANGUAGE, I WILL READ THERE IT, SHALL THE CLAY COUNTY BE REMOVED TO REMOVE THE SPECIFIED COMMISSION SALARY OF 37 THOUSAND, SO STARTING WITH THAT PART OF THE SENATE'S FRAGMENT IF YOU WILL, THESE REFERENDA AND BALLOTS ARE ALL GOVERNED BY FLORIDA STATUTES 101161, SO THE STATUTORY RIMER FOR THIS AND THERE'S A WHOLE BODY OF CASE LAW ON THIS, IT FLUSHES AUTOALL THESE TYPES OF ITEMS BUT IT SAYS CLEARLY THAT THE MEASURE SHALL BE PRINTED IN CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE TO BE LISTED ON THE BALLOT AND THEN IT CONTINUES ON AND IT'S 75 WORDS AT L*EPGT AND THAT THE CHIEF PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE HAS TO BE STATED. SO, WHAT I STRUGGLE WITH BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONCERN AMONGST THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, HOW CAN WE WORD THIS TO ACCOMPLISH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE COMMISSION AND STILL BE CLEAR, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER, WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO HAVE DONE WITH THIS PROPOSAL FOR THE 70% IS TO -- REALLY IT'S TO REMOVE THE AMOUNT AND THEN THE NEXT LINE THAT I HAVE WRITTEN HERE IS REMOVER THE RIMER THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER SALARY CHANGES MUST BE APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF ELECTORS IN A GENERAL ELECTION AND WE'RE REMOVE HATING REQUIREMENT TOO WHEN WE REPLACE IT WITH THAT THEY WILL BE ADJUSTED ANNUALLY TO EQUAL 70 RIDER OF -- 70% OF SALARIES SET BY THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE, SO THOSE ARE -- THAT'S THE CLEAR PURPOSE OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND REALLY WHAT THE CONCERN IS, IS THAT WHAT I FEEL MY ROLE IS IS TO DO IS TO PROVIDE THIS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ST TEAPOY LANGUAGE AND THE CASE LAW AND REALLY THIS NEEDS TO BE CLEAR ENOUGH AND AMBIGUOUS ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND A CITIZEN CHARGE THAT THESE BALLOT MEASURES DO NOT STATE THE CLEAR PURPOSE, I MEAN THA,'S WHAT WE'RE RI TOING DO, IF WE DON'T DO THAT, I THINK SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN THE PRESS ABOUT THIS ITEM ALREADY AND A CITIZEN COMPLAINT, IT'S GOING RESULT IN LITIGATION WHICH THE COUNTY'S GOING TO HAVE TO AT LEAST INITIALLY DEFEND AND I DON'T THINK IT'S -- SO I CAN WRITE WHAT Y'ALL WANT BUT I'M GOING ON THE RECORD VERY CLEARLY AND CONCISELY THAT THIS IS THE LANGUAGE THAT IS RECOMMENDED TO BE INCLUDED TO STATE THE CLEAR PURPOSE OF THAT. SO, THAT'S THAT.

THEN DOWN BELOW, WE JUST HAVE THE NEW LANGUAGE. SO HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS IN SOME

WAY. >> THANK YOU, GLEN, I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION NOW THAT WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE BEFORE US. TIM?

HOLD ON ONE SECOND, CAN YOU GRAB THE MIC. FOR US? >> I THINK THE 70%, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT MISREAD THAT AND THINK IT'S 70% OF 37 THOUSAND OR THEY DON'T HAVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT, CAN WE SAY AN INCREASEFINGER IT WOULD BE AN INCREASE? BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY SCANNED IT REAL FAST AND READ IT, CAN THEY ACCIDENTALLY THINK WE'RE CUTTING THEIR PAY TO 70%?

>> OF THE 37 THOUSAND? >> YEAH. >> I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE -- I

GUESS ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. >> I THINK SPEAK WITCHING YOU, IT WAS THE 70% OF THE 98

THOUSAND. >> 96 THOUSAND 4 450*. >>

>> SO, WE WOULD TAKE WHAT IS GIVEN IN STATUTE AND CURRENTLY IT SHOWS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE -- IF WE DIDN'T PUT THE 70%, IT WOULD BE 96 OR 98 THOUSAND, SO IT WOULD BE 70% OF THAT

CURRENTLY AS IT STANDS. >> BUT AS AN 18 YEAR-OLD PERSON VOTING FOR THE FIRST TIME --

>> I'M NOT -- >> IT'S NOT CLEAR ENOUGH TO SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A 70% OF

THE 98 THOUSAND, SO -- >> [INAUDIBLE]. SOFRJTS, WE WON'T KNOW WHAT THE

LAW S THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. >> WELL, THE LAW IS -- YOU CAN GOOGLE SXIT YOU CAN READ THE

[00:20:07]

FLORIDA STATUTE RIGHT THERE. MY RECOMMENDATION AND, AGAIN, I'M NO LAWYER AND I KNOW IT'S A HARD JOB STRINGING TO PUT THIS TOGETHER BECAUSE IT'S A FORMULA BASED ON POPULATION AND SOME OTHER THINGS IN THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS SO EACH DISTRICT WILL PROBABLY BE DIFFERENT BASED ON

THAT POPULATION OR IS IT JUST THE COUNTY AT LARGE? >> I BELIEVE IT'S JUST THE

COUNTY AT LARGE. >> SO, IT IS BASED ON THAT FLORIDA AND MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD MAKE IT EVEN MORE CLEAR AND AMBIGUOUS, COME HINTING THIS, I'M NOT 17, A LITTLE BIT OLDER THAN THAT, BUT JUST READING IT ON THE BALLOT, I WOULD TLIEK SEE SHALL CLAY COUNTY AMEND IT CHARTER SO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMPENSATION IS LIMITED TO THE SALARY SET FORTH BY STATE LAW, FLORIDA STATUTE 145-041 AND THAT IS CLEAR, THAT'S BASICALLY SAYING DO WE WANT OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PAID IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE OR ARE WE GOING STICK WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN THE CHARTER AND THAT TO ME IS TRANSPARENT TO ALL THE VOTERS. THERE IS 67 COUNTIES IN FLORIDA AND 47 OF THEM ARE NOT CHARTER AND FOLLOW THIS, SO DO WE WANT TO FOLLOW SUIT WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTE AND FLORIDA LAW OR DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS. I DO HAVE TO DISSECT THE PARAGRAPH TO UNDERSTAND, ESPECIAL -- ESPECIALLY NOT BEING IN THE DISCUSSIONS, NOT AS CLEAR, SO I WAS GOING THE MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT MORE SIMPLE.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS FURTHER BEFORE I DO THAT.

