The (failed) 2007 secret meetings to unify the slow-growth candidate vote

About a year ago, several of us were concerned that  slow-growth advocates needed to unite behind a single Commission candidate in each district if we wanted to prevent a repeat of the 2004 election, which put a pro-developer majority on the Commission.

It was like pulling teeth, but with help I convened a meeting of nine leading, high profile slow-growth advocates. Two others could not attend. No potential candidates were invited. All of us knew each other, and the meeting was cordial, purposeful and seemingly productive.  We discussed prospective candidates, evaluated the qualities that would make an excellent commissioner, and considered their potential for winning the 2008 election.

We came to the conclusion, by informal consensus, that the three best prospects were Henry Copeland (District 1), Martha Bennett (District 3), and Ian Pollack (District 5).  We would leave it to a follow-up meeting to explore what could be done to support the favored candidates.

While the meeting was in progress, one of the attendees stood up and said he was leaving. He insisted without saying why that his favorite, Fullman, was a better choice than Copeland. Then he went on a blustering rant, saying there were many bad things about Copeland that we did not know. We were all taken aback. I challenged him to be specific, and to explain a few of those supposed bad things. Instead of an explanation, he stalked out of the room. Uh oh! So much for unity. We never held the follow-up meeting.

Independently at about the same time, Lloyd Brumfield, who operates an excellent filtered news service, called a broader meeting with the same objective as mine. Discussion by a few dozen attendees was lively, but rambling and contradictory. We would work out differences at a scheduled follow-up meeting. That meeting was subsequently canceled.

We now know from the Republican primary results what the lack of solidarity brought about. In District 5, the three-way slow-growth split gave victory by plurality – not majority - to Ciampi over Pollack. That’s how DiTerlizzi won the district four years earlier. In the District 1 Republican primary, Smith barely nosed out Copeland, not by split vote, but by some support splitting away to favor new Democrat Fullman.

I hate to admit it, but Stuart News columnist Rich Campbell (who is wrong on numerous matters, and probably did not know about the meetings) has been right – so far – in his New Year prediction, “What’s ahead for us in 2008?”  He said: “Martin County’s slow-growth faction will divide and conquer itself during the elections just as it did in 2004. Too many slow-growth candidates will split the vote.” Please join me in working to prove Campbell is not such a great prognosticator.

THE BATTLE IS NOT OVER! Be inspired by Churchill’s uncounquerable determination and bold exhortation: “Never, never, never give up.” THE GOOD GUYS CAN STILL WIN BY UNITING!

Look at the candidates in District 5

Ed Ciampi, who won the four-way Republican primary with the unified. generous financial backing of developer-business and landowner interests, is an admirer of Big Sugar, and wannabe clone of incumbent DiTerlizzi. He’s bad news for the county.

Linda Green, the unopposed Democrat, was protégé of sorts under Mary Dawson, co-author of the Valliere Rural Cluster Amendment. However, Green has struck out independently, opposing this bad law. Green is a good candidate – but lacks experience, and has not been in the forefront of slow-growth battles.

John Patteson, a long time registered Republican running as No Party Affiliation (NPA), is the strongest, most experienced and best informed candidate of the three. It’s not just the positions he takes. It’s his irrepressible zest in standing up before the Commission for environmental and slow-growth issues that wins my support.

I”LL VOTE FOR JOHN PATTESON BECAUSE I KNOW HE WILL FIGHT FOR A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL OF US!

Lesley Blackner Receives “2008 Woman of the Year Award” from Defender  

Leslie Blackner, co-author of the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment, received the “2008 Woman of the year Award from the Martin County DEFENDER, an e-newsletter edited by Palm City resident Al Forman. The presentation was made at the County Commission chambers, Fast-growth commissioners had opposed the Amendment.

As stated on the presentation plaque, the award was given to Ms. Blackner “For her indomitable spirit and outstanding courage in the battle to place on the ballot the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment that will grant the people the right to vote on land use changes that change the face of their community forever. “

Upon receiving the award, Ms. Blackner said:

“Martin County is perhaps the best place left on the east coast of Florida. It’s a reminder of just how gorgeous and unique the entire state of Florida used to be.  Why is Martin so different from Palm Beach County or St. Lucie—ruined by developers gone wild?  Citizen leadership is the reason.  Martin has been blessed over the past decades with dedicated citizens who don’t want to see Martin paved with wall-to-wall sprawl.  For years now, Martin’s citizen leadership has fought the good fight to make sure it isn’t swallowed up in concrete. 

