# Amendment 2, Explained: Why Pompano Beach Needs Independent Advisors **A plain-English walk-through of what Amendment 2 actually does, why it matters, and what it does *not* touch.** --- ## The one-sentence version Amendment 2 writes four simple rules into the city charter so that the consultants who shape what gets built in Pompano Beach can't also be paid by — or partnered with, or employed by, or seated on the boards of — the people who profit when those plans get approved. --- ## The problem, in four overlapping pieces Good government depends on independent advice. When the City pays a firm to tell it what to build, where to rezone, how to spend redevelopment dollars, and which districts to prioritize, that advice needs to answer to residents — nobody else. Today, one firm can quietly occupy four roles at once: 1. **Dual client.** Hold a paid strategic-planning contract with the **City of Pompano Beach** *and* a paid strategic-planning contract with the **Pompano Beach CRA** at the same time — even though the City and the CRA are legally separate entities with their own budgets and, on many deals, opposing interests. 2. **Self-dealing.** Have principals who personally own property, or hold investment stakes, inside the very districts they're being paid to advise on — TOD corridors, redevelopment areas, zoning-change zones. 3. **Revolving door.** Place former staff directly into pivotal City or CRA planning, zoning, and procurement roles — where those former consultants then help push through the plans their old firm drafted. 4. **Shadow governance.** Sit as voting members on the joint City / Greater Pompano Beach Chamber of Commerce Economic Development board — the same board that helps direct the redevelopment plans the firm is simultaneously being paid to produce. Any one of those, on its own, is already a structural conflict. Stacked together, they describe something closer to capture: the consultant effectively helps write the plan, helps decide the plan, helps staff the plan, and personally benefits from the plan. This isn't hypothetical. The pattern is visible in Pompano Beach's own public contracting and board records. --- ## What Amendment 2 actually does: four rules Amendment 2 regulates the **City's own** contracting, hiring, and appointment powers — which is exactly what a city charter is for. It does not try to tell the CRA what to do directly. It just changes the City's rules about who the City itself pays, hires, and appoints. ### 1. No dual strategic-consultant contracts A firm providing strategic planning, economic-development, redevelopment-management, or policy-advisory services to the City cannot, at the same time, hold a contract providing the same or similar services to the CRA. One strategic advisor, one client at a time. Same rule applies to affiliated entities under common ownership. ### 2. Disclose every outside interest Any consultant advising the City on planning, zoning, TOD, or redevelopment must file — and annually update — a disclosure covering: - Real-property interests held by the firm or its principals inside the districts or corridors they advise on. - Outside compensation received from developers, property owners, or other governments doing business with the City, within a 24-month lookback. - Voting or advisory roles on any board whose recommendations direct City economic-development policy. Disclosure is sunlight. It doesn't forbid the relationship — it just forces it out into the open so residents, reporters, and the Commission can see it before votes are cast. ### 3. Close the revolving door — both directions A 24-month cooling-off period between: - Being a principal, officer, or senior employee of a City strategic-consulting firm, **and** - Being hired into or appointed to a City or CRA staff position with authority over planning, zoning, procurement, or redevelopment. Works in both directions. Consultants can't walk straight into staff jobs that approve their old work. Staff can't walk straight out into consulting firms that benefit from the relationships they just built inside City Hall. ### 4. No board seats that grade your own work A principal of a firm holding a City strategic-consulting contract cannot simultaneously sit as a voting member of any board whose recommendations materially influence the scope or direction of that same consultant's own City work. That includes the Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Council (to the extent it's jointly constituted with or advisory to the City), CRA advisory committees, and any City-appointed planning, zoning, or economic-development board. You don't get to grade your own homework. --- ## What Amendment 2 does *not* do This matters. **Construction and engineering firms are not covered.** Licensed construction, engineering, architectural, and design-professional firms performing project-specific, bid-awarded scopes of work can continue to contract with both the City and the CRA, exactly as they do today. Building a road, a stormwater upgrade, or a fire station is a different legal category from quietly drafting the strategy that decides which road, upgrade, or station gets built. The City needs a competitive bench of builders — this amendment leaves that bench alone. **It does not target a specific firm.** Amendment 2 is a permanent structural rule that applies to every strategic consultant and every principal — current and future. Good governance doesn't depend on who happens to hold a contract this year. The rules stay when the names change. **It does not try to regulate the CRA.** Under Florida law, the CRA is a separate, distinct, and independent entity, and the city charter cannot directly bind it. Amendment 2 doesn't try. It changes only the City's choices about who the City itself retains, hires, and appoints — which is squarely within resident charter authority under **Florida Statute §166.031**. --- ## Is this legal? Yes. Every provision is drafted to stay on the right side of three legal lines: - **§166.031 charter authority.** Residents can amend their city charter to regulate the City's own contracting, hiring, and board-appointment powers. That's the core power Amendment 2 uses. - **CRA separation.** The [Florida Attorney General has long held](https://www.myfloridalegal.com/ag-opinions/community-redevelopment-agency) that a CRA is separate, distinct, and independent from its creating municipality. Amendment 2 is drafted to respect that — it governs the City's own choices, not the CRA's. - **Local ethics supplementation.** Florida Commission on Ethics guidance recognizes that municipalities may adopt **stricter** local ethics rules than the Chapter 112 Part III baseline — see the [FACA preemption whitepaper summarizing CEO 75-20](https://faca.fl-counties.com/sites/default/files/2021-09/Preemption.Whitepaper.61421%20FINAL.pdf). Amendment 2's disclosure and cooling-off provisions sit comfortably inside that room. Before a single petition is circulated, the final charter text is being reviewed and drafted by a Florida municipal attorney experienced in §166.031 petitions. --- ## The draft ballot summary Under **§101.161**, a ballot summary has to be 75 words or fewer and has to state the chief purpose clearly (the *Askew v. Firestone* standard). This is the current draft, at 64 words: > *"Shall the Pompano Beach Charter be amended to prohibit City strategic-planning consultants from simultaneously consulting for the CRA, require disclosure of consultants' property interests and outside developer compensation, impose a 24-month cooling-off period between consultant and City or CRA staff roles, and prohibit consultants from serving on economic-development boards that direct their own City work — with exceptions for licensed construction and engineering firms?"* Counsel will finalize the exact language; the substance will not change. --- ## Why this goes on the ballot, not through the Commission Under **Florida Statute §166.031**, residents can place a charter amendment on the ballot by collecting signatures from 10% of registered voters — **5,796 signatures** in Pompano Beach. Once a valid petition is filed, the Commission is legally required to put it to a vote of the people. The word "shall" in §166.031(3) is not optional, and it applies *notwithstanding any charter provisions to the contrary*. No commissioner gets to veto it. The residents decide. That's the whole point of a citizen-initiated amendment: when a conflict runs through the Commission itself, the fix goes directly to the voters. --- ## What you can do - **Request your petition packet.** [pompanopetitions.com](https://pompanopetitions.com) — fill out the form and we'll email it to you. Print it, sign it, return it. - **Share this page with three neighbors.** Every signature moves us closer to 7,000. - **Ask your questions.** Email [info@pompanopetitions.com](mailto:info@pompanopetitions.com). We'd rather answer a hard question than assume you already trust us. --- *Produced by Pompano Beach residents in support of a citizen charter amendment petition. Not affiliated with any candidate or political committee.*