MCS Editorial got it right...

I agree. It was a good editorial. I'm pretty sure there are a lot that don't agree but that's why we have a vote. 

Mike Heemer

Mike H.

I think about the path this county is mapping for itself and I see many positive steps government has taken: the hiring of a professional county manager, the election of two new commissioners, the appointment of a Clay citizen to the BCC and a quality of life visioning study underway.

Things are changing for the better. I can't fathom why anyone would want to obstruct progress directed at supporting this type of continued local reform. I think we all have a desire to see Clay County succeed in the future. Let's move county forward. A seven-member commission is perfect for where we're at today and where we need to be in five or more years because whether we like it or not, things are going to keep changing and growing.

If you look around and compare Clay with other counties, you'll notice this county has very little government in terms of extraneous commissions and appointments that drain the taxpaying coffers. What we're talking about in Clay is adequate citizen representation - not draining the coffers.

But you're right Mike, that's why we get to vote things up or down. My hope is there are fewer obstructionists and more reformers out there than we know about.

Yes many people will agree with the editorial and key2life, but mostlty people in the growth industry and newcomers. Those of us who have lived here 20 tears or more have a slightly different take on the status.While many were tired of some of the good le boy politics, I can say in retrospect most changes did not bring improvement. We now have a deeply beaurocatic government that is not accountable to anybody, accept growth money. Accountabilty went out the door with making the appointed co. manager the comptroller, followed by a board so weak and inexperienced that the public has no one to turn to and get answers and results. The special interest people sold all this new government to us by claiming to remove the politics. Well they did and the politics was our ability to be heard.  Thhe utility tax and garbage mess are just 2 exanples of how we are heard. There is no other county in the state of Fl structured like Clay. I wonder why.

As an opponent of the original plan to add two additional members to form a hybrid County Commission, I, naturally, will vote in favor of this year's Charter Amendment to abolish the at-large seats before they're implemented.

I'd resent being called an obstructionist just because it's inaccurate overall and in the context of this particular local political issue, but I can't stop laughing about how absolutely silly it sounds just being called an obstructionist.

Keep thumbing through that thesaurus and finding new words to call folks who disagrees with you, Key.  You're breakin' me up.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

Mike, man...(cute, eh?), I sat up a long freakin' time to find that word "obstructionist" and I love the word. (Actually in all honesty, it was suggested to me in conversation by a friend of mine and I jumped on it.)

Obstructionist: Someone who systematically obstructs some action that others want to take.

Voters wanted the 5 + 2 plan, members of CTLAC don't want it. They place an amendment on the ballot to take it off. I'd say they pretty much are obstructing the process of electing two (and in some districts 3) commissioners which is what more than 6 people wanted in 2006.

But here's the real issue of the day for me...I think what's sad is the fact that the opposition doesn't know what it doesn't know and cannot see that the county is moving forward and will soon leave them behind. What they want is not relevant anymore and is part and parcel part of the politics of the past. It may pain them to hear it but their watchdog days did in fact run simutaneously with all they claim was wrong with Clay County. Their association is with the past.

Perhaps Mike, you haven't stopped long enough to notice but there's a lot of youth now on Commission: Commissioners Rutledge, Conkey, Stewart and Bradley are this and next generations' leaders. With youth brings new ideas and ways of doing things. I think they're proving that: Paving roads through MSTUs, reducing property taxes by 20 percent this year, and writing an Ethics code to name a few.

Once Commissioner Bush is gone (but never forgotten), the gap between what was and what is will widen. There are going to be some folks who are left behind and there will be some folks who understand the movement and are in for the ride. The kicker is, in order to be part of the movement who drives Clay forward, it's my opinion (only) that you'll have to be someone who is unwilling to simply identify a problem without offering some solutions.

Perhaps we should include whiners and complainers as part of the politics of the past, too.

New campaign slogan: No obstructionists, whiners or complainers allowed. Doers, makers and shakers need only apply.

I'd bet a campaign donation to your account which side the opposition will be on when the ship sails. Whaddya think, Mike?

Key;

Some people's past is a lot shorter than others so I don't have a lot to compare. I just try to absorb what comes out and make decisions based on the best information I can find.

I do like your slogan. Kind of goes along with another thread.

Old proverb: Some make things happen, some watch things happen and others wonder what happened.

Or as my Marine friends like to say: Lead, follow or get the heck out of the way!

Mike Heemer

You all know where I stand on this expansion of elected officials. I don't care if I am labelled obstructionist  but I prefer anarchist. :>) And as I stated before, while not happy with having two more suckling pigs at the public "trough", I recognize I am on the losing side of that vote and will now give it a chance to prove me wrong. At any rate, without rehashing past arguments, Key, I would like you or someone to expound upon your phrase "I think we all have a desire to see Clay County succeed in the future. Let's move county forward."

I find it condescending and too vague to even consider. What the heck do you mean by seeing Clay County succeed and even more what does Forward mean to you? This sounds more like an empty platitude than a real mission with a measurable outcome defining success. Forward where?

I am not trying to be inflammatory. I think I have demonstrated enough times that I can do so. I am honestly asking for an explanation for where and what Forward is.

"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." Groucho Marx

I thank you for asking me in a non-confrontational way, lily. I think "forward" means exactly how you described it: "a measurable outcome defining success."

