My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/19/2010
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2010
>
01/19/2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/20/2018 3:43:53 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:24:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/19/2010
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Book and Page
138, 640-673
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
8173
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
9. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND <br />GOVERNMENTALAGENCIES <br />9.A. DERYL LOAR, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF <br />RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 610 AND HOUSE BILL 417 <br />Sheriff Deryl Loar invited James Harpring, General Counsel for the Sheriff's Office, to <br />present the request for a resolution of support for Senate Bill 610 (SB 610) and House Bill 417 <br />(HB 417). <br />Attorney Harpring recalled that during the impasse hearings between the Coastal Police <br />Benevolent Association (CFPBA) and the Sheriff's Office (heard by the Board in September <br />2009), the Board had articulated the desire to not be required to resolve a collective bargaining <br />impasse by any Constitutional Officer. He explained that Senate Bill 610 and House Bill 417 <br />would amend the relevant provision of Florida Statute 447.403 "Resolution of Impasses", to <br />articulate that the respective Constitutional Officers of a particular County would be the <br />Legislative Body of their respective employees for purposes of resolving a collective bargaining <br />impasse. <br />Commissioner Wheeler was concerned that the definition presented in HB 417 (page 103 <br />and 104), wherein the "Legislative Body" is described as "...having authority to appropriate <br />funds..." could be construed to mean the Constitutional Officers could appropriate funds. He <br />wanted clarified that the proposed resolution or legislation could not be interpreted in that <br />manner, or open the door for the appropriation of funds by the Constitutional Officers. <br />Attorney Harpring explained that because of the language and rules of statutory <br />construction, the proposed legislation does not amend or authorize the authority of a <br />Constitutional Officer to appropriate funds. He emphasized that the language specifically refers <br />only for the purposes of Section 447.403, which deals with the resolutions of collective <br />bargaining impasses. <br />9 <br />January 19, 2010 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.