5th Question: Speaking Limitation

Do you favor continuing to limit speakers to 5 minutes each during the commission's public comment period?

No, I do not favor limiting speakers to a 5-minute time limit. The mayor controls the meeting and, from the outset, can remind folks that in the interest of others, comments should be limited. If a speaker ignores that request, the mayor, as the chair of the meeting, can graciously tell them to conclude their remarks.

Not only do citizens have comments, but many times they also also have questions about various issues. Those questions and any answers they might receive currently go against their five minutes. This is not fair. Government belongs to the people, not the other way around.

What Do I Think About ECP

As I posted over at Cataract City, the Tribune has started to publish the Commission Candidates responses to several questions they asked. Today, they published the answers to the following question pertaining to ECP:

Do you think the city should shut down its utility arm, Electric City Power, or should the city try to make its venture more profitable? The city stood to lose an estimated $4.75 million if it suddenly liquidated its electrical energy business earlier this year.

My response:

I believe ECP should be shut down for a number of reasons. Citizens were never given the opportunity to vote as to whether they wanted their government to get involved in public power in the first place. The city has already lost more than $4 million on this venture, and according to ordinance #2925, this entity was to be self-sustaining from day one. Citizens continue to be barred from information pertaining to this entity and cannot get straightforward answers to their financial questions and concerns. This foray into public power has not been a benefit to the city or its citizens and has already cost us millions of dollars.

Contrary to what the incumbents say, this entity has already lost several million dollars and will not benefit city residents. (As a result of legislative action, ECP cannot sell power to the residents). The "blended rate" scenario mentioned by mayoral candidate Commissioner Bronson is the subject of a lawsuit (page 9). Information pertaining to the "blended rate" has also been kept from the public by this lawsuit. (Commissioner Jolley, who is the only commissioner to have actually viewed the documents in the secret box, has indicated that there are documents in the box pertaining to the "blended rate").

My Candidacy For Mayor

I read the following statement at the mayoral forum that was hosted by Neighborhood Council 3 on June 4:

As a citizen involved in local government for the past four years, I have become increasingly concerned about the lack of openness, transparency and accountability within our local government. OTAG is our constitutional right; not an option to be exercised at the whim of our leaders.

According to our city's organizational chart, the citizens are to come first. For the past several years, it's been the exact opposite. Citizens have been increasingly denied their right to speak at public meetings, get answers to their questions and obtain public documents.

It is time to put citizens back in charge of their government.

After reading that statement, I next suggested ways in which I would implement OTAG:

1. Meeting room for the Commission - If elected, I would suggest that citizens be giving access to their elected officials by having an office for the Commission at the Civic Center. Because this is not a full time position, Commissioners would have to determine what time they could be available during the week, if at all.

2. Rescind the five minute speaking ordinance - If elected, I would suggest doing away with the five minute time limit at public comment time at the City Commission meetings. This would not mean that citizens could talk without abandon. The mayor has the right to ask citizens to limit their comments to a reasonable amount of time.

3. Getting answers to questions - When citizens ask city related questions at City Commission meetings, they have a right to an answer. If elected, I would not circle the wagons around staff. They are public servants who work for the citizens, not the other way around. If a question could not be answered right away, because it might require additional research for example, then that question would be on the next meeting's agenda under "old business". Under my leadership, citizens would also not be told they have to put their questions in writing.

4. The right to public documents - The public has a right to ask for and obtain copies of public documents without being given the runaround. Citizens have the right to know and question what their government is doing.

(Please read this, if you wish to comment).