In a few short months, Clay County will have written a vision for itself. I think it's then time for the people in charge of the resources (and especially those running for elected office) to give us concrete examples of how they plan to achieve what the people of Clay County said they wanted.

[I preface this next comment with a mea culpa if my words are too harshly worded but I do feel strongly about it...] When the JCCI study comes out and people on this blog site begin to gripe about what it does or does not include, I personally won't have an ounce of empathy because the door was open to all to be part of the process and only three or four of us (to my knowledge) from MCS volunteered to participate.

But getting back to lily's question, there are some among us who desire to move Clay County forward by taking us backward to a time.

Forward (for me) would be experiencing a great marriage between government and citizenry. And it follows along relationship lines. When something negative happens, both sides talk about it, try and make adjustments in their behavior, say they're sorry and move on. Put it where it needs to be...in the past.

The trouble with a bad or dysfunctional marriage between government and citizenry is lack of communication and reliving the same mistakes over and over again.

I think there are a growing number of people who know what it's like to be in a great marriage. They're bringing or going to bring their experience, energy and enthusiasm to Clay County.

And the folks who never learned to resolve problems in relationships are going to be left behind. Those are the folks who are part of the politics of the past.

I certainly didn't mean to be condenscending nor vague. I hope that helps, lily.

Mike H. You're all over it, dude. What's scary is the large percentage of people who are "wondering what happened." The least number of people are the ones who are making it happen. Go figure.

Karen Lake

"The trouble with a bad or dysfunctional marriage between government and citizenry is lack of communication and reliving the same mistakes over and over again."

Key, I've been searching for just the right way to describe Clay County government, and you've beat me to it.  When I have some campaign literature printed up, can I borrow it?

Include whiners and complainers as part of politics of the past because that is, thankfully, historically accurate.  Imagine what Clay County, or any government, would be like if no one spoke up when they perceived a problem.  We'd better hope there remain some whiners and complainers in the future, too.  Government is a dangerous, dangerous thing without them.

Whiner, complainer, obstructionist, opponent, relic or any other label you'll find in the thesaurus, it's really the same thing.  Someone who has a perspective that differs from the one that has already been vetted and endorsed by the at-all-times-temporary politically powerful and influential.

Opposition, in the form of ideas and opinions and questions that do not necessarily join a team headed in a singular direction on every issue, isn't a bad or even negative thing, it's an absolutely necessary part of a truly healthy and efficient government.

As for the lead, follow, etc. theory, that thing works great in the military service.  But anyone who thinks I have to follow or get out of the way of the five or seven folks making decisions during their part-time, temporary positions as County Commission, obviously has view of a citizen's relationship with his civilian government that differs from mine.

There are some relative political youngsters on the Commission now, Karen.  They are this and next generation's leaders, guaranteed right until November for Bradley and Rutledge, and November 2010 for Conkey and Stewart, when their respective contracts as leader of the next generation runs out.  I hope those four folks don't have quite the sense of entitlement to generational importance as you do.

Once Commissioner Bush is gone, District 3 voters will at least have had a variety of candidates from which to choose the next representative.  I hope they don't decide who it is based on any campaign slogans.  It's not like they'll have to go to the ballot box and think their vote won't make really make a difference based on issues, philosophy and experience, is it?

I can't take the wager, though.  Betting is just one of those things, like competing for PAC money, I've decided not to do for campaign donations.  I still think a campaign should be about something besides chasing bucks.  Besides, I don't want to complicate my April 1 campaign financial report.  It's gonna be really, really easy, just like my first one.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

Mike I agree a govenrment with a free reign and no one complaining or asking questions is a scary thought. Some one needs to be a watchdog because when left to their own device we the taxpayers will pay when they mess up. It's clear they don't.

That seems to be more of the politics of the past of everybody getting in their cars driving to another county to work. The Commissioners and their staff going to Green Cove to work and in the middle of day holding committees and meetings that reatively few were able to watch or know what was going on down there. People in the county electing people that they thought would and should protect their best interest cost us dearly. A lesson we should never forget.

Having the attitude of "Trust Me I'm from the Government" should scare everyone. We already tried that attitude it didn't work. Everyone stepped aside and let them lead us right to the dump.

I just continue to be perplexed as to why so many counties can operate under a 5 member commission and not have all the problems of corruption in the county. Could it be quality v quantity.

We do have some new people on the board. When one of our new Commissioner's discussed the Highlands project came out vocally against the project when it first came before the Board. Excellent position so did the DCA when they kicked it back for uban sprawl. This last workshop stated I'll call you on the phone and ask you some questions. Red Flag, new commissioner or old commissioner it doesn't matter. Somebody better be watching because that's what Clay County needs more urban sprawl. 

I can give you a concrete example of how to achieve what the people of Clay County said they wanted in the study. A moratorium until we can get the needed infrastructure in place to handle the people we have now before we dump a bunch more in here. If they come out of the committees with anything different than that result then they didn't listen to the people. And when they complain about the added problems who cares if they show empathy. They didn't respect the wishes of the people. St Johns County get the picture and the people in the county need to speak up like they did if you really want change. They are even talking moratorium in St Johns County.

Just research what happened to Clay County's population after they built the Buckman Bridge. A repeat will be the Outer Beltway. All the rooftops have already be approved by the BCC. They are working on the year 2020 now.

Like the relationship you were talking about it should be voters speak up now or forever hold your peace.

