Comments on: No Boss Mayor funded by ICMA

By: Xochitl

Xochitl — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:03:50 +0000

What “process” are you talking about, Interested? I find that city services are run VERY efficiently. My garbage is picked up on schedule, the police give me a ticket every time that I speed, and the fire department responds with 3 vehicles to every minor traffic accident. One of the hallmarks of a Manager form of government is that city services are run efficiently.

If you are referring to real estate development as the “process,” then I whole heartedly agree with you. Of course, I also believe that the city government has no business trying to be a real estate developer in the first place.

The “true vision” part concerns me as well. I have seen the “true vision” of those that are pushing this agenda, and I don’t like ti. Their “true vision” always seems to benefit the same small group of fat cats at the expense of the rest of the populace.

Ah, but you say there is “accountability.” I think that you are underestimating the political machines that control Pensacola. Are you oblivious to the fat cat who made 5 phone calls and raised $50,000?

Good luck in the election, Interested. I personally believe that either system can work as long as the people in charge are “benevolent.” I hope that you will work hard to make sure that happens.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:08:55 +0000

I can’t believe the group funding this doesn’t have a strong mayor candidate.

But again, if there is a residency requirement, where has this leader with vision and city management experience been hiding?

I’ll take Thad Cohen. He doesn’t seem to check last names before he makes a decision.

By: Interested

Interested — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:56:47 +0000

I need to make it clear, so I will reiterate my message. Please forgive me for shouting:

OUR CURRENT PROCESS IS INEFFICIENT AND LACKS A TRUE VISION DRIVEN BY AN ACCOUNTABLE LEADER — (by-the-way, this leader is a mayor-role, NOT a dictator).

Thank you.

By: Xochitl

Xochitl — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:10:40 +0000

In some ways you are right, Interested. In high school Civics class we learned that the BEST and MOST EFFICIENT form of government is a benevolent dictator. Decisions are made quickly and things get done fast. The problem with that system is that 99 out of 100 dictators are not “benevolent.” If we had a crystal ball and could see who your “accountable leader” turned out to be, everyone could more easily make their decision. From my observations of the Pensacola political scene, I believe that the “accountable leader” will be a puppet who will be manipulated in much the same way as the current leaders are manipulated.

Yes, the process does contribulte to our current mess, but only in the fact that it produces such less than mediocre leaders. I (and others) have suggested that salaries for the city council and mayor need to increase to encourage others to run for office.

By: Interested

Interested — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 03:03:35 +0000

Our current process is inefficient and lacks a true vision driven by an accountable leader. To believe or pretend we are doing great and continue on with our current method is insane.

My question to you is how many successful projects have NOT happened because of our current system?

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:06:13 +0000

That was the question interested. What is he problem with the current form that prevents development?

By: Interested

Interested — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:31:58 +0000

Xochitl: Wow, that kind of drama can get you a TV spot along with Glen Beck. If you truly belive our “existing government is a failure” then you really have to consider the process as a contribution. No one is going to be able to prove this one way or another, so no sense in getting bent out of shape. Besides, TIME will tell the story.

By: Xochitl

Xochitl — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:56:44 +0000

You may be right, but the thought of it still gives me nightmares. (The horror! The horror!) I can vividly see the acceptance speech.

“Friends, I was against this charter thing at first, but the voters have spoken. I hereby accept your appointment as ‘Dictator For Life’! Please pass out the spoils to all of my supporters who wrote checks for $10,000 or greater.

By: Derek Cosson

Derek Cosson — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:37:16 +0000

Xochitl: I think you’re off on that last part. If the charter passes, Wiggins may run, but I doubt he’d win. That’s part of the reason he opposes it.

By: Xochitl

Xochitl — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:35:45 +0000

“Interested”, you failed to mention Hawkshaw. Was that an “impressive example of beautification and enhancement”? As I recall, two fat cats were fighting over the spoils of a city-owned land give-away. I also seem to recall that they were able to get a city council that was “in their pockets” to actually give them Admiral Mason Park so that they could use it as their stormwater retention pond.

Joe is correct when he says that the existing city government is a miserable failure. I attribute that more to the quality of people running the city government rather than the form of government. Will the quality of people improve with a new form of government? As I’ve said before, if the charter passes Mike Wiggins (and the people who CONTROL Mike Wiggins) will be running things at city hall for the next 12 years.

By: Interested

Interested — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:31:08 +0000

I live in the same world as you. We are just seeing the same thing, but with a different perception. I know many wealthy people who have very fine intentions and do care deeply about their community. This is what I know.

By: Xochitl

Xochitl — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:21:43 +0000

No, no, no, Joe. Don’t try to change the subject. The subject of your first post was “ a special interest group flooding a campaign with money”. We are not talking about the pros and cons of the charter. We are talking about a “system” that allows a special interest (i.e. millionaire Quint Studer) to buy an election. You don’t seem to have a problem with the “system” as long as the results are in your favor. Am I correct?

BTW, the News Journal reports that the “pro charter” group has raised TWICE as much money as the “anti-charter” group. This has occurred because a very small number of fat cats have each chipped in $10,000. Would you deem this group to be a “special interest” just like you deemed the ICMA a special interest?