Agenda 10/22/2013 Item #16K4 Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
October 22, 2013
Add-On Item 14A5: Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute the attached
Resolution authorizing signature of Joint Participation Agreement No.AR734 with the
Florida Department of Transportation to accept a grant offer in the amount of$14,296 for
the Design and Construction of the South Taxiway at Everglades Airpark,and to authorize
associated budget amendments. (Staffs request)
Withdraw Item 16B2: Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) acting in its capacity as the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency(CRA) approve the attached amendment#01 to the previously approved funding
agreement between the CRA and the South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD)
which extends the performance period outlined in Exhibit B1: Payment and Deliverable
Schedule. (Staffs request)
Continue Item 16F2 to the November 12, 2013 BCC Meeting: This item continued from
the October 8,2013 BCC Meeting. Recommendation to approve an amendment to the
Tourism Travel Expense Resolution 2006-40 related to County Purchasing Card limits
consistent with the County Purchasing Policy and make a finding that this item promotes
tourism. (Commissioner Nance's request)
Move Item 16K4 to Item 12A: Recommendation that the Board
adjust its Public Speaker practice by (1) Public Comment
should be relocated back to the end of the Regular Agenda; (2)
Whenever practicable, agenda items that are expected to
generate substantial public comment shall be staggered over
multiple meetings; and (3) Should there be large groups or
factions at the meeting, the chair may allow a representative of
each group or faction to address the Board on a proposition
before the Board, rather than all members of such group or
faction, but shall give such representative a minimum of 15
minutes to address the Board. (Commissioner Nance,
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Fiala's separate
requests)
Note:
Item 14A3: The FAA Funding amount in the table should read: $6,754,362 NOT
$6,754,262. (Staffs request)
Item 16D13: A scrivener's error is noted as this is Amendment No.2 1; and the companion
item reference should read 16D44 12. (Staffs request)
10/22/2013 8:53 AM
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation that the Board adjust its Public Speaker practice by (1) Public Comment
should be relocated back to the end of the Regular Agenda; (2) Whenever practicable,
agenda items that are expected to generate substantial public comment shall be staggered
over multiple meetings; and (3) Should there be large groups or factions at the meeting, the
chair may allow a representative of each group or faction to address the Board on a
proposition before the Board, rather than all members of such group or faction, but shall
give such representative a minimum of 15 minutes to address the Board.
OBJECTIVE: To provide for a better forum for public speakers during Board meetings.
CONSIDERATIONS: This item is in keeping with a Board request at its last meeting that the
County Attorney come back with recommended proposals regarding public speakers during
Board meetings.
At its 2013 legislative session, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 50, codified as Section
286.0114, Florida Statutes, to require that "Members of the public shall be given a reasonable
opportunity to be heard on a proposition before a board or commission."
The Board's current procedure is set forth in Resolution 98-167 (which among other things
created the Public Comment portion of the Agenda); in the Board's Meetings Ordinance (Ord.
75-16, as amended); and by longstanding custom. Although Collier County's present Board's
meeting procedures fulfill the requirements of Senate Bill 50 and need not be amended, the
following minor tweaks to what the Board is already doing could prove beneficial to the public.
The County Attorney recommends the following:
1. Public Comment should be relocated back to the end of the Regular Agenda.
Rational: It is the feeling of the County Attorney that relocating the Public Comment portion of
the Agenda toward the beginning of the meeting had the unintended consequence of creating
some frustration to the public, who at times found themselves having to wait to be heard for
much of the day as the Board attended to various time certain items and took its scheduled
breaks, including lunch. Relocating Public Comments back to the end of the Regular Agenda
should remove this frustration and result in less waiting time for the public.
2. Whenever practicable, agenda items that are expected to generate substantial public comment
shall be staggered over multiple meetings.
Rational: Staggering items which are expected to generate substantial public comment should
allow the Board more time to attend to these items, and reduce the waiting time for those
members of the public wanting to speak (as they would not have to sit through a lengthy
discussion on an item they have no interest in).
Packet Page-2123-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
3. Should there be large groups or factions at the meeting,the chair may allow a representative of
each group or faction to address the Board on a proposition before the Board, rather than all
members of such group or faction, but shall give such representative a minimum of 15 minutes to
address the Board.
