Penny-Pinching Begins

Nice to see there is another 'night owl' OneMann.   I watched the BCC Meeting from home.....Bradley's got to pull in the reigns on 'time set' items.  The 3:30 'time set' for citizen comments was an hour late, wasn't it?  And I didn't see Mr. Smith!  It was a somewhat interesting meeting.  Will be anxious to hear the outcome of Mr. Bush's and Mr. Berhing's (sp) trip to the courthouse.  Isn't the report due at the next BCC Meeting? 

Thanks for you reporting again......sure is easier to follow than the meeting itself.  Keep us on track.

Stryker

Lets start by voting to relief 2 commissioners of there duties......

OneMann;

I'll be a little sarcastic here but just a little.

You may need to do a little studying on governmental book keeping. First throw out anything you ever knew about GAAP.

Once that line is entered into the books it is gone. If the BCC gave her $20 it was 'spent' before the ink dried. There can be no change expected. You gave me $20 to buy 'X'. I bought 'X'. The fact that I thought 'X' was going to cost me $20 but it only cost me $4 is irrelevant.

Surly you don't expect me to use the extra $16 to buy this $10 item. If you turn down my request for $10 the item will just not be bought. Oh, the $16, I spent that in something else. I just can't remember what it was.

Wow! Just had a flashback (nightmare)! My ex-wife must have been channeling. Sounded just like one of her explanations. 

Mike Heemer

Stryker, the County Commission is routinely cavalier with its attitude toward the public comments portion of the Agenda.  Yesterday, when one citizen had to wait an extra hour past the "time certain" for comments, it was closer to business as usual than  abnormal BCC behavior.

Each citizen who wants to address the Commissioners fills out a card with their name, address and the subject matter of their comments.  Those cards are then passed to the Chairman, who will then call those individuals to the microphone.  Yesterday, 3:30, the scheduled time for public comments came and went and the BCC danced around a few other topics.  Finally, I guess they figured out that Mrs. Martin, the one citizen who wanted to say something, wasn't going to go away or fall asleep, so they allowed her 180 seconds at the microphone.

Can you even imagine that hour-long wait if the last name on the card had not been Martin, but instead was Thrasher or Myers?  Hell, no.  There'd be five County Commissioners with apologetic puckers primed for placement.

It doesn't matter if the speaker is dress in Armani or Goodwill.  Anyone who takes the time to arrange their schedule to accommodate the "time certain" should be shown respect by the County Commission.  Just because that's the portion of the meeting reserved for regular folks doesn't mean it should be the Agenda's red-headed step-child.

Finder, you reminded me of my early-marriage experience when my ex squeezed through the door with her four big bags from the mall and an announcement that she'd just "saved" us $90.  It was surprisingly difficult to dissuade her from the idea that her $90 "savings" couldn't be applied to that month's electric bill.

Michael S. Mann

A cavalier attitude toward the public and selective enforcement of the 3 minute comment time rule is indeed nothing new. I've mentioned before the example of the builder that was allowed to speak for over seven minutes, while at the same meeting a lady was stopped in the middle of her last sentence in order that the 3 minute rule be followed.

Public comment time is 3:30 PM. What amazes me just as much as Ms. Martin waiting for more than an hour to speak is when the commissioners take a 15 minute break at 3:25 PM, knowing there is only one citizen ready to speak at his 3:30 time certain.

1) Why do they need a break at all since the meeting just started at 2 PM?

2) Wouldn't common courtesy be to allow the public to speak at 3:30 and take your "much needed break" after the public has been given their 3 minutes?

I guess courtesy is not part of the BCC agenda in Clay County.

I watched the meeting on tv as well. After waiting an hour after the scheduled time for public comments. Mr. Bradley stated he had other cards but it appeared those people had left. Then he acknowledged the lady that stayed and told her to come up and speak. I guess it was like Mike stated they were waiting out the public to see if they would stay and speak or evidently as many did got up and left.

sorry posted 2 times

Funny how those 'savings' work isn't it? They can't be put into the gas tank either.  