>> I MEAN, I THINK WE NEED TO BE CLEAR THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN INCREASE OF OVER 37

THOUSAND DOLLARS. >> I THINK WE EITHER FOLLOW THE LAW OR WE DON'T.

I MEAN, TO ME, IT'S -- THAT IS THE CLARITY THAT WE FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE OR DO WE WANT TO FOLLOW WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS. AND AS A VOTER, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD WANT TO KNOW THAT I HAD NO IDEA UNTIL I CAME INTO THIS COMMISSION THAT WE DIDN'T FOLLOW THE STATE LAW, THAT WE WERE FOLLOWING WHAT WAS DECIDED IN THE CHEATER 18 YEARS SXAG IT TOOK DIFFERENT GUEST SPEAKERS TO DOM AND EXPLAIN WHY THE SALARY WAS THAT WAY. IN MY OPINION, IF WE FOLLOW THE STATE LAW, THEN IT MAKES IT REALLY CLEAR WHY THE SALARY IS THAT WAY AND WE'RE COMPARABLE TO LIKE ST. JOHNS COUNTY THAT'S NEXT TO US THAT'S ABLE TO SEND THEIR COMMISSIONERS TO TALLAHASSEE TO FIGHT FOR DIFFERENT ISSUES WHILE OUR COMMISSIONERS ARE STILL PART TIME, SO THAT'S WHY TO ME THAT IS BLACK AND WHITE FOR VOTERS. THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY BUT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE'S ONLY ONE SALARY IN THE CHARTER, NO OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL OR COMPENSATION IS MENTIONED MANY THE CHARTER FOR ANYBODY ELSE, WHY IS THAT, AND IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE UNTIL I SAT IN HERE AFTER A CUP OFL MEETINGS TO FIGURE THAT OUT.

AS A NEW VOTER COME INING AND AS A 17 YEAR-OL, WE'RE ASKING THEM DO, YOU THINK WE SHOULD FOLLOW FLORIDA LAW OR FOLLOW THE CHARTER AND PEOPLE CAN DO THEIR RESEARCH BASED ON THAT.

>> WINGI THINK WE HAVE COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, AND I BELIEVE WHAT -- TOIPT MAKE SURE BECAUSE WE ARE A CHARTERED COMMUNITY, WE ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW WHICH IS OUR CHARTER, SO

JUST BECAUSE WE'RE FOLLOWING THAT DOESN'T MEAN -- >> YOU MEAN FLORIDA STATE LAW

OR STATUTE. >> CORRECT, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE A CHARTERED COMMUNITY WEBSINGER EAR ABIDING BY THE LAW THAT OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE SET FOR US, I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

>> GO AHEAD, VAN. YOUFRJTS EAR TALKING ABOUT GOING THE FULL AMOUNT, REMOVING THE 70% ?FRJTS I PERSONALLY THINK WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE OR WE DON'T.

WHEN WE START ADDING MORE TO IT THA,'S WHEN WE ADAM BIG YAOUTTY AND THEN WE CREATE A LOT OF CONFUSION, IS IT 98 THOUSAND OR WHAT IS IT, WHERE THIS WAY WE EITHER SAY WOULD *F DO WE FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE OR THE CHARTER? BECAUSE NEITHER IS BAH WRONG BUT WHAT DO WE WANT FOR CLAY COUNTY, DO WE WANT TO HAVE A COMMISSIONER THAT WORKS FULL TIME FOR US OR DO WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE PART TIME THAT WE'RE -- COMPENSATION WE PROVIDE THEM NOW, WE'VE HAD TWO COMMISSIONERS COME IN AND SAY ALREADY IT'S NOT REALLY COMPENSATION FOR WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING I THINK WE TAKE OUT ANY OF THE GRAY GAYER AND WE EITHER FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE OR THE CHARTER, NEITHER IS THE

WRONG ANSWER, BUT WHAT IS YOUR PREFERENCE, VOTERS. >> I KNEW THIS WAS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM. WHEN WE ORIGINALLY STARTED TO TALK ABOUT IT, I'M AFRAID AND I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WE PUT THE 70% IN THERE IS I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE 17 YEAR-OLD ISS GOING TO BE ONE THING, IT'S THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED HERE FOREVER AND GOING FROM 37

[00:25:05]

TO 98, I'M NOT DOING THAT, WE'VE HAD IT GO FROM 37 TO ALL SORTS OF DINT NUMBERS AND HAVEN'T COME CLOSE. THE REASON I PARTICULARLY LIKE THE 70% AND EVEN IF WE NEEDED TO PUT IN PARENTHESES AND I'M NOT SURE, GLEN, IF YOU CAN DO THIS, CURRENTLY AT OR SOME TYPE OF CURRENTLY THIS IS WHAT CURRENTLY SITS AT KIND OF NUMBER IN THE PROVISION, BUT I'M AFRAID IF WE DON'T GET THE 70%, IT'S NOT GOING PASS, SO IF WE WANT THERE TO BE A POSSIBILITY OF RAISING THAT STANDARD AND GETTING PEOPLE PAID AT LEAST PARTIALLY, BY SPELLING OUT 70%, I THINK THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTY IS GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY I GOT A BETTER DEAL THAN ST. JOHNS COUNTY SO IT CAN'T BE THAT BAD AND THAT'S MY REASON FOR WANTING TO STICK TO THE 70%. LIKE I SAID, IF WE NEEDED TO CLARIFY IT ALGT BIT FROM A COUNTY STANDPOINT, I THINK WE CAN SIT HERE AND WORDSMITH CURRENTLY AT OR WOULD BE 66 OR 70% OF 98, WHATEVER BRACKET, I NAOEMENT SURE IF I HAVE SEEN ONE LIKE THAT BUT THAT'S MY