“Not surprisingly, Martin is held up as a model of “responsible growth management” throughout Florida.  Martin was lucky for many years.  But luck can change.  And knowing that the difference between responsible development and being paved over often boils down to just one vote on the county commission means that our current land use system vests way too much power in the hands of commissioners.  That’s why developers will say and do just about anything to retain power over commissions.  The growth machine will tell you anything to maintain power.  Look at the campaign contributions and see who donates the most to local races.  Look (if you can) and see who’s sending out sneaky ads. 

“The truth is that land use is politics.  The law rather naively assumes that when a commission approves a requested land use change, the change is granted because it is in the public interest.  The hard truth is that the public interest is too often defined as keeping politically greased developers happy, and everything else is irrelevant.  In fact, the current real estate debacle can be laid directly at the feet of Florida’s commissions who hardly ever say “no” and let developers go wild, overbuild on speculation and crash the entire US economy.

“With the advent of Florida Hometown Democracy citizens will have some peace of mind knowing that changes to their local growth plans truly reflect the broad public interest because voters themselves will have the final say over whether or not they want the change.  We wish we had qualified for the 2008 ballot but the growth machine, to their credit, did a good job of seeing that it did not happen.  Nonetheless, we are just about qualified for 2010 and all our opponents can do is defeat us at the polls.  We have the next two years to win the hearts and minds of Floridians about this important reform.  You can do your part by connecting it to ongoing growth fights here in Martin.  When you hear about a proposed growth plan change think how Hometown Democracy would impact the proposal.  Talk to everyone about this hope for the future.  Wouldn’t you like to have a voice on whether or not Martin is paved or saved?” Ms. Blackner concluded.

Why the Commission must be reformed

The Commission majority has been passing laws and land use changes that benefit special financial interests and burden residents. These changes will become irreversible if this same majority – even with different faces – continues in power for the next four years.

A survey of 1,500 Martin citizens, conducted by our Martin County Consensus and published in the April 24, 2008 Stuart News, found that 78.2% of residents, believed that the County Commission was doing a Poor or Very Poor job.

Above and beyond the national economic downturn, based on county performance (library hours, traffic, parks, neighborhood encroachment, wasteful expenses, taxes, Comp Plan erosion, etc.) each of us should ask ourselves:

IS MY FAMILY BETTER OFF AS A MARTIN RESIDENT THAN WE WERE FOUR YEARS AGO? If not, it makes sense to change the status quo.

If you like Martin County the way it has been, and want to preserve those wonderful qualities, the only solution is to unite behind the credible candidates who will reform the Commission.

The candidates who will bring about needed change are:

* Joan Wilcox, District 1, long time Republican running NPA

* Martha Bennett, District 3, Democrat

* John Patteson, District 5, long time Republican running NPA

WISHFUL THOUGHT FOR TODAY: In these days of reduced public services without tax reduction, wouldn’t it be nice for the county to have on hand an extra $573,000 – the amount that was wasted by the Commission majority on the Glatting-Jackson and Urbanomics consultant reports?

+++++

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.

Al

Al Forman, Editor                                  9/20/08

The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2008 by WordsmithAmerica,

. All rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE:  All correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.

All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:

www.MartinCountyDefender.com

 What’s happening in Stuart? Check out the following website:

www.SailfishCity.com

–

  Al Forman
  mc_defender@fastmail.net

The Martin County

Defender

The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 70

PARAPHRASING SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN:

“County matters more than party!”

A strong two-party system provides stability nationally. However, in local matters, political parties do not play such an important role. After all, what social, cultural, economic and philosophical differences are there about fixing a pothole? That is why many communities across the nation have made elections non-partisan.

Rather than voting for a local candidate just because of his or her party label, it makes better sense to vote for the person on the basis of record, character and qualifications, as well as position on issues. The worst reasons to vote for a candidate are the non-binding promises to do this and improve that.

