07-12-1988 Regular MeetingThe meeting of the Village
Mayor Spero Canton at 8:03
Board Members:
Also Present:
Miami Shores Village
Pension Board Meeting of July 12, 1988
of Miami Shores Pension Board was called to order by
a.m. The following were in attendance:
Mayor Spero Canton
Mr. William Walker
Sgt. Jack Ulmer
Mr. Elly Johnson
Dr. Robert Butler
Ms. Patricia Varney
Mr. William Fann, Village Attorney
Ms. Gail Macdonald, Plan Administrator
Mr. Bruce Baker of Stembler Adams & Sweet
Absent: Mr. William. Heffernan
1. Fiduciary Insurance and. Fidelity Bond Coverage
Mr. Baker presented a benefit and price comparison of the various insurance companies
that offer fiduciary responsibility insurance and fidelity bond coverage. After a
discussion by the Board, Dr. Butler made a motion to accept the proposal by Aetna
Insurance for a 3 million dollar coverage and an annual premium of $6,439 for
Fudiciary Insurance. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion, the motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Walker made amotion to accept the Fidelity Bond coverage by Aetna with an annual
premium of $253. The motion was seconded by Mr. Johnson and the motion passed
unanimously.
2. Final discussion andselection of new Actuarial representative.
Dr. Butler made a motion to accept The Wyatt Company as the new Actuary effective
September 1, 1988. The motion was seconded by Mr. Johnson. The motion passed
unanimously;,,
3. Approval of the Minutes of the June 7, 1988 Pension Board meeting.
Sgt. Ulmer made a motion to approve the Pension Board minutes of June 7, 1988 with
the amendment to paragraph 5 as so stated. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion and the
motion passed unanimously..
4. Old Business
Attached, as a permanent part of these minutes, is the District Court of Appealt'
decision on the amendment of Chapters 175 and 185.
5. New Business
No new business to be discussed at this time.
6. Adjournment
Mr. Johnson made a motionto adjourn the meeting. Dr. Butler seconded the motion and
the motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 a.m.
Elly . Joy nson , Secretary
•
THE CITY OF ORLANDO; THE
CITY OF BRADENTON; THE CITY
OF FERNANDINA BEACH; THE
CITY OF PLANT CITY; THE
CITY OF PANAMA CITY BEACH;
AND THE CITY OF DAYTONA
BEACH,
Appellants,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF INSURANCE; and BILL
GUNTER as INSURANCE
COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE
OF FLORIDA,
Appellees.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES
* TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF
* FILED.
* CASE NO. 87-1409
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Opinion filed July 7, 1988.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County
Charles Miner, Judge.
James C. Massie, Tallahassee, for Appellants.
Gabriel Mazzeo, Tallahassee; Richard A. Sicking of Kaplan,
Sicking & Bloom, Miami; Robert D. Klausner of Robert D.
Klausner, P.A., Hollywood, for Appellees.
James R. Wolf, Tallahassee; James W. Linn and Lucille E.
Turner of Carson & Linn, P.A., Tallahassee, for Amicus Curiae.
BARFIELD, J.
Appellants seek review of an order finding Chapters 86-41
and 86-42, Laws of Florida, amending Chapters 175 and 185,
Florida Statutes (1985) respectively, to be facially
constitution61. We affirm, with one exception, the trial
court's determination the Acts do not violate constitutional
tenets. Chapters
175 and 185 create a purely voluntary
program whereby municipalities may receive state -collected
taxes, imposed on property and casualty insurance premiums,
with which to fund retirement programs for local police and
firefighters. In exchange for receipt of these funds, the
legislature has established certain criteria under which the
funds must be operated and managed. The cities may opt into
or out of such plans at their discretion. As the program is
not mandatory as to any city's participation, we find nothing
that. renders the amended statutes to be facially
unconstitutional.
However, we reverse that portion of the order finding
that both Chapters 86-41 and
5(a), Florida
Constitution,
precluded municipal officials
86-42 and Article II, Section
barring dual officeholding,
from serving on the Boards of
Trustees of the respective municipal police and firefighters
pension trust funds. The legislative history, submitted to
this Court without objection, reflects the legislative intent
that elected or appointed officials could be appointed by the
local legislative body to serve as the municipality's
representatives on the Boards. Further, there is nothing
inherently inconsistent or incompatible in service by
municipal officials on these Boards so as to say that it
2
•
presumptively violates the prohibition against dual
officeholding in Article II, Section 5(a). Bath Club, Inc. v.
Dade County, 394 So.2d 110 (Fla. 1981); Gryzik v. State, 380
So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA), petition for review denied, 388
So.2d 1113 (Fla. 1980). Such determination must be made on a
case-by-case basis as to each Board or individual trustee.
Accordingly, the trial court's order is AFFIRMED in part
and REVERSED in part.
THOMPSON AND NIMMONS, JJ., CONCUR.
3