Rational: This procedure is expressly provided for in HB 50, and consistent with Resolution 98-
167, which authorizes this practice. This procedure should be utilized more to keep order and
decorum during a clearly contentious item than as a limitation on public speakers.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney, is
approved as to form and legality, and requires majority vote for approval. -JAK
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adjust its Public Speaker practice by:
1. Public Comment should be relocated back to the end of the Regular Agenda;
2. Whenever practicable, agenda items that are expected to generate substantial public comment
shall be staggered over multiple meetings; and
3. Should there be large groups or factions at the meeting, the chair may allow a representative of
each group or faction to address the Board on a proposition before the Board, rather than all
members of such group or faction, but shall give such representative a minimum of 15 minutes to
address the Board.
Prepared by: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Attachments: SB 50 (new Florida Statutes Sec. 286.0114); Senate Bill Analysis
Packet Page-2124-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.16.K.16.K.4.
Item Summary: Recommendation that the Board adjust its Public Speaker practice by (1)
Public Comment should be relocated back to the end of the Regular Agenda; (2) Whenever
practicable, agenda items that are expected to generate substantial public comment shall be
staggered over multiple meetings; and (3) Should there be large groups or factions at the
meeting, the chair may allow a representative of each group or faction to address the Board on
a proposition before the Board, rather than all members of such group or faction, but shall give
such representative a minimum of 15 minutes to address the Board.
Meeting Date: 10/22/2013
Prepared By
Name: CrotteauKathynell
Title: Legal Secretary,County Attorney
10/15/2013 1:30:21 PM
Approved By
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney
Date: 10/15/2013 3:20:12 PM
Name: GreenwaldRandy
Title: Management/Budget Analyst,Office of Management&B
Date: 10/15/2013 4:01:09 PM
Name: IsacksonMark
Title: Director-Corp Financial and Mgmt Svs,CMO
Date: 10/15/2013 4:56:20 PM
Packet Page-2125-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
286.0114 Public meetings; reasonable opportunity to be heard; attorney fees.—
(1) For purposes of this section, "board or commission" means a board or commission of any
state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of a county, municipal corporation, or
political subdivision.
(2) Members of the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard on a proposition
before a board or commission. The opportunity to be heard need not occur at the same meeting at
which the board or commission takes official action on the proposition if the opportunity occurs
at a meeting that is during the'decisionmaking process and is within reasonable proximity in time
before the meeting at which the board or commission takes the official action. This section does
not prohibit a board or commission from maintaining orderly conduct or proper decorum in a
public meeting. The opportunity to be heard is subject to rules or policies adopted by the board
or commission, as provided in subsection (4).
(3) The requirements in subsection (2) do not apply to:
(a) An official act that must be taken to deal with an emergency situation affecting the public
health, welfare, or safety, if compliance with the requirements would cause an unreasonable
delay in the ability of the board or commission to act;
(b) An official act involving no more than a ministerial act, including, but not limited to,
approval of minutes and ceremonial proclamations;
(c) A meeting that is exempt from s. 286.011; or
(d) A meeting during which the board or commission is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity. This
paragraph does not affect the right of a person to be heard as otherwise provided by law.
(4) Rules or policies of a board or commission which govern the opportunity to be heard are
limited to those that:
(a) Provide guidelines regarding the amount of time an individual has to address the board or
commission;
(b) Prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of groups or factions on a proposition to
address the board or commission, rather than all members of such groups or factions, at meetings
in which a large number of individuals wish to be heard;
(c) Prescribe procedures or forms for an individual to use in order to inform the board or
commission of a desire to be heard; to indicate his or her support, opposition, or neutrality on a
proposition; and to indicate his or her designation of a representative to speak for him or her or
his or her group on a proposition if he or she so chooses; or
(d) Designate a specified period of time for public comment.
(5) If a board or commission adopts rules or policies in compliance with this section and
follows such rules or policies when providing an opportunity for members of the public to be
heard, the board or commission is deemed to be acting in compliance with this section.
(6) A circuit court has jurisdiction to issue an injunction for the purpose of enforcing this
section upon the filing of an application for such injunction by a citizen of this state.
(7)(a) Whenever an action is filed against a board or commission to enforce this section, the
court shall assess reasonable attorney fees against such board or commission if the court
determines that the defendant to such action acted in violation of this section. The court may
assess reasonable attorney fees against the individual filing such an action if the court finds that
the action was filed in bad faith or was frivolous. This paragraph does not apply to a state
attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or an officer charged with enforcing this section.