When we vote for one of the 100 senators and 435 congressional representatives, we are voting for 0.019% of the legislative body. When we vote for a county commissioner, we are voting for 20% of that body. So it pays to focus on the individual at election time.

After considerable thought and examination, I have chosen the candidates in Commission Districts 1 and 3 whom I’ll vote for. It was not an easily made choice, because the race is not between an angel and a devil. It’s between well-intentioned individuals - not necessarily equally desirable individuals - vying for both the power and the opportunity to serve.

DISTRICT 1 CHOICE

In District 1, I will vote for Joan Wilcox , a long time Republican running as a No Party Affiliation (NPA) candidate. The primary reason for this decision is that the county is desperately in need of experienced financial management experience. Her credentials in this regard are far superior to those of her opponents.

Ms. Wilcox has a fair chance to win if the almost 50% of Republicans who voted in the primary for Copeland (Wilcox and Copeland positions on issues are essentially the same) are joined by more of the 21% of voters who are Independents. Furthermore, realistic Democrats who recognize that the Democratic candidate has little chance to win, may wish to vote for Wilcox rather than split the vote to allow the fast-growth, pro-cluster incumbent to be re-elected. Only Wilcox has a chance to win against Smith.

DISTRICT 3 CHOICE

In District 3, I will vote for Martha Bennett, a Democrat. The main reason is that line-in-the-sand issue: The Valliere Rural Cluster Amendment. Bennett will work to rescind it, while her opponent will support it.

Ms. Bennett has a fair chance to win if she can gain the votes, not only of Democrats and Independents, but those same Republicans who supported Copeland in District 1.

ELECTION CONSEQUENCES

Unlike the Primary Election, the November General Election is open. Any voter can vote for any candidate, irrespective of party affiliation or lack thereof. A vote for Wilcox and Bennett is a vote for change. Why do we need change? Well, consider what the present Commission has caused or failed to anticipate: The closing of parks; the reduced library hours; the staff layoffs; negatively impacted residential neighborhoods; the eroded Comp Plan; and developers poised to sprawl into western county as soon as the real estate market turns up. Change for the better is vitally needed ….. and it’s achievable if we recognize that “County matters more than party.”

GRIM IRONY DEPARTMENT: Some pro-Fullman slow growth advocates did not raise a finger to increase the vote foo Henry Copeland when he could have beaten Smith (Copeland lost the Republican District 1 Commission primary by only 188 votes). Now they are hand-wringing, crying because they can’t muster enough support for their candidate. Well, boo hoo!

Nasty shenanigans by Commission majority

Lovely Peck Lake Park would be closed for want of $10,000/yr to operate it. The park is located in District 4, represented by Sarah Heard.  All commissioners have a reserve, funded by a district tax. How to spend this reserve is at the commissioner’s discretion, subject to Commission approval. Heard has retained almost $2 million.

So some people, including a Stuart News scribbler and Commissioner Weberman, more or less accused Heard of unreasonably withholding the money that would keep the park open. Here’s what really happened previously: To embarrass Heard, Commissioners DiTerlizzi, Weberman and Valliere initially prevented her reserve money from being spent on two other District 4 parks. Their hollow argument was that she wouldn’t be the district commissioner forever.  Yep, it’s the same bunch that does not let Heard rotate to the chairmanship.

This story still has a good ending in spite of the political shenanigans. Finally, because of adverse publicity, the Commission voted to allow Heard to allot $20,000 to keep the Peck Lake Park running for the next two years. Separately, instead of using her district reserve as a tool for political influence, Heard has allocated $200,000 for work on an apartment building to house 40 homeless and working poor women, and up to 80 homeless children.

Is 2% the magic number for growth?

