Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Tampa council outlines scope, timeline for Charter Review Advisory Commission; agrees public comment and disclosure rules
Loading...
Summary
City of Tampa council held a workshop to finalize a resolution creating a Charter Review Advisory Commission, agreeing on a narrow scope, membership rules, timeline for drafting ballot language, and public‑input procedures including web submissions and a 15‑minute public‑comment allowance at meetings.
The City of Tampa City Council met in workshop to direct staff to prepare a resolution establishing the City of Tampa Charter Review Advisory Commission and to set the scope, membership rules and schedule for the commission’s work.
Council Chair (Speaker 1) opened the session by saying the purpose was to ensure the city attorney has “the scope and the details to create a final resolution,” and added, “we're not leaving this meeting until we give him all the information he needs to create that resolution.” The council instructed staff to return a draft resolution for review on or after Nov. 20 with a separate ‘scope’ section and a target to compile council-supplied questions by Jan. 8.
Why it matters: The resolution will set the commission’s authority, membership, eligibility and the timeline for any charter changes pushed to voters. Council members emphasized clarity on what the commission may and may not do, how recommendations will reach the council and how ballot questions are drafted and reviewed.
Key decisions and draft directions
- Start point and drafting: Staff and legal counsel circulated a memorandum and a draft resolution built from the city’s prior 2017 resolution (referenced in the meeting). Council asked staff to use that document as a baseline and to highlight decision points where council input is required.
- Scope: Council agreed to create a distinct scope section in the resolution structured, in plain terms, as: (a) review the charter and propose modifications, (b) consider city-attorney recommendations for non‑substantive housekeeping changes, and (c) consider a list of questions to be supplied by individual council members (the third element was described as optional).
- Timeline and attorney role: Council set an internal timeline (draft back Nov. 20; council input compiled by Jan. 8; May 1 flagged as a key calendar target for election/ballot timing). Members clarified the intent to retain an independent attorney (not city legal staff) to draft ballot questions and summary language so as to reduce perceived bias in ballot wording.
- Composition, eligibility and procedures: Council discussed composition (the commission size discussed as nine members including alternates), residency requirements (appointees must be Tampa residents; some members suggested a one‑year residency preference), and exclusions (language preserved to bar certain public officials or recent employees where appropriate). Staff will require Form 1 financial disclosures and the standard background check for appointees prior to final appointment.
- Meetings, attendance and public participation: Council agreed the commission should meet at least twice a month (roughly January through September, about 16 meetings). Attendance rules discussed: members may miss up to three meetings total but not more than two consecutive meetings; alternates should receive materials and be prepared to participate. The council also agreed in principle to web submission of public input and to allow a limited public‑comment period at meetings (consensus of up to 15 minutes per meeting) and directed staff to create a CRC webpage and public-comment web form.
- Chair and facilitator: The council confirmed the facilitator is not the commission chair; the commission itself will select a chair and vice chair from among its members within 30 days of organizing. Staff will restore exhibit language in the draft resolution to reflect that selection process.
What remains: Staff (legal counsel) was asked to prepare and circulate a clean draft resolution promptly (council requested a turnaround within 24–48 hours for an initial review), including the agreed scope language, timeline, disclosure and background-check requirements, attendance rules, the dissolution/backstop language (if no amendments are recommended by the submission deadline), and draft language directing an independent attorney to prepare ballot questions and summaries.
Quotes from the meeting
“We're doing this special … workshop because we have an aggressive schedule,” Council Chair (Speaker 1) said, explaining the rationale for a compact schedule and clear direction to staff.
“This is called the City of Tampa Charter Review Advisory Commission. This is not like Hillsborough County … This is purely advisory,” staff counsel (Speaker 4) said, emphasizing that the commission’s recommendations will return to council for approval and, if placed on the ballot, must go through readings and public comment.
Next steps and timeline: Staff will prepare a draft resolution capturing the council’s direction and decision points for circulation. Council members agreed to provide lists of questions for possible inclusion in the commission’s scope; the council expects to finalize the resolution language and calendar milestones ahead of the Jan. 8 addendum and in time for ballot planning in the spring.
