Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Edgewater charter panel votes to add current council chambers deed to voter-approval language
Summary
The City of Edgewater Charter Review Committee voted to add the current council chambers deed to existing ballot language that requires voter approval before sales or conveyances of park property, after citizen comment urging explicit protection and discussion of carving the council chambers into Question 18.
The City of Edgewater Charter Review Committee voted March 31 to add language carving the current council chambers deed into Question 18, the ballot measure that requires voter approval before city-owned park property may be sold or conveyed.
The move followed public comment from Kim Long of 3312 Mango Tree, who told the committee, "What doesn't go in our Charter can be manipulated by vote of just three people on our city council," and asked members to ensure City Hall property is explicitly protected so voters can decide. "You can protect this property now," Long said.
City Attorney Rollins told the panel that the committee's work will be translated into ordinance text and a ballot summary the council must approve before placing the measures before voters. "I'll take all those questions and I'll use the ballot language and the actual language that will be changed in the Charter," Rollins said, describing the regular process of drafting a municipal ordinance and the associated 75-word ballot summary.
Committee member Donna McDavid moved to add the current council chamber deed protection to the Question 18 language and the motion was seconded and approved by roll-call vote. The committee instructed Rollins to prepare updated ballot and ordinance language and to present the drafts at the next meeting for final review.
Rollins clarified that adding the council chambers deed would act as a carve-out to existing Question 18 rather than replace its voter-approval requirement: the revised language would still require a referendum before any sale or conveyance of the covered property. He noted the council—not the committee—decides whether and when to place ordinance(s) on the ballot, and that voter approval could occur at a regularly scheduled or special election.
The committee discussed, and rejected, a broader approach that would have made the restriction apply to all city-owned property; members favored a targeted carve-out for the council chambers and parks. The committee indicated the attorney would return with precise ballot-language edits in time for the committee's next scheduled meeting on April 14.
The panel adjourned at 4:31 p.m.