But that's probably a converstation for another blog. Or maybe it really isn't when you think about how our legislators 'save' us money and 'reduce' the deficit. 

Mike Heemer

Onemann...... exactly!!!!!!  And the agenda item brought up at approximately 3:25 yesterday was one they (the BCC) were perhaps hoping would get 'cut short' do to the "time certain" (got the temanology right this time, thanks).....or, by a lenghty discussion would deter Mrs. Martin from waiting to address the BCC.  Either way, it didn't work.  If it had been Thrasher or Myers, you can bet you 'sweet bippie' the "time certain" would have been adhered to and probably a minute or two before the 3:30 bell. 

pioneer.....I agree! Courtesy and let's add Respect, it appears, are not  words in the vocabulary of the BCC, therefore it could not be part of their agenda.  Everyone who comes before the BCC deserves to be treated with courtesy and respect and  a "Thank You" at the end, not a select few.  It all depends on which side of the fence you are on when addressing the BCC whether or not one recieves a "Thank You."  And within a few seconds one can determine how the BCC will react...you can see it in their facial expressions and hear it in their voices.  Yesterday was a prime example!!  We, are expected and required to show respect and courtesy (as it should be) when addressing the BCC; woe be unto us if we don't.  It should work both ways, but it doesn't.  It's that ole saying "Do as I say, not as I Do!" 

If Bradley's display as Chairman yesterday was an indication of how he will Chair the BCC for 4 years...no "Thank You."  I don't want anyone in that position for 4 years. 

Hope someone can answer a question for me....What is the responsibility of the BCC in regards to citizens requests, such as the one Mrs. Martin has repeatedly submitted? 

Thank You and have a great day.

Stryker

This is an email to Commissioner Bradley from Ms. Martin it is a public record:

From:  Teresa Martin [pets4friends@yahoo.com]Sent: Thu 1/3/2008 7:54 PMTo:  CommissionersCc:  scafl@bellsouth.netSubject:  Request for an Investigation

Dear Commissioner Bradley:I appreciate your response. However, I disagree with your  comments concerning the investigation for the following reasons:First, you are an attorney and have taken an oath to protect the constitutional rights of all people.Second, you are a Commissioner and have taken a oath to protect and uphold the Constitution of the State of Florida.Third, you were a member of the CRC who worked on the non-interference clause that was voted into the Charter.I would like to direct you to the CRC Meeting and Minutes dated May 4, 2006.In a conversation between you and Mr. Watts concerning your power to investigate which was discussed. I would then like to refer you to the Florida State Statutes 951.061 which the Board of County Commissioners by Ordinance has designated the Sheriff to be the Chief Correctional Officer.If designated, the Sheriff or his or her designee shall enforce all existing state law concerning the operation and maintenance of county jails.Due to the facts that a substantial amount of these incidents that happened which involved my son happened in the county jail in violation of the state laws, and am requesting this investigation by the Commissioners.I have a medical facility inspection report that was dated 2 days before my son was placed in the County's jail. This report indicates there were a critical low in the medical staff at the jail.In closing, you have become a candidate for the new Chairman's position to lead the county in this historical position. Being denied this investigation denies the citizens the right to see if this investigation leads to better legislation concerning these matters.Thank you for your time,Teresa Martin

Here is a copy of the minutes from the CRC meeting she talks about in the email and the powers of the Commissioner concerning the Non-Interference Clause we voted for. Mr. Watts was the attorney for the CRC. These minutes can be found on the County's website for those who would like to verify.

Chairman Cummings: Any comments?

Rob Bradley: Mr. Watts’, I wanted to ask a question to clarify the last sentence of the proposal where it discusses investigations by the county commission into the department or office of the County, "Is it correct to say that this includes investigations of the constitutional offices?"