Packet Page-2126-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
(b) Whenever a board or commission appeals a court order that has found the board or
commission to have violated this section, and such order is affirmed, the court shall assess
reasonable attorney fees for the appeal against such board or commission.
(8) An action taken by a board or commission which is found to be in violation of this section
is not void as a result of that violation.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2013-227.
Packet Page-2127-
ARC:
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By:The Professional Staff of the Committee on Rules
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50
INTRODUCER: Rules Committee; Governmental Oversight and Accountability Committee; and Senators
Negron and Evers
SUBJECT: Public Meetings
DATE: March 8, 2013 REVISED:
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Naf McVaney GO Fav/CS
2. McSwain Hansen AP Favorable
3. Naf Phelps RC Fav/CS
4.
6.
Please see Section VIII. for Additional Information:
A. COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE X Statement of Substantial Changes
B. AMENDMENTS Technical amendments were recommended
Amendments were recommended
Significant amendments were recommended
I. Summary:
CS/CS/SB 50 requires that members of the public be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard
on a proposition before a board or commission of a state agency or local government. Such
opportunity does not have to occur at the same meeting at which the board or commission takes
official action if certain requirements are met. The bill excludes specified meetings and acts from
the "right to speak" requirement.
The bill specifies that the section does not prohibit a board or commission from maintaining
orderly conduct or proper decorum in a public meeting. It authorizes a board or commission to
adopt certain reasonable rules or policies governing the opportunity to be heard. If a board or
commission adopts such rules or policies and thereafter complies with them, it is deemed to be
acting in compliance with the section.
The bill authorizes a circuit court to issue injunctions for the purpose of enforcing the section
upon the filing of an application for such injunction by any citizen of Florida. If an action is filed
against a board or commission to enforce the provisions of the section and the court determines
that the board or commission violated the section, the bill requires the court to assess reasonable � x
Packet Page-2128-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 2
attorney fees against the appropriate state agency or local government board or commission.
However,the bill also authorizes the court to assess reasonable attorney fees against the
individual filing the action if the court finds that the action was filed in bad faith or was
frivolous. The bill excludes specified public officers from its attorney fee provisions. A court is
required by the bill to assess reasonable attorney fees if a board or commission appeals a court
order finding that such board or commission violated the section and the order is affirmed.
The bill provides that any action taken by a board or commission that is found to be in violation
of the section is not void as a result of such violation.
This bill creates section 286.01 14, Florida Statutes.
II. Present Situation:
Florida Constitution: Public Meetings
The Florida Constitution requires all meetings of any collegial public body of the executive
branch of state government or of any collegial public body of a county, municipality, school
district, or special district, at which official acts are to be taken or at which public business of
such body is to be transacted or discussed,to be open and noticed to the public.'
Government in the Sunshine Law
Access to government meetings is also governed by the Florida Statutes. Section 286.011, F.S.,
also known as the "Government in the Sunshine Law" or"Sunshine Law,"requires all meetings
of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any
county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, at which official acts are to be taken to be
open to the public at all times. The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all
public meetings. Public meetings may not be held in certain locations that discriminate on the
basis of sex, age, race, creed, color, origin, or economic status or which operates in a manner that
unreasonably restricts the public's access to the facility.` Minutes of a meeting of any such board
or commission of any such state agency or authority shall be promptly recorded and be open to
public inspection.3
Right to Speak at Public Meetings
The Florida Constitution and the Florida Statutes are silent concerning whether citizens have a
right to be heard at a public meeting. To date, Florida courts have heard two cases directly
addressing whether a member of the public has a right to be heard at a meeting when he or she is
not a party to the proceedings.
In Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc.,4 the plaintiffs alleged that the
Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., (CMPA)5 violated the Sunshine Law by not
Article I.s. 24(b)of the Florida Constitution.
2 Section 286.011(6),F.S.
'Section 286.011(2),F.S.
432 So.3d 659(Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Packet Page -2129-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 3
providing them the opportunity to speak at a public meeting concerning the development of
certain waterfront property. The plaintiffs argued that the Sunshine Law phrase "open to the
public" grants citizens the right to speak at public meetings, but the First District Court of
Appeal held that no such right exists:
Relying on the language in Marston6, the trial court determined that,
although the Sunshine Law requires that meetings be open to the public,
the law does not give the public the right to speak at the meetings.