Karen, thank you for your explanation. It was extremely well written and conveyed your thoughts with great clarity. I didn't mean to suggest you, personally, were being condescending, only that is how the usage of "forward" has been interpreted by me in the past.

Thank you again.

Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman

Angela,

Sometimes you have the uncanny ability of spinning words into something they were not intended to say. For example:

"I agree a government with a free reign and no one complaining or asking questions is a scary thought. Some one needs to be a watchdog because when left to their own device we the taxpayers will pay when they mess up. It's clear they don't."

No where in my blog entry did I suggest people should not complain or speak up. I said gone are the days when the only thing a person can do is complain and walk away without offering something substantive to correct the problem.

I think you're going to start hearing elected officials say more and more often, "Do you have a way to fix it?" And then follow up with, "When you have a viable solution, come back," because funding is getting scarcer and people are going to start protecting their kingdoms more territorially.

Mike M.

Agitation for its own sake is simply an egotistical cruise down Masturbation Lane (I'm hoping lily will appreciate this comment).

Ideas, questions and observations may be presented without being "opposition" to anyone or anything. It's the attitude with which it's presented which brings me back to "agitation for its own sake is simply an egotistical cruise"...finish the rest.

Karen Lake

TH, Foxx - this is how it's done.  Blogging for a reason.  See - the more the merrier.

I was also pleased to see what I have always thought was a good idea supported on the Editorial page of MCS.  We can slice & dice words all day long, but at the polling place, we will all vote our heart. 5 commissioners (only 1 you get to vote for) either works for you or it doesn't.  5 + 2 at-large with 1 elected by we-uns as a 4 year Chair either works for you, or it doesn't.

Deciding whether it's forward or backward or sideways will be known years from now. 

Obstructionist, antagonist, anarchist, Baptist (oops, that's another blog), sadist/masochist (oops, that's Folio), genius-ist?  (Sorry Mike, I've misplaced Roget's).  I don't know what you call "it", but there is a political movement in the County that meets the definition of Opposition.  We must have "it", no doubt, but I always struggle to understand what motivates the vitriolic nature of the "opposition".  I know everything in Clay is not perfect, and people should complain - loudly - when they feel wronged.  But sometimes I feel like if "they" aren't complaining and tearing down, "they" are not happy.  For me, it makes me question their true motives.  Are they for what is best in Clay County, or, are they simply trying to stay relevant by always pumping up the angst.

Life's tough - for us all.  But, is it really that bad?  Me thinks not.  To borrow a line from a good friend, "Smile, Life is good."

I offered a solution that not only cost nothing to the taxpayers but was the result of a survey that was taken in our county.

What better solution can you have to a serious problem we have in the county.

It's viable, free at no cost to the taxpayers but a huge benefit to us all. It's called a moratoruim on all building in Clay County. After all I think we have plenty planned until 2020. A few years without approving all the unmanaged growth will only benefit the citizens.

Have they found any suckers to take the bite on the Outer Beltway funding with the P&P partnership? We have already approved the rooftops right!

Speaking of new Commissioners it seems mismanagement and crimes may not be off the table yet from the looks of the BCC meeting today.

Bax, I always appreciate and enjoy discussing issues like this with you, even though we often have opposing viewpoints, as we do here.  The 5+2 issue can be legitimately debated from either position, but ultimately what is most important is not the number of seats on the County Commission and not even the method of electing them.  What's most important are the individuals voters select to fill the seats.

Karen, making sure there is more than one perspective presented isn't agitation, nor is it for self-pleasure.  It isn't my ego (as sizable as it can be in some situations) that drives me to point at problems I perceive in government.  It's my patriotism, my desire for government to be what it can be instead of just what it is, no matter how good it is.  It is my responsibility because I'm an American, and my duty because I can.

An approach that isn't dedicated without question to your vision, of what government or Clay County is or should be, isn't dangerous, Karen.  It's just a differerent point of view, a means to expand discussion, a guarantee to ensure that any vision does not become too narrow even when reaching the same ultimate conclusion.

Providing that different perspective need not always require having a specific answer to an exposed problem.  It is what you so proudly pointed out that the new, young members of the County Commission are doing - pointing at a problem and asking "Can we fix this?"  You berate and question the motives of one, then praise those politicians you support for doing exactly same thing.

Though I think it's a waste of time, distracts from real issues, and lowers the level of conversation, I'm not worried about you guessing or misinterpreting or otherwise questioning my motives.  I've got a long written history that makes my motivation transparent for anyone who doesn't want to depend on your speculation.

Angela, I agree about public trust.  Even when government earns it, it is inherently unhealthy for the public to invest it.  A trusted government is only accountable to itself.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

Mike M.

If you re-read Bill's entry, you'll understand that one person understood what I was saying. My entry was not about you, Mike. Sorry you missed the point.

Karen Lake

I don't think Bill was the only one who understood your comments.  Your communication really was effective, Karen.  I didn't have any trouble understanding any of it (something I can't always say, given your usual communicative effectiveness.)

I thought since you directed a specific comment to me about the motivation of agitators and opposition, and my philosophical leanings tend to include some beliefs that you'd referred to as obstructionist, opposition, agitating and part of the past, I thought I was free to offer my opinion.  If you don't want that in your blogs, just make a note from now on, and I'll refrain from participating in your discussions.  Won't hurt my feelings a bit.  It's just politics.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

I must be missing the point here too. First we use the obstructionist term as if anyone who is not for the added government bureaucracy then they are an obstructionist. This is a largely Republican County. I find that to be diametrically opposed to Republican views of larger government. This is then expounded upon by including whiner and complainers in the county, which includes watchdog groups. Did I leave anybody out?