THOUGHT. >> IPG MY QUESTION AND MY COMMENT, FOUR YEARS WHEN THEY COME BACK AND LOOK AT THIS COMMISSION, ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM THIS BOARD HAVE TO COME IN AND SAY WHY DID YOU PICK 70%. EITHER YOU FOLLOW THE STATUTE OR FOLLOW THE CHARTER AND THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT JUST OPENS UP MORE QUESTIONS,

BUT, I MEAN, -- >> THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA HOW DID WE GET 37%, IT'S A STARTING

TEACHERS SALARY, AS WE SAID AS A CHARTER SCHOOL -- >> BUT I DO THINK A TEACHER'S SALARY AND A COUNTY COMMISSIONER, WE'RE MIXING APPLES WITH ORANGES, I THINK THEY DO DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS FOR NUS THE GOVERNMENT, SO IT NOTICE A COMPARABLE SALARY.

>> IT WAS AN ARBITRARY NUMBER TO BEGIN WITH. >> THAT NEVER CHANGED IN 18

YEARS. >> SXIT'S NEVER CHANGED. MY HOPE WAS IN SITTING HERE IN THIS ONE, AS A CHARTER, FINE, I'LL THROW IT OUT, HE SAID, BUT HE SAID THE ONLY ONE THAT MAKES SENSE IS TRYING TO MOVE THAT SALARY RANGE AND I THINK MS. CONDONE, FOR HER TO SIT THERE AND SAY WHAT SHE SAID JUST TRULY SHOWED HOW YOU CAN'T DO IT BUT I BELIEVE IF YOU PUT IN

HERE AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, I DON'T THINK IT PASSES. >> ONE MOMENT TO HAVE DEBBIE

SPEAK. >> SO, I AGREE, I THINK PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE SHELL SHOCKED WHEN THEY THINK, BUT WE'RE GETTING SUCH A GREAT DEAL, BUT I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING O DO TO COMPENSATE PEOPLE FOR THEIR WORK AND THEIR TIME AND THE WORKLOAD THEY HAVE.

I KNOW THAT WE HAVE DID -- WE ONLY HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF WORDS WE'RE ALLOWED TO PUT IN THIS THING BUT THE IDEA OF SAYING SHALL WE INCREASE THEIR PAY BY 10%, 15%, WHATEVER NUMBER YOU WANTED, BUT SHALL WE INCREASE THEIR PAY ANNUALLY UNTIL IT'S COMMENSRATE WITH THE STATE STATUTE, I FEEL LIKE THAT MAY BE EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO DIGEST, JUST BECAUSE THEN IT SEEMS LIKE A SOFTER BLOW AND LESS CONFUSING AND I AGREE, I LOOKED AT THAT 70% AND I'M LIKE, BUT WHY, ARE THEY 30% LESS VALUABLE, WHY WOULD WE LIMIT PEOPLE AND WHERE DID THE NUMBER COME FROM. SO, I JUST -- MY PROPOSITION IS TO JUST SAY LET'S INCREASE THE

PAY BY X AMOUNT ANNUALLY UNTIL WE MATCH THE STATE AVERAGE. >> BUT THAT MEANS YOU'LL BE REVISITING THAT TOPIC EVERY FOUR YEARS WHEN YOU REVIEW THIS COMMISSION.

>> WELL, BUT IF WE SAID IT THAT WAY -- >> HOLD ON, DO YOU HAVE YOUR --

>> IF IT'S WRITTEN THE WAY SHE JUST MENTIONED IT, IT WILL AUTOMATICALLY --

>> IT WOULD ANNUALLY BE I CREASED. >> IF WE SAID 10 OR 15, IT WOULD ANNUALLY INCREASE BY A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE UNTIL WE MET THE NUMBER WE WANT WHICH IS

AVERAGE. >> WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE WHEN THAT 37 WAS ORIGINALLY UNFAIRLY TO ME USED AS A WEAPON POLIICALLY, SO THIS WOULD GET A INCREASE IT WITH THE COST OF LIVING, WITH ALL OF THOSE FACTORS IN THERE. AND THAT TAKES OUT WEAPONIZING COMMISSIONERS' PAY AS WELL BECAUSE THEN IT'S DRIVEN BY NUMBERS, NOT FEELINGS.

>> SUSAN, DID YOU WANT THE MAKE A COMMENT? >> LAST MEETING, I VOTED AGAINST WHAT WE ALL VOTED FOR BECAUSE I DID NOT FEEL LIKE IT COULD GET PASSED.

[00:30:05]

WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS EXACTLY WHAT DEBBIE WAS SAYING, FIRST OFF, I GOT A HOLD OF TWO COMMISSIONERS AND THIS PIECE OF PAPER WE PASSED AROUND, I FELT IF WE GOT THIS INFORMATION OUT, I THINK WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THIS PASSED BUT WHAT MY THOUGHTS WERE, NOT DOING THIS 70% BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REVISIT IT AGAIN DOWN THE ROAD.

I WANTED TO DO 50 THOUSAND AND THEN DO LIKE 5% INCREMENTS EVERY YEAR UNTIL THEY REACH THE STATE STATUTE. THAT WAS MY IDEA. SO, WHEN YOU SAID THAT, I WENT, OH, GOOD, SOMEBODY ELSE IS THINKING THAT TOO. BECAUSE THEY DEFINITELY NEED A

RAISE, THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE WE'VE GONE THIS WRONG. >> DO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND

RAISED, KURT? >> YEAH, WHEN THE COMMISSIONER CAME UP AND SPOKE, SHE MENTIONED THE UTILITY TAX, THAT WAS AN ITEM I ASKED TO BE ADDED AS AN ADDITIONAL ITEM WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL TENSES AND I WAS GOING TO USE THAT WHEN WE GOT INTO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE A CHARTER COUNTY.