Appellants have failed to point to any case construing the phrase "open to
the public"to grant the public the right to speak, and in light of the clear
and unambiguous language in Marston (albeit dicta),we are not inclined
to broadly construe the phrase as granting such a right here.
In the second case,Kennedy v. St. Johns Water Management District, the plaintiffs alleged, in
part, that the St. Johns Water Management District violated the Sunshine Law by preventing
certain people from speaking at a public meeting concerning the proposed approval of a water
use permit. There, the trial court held that, "Because, as clearly articulated in Keesler, the
Sunshine Law does not require the public be allowed to speak, plaintiffs' claim ... fails as a
matter of law."9 The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's ruling.t0
111. Effect of Proposed Changes:
The bill creates s. 286.0114, F.S., providing that members of the public must be given a
reasonable opportunity to be heard on a proposition before a board or commission of any state
agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or
political subdivision. The opportunity to be heard does not have to occur at the same meeting at
which the board or commission takes official action on the proposition if such opportunity:
• Occurs at a meeting that is during the decision-making process; and
The CMPA is a not-for-profit corporation charged by the City of Pensacola with overseeing the development of a parcel of
public waterfront property.The CMPA did not dispute that it was subject to the requirements of the Sunshine Law. Id.at 660.
A private entity is generally subject to public records and open meetings laws when 1)there has been a delegation of the
public agency's governmental functions;or 2)the private entity plays an integral part in the decision-making process of the
public agency or has a significant level of involvement with the public agency's performance of its duties. See Ops.Att'y
Gen.Fla. 92-53 (1992)(direct support organization created for purpose of assisting public museum subject to s.286.011,
F.S.);83-95 (1983)(where county accepted services of nongovernmental committee to recodify and amend county's zoning
laws,committee subject to Sunshine Law).
In [food v.Marston,the Florida Supreme Court held that the University of Florida improperly closed meetings of a
committee charged with soliciting and screening applicants for the deanship of the university's college of law.However,the
Marston court noted"nothing in this decision gives the public the right to be more than spectators.The public has no
authority to participate in or to interfere with the decision-making process." Wood Y. Marston,442 So.2d 934,941 (Fla.
1983).
Keesler,supra note 3,at 660-61.
8 The trial court was the Circuit Court of the Seventh Judicial Circuit, in and for Putnam County,Florida. See the trial court's
"Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment,"September 28,2010,at 1-3(on file with the Governmental Oversight and
Accountability Committee).
9 Id.at6.
10 2011 WL 5124949(Fla. 5th DCA 2011). Aftlok
Packet Page-2130-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 4
• Is within reasonable proximity in time before the meeting at which the board or commission
takes the official action.
The bill specifies that the section does not prohibit a board or commission from maintaining
orderly conduct or proper decorum in a public meeting.
The opportunity to be heard does not apply to:
• An official act that must be taken to deal with an emergency situation affecting the public
health, welfare, or safety, when compliance with the requirements would cause an
unreasonable delay in the ability of the board or commission to act;
• An official act involving no more than a ministerial act, including, but not limited to,
approval of minutes and ceremonial proclamations;
• A meeting that is exempt from open meetings requirements; or
• Meetings in which the board or commission is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity. The bill
specifies that this exclusion does not affect the right of a person to be heard as otherwise
provided by law.
The bill authorizes a board or commission to adopt reasonable rules or polices governing the
opportunity to be heard." Such rules or policies must be limited to those that:
• Provide guidelines regarding the time an individual has to address the board or commission;
• Prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of groups or factions on a proposition to
address the board or commission, rather than all members of such groups or factions, at
meetings in which a large number of individuals wish to be heard;
• Prescribe procedures or forms for an individual to use in order to inform the board or
commission of a desire to be heard, to indicate his or her support, opposition, or neutrality on
a proposition, and to indicate his or her designation of a representative to speak for him or
her or his or her group on a proposition if he or she so chooses; or
• Designate a specified period of time for public comment.
The bill provides that a board or commission is deemed to be acting in compliance with the new
section if the board or commission adopts rules or policies in compliance with the section and
follows such rules or policies when providing an opportunity to be heard.
The bill authorizes a circuit court to issue injunctions for the purpose of enforcing the new
section upon the filing of an application for such injunction by any citizen of Florida.