Allen Watts: It depends on the purpose of the investigation. Every legislative body has the inherent power to investigate and to inform itself so it can consider whatever legislation might be necessary to correct any present practices that it thinks are improper or to review the budget; these are inherent powers of the legislative body. The Charter gives all of the legislative power of the county, the whole government including the constitutional officers, gives that legislative authority to the Board of County Commissioners. It is therefore my review that the Board of County Commissioners has the same authority to investigate the Constitutional Officers that the legislature itself would have. It is an inherent power; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized that the legislative bodies has this power, in fact, as far as the Florida Legislature is concerned, it is spelled out in Article III, Section IV of the State Constitution. The power is there whether or not it is spelled out; the purpose here was to simply make it explicit.

Rob Bradley: When it says that the Board of County Commissioners can require reports from all county officers as an employee, is it fair to say that that means they can require reports from the constitutional officers?

Allen Watts: That is correct. Of course, if the Constitutional Officers were unwilling, the remedy would be for the Board of County Commissioners to go to a Circuit Judge and ask for enforcement of the Boards’ subpoena. The Circuit Judge couldn’t consider objection from the county officers that investigation is outside of the legitimate right of the Commission to investigate for the purposes of adopting legislation. You can’t simply investigate because you are on a witch hunt but you can investigate if it will lead to better legislation.

Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONSChapter 951
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL PRISONERSView Entire Chapter

951.06  Employment of correctional officers; duties; salary.--

(1)  The county commissioners shall designate a chief correctional officer and such correctional officers as they deem necessary.

(2)  All chief correctional officers of prisoners shall see that all rules and regulations prescribed by law or the department are fully observed and complied with; enforce discipline among the prisoners in and about the camps; and administer punishment to prisoners, when in their judgment the same is necessary in order to enforce proper discipline, conforming always to the law and rules and regulations.

(3)  All boards of county commissioners shall immediately discharge any correctional officer who shall be guilty of gross negligence or cruel and inhuman treatment of prisoners under their control and their action shall be final.

(4)  The salaries of correctional officers provided for in this chapter shall be fixed by the board of county commissioners, and the chief correctional officer shall be furnished means of transportation over the roads of the county when necessary, the upkeep and operation of which shall be furnished by the county; however, the county shall not in any case be required to furnish a driver of such conveyance where such services are required to be paid for.

(5)  All salaries contemplated by this chapter shall be paid from the general revenue fund of the county.

The Sheriff has entered into an agreement to be the Chief Correctional Officer by Statute.

Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONSChapter 951
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL PRISONERSView Entire Chapter

951.061  Designation of sheriff as chief correctional officer; duties.--

(1)  Upon adoption of an ordinance by a majority of the county commission, the sheriff may be designated the chief correctional officer of the county correctional system, and the sheriff shall appoint such officers as he or she deems necessary.

(2)  If designated, the sheriff or his or her designee shall enforce all existing state law concerning the operation and maintenance of county jails.

(3)  The salaries for county correctional officers shall be paid from the general revenue fund of the county and shall be included by the sheriff, if designated as chief correctional officer of the county, in his or her proposed budget of expenditures for the maintenance and operation of the county correctional system as provided in s. 30.49.

According to the documents that I am able to research it seems she is at the right place and asking the right questions. Unless someone has some other information they would like to provide. Hope that answers your questions.

Stryker, I recognized Ms. Martin at last week's meeting of the Fleming Island Republican Club and made a point to introduce myself.  Hopefully, she and I will be able to sit down and discuss her whole issue.  I haven't been able to fill in all the gaps, being limited to 3 minutes of her information every other week.

Angela, love that research!

Michael S. Mann

OneMann we should review why her son who was in the Clay County Jail in the first place.

I believe it was at her/his and his attorney's request for him to do two years consecutively in the county jail rather than go to prison where he should have been taken. Seems that they did her a favor and are being punished for it.

