A Snowball view of District 3 and Clay County Issues

Thanks Mr Raymond.  Here's some simple questions that only need one or two word answers.  Please don't put the political spin on these answers, respect us by being straight.

I heard you are or were a democrat, which is fine, but if this is true, how long were you a democrat?  when did you change your party affiliation?

You say the county doesn't include enough different people on committees.  Have you ever applied to be on a county committee?  Were you denied?

do you support the outer beltway?

you say that our current commissioners are growth at all cost and that needs to be changed. Which current commissioners do you believe are growth at all cost?

other than ms. fitzgerald, (who a jury found not guilty), which county officials do you think have committed improprieties as you say, this is important because just making a general statement about improprieties can be unfair to people who are doing a good job

do you think that the county budget is not balanced?  you seem to say that it is not balanced.

have you ever reviewed the county's current plans to build and widen roads?

if you have, what needs to be changed?

tough questions, but that's what it's all about, right?  i would ask the other commission candidates on these blogs to answer these questions as well.

Welcome, Ron.

1. Currently, Clay County taxpayers "adopt" retired county employees for life by paying heftily for their insurance. We even "adopt" their families! Currently (But the figures will soon rise.), for single retiree coverage, the county taxpayers pay $347 a month for health benefits for the retiree, and the retiree pays $100.  As it stands now (But the figures will soon rise.), the county taxpayers pay $928 a month for the retiree's FAMILIES' coverage, and the retiree pays $200.

My view is that Clay County taxpayers cannot foot this bill any longer. That's my view, Ron. What's yours?

Other candidates for BCC, please feel free to add your view.

Actually I have been a Registered Republican most of my life, When I moved to Clay County in the mid -seventies the County was by and large democrat, to make my vote count I changed my registration to “D” When all the elected Democrats became Republicans I changed affiliation again. to make my vote count When Bill McBride Challenged Jeb Bush I changed to D.  Now I am Independent because “party politics” are not consistent.

The committee’s are nominated by the elected officials. They usually choose “like minded people.

I support AN outer beltway but not the current plan.

Three of the five sitting commissioners regularly vote for growth.

I simply stated the County Commission should be an oversight body avoiding direct contact with county employees. (This is a mistake Ms Fitzgerald made)

The papers have been full of news stories about budget cuts needed to balance the budget.

 No. I haven’t

I don't know enough about it to comment, except to say officials elected to part time jobs should not recieve retirement benefits. 

Thanks Mr. Raymond, i hope the others respond too.

when did you change from democrat to indep. 

Which specific project or projects have these 3 voted for that you disagree with?

Have you ever asked your district commissioner to get on a committee?  Were you denied?

the state says the beltway won't be built without tolls, are you are against going forward with that beltway if it has tolls? 

if you are against the route picked by the state, did you participate in the public hearings when they were picking the route? 

if you are against the route picked by the state, where would you put it?

thanks for the answers!

Ron,

I am glad you recognize that the office of county commissioner is a part time job, with hefty benefits. Currently, the base salary for commissioner is $63,213, and goes up annually Oct. 1. Once benefits (health, retirement, dental, life insurance, travel, and phone) are added, the burden on taxpayers for this part time position nears $90,000 annually.

However, what I was specifically talking about is the current and long standing practice of paying health benefits to county retirees and their families---a bill largely footed by the county taxpayers, and not the retiree. This practice of "adopting" county employees and their families for life is simply a policy that needs changing. As a prospective county commissioner, this is an area I know you will want to study and see that changes are made, once elected.

The number of people who have retired from the county are relatively few. Not many people would stay long during the 70's and 80's. 

As far "adopting" these people, I feel that they have been here through good times and bad, made less money than they could have made elsewhere, and put up with all the bull politic wise, they should be looked out for.

 Does the federal government not do the same for the veterans, and rightfully so. These "retirees" are law enforcement and firefighers along with the other workers. Didn't they earn some benefits? They were always promised this when raises were not given, when elections had everything in turmoil, when grand jury investigations of the Clerks Office and the Sheriff's Office were ongoing, the only thing these people looked forward to was the safety of the County benefits.

 Please don't let them down.

Something to consider is the competition for employees.  Benefits for retirees is part of one's compensation package .  Reducing those could cause qualifed prospects to look elsewhere. 

Are these county employee's not paying into the county health care programs to provide health care for themselves and family members?

Are these county employee's not paying/contributing to a retirement plan?

When any of us look for a job do we all not seek employment where there is health care and retirement bennies?