Mr. H, one of our critical but friendly readers, has been asking me some reasonable questions: Why are we always urging slower growth? Isn’t our recent 2% annual rate slow enough? Do I have some other growth rate in mind? And implied: Why not be more receptive to faster development? Here is our answer:

Perhaps you think a 2% growth rate should immunize fast growthers from criticism. Not so. Broward once had a low growth rate. The issue is what are influential fast growth forces poised to do if we give them the opportunity. We’ve seen the home building overstock in anticipation of faster growth. We’ve seen public utilities going west to accommodate developers. We’ve seen clustering to induce sprawl and higher taxpayer infrastructure cost. We’ve seen reduced Level of Service traffic to accommodate more construction. We’ve seen zoning and land use regs changed to benefit you-know-who. We’ve seen residential neighborhoods punished for being close to where industry wants to build. We’ve seen commissioners saying yes yes yes to the Comp Plan eroding growth machine that feeds their campaign treasuries.

If you want to stave off the damage of an impending hurricane, you don’t start taking action when the winds hit. You start as soon as you see the direction the storm is heading. Our Comp Plan provides for the kind of growth that will not ruin our quality of life, whatever the growth percentage.

+++++

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.

Al

Al Forman, Editor                                  9//13/08

The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2008 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828, Palm City, FL 34991. All rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE:  All correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.

All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:

www.MartinCountyDefender.com

The Martin County

  Defender

The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 66

Stuart News screws up – again

ENDORSEMENTS REFLECT SHORT-SIGHTED BIAS

The Stuart News is a remarkable newspaper. Some may consider it a touch schizoid. Normally it sails along in the finest tradition of journalism, not only presenting excellent news reports, but also opening its pages and blog to a wide array of different viewpoints. We are fortunate to have a local daily that allows its severe critics to use its pages to lambaste the paper itself. Bravo!

However, when it comes to endorsing political candidates, an unhealthy different personality emerges. The interviews with candidates, and an examination of their records, seem to mean nothing. The editorial board’s mind is apparently already made up, coinciding with the views of some private organizations that work for the selfish interests of their members.

Some residents claim that the endorsements reflect the financial self-interest agenda of the News. That is, faster growth candidates will convert to more readers and more advertising dollars. I don’t think so. I think it’s simply their sincere but misguided adoption of the inverted and discredited old view: What’s good for General Motors is good for the country.

Endorsements for Districts 1 & 5 prove the point

First came the endorsement for Commission District 1. The paper made it possible for readers to view online the interviews of Republicans Doug Smith and Henry Copeland. The contrast between the two was striking.  More important than coming in late for the interview and some bad slouching body language, Smith’s answers were often mumbled, vague or evasive. Copeland’s replies were clear, constructive and insightful. So, to further its business organization agenda, the News endorsed Smith!

Hard on the heels of that fiasco, their editorial board considered the four Republican candidates in District 5. There were three good candidates truly concerned with the quality of life in the county, men who had spoken up publicly for some time on key issues. I think Ian Pollack had done so most effectively and for the longest time. A fourth Republican candidate, Ed Ciampi, thinks that our river and estuary are “pristine,” not surprising from someone who is a big booster of Big Sugar. Ciampi supports rural clustering. His views, ranging from angry to vague, did apparently have one over-riding saving grace for the editorial board: They parrot the positions of some business organizations. So on the very day that a reader guest column stated “I would hope that the paper’s endorsement for the District 5 race is not a foregone conclusion,” the News showed it was indeed a foregone conclusion. It endorsed Ciampi.

In the interest of honest communication, I urge the editors to post the following notice outside its interview room when speaking to Commission candidates opposing fast growth changes to the Comp Plan:

***
IF YOU HAVE NOT ADOPTED THE POSITIONS OF THE

ECONOMIC COUNCIL AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,

DO NOT WASTE OUR TIME TRYING TO PERSUADE

THE NEWS EDITORS TO ENDORSE YOU!

***

However, when the question is not local fast growth, but rather understanding of other issues, sanity returns to the editorial board. For example, with the News Democratic endorsement for state rep District 81, the paper wisely endorsed Bill Ramos over his opponent who is flush with an $89,786 bankroll - hardly any of the contributions from Martin County.

The Commission gift to developers is  primed to explode in their faces

Would you like a gift with a bomb attached? That’s what two developers would get if they start pouring money into a system for utility water and sewer. The developments are outside the Primary Urban Services Boundary, and thus not consistent with the Comp Plan.