People should have choices and sometimes we make choices based off the information we have at the time. I think when the 5+2 was voted upon voters had a very limited view of how the county was suppose to be ran under a Charter form of government. Just because they adopted a Charter they never followed the Charter. That was the problem with the govenment in Clay County.

I hope that as time has passed and people see that the Commissioners responsiblity as policy makers only instead of the executive branch of our government. They have a better understanding of how the system should work and if 2 additional Commissioners are what the county really needs to move forward. I think with budget cuts and an unstable economy additional staff who would provide services such as police, fire, rescue, or roads and other issues would top my list.

I personally think it's not how many people you have on the board but the quality of people you have on the board. More is not always better. I am still perplexed as to why some many other counties with more citizens than we have can successfully run their county government with a 5 member Commission.

After the BCC meeting yesterday and the Commissioners being publicly asked why they are violating the laws. I don't see the gap getting wider from past to present. Other than Bush those are individual Commissioners and they are accountable for their actions or lack thereof. They are all accountable for their staff of 3 being the manager, attorney, and auditor.

I appreciate a watchdog group that would work hard to get over 5000 signatures to have an amendment placed on the ballot to give the citizens an opportunity to decide based off having had the opportunity for the past 2 years to see how a Charter form of government is suppose to be legally ran. A benefit they were not allowed prior to the vote. And if the extra Commissioners are needed to make policies. I hope they decide not to add more government but more quality Commissioners to sit on that Board. I hope they get out there and vote for a better Clay County. I certainly don't see them as obstructionist. But a geniue group of citizens who are working to make Clay County a better place with ideas they think will help move the county forward too. It may not be the opinion of the CRC members which you and Baxley were both on. But an idea that voters will have an opportuntiy to vote on after having the benefit of seeing how the Charter form of government should be ran.

I don't see that as going backwards but a time for voters to make an assessment and cast a vote with the benefit of more information on how our system works. 

As a result of the MCS Editorial and Karen’s glowing endorsement of the author’s “opinion”, I have some questions to pose to anyone who can help with the answers.

MCS  “Add two at-large seats to the commission, expanding it from five members to seven. One of those members would basically be a weak executive assigned to ceremonial and planning duties.”

Question:  If the executive is weak, why is the salary higher than the other six positions?

MCS:  “Reduce the salary for commissioners from their current $61,875, set by the state. Six of the seven commissioners would receive 70 percent of the state formula, about $43,000. The at-large executive would receive 80 percent, about $50,000. The effect would be to add two commissioners at no additional cost than the current five members receive.”

Question:  Does this take into consideration the additional benefits paid to 7 individuals rather than 5?  I believe that would add considerably more to the base salaries.

And…are these salaries in place until changes are approved by the electorate, as the CTLAC amendment specifies (as a Charter county) or will they again rise when the population expands (per Tallahassee’s formula)?  Seems as if growth benefits only the few.

MCS:  The citizens group wants to scrap the two additional commissioners and reduce salaries even further, to $37,000.

Comment:  I believe that $37,000 plus benefits is very ample for a part time position which allows for other employment as well.  I had to make the worst commute in Florida to earn that income in a full time job.

We reside in District 1 and supported Tom Platt in 2004 because he was against the utility tax that had been forced upon us.  Mr. Platt was elected by the majority of District 1 voters, but was defeated by the money-backed Ms. Fitzgerald in an “at large” county wide election (by a very narrow margin).  After she was suspended, John Thrasher became my representative on the BCC thanks to his good buddy Jeb Bush.  As an aside, I was astonished to realize in 2000 that we were now governed by Bush’s on all levels of government -  local, state, and national levels – yikes!!  But, I digress – back to my points. 

Mr. Thrasher was our rep until he achieved his goal of county wide trash collection by the company he represented as a lobbyist until a few hours before the appointment of Advanced Disposal to be our countywide collection company.  This of course was against the will of the people who turned out in large numbers to object.  I thought the follow-up letter from the BCC threatening that if payment wasn’t forthcoming, your property could be jeopardized was an especially nice touch. 

After Mr. Thrasher accomplished his goal for his customer, he resigned and the powers that be appointed  Mr. Bradley to be my District 1 representative.  I do not know Mr. Bradley so anything I say about him henceforth, is not to criticize him as a human being. I bet he’s a really nice guy – a good Christian family man.  Since he is an attorney, and since he was on the CRC that decided in good faith that we the people of Clay County should have more representation than we voted for in 2006, he’s now on the path with no opposition, to being the weak executive who earns more money than his cohorts in the basic seats on the BCC. 

Remember folks, 64% of the electorate approved the amendment for single district members.  The hardworking and dedicated CTLAC members worked diligently to get the signatures needed to put that amendment on the ballot.  I was one of those 64% who agreed with the CTLAC (and agree with them on all three amendments in the upcoming election). In November of 2006, the CRC amendment which added two additional seats on the BCC, was on the ballot and much advertising was done to promote it, encouraging the electorate to approve this.  I believe they did not have to work hard to gather signatures or have anyone's approval for this to be on the ballot except the 15 members appointed by the BCC.

