From "book club without a book" to "cabal unmasked"!

Rick Barry rips the lid off the soft underbelly of a mysterious organization unafraid of mixed metaphors!

Taking investigative journalism  to a new plateau, Pelican Press writer Rick Barry uncovered, documented and brazenly reported on a little known organization that has existed in our midst for four or five years. Code-named (well, actually just named) ENZYME, Rick was no doubt hoping for some dastardly entity comparable to SMERSH or SPECTRE, some underground organization plotting some nefarious action that will bring Sarasota to its knees; like installing roundabouts on I-75, opening a new pass along the Manatee-Sarasota County line on Longboat Key or draining the Myakka to create a mid-county recreational trail. 

What he found can barely be considered an organization. There are no dues, no bylaws, no minutes, no actions, no initiatives. As one member put it: " We don't really do anything." This puts the ENZYME 'cabal' on a level with any other group that gets together informally. I told him it was like a book club without a book. 

Here's what Rick quoted me as saying about the group: 

Miller more or less confirmed these assessments: "It's just a group of people who care deeply about the area. Each month, Debra will give us a homework assignment, and each group of two or three will look into a subject and make a presentation to educate the others.

"We talked about how Englewood and Longboat Key are split between two counties, and how that affects those towns; how North Port's physical layout affects its development, that sort of thing.

"It's named 'Enzyme' because they are natural catalysts. And we hope by getting together and learning ... and getting to know one another, we might have a positive effect on the community. But it's all very relaxed, informal ... and not really very secret at all."

Click on the highlighted text to read Rick's article.

Losing 4-1

Today's Sarasota Herald Tribune  (March 25, 2008)  took some editorial space  (see accompanying scan on the left) to comment on Commissioner Mercier's forceful opposition to the USB consensus alternative his fellow commissioners embraced. 

To be fair, Mercier is not alone in questioning the process that brought the community to this point -- at least one citizen and one Pelican Press editorial writer agree with him, apparently mostly on procedural grounds.

Opinion seems to be divided regarding his motive: was this a shrewd play to align himself with voters who may already feel disenfranchised, or a principled stand based on deep convictions? 

I try to avoid cynicism and conspiracy theories and I'm prone to taking people at their word until they convince me that's unwise. Hence, I'm inclined to believe Paul's position is heartfelt, sincere, and based on deep convictions. He could no doubt see how the vote was going down and had the opportunity to go along to get along, but he made a conspicuous choice that further distanced himself from both the rest of the commission and a broad spectrum of the community. 

There's no shame in a principled stand. While I agree with the editorial's conclusion that his comments were unreasonably dismissive, it's important to note that being on the losing end of a 4-1 vote doesn't mean the minority position is wrong, it just means the losing party was unable to mount a convincing argument. 

This matter is not fully settled and reflection may yet lend credence to some of Paul's concerns. All we know today is that one commissioner, for whatever the reason, went out of his way to thwart a unanimous endorsement of a unique settlement distinguished not as some would argue by who was excluded, but rather by the breadth of those that were included. 

Sarasota USB Monday: The will of people -- who are they and how is it determined?

At 1:30 p.m. this Monday the Sarasota County Commission will wade into water that, apparently, no other County Commission in the state of Florida has ever waded in before. They will explore whether, and under what circumstances, a referendum with enough valid signatures may be withdrawn from a ballot. 

Some have argued that pulling the measure from the ballot, if it is even legal, is a form of disenfranchisement or even 'betrayal' of the 12,500 signatories. This suggests that, once approved, the ballot measure belongs either to the citizenry as a whole or, somehow, to the signatories, but not the initiators who conceived, and nurtured the measure -- the people responsible for its existence . 

Others, the initiators and the broad spectrum consortium supporting an alternative "consensus", believe that there is both a compelling will and a legal way to retire the original ballot measure and replace it with one more agreeable to all sides. 

Here are just a few of the submerged logs and gator holes the commission and its legal staff will have to negotiate during their wade:

Who has standing to challenge withdrawal?  Any citizen? Any registered voter? Anyone who signed the petition to get the measure on the ballot? This is second cousin to the efforts of some opposing the Florida Hometown Democracy asking petition signers to rescind their signatures -- an innovative and ominous development, in my opinion. 

And what if one signer, or ten, or even five hundred petition signers show up demanding that the original measure be sent as originally drafted for a vote? Would that suggest that 12,499 signers or 12,490 or even 12,000 signers were comfortable with the alternative consensus measure?

 If so, how are their competing interests to be weighed? Simple majority? Super majority? Unanimity? 

Either way, it promises to be a milestone in local government that may set precedent for the entire state as well as either derailing or affirming an intriguing convergence of interests. 

I don't have the responsibility of deciding such matters. If I did I would be interested in two things: 1) Is their any compelling legal precedent in such matters that constrains Board action, and 2, if not; how to honor and respect both the intentions of the majority of the signatories and the historic broad spectrum consensus that has emerged. As I stated in an earlier blog, "it will be unfortunate if this historic agreement is derailed by legal hurdles that confound and contradict the wishes of the people who started the whole thing." 

Stop the Presses ! Republican Supports Democrat!

The Sarasota Herald Tribune is reporting that a local elected Republican official is endorsing and contributing money to the candidacy of Democrat Charles McKenzie who is in a three way race for the Fla. House District 55 seat.

Bold move? Probably not, more likely part of a growing trend in Sarasota, a trend building on a tradition of local Republicans supporting (and voting for) solid Democratic candidates. 

We see it in state wide races with Bill Nelson and Alex Sink and locally with the success of Keith Fitzgerald  and in the ostensibly non-partisan races in Venice and Sarasota. And we'll no doubt see it again in the District 1 County Commission race in November.

