CRB Questionnaire: Karen Collins-Fleming

Karen Collins-Fleming
Sarasota County Charter Review Board, District #2

• Site

1. Why do you think you’re particularly well suited for the Charter Review Board?

I feel that I am particularly well suited for a position on the Charter Review Board in light of my 25+ years of county government experience – 8 years in Comprehensive Planning plus 16 years administering the County’s environmental management/protection functions. Although this experience was gained in Manatee County, the commissions function in the same way and are faced with identical challenges from rapid growth and development. I am intimately familiar with the workings of local government and the ways in which such could be improved to make County Commissions more responsive to the citizens they are elected to serve.

2. Do you think the Charter Review Board should be changed from an elected board to an appointed board? Please explain.

I feel strongly that the Charter Review Board must remain an ELECTED body, one that meets on a regular basis, whose meetings are well publicized to maximize public participation. It has been proposed that the CRB be reconstituted as an appointed body, with infrequent meetings. In my opinion, an appointed CRB would be little more than a rubber stamp for the Commission and a facilitator for special interests. Citizens would not have the ability to vote appointed CRB members off the board, and so would have little or no influence or power to change the Charter except for the very onerous petition process.

3. What are three issues that have been suggested for the CRB’s consideration that you feel are worthy of further inquiry? For each one, please explain why you think it’s important.

Three issues that have been suggested for the CRB’s consideration that may be worthy of further inquiry:

A. Independent, elected ethics committee – I FAVOR this idea. At present, there appears to be one person within the County structure responsible for ethics questions, along with other responsibilities. As it stands, this position is not independent of Commission influence, and thus has an inherent conflict.

B. Single member districts for the County Commission and Charter Review Board – I strongly FAVOR this proposal. At present, candidates for either the Commission or the CRB must run countywide campaigns. The County is very large, so there is a huge area to cover, making running an effective campaign prohibitively expensive except for those candidates funded by deep-pocket special interests. The influence of special interest donors is well known in politics at all levels. Single-member district campaigning would level the playing field for campaigners, and serve to encourage more diversity and foster more enthusiasm for running for local office.

C. Limiting the length of time petitioners for Charter change have to gather signatures for their particular issue – I feel that a move to put strict time limits on gathering signatures for a petition is another way to limit the citizens’ ability to participate in their government. It takes many, many signatures to complete a petition for a referendum. Additionally, it takes time to educate and inform the citizenry on the issue. Placing an important issue on the ballot takes time and lots of legwork. Petition sponsors/initiators should be allowed whatever time it takes to move a proposal forward to a vote.

4. What is your position on single-district elections?

I STRONGLY SUPPORT single member districts for County Commissioners and CRB members.

5. Do you believe citizen petition charter amendment drives should be subject to a time limit on gathering signatures?

I do NOT believe citizen petition charter amendment drives should be subject to a time limit on gathering signatures.

6. Do you believe advisory boards should be subject to a rule that aims to balance them by geography, areas of expertise, and relevant experience in advocacy? (For example, for the Planning Commission, at least one member with experience in advocating for affordable housing.)​

YES, I believe advisory boards should be subject to a rule that aims to balance them by geography, areas of expertise and relevant experience in advocacy. These boards, whatever their purpose, should be truly representative of ALL citizens of the county.