I'm wondering if the powers that be have fixed on June 10th for some historic reason: maybe our readers can inform us.On the Budget and Finance Agenda for June 10th, County Commissioner Pepe Diaz want to change the time of termination of the “cone of silence”, so that the prohibition against discussion of county contracts ends when the bids are opened, instead of the time clock that begins when the County Manager makes his written recommendation to the County Commission. What this does is give more reason for lobbyists to lobby around the County Manager's back, before he issues a written report. Expect lavish lunches of persuasive talk at best and brow beating at worst.
Great! Not!
Then, on June 10th, the Hialeah city commission is going to discuss eliminating term limits. Despite the complaints of citizen activists, Mayor Robaina and city commissioners appear determined to be able to indefinitely serve the public-- just like Natacha Seijas and her unreformable majority on the county commission.
It's interesting, isn't it: the economy is in the worst shape in a century, and zoning applications are down-- there's not much for the elected officials to do except tinker with things so that they have more power. I'm ready to fire them all, what about you?
Hit on image to enlarge it.
11 comments:
I don't know about the Hialeah issue, but, I can speak to the "Cone of Silence" issue. The Cone was legislation suggested by former Commissioner Morales. It is good intentioned, no doubt, but, what it has done in practice is make it harder for those that operate by the rules to counter those that do not. Contrary to popular belief, there are good lobbyists out there that advocate on behalf of their clients, based on merit. Those lobbyists are at a severe disadvantage when faced up against the Rodney Barretos, Brian Mays, Courtney Cunninghams, Miguel de Grandys and Jorge Lopezs of the world who will not and do not abide by the Cone of Silence, and because of the nature of the Cone (prohibiting oral communication) and the fact that it is extremely difficult to enforce (similar to sunshine law enforcement issues, we know it happens, yet, sufficient evidence is hard to come by) the status quo will continue to give the less desirable lobbyists.
There may be good lobyists, but allowing the Commission to meddle even more in the contract award process is definitely NOT the answer.
Good lobbyists?? It is more like influencial lobbyist vs. impotent lobbyist.
Lobbyists that inform may not be much good when there are lobbyists that don't even have to bother informing because they bring other things to the table..more important things. The "horrific lobbyists" (I don't like to call them bad- so unfair) do give some of the commissioners a script to recite....and they do recite those scripts faithfully. I don't think the commissioners really even understand what they are parroting half the time.
I agree with anonymous 2.
Removing the Commission from the procurement process entirely is another issue. I go back and forth on that myself. On one hand, if you pull procurement from the Commission, then presumably, staff would run the entire process. For those that think staff is not lobbyied as much or more than staff (a reasonable assumption without experience), I can tell you that staff is hit up by lobbyist at least as much, and likely more than individual members of the Commission. Staff generally meets under the cloak of darkness, and if you want some real meddeling in the process and turn a quasi-transparent process to a totally opaque process, just hand procurement over to staff.
On the other hand, the current process is only quasi-transparent, partley because of what Genius spoke about above. Many times Commissioners will be given talking points, and you can pretty much tell. I can remember one instance in particular when Bruno was clearly going off prepared talking points, and after he spoke, he looked to a certain lobbyist in the dais, and gave him a thumbs up. It was sick. Also, what I spoke about above, makes the current process only quasi-transparent (the "horrible" lobbyists violate the Cone early and often).
Maybe the best answer is someplace in the middle. The trick is to remove subjectivity and make the procurement process as objective as possible. The problem is that most RFP's and RFQ's and other types of procurement vehicles have subjective review elements. Many times claims are made as to the subjective criteria that are just plain false, but, staff often misses it because they rely on the veracity of the materials submitted by the proposers.
Thinking about this a lot over the years, there are several common sense reforms that should be enacted. Selection Committees, for example, should be made up of qualified staff, however, the specific members should be selected at random by some sort of lottery process (or any process that cannot be manipulated). Many times you will see the same members of staff on all the Selection Committees, and I will tell you that that is not done by accident.
Selection Committee meetings should also be webcasted to allow watchdog groups to watch and hear the discussion. So much is lost in terms of body language when you operate on audio tapes alone.
I have other thoughts, and will try to add them to the blog later.
Be well all.
It is humerous, if not so sad, to hear commissioners spout incorrect information from the dais then strut like a peacock when they think they have said something brilliant. It's easy to tell the lobbyists' scripts from thinking commissioners' comments. Edmonson, Sousa, Diaz, Bruno, Martinez, Seijas and Rolle are famous for parroting scripts. Watch them, they can't deviate from the script and just keep saying the same thing over and over, like a pit bull with a bone.Of course, these scripts always come after public comment so they can't be challenged.
Good comments, keep them coming...
There is no such thing as a good lobbyist. They are motivated by profit not the good of the community. They have an agenda which is understandable, but they are fooling themselves with the illusion of goodness when they are trying to manipulate the commissioners to vote the way of their client..
I love this Blog!
term limits are not the solution to Hialeah's election problems, absentee voter monitoring is.
Ever notice how few of the mayor's picks lose? That is because Hialeah elections are controlled by the 3000+ voters who live in HUD/Senior housing. The director of the program serves at the pleasure of the mayor. Hmmm, what's up with the amazing number of absentee voters who vote for the mayor's slate every election cycle?
Absentee votes controlled by the housing program/mayor is the problem not term limits.
Don't be so myopic. Of course there are good lobbyists... There are lobbyist that lobby on behalf of very important social issues, and sure, they are motivated by profit, but, they represent their clients within the confines of the law and ethics, and address the merits of the particular issue, rather than just the politics. That's like saying there are no good attorneys because someone has to pay their fees. Nothing in this world is black and white. Nothing!!
Post a Comment