Whenever an action is filed against a board or commission to enforce the provisions of this
section, the bill requires the court to assess reasonable attorney fees against the appropriate state
agency or local government board or commission if the court determines that the defendant to
" Executive branch agencies that are subject to the Florida Administrative Procedure Act(ch. 120,F.S.)must adopt through
the rulemaking process(s. 120.54,F.S.)any agency statement defined as a rule by s. 120.52,F.S. Section 120.52(16),F.S.,
defines`'rule"to mean each agency statement of general applicability that implements,interprets,or prescribes law or policy
or describes the procedure or practice requirements of an agency and includes any form which imposes any requirement or
solicits any information not specifically required by statute or by an existing rule.
Packet Page-2131-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 5
such action acted in violation of the section. The bill also authorizes the court to assess
reasonable attorney fees against the individual filing such an action if the court finds that the
action was filed in bad faith or was frivolous. These attorney fee provisions do not apply to a
state attorney, to his or her duly authorized assistants, or to an officer charged with enforcing the
provisions of the act. The bill also requires a court to assess reasonable appellate attorney fees if
a board or commission appeals any court order which has found such board or commission to
have violated the section and the order is affirmed.
The bill specifies that any action taken by a board or commission that is found to be in violation
of the section is not void as a result of such violation.
The bill's effective date is October 1, 2013.
IV. Constitutional Issues:
A. Municipality/County Mandates Restrictions:
The county/municipality mandates provision of s. 18,Art. VII of the Florida Constitution
may apply because this bill could cause counties and municipalities to incur additional
expenses associated with longer meetings or increased meetings due to the new requirement
that the public be provided with the opportunity to speak at such meetings.12 An exemption
may apply, however, if the bill has an insignificant fiscal impact. If an exemption does not
apply, an exception may still apply if the bill articulates a finding of serving an important
state interest and applies to all persons similarly situated. The bill contains a legislative
finding of important state interest and applies to boards and commissions of all state agencies
and authorities and all agencies and authorities of counties, municipal corporations, and
political subdivisions; therefore, it appears to apply to all persons similarly situated.
B. Public Records/Open Meetings Issues:
None.
12 Article VII,s. 18(a)of the Florida Constitution provides that no county or municipality may be bound by any general law
that mandates it to spend funds or take an action requiring the expenditure of funds unless the Legislature determines that
such law fulfills an important state interest and one of specified other requirements are met. The other specified requirements
are:
• Funds have been appropriated that have been estimated at the time of enactment to be sufficient to fund such
expenditure;
• The Legislature authorizes or has authorized a county or municipality to enact a funding source not available for
such county or municipality on February 1, 1989,that can be used to generate the amount of funds estimated to be
sufficient to fund such expenditure by a simple majority vote of the governing body of each such county or
municipality;
• The law requiring such expenditure is approved by two-thirds of the membership in each house of the Legislature;
• The expenditure is required to comply with a law that applies to all persons similarly situated, including the state
and local governments; or
• The law is required to either comply with a federal requirement or required for eligibility for a federal entitlement,
which federal requirement specifically contemplates actions by counties or municipalities for compliance. Id.
Packet Page-2132-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 6
C. Trust Funds Restrictions:
None.
V. Fiscal Impact Statement:
A. Tax/Fee Issues:
None.
B. Private Sector Impact:
None.
C. Government Sector Impact:
Governmental entities may incur additional meeting related expenses because longer
meetings may be required when considering items of great public interest. The amount of
those potential expenses is indeterminate and will vary depending on the magnitude of each
issue and the specific associated meeting requirements.
VI. Technical Deficiencies:
None.
VII. Related Issues:
Rulemaking
The constitutional separation of powers doctrine13 prevents the Legislature from delegating its
constitutional duties. a Because legislative power involves the exercise of policy-related
discretion over the content of law, 5 any discretion given an executive branch agency to
implement a law must be "pursuant to some minimal standards and guidelines ascertainable by
reference to the enactment establishing the program."16 Although the bill authorizes, but does not
require, state agency boards and commissions to adopt certain rules or policies, executive branch
agencies are required to adopt as a rule a statement of general applicability that implements law
or policy and that imposes a requirement not specifically required by statutes or existing rule.'?
The bill prescribes the items that such rules or policies may address.
Boards and commissions subject to the state Administrative Procedure Act18 must comply with
the rulemaking procedures set forth in that chapter. Generally, rulemaking pursuant to those
procedures takes a minimum of 90 days.'9
Article II,s. 3 of the Florida Constitution.