P.S. I too have contributed to the McKenzie campaign and support his candidacy. I've believed in Charles since I first heard him speak over five years ago. Earlier this year I marched next to Charles McKenzie holding the Democratic Party Banner with him from City Hall to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr Park. His headline-making Republican supporter was nowhere to be seen at that time, but sometimes it just takes awhile to figure out what makes sense. Let's get out the local vote and see if we can put Charles over the top.

Is the proposed Urban Services Boundary agreement legal?

Is the proposed Urban Services Boundary agreement legal? Or can the over 12,000 people that signed the petitions demand that it go forward to a vote as drafted?

Darned if I know -- it's a legal matter. But I do have a take on it based on my own experience. 

I'm collecting signatures to get on the November ballot. [Very well, thanks -- more than halfway there.] And when I'm done there will be 2,505 Sarasota County Voters who signed documents with the intent of putting my name on the ballot. 

I initiated the process, I've overseen it and I will benefit when my petition signatures are all in and accepted. [Yes, you can download them online at www.jono08.com]. 

But I cannot, for example, transfer those signatures to another candidate -- they are valid for me only and, in that sense, exclusively mine.

So what if I contract a [knock on wood] debilitating disease that forces me to reconsider? Can the 2,505 citizens that put me on the ballot force me to run? Nope. That's my call. 

So what about the Urban Service Boundary signatures? The proponents conceived it, drafted it, circulated it and got the necessary signatures. And just as I can't transfer my signatures, they can't somehow append the signatures they collected to some other similar measure. But, I would argue, they should be able to reconsider and withdraw, just as any candidate can.

Will that reasoning hold up in a legal challenge? Who knows, but it seems to me the people that initiate the ballot measure are the people that speak for it, not the signers.

We'll see how this shakes out, but it will be unfortunate if this historic agreement is derailed by legal hurdles that confound and contradict the wishes of the people who started the whole thing. 

And that outcome could have a more chilling effect on citizens interested in improving the County than concluding the function of the 12,000 signatures was to empower the initiators rather than to hamstring them. 

********

It is not at all clear to me if the following sentence is required or appropriate in this blog, but here is it anyway: Political advertisement paid for and approved by Jono Miller, Democrat for the Sarasota County Commission.

Please visit my website at www.jono08.com

Now We're Talkin'! Beyond the USB fight.

The above-the-fold headline in today's Sarasota Herald-Tribune announces a proposed settlement that could lead to replacing the impending vote on making Urban Service Boundary (USB) changes subject to voter approval. The centerpiece of proposed alternative would require a unanimous county commission vote for an USB change. 

Although I can quibble with some the facts as presented in the paper, this is big stuff and the people who negotiated it deserve a lot of credit for coming to the table to explore (and hammer out!) a workable alternative. And County Administrator Ley deserves credit for providing county support for the effort. He has a pretty good eye for seeing train wrecks ahead and encouraging engineers to apply brakes and look for other track. Commissioner Staub's involvement no doubt added impetus and a needed reality factor to the proceedings.

Was I involved? Nope. Not directly anyway, and that's probably a good thing. Inserting my presence into the matter would have added an un-needed and unhelpful political spin during this campaign season. 

Was I arguing for just such a solution? Yes. I felt both sides were not acting in the best long and short term interests of the County and I was letting people know about it. 

Near the beginning of the campaign, I had emailed one of the proponents of the voter approved USB changes: "Don't expect me to support a citizen referendum on Urban Service Boundary changes." 

And I had a recent meeting with a former head of  the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce in which I bemoaned the approaching confrontation and expenses both sides would incur. I also argued that recent efforts to fight measures such as the supermajority were so over the top that they were actually hurting the business community (when has telling voters THEY were engaged in a "power grab" been a good strategy?)

And while I didn't dream up a unanimous board vote as an alternative, I did suggest to the former Chamber head that a better outcome would be for the two sides to meet, pool their respective warchests for the upcoming media battle and decide to spend the money doing something they both could agree on that would improve the county. 

Some like to focus on the perceived polarization between factions in our community and, to be sure, there are some deep and substantive differences. But this breakthrough is extremely significant, not for the specifics alone, but also for the fact that one side could pick up a phone and call the other to ask if we Sarasotans couldn't do better. 

In these challenging economic times we need to pull together, expending more energy to agree on ways to protect our economy, neighborhoods and environment than on divisive contests that consume our community's energy, creativity, and dollars.

Kudos to all involved. 

Sarasota twice as good as the rest of the state

More than one experienced politics-savvy veteran has told me a candidate has only two tasks - to raise money and meet voters. I'm working on both, but I'll confess to feeding my need to learn about crucial issues facing the state and county. I have to believe being better informed DOES benefit the campaign.

I just returned from a two day conference on sustainable water in Gainesville and I was impressed with the near-reverence with which Sarasota County is regarded by many state water experts. This admiration stems from the fact that the average Floridian uses 170 gallons of water a day, whereas the Sarasotans supplied by the county now consume half that (86 gallons per person per day). Thus it is tempting to conclude that if everywhere was doing as well as we are, a lot of the perceived water crises and" wars" erupting around the state would be averted. In fact (can't lay my hands on it right now) columns have been written suggesting as much. 

There is general agreement that it is easier (cheaper) to save water than go find, store, treat and pump new water, but state funding has been biased against this approach. The State's Water Protection and Sustainability Trust Fund dollars cannot be spent on improving efficiency, demand reduction, avoided use, or any other euphemism for conservation. That's unfortunate, because it is far more cost effective. Some speakers were optimistic this might change in the next year or so, but until then be prepared for more pipe projects that will cost citizens far more than other approaches. 

This is just another example of how what is better for the environment also happens to be the most fiscally conservative.