Question:  Who paid for this advertising to encourage people to vote for this amendment?  Was it paid for by tax dollars or was the marketing paid for by private funding from the Thrasher/Horne group or other interested parties? 

52% of the voters approved the amendment, and it was celebrated by all in the kingdom except the 48% who voted against it. The voters who only checked the yes box because they trust their government to do the right thing, might have had no idea of the consequences of their decision in the "booth".  There are voters like that – yes, there are!!  They don't take the time from their busy daily lives to do their own research, and they shouldn't have to if they had trustworthy representation.

MCS:  There is nothing radical about the proposals. The review commission's proposals deserve a chance to take effect. 

Comment:  So…if two more positions are added at additional overall costs to the taxpayers (including benefits) one being a weak executive and the other being an additional at-large position, approved by 52% of the voters deserves a chance, but the original amendment for single member districts approved by 64% of the voters, doesn’t deserve a chance for success with an all new board of 5 commissioners elected by their districts and serving the county overall.  I do not understand the logic and common sense of that argument. 

Oh – and one final question/comment:   Republicans supposedly believe in smaller government, and less taxes.  I don’t see that happening in Clay County.  Can you please explain the 5% utility tax and the additional property tax of $180 per year for mandatory waste collection?  And now we seem to need a weak executive who was never voted into office as commissioner and now runs unopposed for that position?  Originally, Commissioner Rutledge threw his hat in the ring, but then changed his mind...why was that, I wonder.

Again, I ask for a logical explanation as to how we reached this point as I don't understand how this is for the greater good of the citizens of Clay County.  Karen Lake's glowing endorsement and comparisons to legislative and executive branches of government on state and national levels just doesn't cut it.  In my humble opinion, that is moving backwards, not forward.

Thanks,
JudyB

I would like to say that according to the editiorial by MCS and Karen's blog they got it right. Sunflowers first question in response to the article.

Question:  If the executive is weak, why is the salary higher than the other six positions?

Statement in the editorial- Add two at-large seats to the commission, expanding it from five members to seven. One of those members would basically be a weak executive assigned to ceremonial and planning duties.

In Clay County under the Charter form of government the county manager is the executive branch of our government. The Commissioners are the legislative branch of our government.

The citizens by voting for this weak executive is just going back to a single Commissioner running the county as they all were illegally doing prior to the FBI coming here and investigating the county with all the problems.

The citizens need to vote for the amendment to remove those positions unless they want to go back to the same thing we have prior to the FBI showing up.

Once you invested the power of a single commissioner to be the executive and legislative branch of our government who is left for oversight. We have no higher government such as a Mayor or a President. Then to put the clause in there that additional power can be given by ordinance then the voters are again cut out of the picture.

The only time you as a voter will have oversight is 4 years later and you will be in competition with special interest working to get them back in there. Just like the Fitzgerald issues Sunflower talks about in her post.

Folks CTLAC has done some great work for the county and the opportunity they have given the voters of this county to revisit this subject is awesome. This is an important matter and needs to be carefully thought out as to how much power you want to give one citizen in this county. Think about it because to me that's not moving forward but a legal maneuver to get us back to where we were prior to the investigations.

Now lets get out the vote!

Once you invested the power of a single commissioner to be the executive and legislative branch of our government who is left for oversight.

I don't know if you really believe that is what the new Charter Amendment actually says, or if you are just mis-informed.  As adept as you are with reading public records, I have to believe you know the Charter Amendment as well as anyone.

The statement you wrote that I C&P is just flat out wrong.  Isn't it?

Can't you just say you don't agree with the Charter Amendment that was approved by the voters without resorting to either intentionally misstating the facts, or making uninformed incorrect statements?

Which is it?  You were wrong by mistake, or you are intentionally making false statements to sway others to your side?

No just pointing out that MCS Editorial didn't get it right as Karen blogged. And if people believe just like MCS does, or did, or made a mistake. Then they need to understand it is not a weak executive position and if it is it's in violation of our Charter form of government.

Even more was Commissioner Bush's statement at a meeting that he didn't like giving up his authority to have items put on the agenda and turn that over to the new Chairman's position which gave only the Chairman and the County Manager the right to put items on the agenda.

The preception which is being presented by MCS is in violation of the Charter but to close to look like a weak executive position for comfort for me. Then with the clause that gives them additional power by an ordinance should concern the people.

If that is what people think they are getting then they are wrong. If this is what people feel that position is then it wrong. If this is being sold as that weak power in the MCS editorial then it is wrong.

I think alot people have a wrong preception but you know what they say preception is reality. It was placed in the MCS newspaper as a weak executive position. With additional powers given by ordinance it can then morph into anything with a few votes on the Commission.

I don't know who is the MCS Editorial Staff and where they obtained that information to write that article but they didn't get it right. I just wanted to make sure everyone understood that clearly.

I had briefly touched on this in the post Obstructionist posted above the legislative and the executive branches of our govenment being seperate. That was the problems that was the cause of the investigation. Commissioners running the county and not the county manager.

Thanks for keeping this civil.  This issue deserves a fair, civil debate on its merits and not its misperceptions.

I have always hated the term "weak mayor" or "weak executive".  You are right - the Elected Chair is NOT executive at all.  Weak or strong.  Thank you again for setting that point straight.  The Elected Chair is nothing more than the current Chair with a four-year term that we get to select (elect).  A better analogy would "Speaker" of the BCC.  Be the face of the county, its Elected leader.

