Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVeto Notification to CommissionersTO FRO Honorable Members of the City Commission ::��y 0-- d CMTodd . Hannon City Clerk CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE : June 3, 2016 FILE: SUBJECT: Mayoral VETO of Ordinance 13610 adopted at the May 26, 2016 City Commission Meeting REFERENCES: ENCLOSURES: `1) I am in receipt of a mayoral veto (received on Friday, June 3, 2016, at 1:11 p.m.) pertaining to Ordinance 13610 that was passed at the May 26, 2016 Miami City Commission Meeting involving the following item: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE XI/DIVISION 2 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATIONBOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS/STANDARDS FOR CREATION AND REVIEW OF BOARDS GENERALLY", TO AMEND SECTION 2-885, ENTITLED "TERMS OF OFFICE; TERM LIMIT WAIVER", TO PROVIDE THAT BOARD MEMBERS' TERMS MAY ONLY BE EXTENDED FOR ONE (1) ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR TERM; PROVIDING THAT SUCH EXTENSION MUST BE APPROVED BY FIVE (5) MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE. Pursuant to City Code Section 2-36(4), the City Clerk is directed to place any item(s) vetoed by the Mayor, together with the veto form(s), on the next regularly scheduled City Commission meeting agenda as the first substantive item(s) for consideration by the City Commission. With this in mind, the mayoral veto of Ordinance 13610 will be addressed at the June 9, 2016 Miami City Commission Meeting as the first substantive item to be heard on the agenda. For your information, the City Commission may override a veto by a four-fifths vote of the City Commissioners present. If four-fifths of the City Commissioners present do not vote in favor of the override, then the mayoral veto shall be sustained. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to contact me. C: Mayor Tomas Regalado Daniel J. Alfonso, City Manager Victoria Mendez, City Attorney Mr. City Clerk, I hereby veto SR.1 an ordinance limiting term of office of Board members, discussed and passed at the City Commission meeting agenda of May 26, 2016. Following is the veto message: Service on a City of Miami Board is a privilege and an honor but not a right by appointment. As such it must be subject to, and guided by, well -thought out and reasoned standards and guidelines governing our board members and the pursuit of the board's mission. While I respect the intent of this legislation, I do not believe that its mandatory provisions governing how long members may serve is the best practice to achieve and maintain effective, experienced and well-balanced board governance. Further, it does not address the threshold issue of what constitutes a reasonable length of cumulative service by board members nor how to cure valid concerns regarding specific board related issues. While some criticisms of not having term limits may be valid in specific instances, these -in and of themselves- do not justify a broad mandate which affects all boards and their members. Some boards may need a performance review of policies and procedures but most are highly effective and their members have shown dedication and commitment by adhering to established rules governing board service. In addition, the mandate before us ignores the overwhelming benefits that long-standing members bring to bear in every collective decision made in furtherance of the board's mission. We cannot dismiss their professional expertise, institutional memory, passionate interest in the board's particular function, intricate knowledge of the community and the history of its issues. Any term limit evaluation must be guided by the facts and circumstances of each individual board as well as the mission its members have been entrusted to accomplish. By holding themselves to such articulated policies and periodic internal self -evaluations members themselves may assess performance and address board concerns such as the need to infuse new energy, succession plans, enforcement of attendance policies, ineffective members, "business as usual attitudes" and other valid issues which periodically affect the work of boards. By doing so, I believe that all boards will be able to grow in strength,vision,maintain operational continuity and strive for a prudent and clear balance between new and experienced members. c: Chairman Keon Hardemon Vice Chairman Ken Russell Commissioner Willy Gort Commissioner Frank Carollo Commissioner Francis Suarez Daniel Alfonso, City Manager Victoria Mendez, City Attorney CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM , Todd B. Hannon TO: June 3, 2016 ::*ILE City Clerk DATE: .-i' `; : Veto Message dam. 'T#yarlt w i SUBJECT: FROM: REFERENCES: ... Tomas P. Regalado Mayor ENCLOSURES: Mr. City Clerk, I hereby veto SR.1 an ordinance limiting term of office of Board members, discussed and passed at the City Commission meeting agenda of May 26, 2016. Following is the veto message: Service on a City of Miami Board is a privilege and an honor but not a right by appointment. As such it must be subject to, and guided by, well -thought out and reasoned standards and guidelines governing our board members and the pursuit of the board's mission. While I respect the intent of this legislation, I do not believe that its mandatory provisions governing how long members may serve is the best practice to achieve and maintain effective, experienced and well-balanced board governance. Further, it does not address the threshold issue of what constitutes a reasonable length of cumulative service by board members nor how to cure valid concerns regarding specific board related issues. While some criticisms of not having term limits may be valid in specific instances, these -in and of themselves- do not justify a broad mandate which affects all boards and their members. Some boards may need a performance review of policies and procedures but most are highly effective and their members have shown dedication and commitment by adhering to established rules governing board service. In addition, the mandate before us ignores the overwhelming benefits that long-standing members bring to bear in every collective decision made in furtherance of the board's mission. We cannot dismiss their professional expertise, institutional memory, passionate interest in the board's particular function, intricate knowledge of the community and the history of its issues. Any term limit evaluation must be guided by the facts and circumstances of each individual board as well as the mission its members have been entrusted to accomplish. By holding themselves to such articulated policies and periodic internal self -evaluations members themselves may assess performance and address board concerns such as the need to infuse new energy, succession plans, enforcement of attendance policies, ineffective members, "business as usual attitudes" and other valid issues which periodically affect the work of boards. By doing so, I believe that all boards will be able to grow in strength,vision,maintain operational continuity and strive for a prudent and clear balance between new and experienced members. c: Chairman Keon Hardemon Vice Chairman Ken Russell Commissioner Willy Gort Commissioner Frank Carollo Commissioner Francis Suarez Daniel Alfonso, City Manager Victoria Mendez, City Attorney