14 See Florida State Bd. of Architecture v. Wasserman,377 So.2d 653(Fla. 1979).
15 See State ex rel. Taylor v. City of Tallahassee, 177 So.719(Fla. 1937).
16 See Askew v. Cross Key Waterways,372 So.2d 913 (Fla. 1978).
17 See note 11.
Chapter 120,F.S.The chapter applies to any'`aoency"as defined in s. 120.52(1),F.S.
19 See s. 120.54,F.S.
Packet Page -2133-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 7
Other Comments
The bill does not define the terms "proposition,""reasonable proximity," "ministerial act,"
"factions," and "groups."
The bill does not specify what is considered an "unreasonable delay"when deciding if the
public's opportunity to be heard should be usurped.
It is unclear whether a state board's or commission's denial of someone's right to speak may
constitute an agency action challengeable under the Administrative Procedure Act. In cases in
which an administrative remedy is available, a plaintiff may be required to exhaust all
administrative remedies before pursuing a civil remedy.20
As currently drafted, each state or local board or commission is authorized to create its own rules
or policies governing the right to speak, Allowing each state board or commission to create its
own rules allows it to tailor its rules to its needs, but may not provide as much ease of use by the
public as would uniform rules created by an entity such as the Administration Commission.
The bill specifies that a circuit court may issue injunctions to enforce the provisions of the act. It
is unclear whether this could be interpreted to exclude civil remedies other than injunctions and
the attorney fees also explicitly authorized by the bill.
VIII. Additional Information:
A. Committee Substitute — Statement of Substantial Changes:
(Summarizing differences between the Committee Substitute and the prior version of the bill.)
CS/CS by Rules on March 6, 2013:
The CS/CS differs from the CS in that it:
• Does not specifically require a meeting at which a board or commission holds an
opportunity to be heard that occurs before the meeting at which the official action is
taken to satisfy the same notice requirements as the latter meeting, as public meetings
subject to the bill are already subject to Sunshine Law notice requirements.
• Specifies that the bill's exception to the right to speak requirements for a ministerial act
includes, but is not limited to, approval of minutes and ceremonial proclamations.
CS by Governmental Oversight and Accountability on February 6,2013:
The CS differs from the original bill in that it:
• Creates a definition for"board or commission" for drafting clarity. The substance of the
definition is pulled from the original bill.
• Clarifies that an opportunity to speak must occur at a meeting that is within reasonable
proximity in time to the meeting at which the board or commission takes official action
on the proposition.
• Specifies that the section does not prohibit a board or commission from maintaining
orderly conduct or proper decorum in a public meeting.
'See, for example, Orange County, Fla. v. Game and Fresh 1t'ater Fish Commission,397 So.2d 411 (Fla.5th DCA 1981).
Packet Page-2134-
10/22/2013 16.K.4.
BILL: CS/CS/SB 50 Page 8
• Changes the term "item"to"proposition" throughout the bill for conformity.
• Deletes the phrase "with respect to the rights or interests of a person" from (3)(d)to
prevent confusion over whom or what constitutes a"person."
• Clarifies that the restrictions on rules and policies apply only to those governing the
opportunity to be heard.
• Rephrases (4)(a), relating to specifying a limit on the time an individual has to address a
board or commission,to provide more flexibility by instead specifying that a board or
commission may provide guidelines relating to the time an individual may speak.
• Rephrases (4)(b), relating to requiring a selection of a representative of a group or
faction, to provide more flexibility by instead specifying that a board or commission may
prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of a group or faction to address the
board or commission.
• Replaces the phrase "it is presumed that" in (5)with "is deemed to be"to prevent
confusion about whether the subsection is creating a rebuttable legal presumption.
• Relocates the authorization or a circuit court to issue injunctions before the attorney fee
provisions for drafting clarity.
• Replaces the authorization of the circuit courts to issue injunctions with a circuit court for
drafting clarity.
• Authorizes attorney fees at the appellate level in addition to at the circuit court level if a
board or commission is found to have violated the section.
• Replaces references within the bill to "the act"with "the section" for clarity.
• Adds a finding of important state interest.
• Changes the bill's effective date to from July 1, 2013 to October 1, 2013 to allow boards
and commissions subject to ch. 120, F.S.,to promulgate rules.
B. Amendments:
None.
This Senate Bill Analysis does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill's introducer or the Florida Senate.
Packet Page -2135-