I do not condome the mistreatment of anyone, but lets look at the whole story. Maybe he didn't suffer any mistreatment. I'm sure the S.O. has a thick folder concerning her complaints.

TruthHurts, please don't include me as a part of any "we" you're referencing.  I've seen your contributions on other blogs and have no interest in being associated with that kind of unceasing personal attacks and innuendo.

As I said before, I don't know the woman's story other than what's been gleened from her three minutes at a time.  I hope to learn more from her (not some ranting blogger), but not so I can spread everything I know on the blogs to satisfy the personality bloodlust of a vicious few. 

Michael S. Mann

I did some more research on the above information with the post by fastone, and have found out the charges against the son were Nolle prossed and/or acquitted. He was never sent to prison or even sentenced to the county jail since the charges were dropped.

The last time I posted research it resulted in the animal control blog getting out of control with ranting bloggers for and against animal control. It got ugly. I figured it would be ranting bloggers in favor or against the Sheriff's Office this time. Same result, different subject.

Hey listen folks, I don't make Fl Statutes, or public records. I just provide them for informational purposes. If they step on your friends toes then take it up with the legislators. If you don't like the laws, change them, if not then abide by the laws, the rest of us do.

Angela,No one wishes to bring discredit the S.O., quite the opposite. My neighbor works at the jail and seems to remember the son and the circumstances I cited. If that was in error, I am sorry, but I think the records should be rechecked. If he spent the amount of time in jail that he did without pleading guilty or going to trial then the wheels of justice do move slowly.At one point his atty did ask permission for him to stay in Clay County rather than go to prison.The son was never abused and received quite adequate care both medical and otherwise.

No, I think we must be talking about different people. I did an extensive research of records this afternoon. The son never had any prior criminal history. All charges were Nolle prossed and/or acquitted.

At the BCC meeting Ms. Martin stated when her son was arrested he had no prior history of disabilities. He has since be approved for disability from Social Security (not an easy task) and I'm not certain of the date she gave. But she stated the date of his disability was started during the time the jail had him.

Now what happened I'm not sure. If you get arrested and go in jail without a disability, and then get one while you are in there. Makes you wonder what did happened. If the charges were dropped then what attorney in his right mind would asked if they could stay in that motel for fun. Maybe he had a bad attorney. I hope she tells us his name I wouldn't want to hire him.

I am not attempting to discredit anyone just provided information. I am certain she will be back with her continued request. This should be a good test for the non-interference clause and if what we voted for meant anything of substance. At this point it looks like it was a waste of time too.

Angela..... Thank you for providing the research info.  It is excellent and has helped greatly as I'm sure others will agree. 

OneMann....will be anxious to hear your comments once you have had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter with Ms. Martin, at least those comments you feel you can share. 

Spot....perhaps you should follow the same path that Ms. Martin has begun. 

Stryker

Yesterday's meeting was quite interesting.  I wasn't sure at first how I felt about Chmn. Bush allowing a rotating gavel, but after watching a few meetings, I think it has some merit.  It is certainly different.  Though another commissioner may wield the gavel, Comm. Bush still acts like the leader.

To me, Comm. Bradley handled the meeting pretty well.  I do agree a little more effort should be made to adhere to the "Time Certains", but I think it is a "3:30 or as soon thereafter" type of thing.  An hour over is bit much, but if I recall, it was the whole Judge Collins thing that threw them behind.  It is not uncommon for "Time Certains" to be heard late - or "as soon thereafter".  I seem to remember a suggestion to move the Public Comments to the beginning of the meeting and that idea met a hail of opposition from free speech advocates.  Comm. Rutledge even held Public Comment meetings before the regular meetings with no time limit.  I think Durwood and I were the only ones ever to show up.

