 |
|
On Marco Island: Independent Reporting, Documenting Government Abuses, Exposing the Syndicate, Historical Records of Crimes Against the Environment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
||||
 Click this BIG button for ... All the evidence in one place! The documentation in pictures, documents and video of what was done to Marco Island .. and more! |
||||
posted by Mario R. Sanchez, Ph.D. at
11:45 AM
|
Number of Comments: 6
CLICK HERE TO VIEW&POST COMMENTS
|
HOW TO POST A COMMENT At the end of every article, there is a "CLICK HERE TO VIEW POST COMMENTS" link. Click this link to view and to add your comments to that article. Its that simple! If you want to post a feature article - an article that will appear on this main page - email it to marcoislandblog@DBIQ.com and it will be posted. These articles must have your full (and real) name! |
Where opinions, views and insights about Marco Island Florida are shared!
The Marco Island Blog strongly supports the cityhood of Marco Island, having its own police, fire and emergency services, its own public works, its community and park initiatives, having its own government and much much more.
This blog is an OPEN forum. Not one comment is moderated, all postings are welcomed, all submissions have been posted.
Progress and consensus are derived solely from communicating with those that don't agree with you. It comes by putting out your ideas and opinions for everyone to see and thereby making them available to be contradicted, criticized and condemned. Let the ideas and opinions pass or fail on their own merit as adjudicated by the rigors of a populace debate.
That practice is the foundation of a successful democracy. And that is the purpose of this blog.
This blog also stands for democratic, federalist and Jeffersonian principles, is against the abuse of government, and stands for the free publications of all views.
It is the duty - the obligation - of every citizen to question, inspect and critique the actions of government. Such is one of the basic tenets of a democracy.
"I am for freedom of the press, and against all violations of the Constitution to silence by force and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of their agents." Thomas Jefferson
As we are.
6 Comments:
So let me see if I understand the pro and con arguments to this issue.
Those who are for an elected city manager argue that the position needs to be responsive to the citizens as a whole, not to the majority of the city council – which translates to just four people. Substantiating this rationale is the premise that if a less than scrupulous city manager gets the position (not our present emperor of course) he/she/it can readily hide behind a contract and four supporters. Uhm … interesting.
Those who are against an elected city manager, such as the city the manager, argue that the position will become politicized, then ipso facto a non-qualified person can be elected since elections are merely popularity contests.
Here is some news for the pro and the con positions.
The idea that ANY governmental position is responsive to the citizens is a quaint idea that sort of went out around the time of Truman (some will argue around the time of Jefferson). The first and foremost concern of any government is to ensure the continuity of the its revenue base (read: TAXES), the second is avoid being indicted, the third is complying with the labyrinth of mountains of regulations – most of which serve special interests – like the government itself.
Those that posit the idea that since an elected position is politicized no good can come of it need to become aware of this little known experiment called the United States of America where for 230+ years ELECTED officials have ushered the greatest nation ever in the history of the world. So you see, just because a position is garnered through an election does not necessarily mean that a dolt will govern. Yes, some goofballs have been elected, but just think of the ones that excelled – Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, JFK, Reagan, Giuliani.
So, are the citizens of Marco Island too stupid to vote for a Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, JFK, Reagan, Giuliani? Apparently, some seem to think so.
AIM (Amazed in Marco)
By
Anonymous, at Thursday, May 04, 2006 8:55:00 AM
According to City Manager Moss, the strongest argument against subjecting the City Manager to a "vote of confidence" every two years (POP's position as I understand it) is that "no Professional City Manager would accept the job under those circumstances because that would violate his/her professional code of ethics." Mr. Moss says he would quit should that resolution be passed. I can understand and, frankly, agree with his position, but perhaps it's time for him to quit even without a resolution.
I concur that a Professional City Manager (as opposed to an elected Mayor) should be apolitical and execute policy rather than set policy. Policy is set by the elected officials, in our case, by the City Council. I submit that the real question that must be asked is whether the City of Marco Island has a "Professional City Manager."
At the May 1 Council Meeting, the Council settled the "waterways issue" by adopting an ordinance limiting the right of transient boaters to anchor closer than 300 feet from seawalls, docks and other structures nor for longer than 72 hours. Permission to extend the time would be bassed on need (bad weather, engine trouble, etc.) and proof that the holding tank had been pumped.