WE COULD KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE, WE COULD FOREGO THIS TALK ABOUT SALARIES WHEN WE GET TO THE ITEM OF WHETHER WE NEED TO PUT BEFORE THE CLAY COUNTY VOTERS WE NEED TO BE A CHARTER COUNTY OR NOT AND YOU COULD THROW IN THE FACT THAT THERE'S REALLY -- THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CHARTER AND A NON-CHARTER COUNTY IN REALITY IS THAT YOU TYPICALLY TAX AND IF YOU WERE TO STATE THAT IN THE BALLOT, THEY COULD SAY YES OR NO AS TO DISCONTINUE BEING A CHARTER COUNTY AND SINCE THE UTILITY TAX IS A UNIQUE ITEM THAT IS ONLY ALLOWED BY CHARTER COUNTIES, AND YOU PUT THAT TO THE VOTERS, AND WE BECOME A NON-CHARTER COUNTY, THIS WHOLE ISSUE OF SALARIES FOR COMMISSIONERS BECOMES MUTE. BECAUSE THEN WE WOULD COME TUNED STATE STATUTE AND THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE BEING PAID EXACTLY WHAT THE OTHER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE BEING PAID, SO I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT MAYBE AT SOME POINT WHEN WE GET TO THE ISSUE OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD PUT TO THE VOTERS ON THE OPTION OF BECOMING A CHARTER -- A NON-CHARTER COUNTY AS OPPOSED TO BINGEING A

CHARTER COUNTY. >> IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, IF WE WERE TO SAY SHALL WE CHANGE FROM THIS TO THAT, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOME KIND OF LIKE EDUCATION OR INFORMATION SESSIONS FOR THE PEOPLE NOT JUST HAVE THEM WORK FOR THE THAIS TIME SEE THE ISSUE AND

NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT IT MEANS. >> SO, BASED ON MY EDUCATION ALONE WITH REGARDS TO THE CRC AND THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE ARE PER THE CHARTER ALLOWED TO DO, I THINK THAT GOES BEYOND OUR SCOPE. I THINK IT WOULD BE UP TO THE COMMISSIONERS TO SET FORTH SOME TYPE OF EDUCATION. HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO EDUCATE US ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT, POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, FOR IT, AGAINST IT, WHICHEVER, WHEN AND IF WE DO DECIDE AS A GROUP TO HAVE THAT AS A TOPIC, THEN I WOULD REQUEST SOME SPEAKERS TO COME IN TO PROVIDE US SOME EDUCATION. NOW ALSO REAL QUICK HERE, JUST LOOKING AT THE TOPICS THAT WE HAVE AGREED TO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT CONSIDERING WHETHER WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE CHARTER

IS ON THIS LIST SO I MAKE A NOTE OF THAT IF EVERYONE HERE -- >> I BELIEVE WE AGREED TO TAKE THAT OFF BECAUSE IT WAS MENTIONED. I THINK THE FIRST OR SECOND MEETING, THAT WAS REMOVED FROM PUBLIC, NOT THAT WE DIDN'T LEVER IT OPEN TO REVISIT BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS A VOTE EARLY ON, FIRST OR SECOND MEETING IF I'M INCORRECT.

>> OKAY. >> SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A NOTE IF WE WANT TO VOTE --

>> I THINK IT WAS ME THAT BROUGHT IT UP AND WE TABLED IT OR CANCELLED IT.

>> IT NAOETS A FOREGONE ISSUE, IF PEOPLE HERE WOULD LIKE TO RAISE THAT AS AND ADD THAT TO OUR TOPIC, WE CAN CONSIDER THAT. I'LL ADD THAT -- WELL, I'LL JUST ASK THIS GROUP NOW.

DO WE -- GO AHEAD. >> SO, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WATCHING THIS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE SALARY AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING AWAY WITH THE CHARTER.

PEOPLE MIGHT TAKE IT THE WRONG WAY THINKING THAT WE'RE GOING AROUND TO GET THEM A PAY RAISE, SO JUST REMEMBER THAT. BECAUSE THIS IS ALL -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PAY RAISES, NOW

[00:35:07]

YOU'RE TALK K ABOUT DOING AWAY WITH THE CHARTER AND THIS -- SOMEBODY MIGHT, HEY, NOW THE COMMISSION IS TRYING TO GET A PAY RAISE BY END THING CHARTER, SO THERE BETTER BE A GOOD

REASON OTHER THAN THEY NEED THE SALARY. >> KRISTI, DID YOU OFFICIALLY

MAKE A MOTION? >> SHE DID NOT. >> I DID NOT.

>> I APOLOGIZE, I'M LIKE -- >> YOUR EARS PERKED UP AT THE SAME TIME.

>> I WANTED TO THROW IT OUT ON THE TABLE TO HAVE DISCUSSION TIME BEFORE MAKING THE MOTION.

>> I JUST HEARD A MOTION, SORRY. >> I DO WANT THE MAKE SURE WE'RE ON TRACK HERE, SO LET'S PAUSE FOR THE DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM WITH REGARDS TO CHARTER VERSUS NON-CHARTER AND LET'S STAY FOCUSED TO THE ITEM CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW WHICH IS TOPIC NUMBER 2 HERE UNDER OLD BUSINESS, SO, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION, A COUPLE OF OPTIONS WITH REGARDS TO WHAT OUR ATTORNEY HAS PROVIDED US. WE HAD SOME PROPOSALS BY DEBBIE AND SUSAN HERE, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WHERE WOULD YOU ALL LIKE O GO WITH REGARDS TO THIS TOPIC?

>> A COUPLE OF DATA POINTS WHILE LOOKING AT THIS INFORMATION.