With additional powers given by ordinance it can then morph into anything with a few votes on the Commission.

Sorry, another bogus statement.  The responsibilities and authority granted to ANY official governed by the Charter can only be changed by a Charter Amendment, which would have to have voter approval.  Another widely argued misperception.

It boils down to me wanting to VOTE for the Chair of the BCC, expecting that person to state a vision for the future of the County, and through their leadership skills, help, help guide us in that direction.  He/She is only 1 of 7.  Good luck. And God's speed.

PS - I'm glad this conversation has elevated past, "I know you are, but what am I?"

Baxley I think this is a very important matter. It is something I hope every voters is working to understand just exactly what this will mean for the county. I want the debate to be civil.

The reason I say by ordinance according to the Charter it states:

(2) Duties of the County Chair. The office of the County Chair shall have all jurisdiction and powers which are now and which hereafter may be granted to it by the Constitution and laws of Florida, this Charter, or county ordinance, provided that such powers shall be exercised in a manner consistent with this charter.

As long as any additional powers given to the County Chair and as I read by a county ordinance and is consistent with the charter it is legal.

To me that means a weak position can become a strong position as long as the position remains legislative and does not cross over to the executive branch. Seperation of the 2 Branches of our Charter government.

It does not say the position remains with the specific powers and duties decided upon at the time elected.

It states it can be changed by ordinance as long as it remains consistent with the Charter.

Well, maybe I'm the one that is wrong.  I want to read the whole clause, but the way you've got it posted it sure seems as if you are right and I am wrong (about how the position can be modified, I'm still right about the whole issue .)  Is it possible for you to post that particular section in its entirety.  I don't think it is very lengthy.

Thanks, Bill.

Bax here is a link to the Charter it can be found under Section 2.2: Legislative Branch. The only part left out is the specific powers and duties. As I said above according to the language in the Charter those specific powers and duties can be changed by ordinance as long as it remains consistent with the Charter. Note it says now and which hereafter may be granted.  

http://www.claycountygov.com/BCC/CRC/homerulecharter07.pdf

Angela (and all others),

From the Charter:

"The office of the County Chair shall have all jurisdiction and powers which are now and which hereafter may be granted to it by the Constitution and laws of Florida, this Charter, or county ordinance, provided that such powers shall be exercised in a manner consistent with this Charter."

I'm researching the issue of changing the responsibilities by ordinance, but it's obvious, they could not conflict with the Charter.  I still think I'm right.  If not, I'll be the first to admit it.

It states powers shall be exercised consistent with the Charter. Legislative or Executive seperate as I described which is our Charter. No need to stick the words county ordinance in there if that was not the intent as a means to change the position by ordinance. I just want the people to understand clearly it can be changed by ordinance. If not those words would not be in there.

I think I may have asked this before but here goes anyway.

What difference does it make whether it is a chairman selected by a 5 seat council or a chairman elected by the people to the position?

Whatever powers that can be bestowed are the same no matter how that person got there aren't they?

Am I just being stupid or is someone picking fly crap out of pepper again because they don't like the new 5+2 arrangement? 

Mike Heemer

Angela,

Thank you for your persistence and the link to the charter that you have again provided. I am very familiar with the charter and the amendment presented by the CRC. I would have hoped that the 15 CRC members would have studied the charter thoroughly during the 10 months they met. I would especially expect members of the CRC to be familiar with their own amendment.

Baxley,

I would like to take this opportunity to complement you. You realize that you may not totally understand at least part of the charter, especially the part about the powers of the chair that can be changed by BCC ordinance ( Majority vote of the BCC.). I much admire that you are able to admit this. Since you may not have understood the charter after serving twice on the CRC, I am sure others on the CRC could have been just as shaky on their Charter knowledge. Irregardless, I appreciate your willingness to question yourself.

Sunflower,

I enjoyed reading your comments on this thread. In answer to one of your questions, the advertising supporting the CRC amendments was paid for by a PAC, including heavy donations from Thrasher and other interested parties. Details about the donations can be found on the SOE website.

Bloggers,

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the thread as it's unfolded. I hope I can add some clarity to the issue of the powers of the Chair. Indeed, duties which are not specifically laid out in the charter may be added by ordinance. Duties such as: The Chairperson is the only commissioner who performs ribbon cuttings; the Chairperson is the Commissioner who introduces all guests at Commission meetings; the Chairperson is the Commissioner who picks up trash on Sundays at 11 a.m. at county parks. All of those are consistent with the charter.

What is not consistent with the charter is adding or taking away duties which changes the balance of power among the commissioners. So for example, adding veto power to the Chairs' duties dimishes the power of the other commissioners and so would take a charter amendment to change it. Giving the chair executive powers changes the balance of power of the 5/2 format and so would take an amendment to do it.

Pi, I am very familiar with the amendment and even so, I consulted a charter attorney before writing this entry to confirm what I knew. It's important to me that accurate information is being read here on MCS.

Bottomline, the Commission can cosmetically change what functions the Chair performs all day long but cannot change the seat from a weak to a strong Chair or diminish the powers of the other commissioners.

Mike H.