At any job do we all not expect at the very least receive a cost of living wage increase yearly?

Government employee's deserve the same bennies available to anyone working for any major corporation maybe even more. They are answering a call to serve the public for the good of us all.

And here is an eye opener, government employee's are tax payers too. they pay for fire departments, police, roads, bridges, and yes even their own salaries.

So like any respectable corporation, if the county is providing good health care and retirement packages for employee's, I say good for them it's the right thing to do.

TRUTHHURTS

Please go to

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer

and sign the petition for the Fair Tax Bill. Tell Congress to pass this Bill.

FastOne;

I'd have to do more studying of the benefits package to make any kind of judgment on FF, SCO and some others, but I can tell you right now that a Commissioner that serves 6 years or whatever it is to qualify for lifetime benefits can in no way be compared to a veteran or any other county retiree.

They did not 'put up' with anything. If anything, they are the ones that caused some of the 'stuff' that others had to put up with. They ran for the office because they wanted to. If they ran for the money, they should have gotten a real job like everyone else does. There are plenty of people in Clay County working two and three jobs that aren't making $63K plus benefits.

They made a LOT more than they should have for a part time job and in my opinion do not earn the salary or the benefits they receive. Especially the benefits they get after they leave office.

Even benefits for veterans change over time. What I was promised when I joined the Navy in 1964 is NOT what I got when I retired in 1990 and those benefits have changed on more than one occasion since then.

Doing away with the +2 and cutting the salary for BCC members to $37K is up for vote this year and every voter should say yes to those two Charter Amendments. We don't pay FF or SCO the kind of money we pay commissioners and they work full time in a real job.

Folks, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to be a County Commissioner. They just want you to think it does. If you don't think the job is hard, and requires some great skill that only they possess, then you might actually run for office and do a better job than they do.

Doing away with the life time benefits for the BCC and cutting back on how much we pay for their active benefits while they serve is one of the first things I would look at. If that is unacceptable to them then this being a free country they are welcome to step down and let someone else serve that isn't looking for a sweetheart deal.

This may not be a popular stance with those now serving and some of those now running but that is my position. I don't even pay for my children's benefits. Why should I pay them for BCC members?

Mike Heemer

You say the county doesn't include enough different people on committees. Have you ever applied to be on a county committee? Were you denied?

No I have not. The actual process to apply seems to be a little convoluted and cumbersome. I do think that we should do a better job of 'actively' seeking people for these committees etc. It is not so much that those in the position aren't doing a good job as it is that I think it is time to get some new people involved. We have term limits on commissioners for a reason. I think it may be time to put some limits on how long or how often a person can serve in the same position.

the state says the beltway won't be built without tolls, are you are against going forward with that beltway if it has tolls? if you are against the route picked by the state, did you participate in the public hearings when they were picking the route? 

I also support ‘an’ outer beltway. Just not this route and not a public/private toll road. The ‘state’ did not say the beltway won’t be built without tolls. They said it can’t afford to build it on this route without going the public/private toll road route. The state did not ‘pick’ this route so much as it was deemed to be the ‘locally preferred’ route.

I’m not sure who ‘locally preferred’ is. Did you ever get a chance to pick which route you preferred? Now, if I were to do some investigative work and do some back tracking of the money I might be able to guess at who good old ‘locally preferred’ is or at least who old local was backed by.

you say that our current commissioners are growth at all cost and that needs to be changed. Which current commissioners do you believe are growth at all cost?

I’ll answer your question with a question. Which development has been approved with a less than 5/0 vote? Which development has ever been disapproved?

other than ms. fitzgerald, (who a jury found not guilty), which county officials do you think have committed improprieties as you say, this is important because just making a general statement about improprieties can be unfair to people who are doing a good job

It was before my time but I seem to remember hearing something about problems in the Sheriff’s office and I seem to remember hearing about a $9M clean up due at least in part to putting someone in a job that was not qualified. Who was it again that approved that move? I think I also heard something about a trash deal that smelled like it may have forgotten to take a shower or use deodorant for a few weeks.

do you think that the county budget is not balanced? you seem to say that it is not balanced.

My take would be that there are probably some things in there we are spending money on that could be reduced or removed. The budget is one of the items that I would want to look at and study line by line.

If it can be tweaked down then we need to do it. And it is going to need to be with the new tax cuts coming from the state.