Pioneer - since I am the builder (or, given the state of the market, former builder)  you have referred to a couple of times about the 7 minute deal - I think it was closer to 4, maybe 5 minutes max, and if you will be totally accurate, I too got the wrap it up signal from Rutledge.  Since that embarrassing moment, I have learned to prepare no more than 3 minutes, and find that I'm usually done at the podium in more like 1 to 2 minutes.  If ANY citizen wishes to speak on the record for than 3 minutes, ask to be put on the Agenda.  Obviously, your request will have to be approved by ? - Co. Mgr.? or Chmn. of BCC? but I really believe if a citizen has a legitimate reason to speak for more than 3 minutes, you can be heard.  By the way, a 3 minute time limit seems to be a very common time limit at public gov't. meetings for public comment - Clay Co. school board, Duval Co. City Council, St. Johns Co., others?

The best thing that happened at the meeting yesterday, personalities and drama aside, was the BCC voting to start the process to bond $85 million for transportation improvements.  Included in the motion was declaring transportation infrastructure the #1 Priority for the BCC.  Can I get an Amen!!

The whole court house expenditure thing provided some comic relief, and another reminder of what a good job Mr. Behring and his staff are doing at keeping a tight grip on the County's purse strings.

Yes, to taking the BCC on the road for budget talks.  The CRC did the same thing and hopefully provided some people who would not have otherwise made the trip to OP or GCS a chance to see first hand what was happening.  This upcoming budget will have people screaming and whining like never before.  Taking the show to the masses will help get the word out, and demonstrate the BCC is serious about letting everyone have a say.  May be a good chance to be more lenient with public comment too.

Bax

I did not use your name in an effort to not make my comment sound like a personal attack, nor did I want to draw attention to a particular person or group. If you prefer, I will use your name and say that Bill Garrison was allowed to speak for 7 minutes during a BCC meeting during public comment time, while a regular folk  was cut off and not allowed to finish her last sentence due to the 3 minute time limit rule being selectively enforced by BCC. You have no reason to be embarrassed anymore at having been given over twice the allotted time to speak. You are not the time keeper, just a citizen familiar to commissioners through your involvement on several advisory committees through the years --nothing more, nothing less.

Bax, I am also all for a more lenient time allowance during public comment.  No citizen should take their time out of their day to come and address the BCC and not be allowed time enough to finish their final sentence. Should I ever wish to speak before the BCC for longer than 3 minutes, I will indeed get put on the agenda. I'm not sure how easy that would be for regular folk, though. I'll call on you for help when the need arises. 

I will have to vouch for pioneer's statement. I too timed the comments and 7 minutes would be the correct time. Not the fault of the speaker Bax, but the person in charge of the meeting who did not start the time clock and/or paid attention to it one.

How many awards do we have to win for the longest commute before they get the message? Glad to see they finally got the message. Don't they have a song called "here's your sign". If we would have known we could have given them their sign. 

Commissioner Bush is still in denial stating it's the State's fault we have no roads. Well if you asked the State they say they didn't approve all those housing developements that caused all the traffic on the 2 roads we have in and out of Clay County. After all how many years has Blanding been considered a failed road? And they just sit up there and kept approving housing developements and more people on the roads. Should we blame the State or the Commissioners?

Should we blame the State of Florida because we have no economic developement in Clay County? Which results in over 60% of the people who live in Clay County who commute to work each day. 

I was glad to see Commissioner Conkey speak up about Blanding if they made the improvements to Hwy 17 with the Centex money. Again Commissioner Bush spoke up and told him not to make FDOT upset. At least not until Bush gets what he wants.

See this is one of my problems with Commissioners who are at large. They are worst than single district Commissioners. Hwy 17 is not a failed road but they get a Bridge improvement that looks nice. They get a mega money walk way. They get improvements at Hwy 17 and 295 proposed. They get a Wells Road Connector that I think Bush considers his baby.

For the price of the Bridge improvement we could have had the College Drive North which would be a critical road for getting traffic in/out of the county. We have no walk way but a traffic build up that is backed up to Kingsley on most days. And when Commissioner Conkey asked for an improvement at Blanding and 295 to relieve the traffic Bush shuts him down. Let's not forget the proposed Outer Beltway that will remove free access in and out of the county and we can just pay for that road and Bridge. Talking about the red-headed step child of the county. You folks on the Blanding side need to speak up.

