Here is another reason why we need paid reporters. They have to sit through Javier Souto talking - and an 8 hour meeting of commissioners mostly pontificating for the TV cameras with some substance thrown in. In other words, they turn a 2 or 3 hour meeting into 8 hours by adding nonsense. Apparently I missed some stuff in yesterday's report because I left early, I couldn't stomach it. They seemed so intent on a straw vote, I thought that was where they were going. Well the tides turned somehow and I was wrong. They did approve some charter amendments to be placed on the ballot according to the Miami Herald:
On May 24, Miami-Dade voters will consider charter amendments that:
1. Set 12-year term limits for county commissioners and ban outside employment in exchange for boosting commissioner salaries to $92,097 a year.
2. Make voter ballot initiatives easier by eliminating a requirement that signatures be notarized.
3. Allow the Charter Review Task Force to bring proposals approved by two thirds of the panel directly to voters.
4. Eliminate the strong-mayor form of government created in 2007.
5. Ban elected officials from lobbying at County Hall for two years after leaving office
6. Put the Inspector General’s Office in the county charter, in a bid to help insulate it from commission meddling.
We definitely want 2, 3 and 6 and should vote for them.
We don't want 1 - it should be 8 years. We don't want 4 - never do we want 4. The Commissioners are making a power grab. Number 5 doesn't go far enough. It should be 5 years but I would probably vote for it. Maybe not.
According to the Herald:
Braman criticized the commission’s proposed 12-year term limits as meaningless because it would do little to alter the current makeup of the commission. Under the commission proposal, the limits would begin with the 2012 election.
“To think these people would stay in office until 2024 is just incredible,’’ said Braman, who was not present at the meeting.
And, how about we recall Joe Martinez, who "...initially argued Thursday that the recall vote last week was a campaign to replace Alvarez and Seijas — not a call for wholesale changes."
8 comments:
The only Charter amendment put forward yesterday that I will support is the inspector general.
The other so called "reforms" aren't really and it's another power grab by the BCC.
We just voted the Manager out, now it appears they want to put one back in and dillute the Strong Mayor, which the people voted to support.
What is the matter with these Commissioners. Are they deaf or just so power hungry with their ego's? The voter's know better, not them, but with district voting and their nearly million dollar a year slush fund, try getting them out of office.
The other issues have the devil in the detail, like being able to serve until 2024.
No term limits NOW, no raise! Eight is enough, not twelve!
How about the petition change --- no notarization. That is huge for us petition gatherers.
Again, I am going to say that I would take 12 years and the higher salary over no limits and this $6,000 salary that gives Commissioners the excuse to work outside of their full time commission job.
Don't you see - 12 years is the poison pill that they (bcc) are hoping will cause us all to vote "no". Let's beat them at their own game and get behind it.
We can always cut that back in future years.
How amazing is it that immediately after the recall slaughter, lil Joe holds a meeting but allows no one from the public to speak? These people act like they live on another planet.
They do live on another planet, and have long forgotten they work for US because they've gotten away with it for so long.
They should impose a five minute time limit per commissioner on each item too. I'm sick of them thinking they know what the "voters" want, because even if they did, they ignore them.
I've heard all the charter changes are going to be grouped together, so you'll have to vote yes or no to all of them. Of course, the changes won't pass, which is what they want and can say - told you so.
Shame on the BCC, like they really care anyway.
If they bundle them, which I don't think they can do, then they all should go down. No one should vote to do away with the strong mayor.
G.o.D. I agree in regard to the Strong Mayor.
I think I heard Martinez ask the County Attorney if they could all be voted on as a group and he said yes, but I have to check the tape (after I take some migrane medication first).
If anyone knows this for sure in regard to grouping these, can you please post and save me (and probably others) the headache.
The grouping - they were talking procedure at the board meeting itself. The items will appear individually on the ballot. There are plenty of things to see conspiracies in, but this isn't one.
As to term limits, I have two points:
1. Hardly anyone ever complained that Katy Sorenson served 16 years. It is the quality of representation that counts. And because of builder's money, she always had a well funded opponent especially compared to the rest of the incumbents.
2. By setting a real-world salary, you'll get SERIOUS candidates to run, not just token opponents. Ever wonder why no State legislators, city mayors, or other politicians never challenged an incumbent Commissioner? Why no civic leaders gave up their day-job to take up the challenge? The term limit item on the ballot is the best one the Commission has ever put forward - 3 terms, full-time job, no outside employment, a real salary. A separate item saying they can't lobby for 2 years after leaving office too.
It may not be the way you want it, but I absolutely do not agree with this "all or nothing" attitude. Change comes in increments. Don't let perfection be the enemy of good.
Post a Comment