The salary and benefits of County Commissioners is certainly one area I see as too high. 5+2 is too many Commissioners, $60+K salary is too much for a part time job and lifetime insurance etc for commissioners is out of line with the open market. I’m not claiming these people as dependents on my 1040. I shouldn’t have to support them like I am and neither should you or any other tax payer.

have you ever reviewed the county's current plans to build and widen roads?

No I have not. However, there are some areas where I feel we could do a better job. One area I would take a look at is developers putting in new shopping centers and businesses. Did either of the two new Hotels on Wells road put up any money for the straightening of the road? If not, they should have. Did the Wal-Mart/Home Depot developer put up any money for a traffic light at Baxley and 220? Same statement.

Has the new Wal-Mart on Blanding put up that noise abatement wall and built that park yet? Why should I even have to ask? It should have been done before we ever let them start building the store. It is unacceptable that the people living there had to put up with that construction noise. That is why it is called a noise abatement wall. You don't build it after the major noise is over. 

You can't demand the world from a developer but you don't have to give away the farm either. 

Mike Heemer

Point well taken.

My concern is that this could become a slippery slope, thereby hurting those employees who earned those benefits fair and square.

Finder,

Just to clarify.  The charter has already been amended to reduce the salaries of the commissioners. This will be in effect with the election. 

While I love to see participation in government and appreciate your answers, I am still left with a big question mark in my mind when I consider your candidacy.  

Consider your answers:  You haven't even looked at the county's road plan, but are sure that you could do better.  You never served on a committee or ever tried to be appointed to any committee, yet you are sure that you could get better results.  You don't think that the County should even have a Chairman, yet you are running for the position. 

These answers concern me.  I want a commissioner to do their homework, study the issues, be involved.  I truly want the county to move forward, not just look at new faces.  There is still time before the election and you seem like your passionate.  I hope you'll use that time to get information from the county (not just the blogs) and get educated on issues around the county.  Seems like you have a lot to offer.

Committees:  I applied for one of the openings on the Planning and Zoning Board.  I never heard a word, not even a Thank You!  I did serve 5 years on the Lake Asbury Municipal Services Benefit District

Beltway:  From the beginning I was in favor of a beltway but against where the state wants to put it.  I attended the meetings which were more information about "Here's what we, your Department of Transportation, are going to do for you"  (reminds me of the statement 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help you'.  The far far better location for the Beltway would have been to intersect I-10 along the Baker County line and head south turning east just below CR 218 and US 301 and bisect the county to cross the river close to where the Shands bridge is, then arch south to I-95 across St. Johns County with Fla 9B picking up traffic to join into 9A to the north.   By extending north across I-10 and into Georgia toward Macon federal money would become available.  My route also provides an efficient evacuation route for the millions on the east coast of Florida instead of jamming them all into Jacksonville.

Growth:  Growth is a necessary evil and at the same time it's good for business. With growth come new challenges for the county.  In the past 5 to 10 years growth has outrun the infrastructure so now the growth must be controlled.   One thing most people don't realize is the county puts in place stipulations and requirements that developers and builders have to meet to gain approval.   Once those requirements are met the county cannot turn down the developer.   Where we have a problem is when the county waives a requirement or allows the developer to come back to the table to modify a previously approved agreement.   That's when the commissioners can take some action.  Also, the commissioners need to take another look at the current requirements and close any and all loopholes.

Improprieties:  I have no knowledge of any improprieties and have not made such a claim.  I do believe that we have several commissioners that are of a Tax and Spend mentality.

Balancing the Budget:  It is each the responsibility of each constitutional officer to submit a budget request to the County Manager in a timely fashion.  The County Manager then looks at the budget and makes recommendations to the commission for final approval.  The requirement to balance the budget is a function of the County Manager.   The BCC has oversite of the process.

Roads:  I have only looked at the plans for the partial widening of CR220 and the replacement of the CR 209 Bridge over Black Creek both of which are in my district.  I know other roads throughout the county are probably in as much need as these two projects.  These two projects will be completed after I am elected.  I promise to NOT take credit for them since they were both begun long before even the incumbent was in office.

I will await answers from the other candidates in my district, it should be interesting.

 JD

JD "Dan" Weisenburger Candidate for BCC 5

ByronM;

Road widening - You need to read my response again. What I said was there are areas where I think we could do a better job. Then I went on to give a couple of examples. That is different than saying I could do a better job of writing the plan.

Commissioners don't write the plan. They may work with the engineers, they may put their two cents in as to when and what but my feeling is their primary concern should be how to finance the projects.