YOU KNOW, I'M A NUMBERS GIRL BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE TO ME AND THEY DON'T HAVE FEELINGS, SO I'M A NUMBER GIRLS, AND WE RANK 64 OUT OF 67 COUNTIES PER CAPITA R*EFR KNEW AND 62 OUT OF CAPITA EXPENDITURES. CLAY COUNTY IS LEAN, WE DO VERY WELL HERE.

NOW, CAN WE ALWAYS DO BETTER, THAT'S A GIVEN, YOU'RE ALWAYS TWEAKING AND DOING BETTER.

IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC HEALTH AND INFRASTRUCTURE, CLAY COUNTY ALIGNS WITH STATE AVERAGE, IT'S HERE, IT'S NOT JUST COMING, IT'S HERE. WE RANK 26 IN STATE CAPITAL PER PERSON INCOME, ON AVERAGE, THE AVERAGE INCOME IS 56 THOUSAND, THAT'S AN AVERAGE, I'M NOT SAYING PEOPLE AREN'T MAKING MORE AND THERE'S NOT PEOPLE WELL LE BOW THAT, THAT'S THE AVERAGE PER CAPITA HERE. WE ARE 25TH IN GROWTH AND I'VE SAID IT A COUPLE OF TIMES,' EVE GOT MAKE SURE WE'RE INFRASTRUCTURE WISE AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD, NOT JUST WITH ROADS, WITH OUR GOTH AND HOW WE PROCESS AND HOW WE MOVE FORWARD. WE NEED TO FOCUS ON HOW WE WANT THIS AND HOW WE WANT IT TO GROW. I AM FOR THE 70% BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S BIG PILL TO SWALLOW FOR OUR CONSTITUENT WHO IS ARE ON FIXED INCOMES BUT ARE STILL LIVING HERE AND WE HAVE TO DO BETTER FOR CLAY COUNTY, I'M NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE, *IP SOMEONE HERE MAY HAVE GOALS FOR THAT, I CAN SIT HERE -- THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF CLAY COUNTBACKER COUNTY MEANS EVERYTHING TO ME AND MY FOLLOWING GENERATIONS, I HAVE ONLY BEEN HERE SINCE 89, MY HUSBAND FOR MANY GENERATION AND IS HOPEFULLY MY KIDS WILL STAY HERE FOR MANY GENERATION AND IS IF WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES NOW, WHAT ARE WE GOING DO? IT'S NOT FAIR TO ASK OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO CARRY THE LOAD THEY CARRY.

I KNOW THERE ARE SEVERAL COUNTY THAT IS HAVE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT SPEND LARGE AMOUNTS OF TIME IN TALLAHASSEE ON BEHALF OF THEIR COUNTY. OUR COMMISSIONERS CAN'T DO THAT.

WE'VE GOT KEEP CLAY COUNTY PUNCHING ABOVE OUR WEIGHT. IF WE DON'T KEEP DOING THAT, WE'RE GOING FALL STAGNANT, I'M FROM PELAKO, THERE'S NO GROWTH THERE, AND THEY DIDN'T DO THE INFRASTRUCTURE, I'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS TO COUNTIES THAT DON'T DO THAT.

SO, -- BUT AGAIN, WE'RE MAKING UP FOR 18 YEARS, HOWEVER MANY YEARS IT IS NOW FOR NO MOVEMENT FORWARD AND THIS IS BEING WEAPONIZED YET AGAIN, THAT 37 WAS WEAPONIZED NOU, WE'VE GOT TO DO BETTER. IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO BETTER NOW, THIS IS ABOUT DOING RIGHT FOR CLAY COUNTY AND ITS GENERATIONS MOVING FORWARD, BUT THOSE ARE NUMBERS, WE'RE 25TH IN GROWTH, 64 AND 62 IN WHAT WE PAY OUT, WE'RE PRETTY DARN GOOD, Y'ALL, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE GO OUT AND START SPEEDING LEFT AND RIGHT BUT WE HAVE TO START PUTTING THESE MEASURES IN PLACE AND I CAN SAY THAT AS A CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN, I HAVE RAN A BUSINESS, I SOLD IT

[00:40:05]

BEFORE I WAS 50 AND I LIVER PRETTY DARN GOOD, I LIVED THE BUSINESS AND PUT BACK INTO OUR BUSINESS, IF WE'RE NOT PUTTING BACK INTO OUR COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET BETTER, WE'RE GOING STAY STAGNANT. THAT'S MY THREE CENTS. ER

>> THANK YOU, RHONDA, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> YES.

>> GO AHEAD, STEVE. >> I'M GOING FOLLOW ON WHAT YOU TAOS THERE, THE QUESTION THAT COMES BEFORE US IS WHAT'S BETTER FOR OUR COUNTY GOING FORWARD, FOR THE FUTURE X CHARTER AND NON-CHARTER, THAT'S THE QUESTION WE SHOULD BE ASKING OURSELVES RIGHT NOW IS WHAT'S BETTER FOR THE FUTURE OF CLAY COUNTY, CHARTER OR NON-CHARTER, THAT'S A

DISCUSSION WE NEED TO HAVE. TLA'S WHAT I WISH WE COULD HAVE. >> I DO AGREE THIS TOPIC MAY NOT BE NECESSARY, IF WE HAVE THAT DISCUSSION LATER ON AND RECOMMEND NON-CHARTER.

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> I'M A SALESPERSONENDINGS AS YOU ALL KNOW, I OPEN A REAL ESTATE COMPANY AND SELL PROPERTY EVERY DAY, I SELL LIFESTYLE EVERY DAY AND HOW YOU FAME A COST OF THE HOUSE, WHAT THE DEAL IS OF THE DAY IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE GOING SELL IT OR NOT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE OF HOW THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS, HOW I MARKET IT AND HOW I SELL IT. WE'RE GOIPG HAVE PUSHBACK WITH CHARTER OR NO CHARTER BECAUSE I DWET TO MAKE MY OPEN WAY, IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY HARD AND I HOPE WE CAN GET IT OUT, IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO SAY, BY THE WAY, YOU SAVE 4% IN UTILITY TAX AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING DO ANYWAY. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN EASY LIFT.