I hope that before supporters of Commissioners Smith, DiTerlizzi, Valliere and Weberman tell me that the Developer’s Elected Quartet knows what it’s doing, consider that it is not just my opinion. It is the conclusion of the Growth Management Department staff and the County Attorney.

County Attorney Steve Fry said: “If the Board were sued over this matter … I think the likelihood would be that we would not be successful.” HERE’S THE BOMB: “And any improvements done would be subject to a Pinecrest Lakes type remedy.” (For newcomers, a somewhat similar scenario of Commissioners ignoring the law some years ago led to tearing down a new, occupied apartment building under court order.)

Judge Larry Schack - we need you back here in Martin County!

Firefighter contract “giveback” a ripoff

COUNTY DIGS A DEEPER FINANCIAL HOLE AS COMMISSIONERS PANDER FOR UNION VOTES

NON-NEGOTIATED SWEETHEART DEAL GETS THUMBS DOWN FROM TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION

In 2006, the Commission signed an overly generous 3-year contract with the firefighters union (IAFF). Many of their non-managerial members earn over $100,000/yr. Recognizing that contract renewal next y ear would be tough in a budget cutting period, IAFF offered to forgo half of their 10% annual raise due in October 2008.

However, the strings attached to this supposed concession would eventually cost more than would be saved. The amended contract approved on August 5, 2008 by Commissioners Smith, Weberman, DiTerlizzi and Valliere, under the claim of public safety, would extend 5% annual increases to 2011 whether we have the money or not.

Furthermore, the base pay of, say a firefighter/paramedic that goes up to $85,370, is just a starting point. The overtime, bonuses and retirement boost it considerably. And there are numerous “plus-ups,” 5% more for becoming a field training officer, 10% more for a promotion, and so on.

The Martin County Taxpayers Association has strongly urged against acceptance of this union initiative. To quote some highlights of their report:

“Not only are these [IAFF] policies unsustainable for their 290+ personnel, they cause serious management problems for all County supervisors …The Sheriff had to reduce his staff by 36 to meet his reduced budget for 2009 …this agreement also mandates hiring 9 more Fire/EMS personnel, 2 more administrative employees, buying new equipment. This severely reduces even the short-term gain from the ‘give-back’ and will drastically increase longer-term cost.

“With a $25 million shortfall in County revenue, over 100 County employees laid off … why is this contract extension being negotiated in ‘executive session’? Why are additional management prerogatives being given away? The short answer to both is that our Commissioners insist on acting as the County’s negotiators during an election year - while they are running for office.”

Only Commissioner Sarah Heard had the sense of responsibility to all Martin residents to vote against this Sweetheart Deal.

Random Musings …..

….. Even a little wit or humor in the political fray is welcome. At the Palm City forum for District 1 Commission candidates, Doug Smith did not show up. Well, it does take courage to be in front of an audience that is not your cheering squad. Henry Copeland put his hand on the chair reserved for Smith, and said with an impish grin: “I’m going to take his seat.” Good laugh from the crowd.

….. At that same forum, one candidate was off on a rousing I’ll-do-this, and believe-me-I’ll-do-that yada-yada harangue. He may have thought he was presenting as a powerful advocate. One observer quipped that he sounded like that pitchman in the TV commercial. Ah, if only we could see ourselves as others see us.

….. In Doug Smith’s TV commercial, he takes credit for slow growth in Martin County. Considering his slavish obeisance to developer proposals, I was perplexed for a moment by this nervy claim. Then, as a fan of SpongeBob, I realized that today must be Opposite Day.

….. Defender No. 63 exposed verbatim statements made in a closed door Commission Executive Session. Commissioner Weberman is very unhappy that such meetings are not kept secret forever, instead of just until the matter at hand is settled. Yep, it’s that #@$%*& Sunshine Law that lets citizens compare what is said privately with what is said publicly. (For the etymologically inclined, the #@$%*& cartoon substitute for cussing is called a grawlix.)

• NO MORE 2004

+++++

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mc-defender@comcast.net

Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.

Al

Al Forman, Editor                                  8/7/08

The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2008 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828, Palm City, FL 34991. All rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE:  All correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.

All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:

www.MartinCountyDefender.com