Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Times recommends: Vote yes on all Safety Harbor charter amendment topics

Safety Harbor residents who go to the polls Tuesday will find they have more decisions to make about the city charter than they do about candidates for City Commission.

Two candidates are running for one seat on the commission, but there are five questions about proposed amendments to the city charter. Voters may be surprised by that, because the charter referendum questions have received little publicity, but fortunately these are easy decisions.

A city charter is essentially an instruction manual for how a city government will operate, but it has the power of law. It is created by the voters and it may only be changed with their permission.

Charters need updating from time to time to keep them current and legal under changing state laws and customs. In Safety Harbor, the charter gets a thorough review every 10 years. A committee of residents was appointed to perform the task and recommended the changes that are on the ballot.

Question No. 1 wraps up the most minor of the changes in one package. Because state law limits how many words may be on the ballot in a referendum, city officials had to make the wording of this question general, so it may be confusing to voters.

Here's a quick rundown on what would happen if Question 1 were approved: The word "not" would be moved in one sentence to correct a grammatical problem; the 10-year charter reviews would be put on a schedule to coincide with city elections; the charter would be changed to require a candidate for office to be a registered voter in the city; there would be a minor wording change in a section on utility franchises; the City Commission would be permitted to assign grants or franchises by resolution rather than by ordinance; and a current charter requirement that property taxes must be uniform throughout the city would be dropped, allowing the city to provide an additional homestead exemption for senior citizens.

Question 2, if approved, would put in the charter tougher attendance requirements for city commissioners. Now, they can have three consecutive unexcused absences or eight total each year. The Charter Review Commission thought that was too many and proposed instead two consecutive unexcused absences and four total in a year. These limits would not apply if the commission excused the absence either before or after it occurred, which is routinely done.

Question 3 seeks to reduce the burden on residents who petition the government for a referendum. The current charter states that 20 percent of the city's registered voters must sign a petition; the proposed change would make that 10 percent. Twenty percent was fine, charter commission members said, when the city was smaller, but now it has almost 18,000 residents, and having to get 20 percent to sign is an unreasonable burden.

Question 4, if approved, would eliminate an outdated provision that let city commissioners demand that the city manager and city clerk post a bond when employed.

Question 5 would affect a section of the charter that spells out exactly how and when the City Commission must approve the city budget. That process now is regulated by state law. This change would add a section that states the city must follow state law on budget approval.

The charter changes proposed on Tuesday's ballot are minimal, and we see no reason for Safety Harbor residents to disapprove them.

The Times recommends a yes vote on the five Safety Harbor charter amendment questions.

Frank DiDonato

David Archie

Debbie White

Yes, on all five

[Last modified March 4, 2005, 01:01:11]