I HAVE NO PROBLEMS.WE SAID GO UP IN A CERTAIN FASHION BUT I'M AFRAID IF YOU TELL THE VOTERS, LET GIVE THOSE FIVE PEOPLE A 10% RAISE FOR THE NEXT UMPTEEN YEARS AS OPPOSED TO WE'RE ONLY GOING TO BE 70% OF WHAT NEXT DOOR IS, WHERE DO I THINK MY BETTER DEAL IS AND I'M AFRAID BECAUSE EVERY CHARTER COMMISSION HAS PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT, UNDERSTANDS IT LIKE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US DO AND BEAT IT TO DEATH AND IT GETS POUNDED IN THE GENERAL ELECTION, IT DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE. SO, WAR SALES MESSAGE WE -- WHATEVER SALES MESSAGE WE USED IN THE PAST, WE HAVE TO REFINE AND COME UP WITH A GOOD SALES PITCH. THEY'RE GOING LOOK AT HOW WE FRAME IT, BOTH OF THESE.

>> I HAVE A THOUGHT ON THAT. THERE IS A MESSAGING THING BECAUSE I KNOW WE'VE HAD MEETINGS BEFORE AND THEN I HAVE READ ARTICLE THAT IS WERE WRITTEN AND I WAS LIKE, WOW, THAT WAS A SLANTED VIEW OF WHAT HAPPENED SO I RECOGNIZE THE MESSAGING GETS PUT OUT BY WHOEVER, THAT THIS IS A BAD INED AND THEN THE PEOPLE WHO READ THE ARTICLE WERE LIKE, IT'S A BAD IDEA, SO I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A MESSES SAJ -- MESSAGE INING ONE DIRECTION SO I BELIEVE WE NEED TO DO EDUCATION AND MAYBE IT'S NOT US THAT DOES IT BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOMEONE DOING THE MESSAGING ON THE OTHER WAY SAYING THIS IS WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS THING, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AND JUST KIND OF INFORM PEOPLE SO THEY CAN VOTE LIKE WITH INTELLIGENCE IN THEIR HEAD OF WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT SO THAT'S JUST -- I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD BE -- HOW WE WOULD DO THAT BUT I FEEL LIKE PEOPLE WILL VOTE, WE'VE GOT SOME SMART PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY, I FEEL IF YOU GAVE THEM THE RIGHT INFORMATION, THIS IS WHAT THIS IS, THIS IS WHY WE'RE LOOK AT IT IN THIS WAY AND THESES HOW IT'S GOING PAN OUT, PEOPLE WILL PROBABLY VOTE THE WAY I THINK THEY SHOULD BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING IS RIGHT BUT I THINK THEY NEED TO BE EDUCATED AND UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> IN THE PAST WHEN WE HAVE RAISED THE HALF-CENT SALES TAX AND THE ONE CENT SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLS IN THE COUNTY, THERE WAS FUNDS RAISED OF OVER A COUPLE OF HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO GET THAT MESSAGE OUT AND I CAN IT WILL YOU THIS, THAT GETTING A MESSAGE OUT TODAY WHILE IT LOOKS LIKE NOT NEARLY AS EXPENSIVE IT WAS WITH BILLBOARDS 20 YEARS AGO, IT'S EXPENSIVE. AND SO MY HOPE IS AND I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE, AND I'M MORE THAN TLOG BE A PART OF THAT EFFORT TO GET IT OUT THERE BUT IT WILL TAKE A CONCERTED, PRIVATE EFFORT OR -- BECAUSE IT WILL BE HARD TO BE A PUBLIC EFFORT, PRIVATE EFFORT TO GET THE MESSAGING OUT THAT NEEDS TO GET OUT AND, AGAIN, I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE.

AND WHATEVER THAT MESSAGE IS, THE EASIER IT IS TO SELL, THE LIFT ISN'T QUITE AS MUCH, AND IT WILL TAKE EVERYBODY GOING, YOU KNOW WAXER I'M GOING PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH AND TELL

[00:45:08]

SX*EFSH BEAT THAT SUCK TORE DEATH. I'M GOING SAVE YOU THIS MUCH MONEY OR THEY'RE OVERPAID AND THEY DON'T PICK UP MY TRASH, THAT'S AN OVERSELL, THEY GET THAT A LOT, THIS ONE'S GOING TO BE HARDER, BUT THEY DESERVE IT AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU KNOW, YOU WONDER WHY AMAZON AND THESE HUGELY SUCCESSFUL PARTNERS PAY THEIR LEADERSHIP WELL AND I LOOK AROUND THIS THERE'S SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE, THEY GET PAID WELL BECAUSE THEY DO A GOOD JOB. THESE ARE THE TOP OF OUR COUNTY AND THEY DESERVE EVERY PENNY WE

COULD POSSIBLY GET ALL THE WAY TO THE 98. >> SUSAN, GO AHEAD.

>> I REALLY AFTER COME TOG THIS CHARTER, I HAD NO IDEA WHAT ALL THESE COMMISSIONERS DID.

I AM SO ENLIGHTENED BY THIS AND I REALLY FEEL LIKE IF WE GOT THAT INFORMATION OUT, NOBODY IS RUNNING. WE HAVE ALL THE RACES ARE UNOPPOSED.

WE NEED MORE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WILL WANT TO FILL IN AND IF WE GIVE THEM THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT I FEEL LIKE -- WELL, NOT I, ALL OF US FEEL LIKE THEY NEED TO GET TO DO A GOOD JOB, THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT A SECOND JOB, THIS COULD BE THEIR PRIMARY JOB AND WE COULD HAVE A HIGHER CALIBER OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO BE COMMISSIONERS. WE HAVE A GREAT GROUP RIGHT NOW AND NONE OF THEM HAVE ASKED FOR A RAISE, NONE OF THEM, BUT WE ALL FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID THEIR FAIR WAGE AND I THINK -- I HONESTLY THINK WE COULD DO THIS.

