Ken Bell

From: Ken Bell

Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 11:05 AM
To: Janet Lander; edfleming@pensacolalaw.com
Cc: bill ross
Subject: RE: Suggested revision to Art. 14

Great comments by Tom.  His stated assumption is incorrect as I understand it, so we need to make that correction.  
And, we need to have a good discussion on this at the Commission meeting.  Do we want to recommend that the 
consolidated government include the Town of Century? 
 
Kenneth B. Bell
Clark Partington Hart Larry Bond & Stackhouse
125 West Romana Street, Suite 800
Pensacola, FL 32502
T: 850.434.9200 F: 850.432.7340
kenbell@cphlaw.com

NOTICE: This e‐mail message and any attachments are private communication sent by the law firm of Clark Partington Hart Larry Bond & Stackhouse, and may contain 
confidential, legally privileged information meant solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, 
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, and delete the e‐mail and any attachments 
from your system. Thank you. 
 
From: Janet Lander [mailto:janet@janetlanderlaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:46 AM
To: Ken Bell
Subject: Fw: Suggested revision to Art. 14

Ed did not have this so I'm assuming you don't either. I haven't made any changes to Tom's amendments. We have to
await a sunshine mtg to do so. I have no problem with discussing it at a full ECCSC meeting.. The legal issues however
should be discussed first by the drafting subcommittee because they may require substantial rewriting.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jean Wilkes
To: janet@janetlanderlaw.com
Cc: tom wilkes
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 8:43 AM
Subject: Suggested revision to Art. 14

Janet -

Attached is the Dec. 8 draft of the charter, but with some substantial revision to "Article 14", which I have morphed into
being section 2 of the special act, rather than an article of the charter. My revisions conform to the way I have seen the
legislative drafting staff do special acts requiring referendum approval. They make only the section calling for the
referendum take effect upon becoming law. The other sections then take effect only upon referendum approval. Also, I
revised the last section in Article 13 to conform to the changes to Article 14. There may be other conforming changes
needed, but I have not had time to look for them.

Anyway, take a look at it and see what you think.

Two other points:

• I have assumed that if EITHER Century or Pensacola vote against the change, there is no consolidation between
the county and the remaining municipality. If I am incorrect, then this revised section on the referendum and
effective dates needs further modifying.
• I put in a repeal/"sunset clause in the event the referendum fails. This likely is not necessary legally. I just think it
may help counter potential accusations by opponents that the county or others will keep having elections until the
38
voters finally give in and approve. It may add to the tidyness of the publc discussion. Obviously, if this is not
something the commission wants to do, take it out.

39