TREASURE ISLAND — In a year when residents continue to debate the future look of the island, as it relates to height and density of resorts and planned developments, commissioners agreed to form a Charter Review Committee to suggest changes to its municipal constitution.
City Manager Charles VanZant told commissioners the reason this item was placed on the agenda to consider establishing a Charter Review Committee is because it’s been five years since the last review.
The city charter notes, “that the City Commission shall consider the necessity for review of the Charter no later than once every five years…It is the intent of the City Commission to create a special purpose committee for the purpose of reviewing and recommending to the City Commission any amendments to the city’s charter that the Charter Review Committee finds advisable.”
He advised commissioners “You don’t have to have one at the five-year mark. You can say we’ve got a lot going on, we want to do it in a year or two from now.”
Commissioner Arthur Czyszczon said, “I think since we suffered catastrophic losses at the last hurricane, I think it’s wise to look to the future. Hopefully it never happens again, but you know we got to make some changes, if there is needed changes.”
Vice Mayor Tammy Vasquez, who sat on the last Charter Review Committee, added “I would agree.”
Mayor John Doctor noted he thinks the process “panned out pretty well,” the last time the committee was formed. “We gave people the opportunity, they took it very seriously; They were out asking and talking to neighbors, and going to their civic associations.”
City Attorney Ralf Brooks noted “according to the city charter each commissioner appoints a person from their district and then three members are chosen at-large by commissioners, based upon recommendation of the mayor.” They have to be Treasure Island voters, not serving on any other city board.
Doctor said, “the consensus is we all want to move forward on this.”
City Clerk Lisa-Marie Kennedy told commissioners a resolution setting guidelines and officially establishing a Charter Review Committee will be brought back to the commission for a vote at the next meeting.
The city will then start advertising for members of the public interested in serving on the committee, with a list brought to the City Commission in late September or early October for consideration.
Commissioners put citizen initiative referendum on the Nov. 3 ballot
The Nov. 3 election ballot will include a referendum question giving Treasure Island residents an opportunity to decide if the city charter should be changed to require a City Commission supermajority vote to approve Planned Developments or Special Area Plans.
Brooks told commissioners, “this is the citizen initiative petition placing the matter on the ballot. Commissioners have to approve this resolution so that the Pinellas Supervisor of Elections will place the ballot language on the ballot. A motion to approve doesn’t necessarily condone the amendment, but it does pass it on to the Supervisor of Elections.”
The vice mayor said, “there were questions raised if this would be considered more restrictive; Even though we don’t currently have the PD’s (planned developments) we’re moving toward that, and this would be one more barrier to it getting approved.” She added she just wanted city counsel’s opinion “on the potential that it would be challenged in the future, against it being more restrictive.”
Brooks advised that, “Senate Bill 180 and the subsequent renewals prohibit more burdensome or restrictive land development regulations. There’s no case law about whether or not a supermajority vote would be more burdensome or more restrictive. The requirements would be the same, but you would need one additional vote from the City Commission to get approval of a Planned Development.”
“Individual Planned Developments would be voluntary applications, but also would apply to Special Area Plans,” the attorney noted. “If a challenge were to be brought it would be after the election, if it passes in the election, and a court would make a determination.”
Czyszczon asked Brooks to confirm that he “is confident that it presents no legal conflicts or risks. Before the City Commission moves forward, I want absolute clarification and your legal opinion that you fully evaluated this resolution under current law, and are confident that it complies with all applicable statutes and does not create a legal risk for the city.”
Brooks answered, “this is not something that city staff wrote. It’s written by the citizens, so if it goes to review it would be reviewed by the courts. But I’m confident that this is legal to go to the referendum.”
The city attorney added “it may be knocked out afterwards, but it’s good to go to referendum.”
During public comment Mark Hohe, chairman of the petition group, said the decision will ultimately go before voters. “Your decision tonight is not yes or no, that you agree or disagree, it’s really to let the voters decide. We had 120% of the minimum required signatures, they came quick and fast. There’s a lot of desire for the citizens of Treasure Island to have a voice, a bigger voice, in development decisions that will soon be forthcoming.”
“I think it’s a foregone conclusion that some form of PD (planned development) will exist that will guide development, and that’s going to make a very important decision on behalf of you as commissioners, and your future commissioners.”
“The feeling from the residents is they want to have assurance that they have a better voice in this important decision going forward,” he added. “That’s what this is about. Let this go, let the voters decide, but more importantly win, lose or draw, listen to the constituents who want to have a bigger voice in this action. They don’t feel they have that up to this point.”
The mayor said the way the petition was presented, “it’s fine. Although I won’t necessarily support it, I will because what will happen ultimately is there will be a challenge after the fact. Whether it wins or not, it will be after the fact, with that being said there’s no harm no foul, the courts will decide.”
Commissioner Arden Dickey quoted Vasquez who mentioned this referendum doesn’t bother her at all, because “if a planned development is a good idea, it’s more likely to get a 5-0 vote.”
Commissioners agreed to place the referendum on the Nov.3 ballot by a vote of 3-1, with Commissioner Czyszczon voting against and Mayor Doctor, Vice Mayor Vasquez and Commissioner Dickey voting in favor. Commissioner Chris Clark, who sent a letter of support, was absent.