>> I THINK THE OTHER IMPORTANT THING IS THE LONG TERM FOR CLAY COUNTY IS WE HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH THE COUNTIES AROUND US AND IF THEY'VE GOT TIME TO GO TO TALLAHASSEE AND WORK ON OLD HARD ROAD ISSUES AND DO THAT FULL TIME AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK BECAUSE THEY HAVE A JOB HERE AND THAT'S WHY I THINK I WANTED TO JUST PROVIDE CLARITY AND SAY LET'S FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE BECAUSE THEN THAT MAKES US COMPARABLE WITH THOSE COUNTIES THAT DO HAVE COMMISSIONERS THAT CAN DO THAT AND THAT IS WHY I BRING THAT FORWARD IS BECAUSE WE ARE ONE OF THE LARGER COUNTIES AND GROWING REALLY FAST AND WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS THAT DON'T -- THEY ARE BALANCING TWO JOBS AND WE NEED THEM TO DO THIS AND I WOULD LOVE TO PUT IT ON THE BALANCE SO THE VOTERS CAN MAKE THAT DECISION, DO WE WANT A PART TIME COMMISSIONER OR NEED YOU TO FIGHT FOR OLD HARD ROAD, THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME, SO IT'S THE OLD ADAGE, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR SOMETIMES SXIT AND IT' NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE OUR COMMISSIONERS DON'T CARE, THEY'RE BALANCING TWO CAREERS ASK THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE IT REALLY CLEAR, DO WE FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE OR THE CHARTER AND MAKE IT THAT EASY ON THE BALLOT SO THE VOTERS GET TO PICK SO THEY GET TO PICK WHO THEY WANT, IF THEY FOLLOW THE FLORIDA STATUTE, IET ASSIST HUGE INCREASE BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO VOTE FOR THAT CONVOYING ANYMORE IF THEY DIDN'T STEP UP TO THE PLATE LIKE THEY EXPECTED THEM TO BE, BUT WE NEED FULL TIME COMMISSIONERS FIGHTING FOR US IN TALLAHASSEE RIGHT NOW WHERE ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS DOING

THAT AND WE DON'T ALWAYS GET THE BENEFIT OF THAT. >> DEBBIE?

>> SO, WE ARE EITHER THE FIRST OR SECOND FASTEST COUNTY IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA SO, WE DO HAVE THAT, WE HAVE THE FUTURE TO LOOK AT, THAT'S PART OF WHY I HESITATED ON THAT 70%, HOW LONG WILL THAT 70% BE FAIR BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT PROBABLY IS GREAT, BUT MAYBE IN TEN YEARS, IT'S NOT, THEN WE HAVE TO REVISIT IT AGAIN. THE OTHER THOUGHT IS I UNDERSTAND NEVER EVER INTENDED TO IMPLY THAT THE COMMISSIONERS WE HAVE ARE ANYTHING BUT STELLAR BECAUSE THEY'RE AMAZING, ALL OF THEM, BUT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ECHOED THE SAME IDEA THAT THE PAY ATTRACTS THEM -- ATTRACTS MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE QUALIFIED AND IT PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE TO DO TWO JOBS. SO, IN A WAY, IT'S -- MAYBE IT'S JUST MY HOPE BUT IF YOU INCREASE THEIR PAY, YOU INCREASE THEIR CAPACITY BECAUSE NOW THEY ARE ABLE TO DO A MUCH BETTER JOB THAN THEY WERE BEFORE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT SPREAD QUITE A THIN, IT'S A DEAL, IT'S SUCH A GREAT -- YOU'RE GET WAG YOU'RE PAYING

FOR. >> MATHEW, GO AHEAD. >> I FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE THIRD MEETING WE'VE SAT HERE, WE'RE JUST HASHING THE SAME INFORMATION, WE HAVE ALL SAID OUR PART, SOMEONE SAID -- I'M AGAINST THIS, EVERYONE -- SOME OTHERS SAID THEY'RE FOR IT,

[00:50:07]

SOME WANT THIS, IT'S THE SAME THING, SO I GUESS I THINK WE NEED MAKE A MOTION TO EITHER --

ARE WE APPROVING THIS OR ARE WE NOT. >> IF YOU WOULD TLIEK MAKE A MOTION. SO, NR'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THN I DO OPEN THE FLOOR UP AND

I WOULD WELCOME A MOTION. >> I WOULD TLIEK MAKE A MOTION AND I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL IS THAT SHALL CLAY COUNTY AMEND ITS CHARTER SO THAT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMPENSATION IS LIMITED TO THE SALARY SET FORTH BY STATE LAW FLORIDA STATUTE

145 TAG 031. >> ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> A SECOND. ER. ER WE HAVE A MOTION ASK A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION BEFORE US? ALRIGHT, I'M GOING TO CALL THE VOTE. WE'LL START AT THIS END THIS

TIME, RHONDA, PLEASE START. >> YEAH. ER

>> I NEED A NAME AND THEN A VOTE. >> RHONDA, YEAH.

>> SHERRY, [INAUDIBLE]. LET ME THINK. GO AHEAD, COME BACK TO ME IF

YOU DON'T MIND. >> OKAY. >> VAN ROYAL, NO.

>> STEVE ANDERSEN, YES. >> MCNE'ER, YES. >> COURTNEY CONNOR, NO.

>> BRANDON SALTER, YES. >> KRISTI PERRY, YES. >> MATTHEW MITCHELL, NO.

>> CURT MUSSER, YES. >> DEBBIE PASCOE, YES. >> SUSAN CALLAHAN, YES.

>> TIM? >> TIM NGUYEN, NO. >> SHERRY WARREN, YES.

>> ALRIGHT, WE HAVE THE YEAS OUTWEIGH THE NAYS, SO THIS MOTION DOES CARRY.