It took two years to get to this point, but the Council finally made its decision. Now we find that our "professional" City Manager is lobbying behind the scenes to arrange meetings between what he deems to a "reasonable" contact in SAMI (Sailing Association of Marco Island, the opponents of the ordinance) and Councilors who might be persuaded to change their minds.
This writer has no horse in this race but it is "unprofessional" of a City Manager to lobby the City Council on behalf of a political group. Mr. Moss claims that his job is simply to carry out the policy of the City Council. Well, the policy has been set, Mr. Moss. Carry it out and stop trying to make new policy. If you're not going to act professional, the citizens of this island need a way to get rid of you! If you'll really leave if POP's resolution is passed, even I'll vote for it!
By
Anonymous, at Saturday, May 13, 2006 5:05:00 PM
I agree with Russ.
It is naive to suggest that any governmental position is above politics.
I also find it insulting that the city manager states that an elected person can not be objective and professional - somehow instantly loosing all integrity by virtue of running for office. Using this arguement, the entire city council (all elected) can not be ethical and professional.
A lesson on logic. A position (the city manager) filled by an elected body (the city council) is also subject to the same political malfesance as if that position was directly elected.
If the citizens are too stupid - as the city manager implies - to vote for a city manager that is and will remail professional - then the citizenns of Marco Island are too stupid to vote for the city council which, ipso facto, are too stupid to vote for a competent city manager.
By
Anonymous, at Sunday, May 14, 2006 10:42:00 PM
Pseudo-Intellectualism
The city manager is quoted in the May 17, 2006 Eagle as saying that the reason some important projects are not being done (like putting a fountain in the middle of a pond) is because of legal fees. The legal fees being spent fighting citizen's lawsuits.
Instead of hiding behind the corrupt legal system - the sole purpose of which is to enrich the ... legal system (read: the lawyers), why doesn't the city manager and the city council show good faith and save the legal fees for such important projects as a fountain in a pond and settle the suits?
Don't these appointed genuises understand that if the suits continue, the legal fees continue to mount on both sides and it costs the taxpayers money - REGARDLESS WHO WINS?
As the denizens of the insane legal system are fond of saying, a bad settlement is better than continuing the fight.
And the fight is against the city's own citizens. Amanzing.
AIM
Amazed in Marco
By
Anonymous, at Friday, May 19, 2006 8:50:00 AM
When POP was initially formed a month or so ago, it was stated that there were four serious flaws with the language of our city charter that could very likely lead to future problems in how our city would be governed. POP decided to focus on one issue at a time (City Manager direct accountability to the public and to the Council) instead of attempting to tackle them all simultaneously. It seems, by their blog above, that CARES has accidently uncovered yet a fifth flaw. It is exactly this sort of "the people learning the hard way" that POP is working to avoid by studying our city charter closely and proposing simple, but effective amendments. Unfortunately, our city council seems opposed to groups advocating government of, for and by the people such as CARES and POP. Nevertheless, POP will study and consider the new charter flaw accidently uncovered by CARES. Hopefully, concerned citizens will realize that, like our nation's Constitution, our city charter can contain imperfections requiring review, identification and amendments. That's kind of American, isn't it? We're sorry that this American concept seems to escape and publicly anger councilmembers Popoff, Minozzi and Tucker. Hopefully, given enough time and education, they too could become productive in improving city government.
By
Anonymous, at Friday, May 19, 2006 10:51:00 PM
Marco Island Thinking Reaches the UN
On June 8, 2006 U.N. DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL MARK MALLOCH BROWN - a senior official - said the following during a speech at the UN:
"... the public discourse that reaches the US heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. That is what I mean by “stealth” diplomacy: the UN’s role is in effect a secret in Middle America even as it is highlighted in the Middle East and other parts of the world."
Yes, of course. Middle America, which is orwellianspeak for everyone who is not a government employee, is brainwashed by entertainers (rush) and the media (fox), follow the mediums blindly, and are too stupid and too uninformed to think for themselves.
Just like us here on Marco - we can't possibly vote for someone who will do a professional job because we will be brainwashed by entertainers (politicians), follow the mediums blindly (the local newspapers), and are too stupid and too uninformed to think for ourselves.
Good to know we are though of similarly at all levels of government - from the city to the UN.
By
Mario R. Sanchez, Ph.D., at Friday, June 09, 2006 9:35:00 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home