I would love some single member districts working for something that helps the people in the different districts for a change. Before we can even get that in place now we will have 2 at large Commissioners taking it away. Just because a few people felt bad because they didn't get to vote for more than one Commissioner. I think I need a little more substance than that for my vote. When we had 5 at large they didn't work for some in the county. I can't see where they worked for the people on the Blanding side of the road except to make them miserable with the traffic. 5 single members stuck up there with 2 at large will just shut them down as has happened in the past.

About the tourism director and more money. We give them 160K a year to pay her salary and advertise. We have a TDC council that doesn't cost anything to the taxpayers (FSS) and could approve the spending of the money without the director. If we have been paying her for 5 or 6 years and she needs to attend a workshop now on how to get tourist to come to Clay County. I would suggest they just hire someone with the proper qualifications to do the job and quit funding studies and wasting money on her salary and benefits. I still haven't seen the tourist but I guess they are stuck in the traffic with the rest of us. The only reason Bush has finally said anything is because he is making a statement against the Chamber because of the poker room support. He refused to meet with the tourist director but the other Commissioners met with her. Statement or a matter of good public policies for the county. I will say I for one will be glad to see Bush go.

As far as Ms Martin getting a time certain. I can't see that happening after Bush told Commissioner Bradley 3 minutes after he called her name. Then he told Diane to start the timer. Review the meeting. Well that was after they made her wait for an hour after the 3:30 public comments time certain. I will agree Baxley he may turn over the gavel but he will never let go of the power. Thank God for term limits.

WOW!! - Time flies when you're having fun!! 

Angela - you actually sat there and timed how long I spoke at a meeting over a year ago - you go girl.  May I suggest a good book, or maybe a hobby.

I didn't time how long I spoke, nor have I reviewed the minutes to confirm it was 420 seconds.  But, if you say so - OK.  It sure didn't seem that long.  But, I give.

I think we all agree - citizens who approach the vaunted BCC with legitimate comments should be allowed a reasonable amount of time to express themselves.  Maybe notifying the Chair that your comments will exceed the 3 minute time limit, or some sort of notice/application you need more than 180 seconds.

I also think we will all agree, the BCC Meetings cannot become a public grandstand for hot-air political statements.  You have to get elected for that priviledge.

As far as using my name - no problemo.  I used to be a shy, unassuming guy, but thanks to this blog site, I'm starting to come out of my shell a little.

Bill Garrison (aka Wild Bill from Clay Hill)

I think more than a few of us would benefit from a hobby.  How this transpired was I taped the meeting because I was scheduled to be out of town. When I returned I watched the meeting. At that time, I didn't know who Wild Bill was (but you were a shy and unassuming guy then), after you started talking I was going when is that light going to come on. No light, no leader, no interruptions either. You know sometimes it is good the public is limited to some extent because we start to repeat ourself after a while. No offense Baxley, I've seen many repeat themselves after a few minutes. So, I had to back that tape up so I could see just exactly how long you talked. You know when you get accustomed to those 3 minutes of fame and somebody comes up there and stays almost 10 minutes it's noteworthy. At least for me anyway.

Well - I'm glad I was "noteworthy".  Maybe we can also agree that "almost 10 minutes" is "almost 3 minutes".  Sorry - I'm being silly.  It's late, it's Valentine's Day, and it's almost bedtime.

Can we agree we have about beat this dead horse enough?  I'm starting to feel like I'm trapped in an Animal Control blog and can't get out.

See you guys later.  Happy Valentine's Day to all the Ladies!!

Durwood is noteworthy too. I've never seen the light come on when he's talking. I guess practice makes perfect. One day when I get all this down pat I might try it too. Until then I'll just be taking notes.