Salary - I'll give you half a point on this one. I should have been more specific. The new salaries are still too high. 70% (80% for the Chair) of the state formula with raises based on growth is still not in line with the open market. The amendment to cut it to $37K is more in line with my idea of a reasonable salary for a part time job.

Committees - How many does a person have to serve on to be 'qualified'? I've said it before but I'll repeat it. This is not Rocket Science. It is plain old leadership, common sense and a desire to do the job the people have hired you to do with integrity. 

What I said was we need to actively seek members for committees. Sitting in the Red Brick Tower waiting for someone to figure out how to get through the maze of putting their name on a list to see if they can get on a committee is not active to me. Active means getting off your butt and going out and looking for people. Have you ever tried to fill out the volunteer form? And oh by the way do one for each committee you want to apply for.

There are way too many people that use these positions for self serving checks in their resume block. I'm not writing a resume for future jobs. I've probably been in the work force longer than my opponent has been alive. I've already retired twice and when I am no longer serving Clay County as the Chair of the BoCC, I'll go back to being fully retired again.

Chairman - No half point here. I did not say we did not need a Chair. What I said was we don't need the +2. That includes the elected Chair. The way we do the Chair now works just fine for me. Then why am I running for the position? I've answered this before but just for you I'll repeat it.

I did not want to see someone that helped create the position and has never received a vote for an elected position step into the job unopposed. If the position is done away with and I never have to take the seat, that would great. It will save the tax payers a lot of money. If I have to take the seat I will not do one thing to try to reverse that vote and recreate the job in some other manner.

If the voters want the +2 then I will serve them well and not try to make this position any more than it should be. It should not evolve into a 'strong' chair or County Mayor or some other name that gives them any more power than the single vote it has now.

And now one for you. Define 'moving forward'. Apparently you think we are standing still or moving backward. Why is that? How far did we move forward during Ms Fitzgerald's absence? And trust me, one person was not responsible for 'the biggest tax cut Clay has ever seen'. I've already heard two people lay claim to that. Funny how it happened just before an election year.

Mike Heemer

Alabayea, Thanks for the further clarification.  My point was merely that the salaries are not the 60+ thousand after this election.  That number gets thrown around alot and is likely to confuse voters who think they need to vote on the amendment in order to avoid paying 60+.  The real choice in November is as you stated.  Thanks.

ByronM; 

Let's run this one more time. It is my understanding that the two sitting commissioners (D2 and D4) will NOT take a pay cut after this election. They will continue to draw the $60+K that they have been getting. I also understand that even if the $37K is voted in they will still draw the higher number until they are re-elected or someone else takes their seat.

Yes, I knew the salaries were set by the state and that the Charter took it to a percentage of that number. I have 2 major issues with that.

1. We have no control over how high that state number goes and therefore no control over our outlay from one year to the next.

2. It is based on growth. If your raises are based on growth do you think you might be able to figure out how to get more growth?

How long do you think it is going to take to get that number back up to $60K? I want control of that salary. I don't want to leave it to the state.

the percentages were contrived is in my opinion a very telling statement.

Mike Heemer

Are you aware that the salaries of county commisioners are set by the Florida Legislature under Section XI, CH-145 Florida Statues?  It's based on population and changes.  When the county population changes, the legislature adjust salaries of not only county commissioers but all constitutional officers as well.

Article II, Section 2.2(c) of Clay County Home Rule Charter only limits the percentanges based on what the legislature sets.  Whereas the CTLAC amendment limits the total compenation any commissioner may receive regardless of population changes.  

While everyone recognized the percentages were contrived to accommdate the two additional comissioners, it will permit salary increases where the CTLAC one will not.  That's the difference.

Alabayea: Yes, I'm very aware.  That is why I sought to clarify Finder's comment.  I also recognized your further points about the percentage based state salary system.  It's not that I don't understand, I just feel differently about it.  But I appreciate your take.

Two points I'd like to add.

Though the combined salaries of the seven-member County Commission may match the combined salaries of the five-member BCC, taxpayers will be paying for additional expenses.  There will be two more members to send to Commissioner school, two more on the county's health insurance plan, two more retirement packages to fund.  Cutting the salaries of the expanded BCC was a good idea, but it doesn't come out to a zero balance on the taxpayers' ledger of expenses.

The salary choices on November's ballot are simple.  Do you want BCC salaries set in Tallahassee (currently in the low 40K-range) with annual raises based on population growth, or do you want the salaries set at 37K with raises only after voter approval? 

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net