Tallahassee voters will decide whether to approve five different amendments to the city charter, from doubling the salaries of city commissioners — putting them on par with their county counterparts — to making the inspector general more independent.
The five proposed amendments will appear as Questions 1 through 5 in the November 5 general election. Although the wage question was one of five that made it to the ballot, it is by far the most controversial of the bunch.
Last year, city commissioners voted 3-2 to move forward with a belated revision of the charter, the city’s version of the constitution, for the first time in 15 years.
A ten-person Charter Review Committee met for several months to review a narrowly tailored list of possible changes. Afterwards, city commissioners decided to place five amendments on the ballot.
Unlike constitutional amendments in Florida, which require 60% approval from voters to pass, city charter amendments require only a simple majority — 50% of the vote plus one — to gain approval. Only city voters are allowed to participate in the charter referendums.
Here’s a look at the proposed changes to the city charter:
Question 1: Charter change affecting city commissioner salaries
The ballot for this charter amendment states that it would “provide that City Commission members be paid an annual salary equal to the annual salary established by state law” for Leon County commissioners.
The term ‘salary increase’ does not appear anywhere in the summary. But that’s exactly what the amendment would do for four of the five city commissioners if approved by voters.
Under current statute, city commissioners are paid half the amount of their counterparts on the Leon County Commission, with the exception of the mayor, who makes the same as the County Commission chairman.
In rough numbers, county commissioners, whose pay is determined by the state formula, currently earn about $99,167. City commissioners, excluding the mayor, make $49,583.50.
It was one of the thornier issues facing members of the CRC, and it ended with them essentially taking the question to the city commissioners. The CRC voted in March to give commissioners the power to convene a committee to study the issue before deciding for themselves what their pay should be.
City commissioners tossed that out when they considered the charter proposals in April. City Commissioner Dianne Williams-Cox led the charge to give commissioners a pay raise, saying it was necessary to ensure people can serve on the city commission even if they are not wealthy or retired.
Mayor John Dailey and City Commissioner Curtis Richardson joined her in voting in favor; City Commissioners Jeremy Matlow, who said it wasn’t the time to ask for a raise, and Jack Porter voted no. It was a reversal from 2022, when Matlow proposed such a charter change and Dailey and Richardson opposed it.
Question 2: Charter amendment to expand the jurisdiction of the Independent Ethics Council
This proposed amendment would give the city’s Independent Ethics Board the ability to hear complaints involving city commissioners when they serve on other boards, including the Blueprint Intergovernmental Agency and the Community Redevelopment Agency.
It came on the ballot with a unanimous vote of the city commissioners. Former City Commissioner Mark Mustian, chairman of the Charter Review Committee, called it a “no-brainer.”
Question 3: Charter amendment to resolve two-candidate elections in the general election
This proposed amendment would move the two-person city commission races from the August primary, when turnout is lower, to the general election in November, when turnout is much higher. City commissioners voted unanimously to place it on the ballot.
It raised some concern among some progressives, as their standard-bearers in the city, namely Matlow and Porter, have each achieved electoral success in the August primaries. One expert told the Democrat that such a change would favor well-funded candidates over grassroots ones, but would not provide a party advantage either way.
Question 4: Amendment of the Charter to provide for periodic revision of the Charter
This non-controversial charter proposal went through the CRC process and received unanimous support from city commissioners. It would require the city to revise its charter every 10 years, with the next one beginning in 2033.
Question 5: Amendment to the Charter to define the role of the Inspector General
An early version of this proposal, intended to strengthen the Office of the Inspector General, emerged late in the charter review process and was put forward by CRC member Ernie Paine, who was previously a member of the Independent Ethics Board.
Later, Inspector General Dennis Sutton offered an alternate version that received a rare 4-1 stamp of approval by city commissioners, with Dailey the lone dissenting vote.
The Office of the Inspector General was created in 2020, when the city auditor, one of four appointed officials directly responsible to the city commissioners, began serving as inspector general.
If passed, the amendment would replace the position of auditor with the inspector general, although the audit function would remain. The IG would serve a five-year term and could only be removed by a two-thirds vote of the city commission, which in practice would require four of the five commissioners.
Contact Jeff Burlew at jburlew@tallahassee.com or 850-599-2180.
This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Tallahassee charter amendments: Commissioner pay among five proposals