The benefit to the people selecting the chair - as I see it - is that it is the popular vote of many and the election is for a four-year term which carries greater stability and accountability for the county. When it's rotated among five members for one-year periods, agencies just get used to sending mail to one and another one has taken her/his place.

Sunflower

I respect Mike Clark and the editorial staff of the T-U. They have, in my mind, consistently and effectively spoken up about important issues facing Duval, Nassau, St. Johns and Clay counties for a long time. If they should choose to write other editorials about the 5/2 format between now and the election [And I certainly hope they do], I'll be here, enthusiastically supporting those editorials as well.

Karen Lake

Key;

I knew that and pretty much agree. I guess I was being just a little facetious.

Someone doesn't like the 5+2 and has on more than one occasion brought up this subject about how the chair could be changed by an ordinance.

So what does that have to do with anything? The rules of the charter are the same whether it is 5+2 or 5.

I was just trying to point out that it doesn't make any difference to the charter as to how the chair got there.

Mike Heemer

Mike H.

Yeah, for some reason cosmetically changing the duties of the Chair seems to be a popular refrain. There's really nothing there.

But you, are exactly right! It makes no difference to the charter how the Chair got there.

Karen Lake

... if the duties of the Chair (whether elected or selected) are purely ceremonial, as has been brought up to, and by, Key et al on numerous occasions, then why is it so darned important that the citizens elect him/her? Did it ever occur to anyone that the term of service for the chair could have just as easily been changed under the five single-member commissioners format? Why did we need to have another elected Commissioner just to have a four-year-serving Chair? Is it really that important to the citizens of Clay County who cuts the ribbon, or the cake, or shovels the first clod of dirt on a new construction project. Frankly I don't care, and supporting another Commissioner to perform such functions is hardly worth the added expense and additional government. As far as the delivery of mail, addressing any correspondence to the "Chairman, Clay County Board of County Commissioners" would have gotten to whomever was in charge at the time!! You can't have it both ways! It's either an important position with meaningful powers to be executed for the betterment of the county or its not.

Wait a minute...I just realized; if we didn't add two at-large commissioners to the board, for what position(s) would members of the CRC be able to run???? Huh! That was simple!

You must have been reading some blogs/responses that I missed. I never saw one that said the chair was purely ceremonial.

I certainly never saw one that said the chair's job was to cut ribbons or turn the first clod of dirt. Unless you are talking about the answer that Key just gave as examples of things the commissioners could add to the chair's duties. These were examples not real duties that the chair already had. She also gave some examples of things they could not added.  

Mike Heemer

You have missed some, but perhaps I should have added "administrative" to "ceremonial". Everything below appears to fit one of these descriptors.

Section 2.2A.(2)(a) Preside as Chair of and in all other respects participate in the meetings of the Board of County Commissioners and have an equal vote on all questions coming before it.
(b) Serve as the official and ceremonial representative of the government.
(c) Issue proclamations on behalf of the government, which shall be reported to the Board of County Commissioners upon issuance.
(d) Execute ordinances, resolutions and other authorized documents of the government.
(e) Serve ex-officio as the county government’s representative, and appoint other Commissioners to serve in the county chair’s stead, on other bodies external to county government.
(f) Place items on the agenda of meetings of the Board (in addition to those items so placed by the County Manager).
(g) Report annually to the Board and the citizens of the County the activities of county government for the previous year and the status of accomplishment of existing goals and objectives. The report shall set forth new and revised goals and objectives for future action. Subsequently, the Board shall meet to consider adoption of a plan of action for implementation of the goals and objectives.
(h) Appoint committees and committee chairs of the Board of County Commissioners and, with the advice and consent of the Board, appoint the chairs and members of advisory boards and committees internal to the County government.

Again, why do we have to have ANOTHER elected Commissioner to perform these duties?

Robert,

Thanks for an opportunity to answer your question...We have another elected commissioner to perform these duties because he's elected by ALL of us - not one-fifth of us.

Karen Lake

pioneer - have we met before?  Recently?  At the FI Rep. meeting?  Hi again.

Thanks for the deftly inserted left handed compliment.  That was slick.  I'm smiling, and licking my wounds at the same time.

One thing about me, I'm not going to BS you.  If I don't know, I don't know.  And I'm not afraid to admit it.  I think that's how you learn.  But, when you know everything, learning apparently isn't necessary.

I hope that through this conversation a lot of people are learning something.  I know I have.

I still stick to my original statement, that Key has much more adroitly expressed, the "powers" of the Elected Chair cannot be modified without the voters of Clay County approving them.  Do you agree with that or not?  No subtle syntax arguments, but substantial, policy altering authority cannot be modified without a Charter Amendment.  Yes or no?

PS - if I serve 10 times on the CRC, I still don't think I will know everything.  Call me a slow learner.  My mom said she dropped me on my head when I was a baby.

First a disclaimer MCS I like you but....... That editorial was so full of inaccuracies they should have to print a retraction. Key's full endorsement makes me question her understanding of what they presented to the voters. Baxley you have my utmost admiration even if I don't agree with the positions. Being able to admit we are all learning is a quality you don't often see. I agree with Lily you are such a gentleman in every aspect of the word.

Now on to the article:

Statement in the article: Add two at-large seats to the commission, expanding it from five members to seven. One of those members would basically be a weak executive assigned to ceremonial and planning duties.