>> POINT OF ORDER IF I DON'T MIND, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE MOTION ON THE TABLE WAS TO CHANGE IT TO ALIGN WITH FLORIDA STATUTE THAT YOU LISTED, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT, YEAH, FOR THAT LANGUAGE. SO, THE MOTION CARRIES BASED ON THE VOTES BEFORE US. SO, MR. TAYLOR, IF YOU WOULD, CAN YOU PRESENT TO US AN AMENDED LANGUAGE AND BRING THAT TO US. SO, NOW THAT WE HAVE LANGUAGE FOR A PROPOSED AMENDMENT, I THINK -- AND GLEN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WE HAVE TO NOW HAVE ABOUT THREE MEETINGS I THINK WITHIN TEN BUSINESS DAYS, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO REFER TO THE CHARTER HERE, NOW THAT WE HAVE APPROVED AN AMENDMENT TO GO BEFORE THE VOTERS.

SUSAN? >> WITH THE WAY KRISTI WANTS TO HAVE IT ON THE BALLOT, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE SAYING WE'RE TRYING TO SMAOEK STUFF BY THEM. IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN PUT THIS TOGETHER THAT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO SNEAK ANYTHING?

>> SO, NOW THAT WE HAVE LANGUAGE IDENTIFIED, DOES THIS COMMISSION WANT TO MOVE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING, HAVE THE ATTORNEY GIVE US PROPOSED LANGUAGE AS THIS COMMISSION HAS VOTED ON, WE ALL TAKE A LOOK AT IT AS WRITTEN AND THEN I GUESS MOVE FORWARD WITH HOWEVER THIS

COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD. >> I THOUGHT -- WE JUST VOTED ON APPROVED ANOINTING WANG, SO WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO -- AND I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE ANYMORE, LIKE, OTHER THAN THE NEXT MEETINGS, HOW THE CHARTER LAYS OUT TELEVISING SHOULD BE NO MORE DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE

JUST VOTED ON THE CHARTER -- >> CORRECT. >> SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY, SO GLEN'S GOING TO GIVE US, HE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BRING US LANGUAGE NEXT TIME BECAUSE WE JUST VOTED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT IS GOING TO BE ON, SO WITHOUT

[00:55:01]

SEEING, WE JUST HEARD AND WE JUST VOTED ON WHAT'S GOING TO BE SEEN.

WE JUST MADE A NOTICE. >> WE PROBABLY WANT TO SEE THE LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT.

I HAVE O GO BACK AND CHECK THE MINUTES TO MAKE SURE I GOT HER MOTION --

>> FOR YOU, YES, BUT FOR US, WE DON'T NEED TO KEEP -- IN MY OPINION, WE JUST VOTE ON IT, WE DON'T NEED TO KEEP -- YOU CAN GO BACK AND THROUGH THE MONEY NUTS -- MINUTES, WE JUST VOTED ON LANGUAGE THAT WE HOPE WE ALL ARE CLEAR ON TLA,'S WHAT WE JUST VOTED ON, SO I WANT TO

MAKE SURE THAT'S ON THE RECORD. >> IT IS ON THE RECORD. THEREAFTER CLEAR VOTE, WE HEARD THE YEAS AND THE NAYS. IF I CAN ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY A QUICK QUESTION WITH REGARDS -- NOW THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR AN AMENDMENT, FOR PROCEDURAL PURPOSES, IS THE NEXT STEP TO HAVE A MEETING SPECIFICALLY ON THAT AMENDMENT PUBLICLY NOTICED?

>> THE WAY IT'S BEEN DONE IN THE PAST IS YOU FIN USHALL YOUR CHARTER BUSINESS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE ANY OTHER PROPOSALS AND AT THAT TIME YOU WOULD ADVERTISE

ALL OF THEM. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> AND THEN DO THE THREE MEETINGS. WHEN YOU GO TO SCHEDULE THOSE THREE MEETINGS, THOSE ARE THREE MINUTES FOR THE PUBLIC, YOU WOEN HAVE DISCUSSION AND VOTING, YOU JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE YOU HAVE A QUORUM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE EVERYBODY PRESENT.

>> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT, THANK YOU. NOW THAT WE HAVE THAT CLARITY, LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3 HERE, AND IT READS ARTICLE II ORGANIZATION OF COUNTY

[3. Article II Organization of County Government, Section 2.3: Executive Branch, D. Commission Auditor Discussion continued from January 12, 2026 meeting. Attached to this item is a copy of the Mission and Scope of Work of Division of Inspector General of the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroler, as requested by the CRC.]

GOVERNMENT, SECTION 2.3, EXECUTIVE BRANCH, SUBSECTION D, COMMISSION AUDITOR.

I BELIEVE, TIM, THAT WAS YOUR PARTICULAR TOPIC. I'M GOING THE GIVE YOU THE

FLOOR. >> THANK YOU. SHOCKER AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH AND TALKING TO SOME PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY AND I HAVE COME -- THIS WHOLE THING STARTED FOR ME WAS IS THERE REDUNDANCY. IS THERE DUPLICATION OF SERVICES BETWEEN THE CLERK OF THE COURTS AND THE COUNTY AUDITOR.

WELL, AFTER RESEARCHING THIS AND TALKING TO SOME PEOPLE, I THINK THAT POSITION IS NEEDED BEAUSE THEY ARE A VERY BIG HELP FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO JUST WITHDRAW SX*EFRG NOT MOVE FORWARD ANY LONGER.

>> ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO WITHDRAW ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF TOPIC

NUMBER 3 UNDER OLD BUSINESS, DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I SECOND IT.

>> ALRIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. TOPIC NUMBER 3 IS HEREBY

[1. Article II Organization of County Government, Section 2.2: Legislative Branch, I. Initiative]

WITHDRAWN. ALRIGHT, MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS.

WE HAVE ONE ITEM BEFORE US, ARTICLE II ORGANIZATION OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT, SECTION 2.2, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, SUBSECTION I, INITIATIVE. I BELIEVE, BRANDON, THIS WAS