The legislative branch of our government is the Commissioners and their (3) staff. The executive branch of our government is the County Manager and his staff. You will not be electing a weak executive in the upcoming elections. You will not even be voting for a strong executive position. You will not be voting for no executive position in the upcoming elections.

Statement in the article under growth:This cannot be done effectively with commissioners who are trying to be both executive and legislative branches at once. That is fine for counties with a small population, but not for fast-growing ones.

This was why the FBI showed up in Clay County mismanagement of the government. This then resulted in a minimum cost to the taxpayers of 9 million dollars to clean up the landfill. This is illegal in our Charter form of government. In hopes to never get stuck with a 9 million dollar tab if I ever see a Commissioner or Commissioners acting as legislative and executives in our government. I will contact the Governor myself and save Durwood the trouble. This is a crime plain and simple.

Statement in the article under leadership: Clay County needs an elected executive.

Clay County might need an elected executive but that would be us voting for an elected County Manager. Personally we would come out cheaper making the County Manager elected than adding 2 more Commissioners. With start up cost and additional salaries that will not fully take effect until 2010 because they can't change the Commissioners salaries. So until 2010 Conkey and Stewart will still be making the big bucks until their term expires.

Statement in the article under leadership:Currently, commissioners take turns being leaders for one-year terms. That is fine for a legislative branch, but doesn't provide the accountability of an elected executive.

This is false we are not electing an executive.

Link to the article http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/032208/nec_260092006.shtml

Who ever wrote this article is so off base they aren't even in the same county.

Key is saying exactly the same thing that I am saying in my post and I will quote, "Giving the chair executive powers changes the balance of power of the 5/2 format and so would take an amendment to do it."

Our Charter which I have linked in one of the above post states:

"The office of the County Chair shall have all jurisdiction and powers which are now and which hereafter may be granted to it by the Constitution and laws of Florida, this Charter, or county ordinance, provided that such powers shall be exercised in a manner consistent with this Charter."

The Chair position can be legally granted any powers considered legislative by county ordinance as long as it is consistent with the Consititution, and the laws of Florida.

We can downplay those additional powers and make a joke a call it picking up trash but the voters need to understand clearly. That Chair position can be legally granted any powers considered legislative by county ordinance without one voter casting any vote.

They can not be granted any executive powers because they are not the executive branch of our government.

That's right. We have 2 branches of government the legislative and the executive. As the Charter states the Chair can be given any additional legislative powers by county ordinance.

Let's not spin the facts like this article which have totally misrepresented and in my opinion done a disservice to the voters of Clay County. 

I certainly hope the voters think about what is being sold and what you are really getting.

Then lets get out the vote. The last thing Clay County needs is more baggage.

Angela, you can kiss Baxley's proverbial as* (and did) and it still doesn't counter the fact that there are two branches of county government: executive (the county manager) and legislative (the BCC). Never the twain will mix as long as each recognize the finite powers of the Charter.

You are on the losing end of this argument if you think you can convince the electorate that the powers of the Chair can be changed (at whim) of the BCC.

Your campaign, your arguments, your frail attempts at influence are dying on the vine. Kiss your proverbial as* goodbye.

Karen Lake

Hey now, don't be cursing at angela she'll report you. 

Foxx,

Tell Angela to bring it on...

Karen Lake

I don't know what key is smoking or drinking but when tomorrow comes she may see how that post looks.

I said the same thing she did without the colorful language.

One more time for those that are slow, "That's right. We have 2 branches of government the legislative and the executive."

Maybe you should try to read my post went you aren't impaired.

Foxx,

Of the two of us, who's hiding behind an avatar?

Karen Lake

No, now we can't be getting upset at eachother, this has to be nice forum with poltically correct comments that way they can't be taken out of CONTEXT.  But hey, that's sarcasim at it's best.

Thanks for the kind words.  We don't have to be mad at each other just because we don't agree.

Well, at least most of us don't.

"Lighten up Francis." From the movie Stripes.

if you were trying to shut me up with the avatar thing, you succeeded, b/c even after i looked the word up, i still don't know what it means?

Haven't you figured out that Clay has already gone to the dogs? It is just going to take a few years for most of the residents to pick up on that. It doesn't matter what kind of local government we have and how many commissioners are on the dole. It is the same old song, money talks, BS walks. And since not many of of here have money, we walk.

Clay was bought and paid for by the "BIG MONEY" years ago. It's just that now many people are finally waking up to that fact.

You can't get elected without big bucks, and big bucks always come from people who want much more than a pound of your flesh. You sign the contract with the man, and you don't have a soul. You don't even own your own a** anymore.

It is admirable that so many people want to fight, but the fight was fixed a long time ago. We just have to sit back and watch it play out.

By the way, I am not a pessimist, just a realist. How many of you here think that things in Clay are REALLY going to change? Not in my lifetime. SOSDD. Same Old Stuff, Different Day.

Mañana!

I can agree with your big buck comment b/c it wil most likely always be about big bucks, but maybe i'm a young dummy to refuse to think that everything is already pre-ordained as if it's the battle of armagedon in the bible.  You sit back and watch it happen if you'd like, i think that's arrogant and ignorant at the highest levels.  Money dosen't change, the desire for money changes always wanting more, but i think that paths can change over time.

Thanks for the civil debate and your efforts to make MCS be the best it can be for everyone to enjoy. I really appreciate the opportunity that we have to discuss and debate issues in this forum. Glad to see you feel the same way.