Equal Treatment Required

I wait anxiously on Tuesdays for the next BOCC meeting agenda to drop. I am always interested on what will be discussed. Sometimes it is "boring" government stuff... bids, contracts and things of that nature. Sometimes (more often recently) we get some interesting things.

Tuesday will not disappoint.

Commissioner Kinnard is bringing a resolution against Commissioner Barek for the comments she made to staff.

First, where was this last week when Commissioner Davis brought this up and wanted a study to poll county employees for their opinion on commissioner conduct? Davis also brought up what Barek said at the meeting and there was no real discussion. Kinnard just referenced that commissioners should not be going to staff for anything and only to Administrator Steve Howard or Attorney Denise Lyn.

That about ended the conversation.

And now we are getting a resolution? Why not bring that up at the last meeting? Why not float the idea then? Makes no sense, but here we are.

I will preface this by saying that what Barek said to Mr Cole was inappropriate. I do not think it was malicious in intent but inappropriate none-the-less. As I told her, she is no longer citizen Janet. She is Commissioner Barek. Her words have more weight not than ever before, so she needs to be careful with how she uses them.

What does a resolution do? Short answer, nothing. It is a slap on the wrist or a lashing with a wet noodle using Commissioner Bays' words (more on her in a second). Her supporters will ignore it. Her detractors will say its about time. And life goes on. Less than a year into her term, this will likely have little impact on her re-election campaign should she decide to do it. 3 years is an eternity in politics. Anything can happen between now and then.

That said, I am not opposed to this. If the goal is to hold commissioners to a higher standard and if we want them to follow the rules, as stated in this resolution, then this makes sense. This is really the only way they can do that, aside from the nuclear option of going to the governor for maleficence. This doesn't reach that level or even close to it... so a resolution like this makes sense.

Where Kinnard loses me is.... WHERE WAS HE WITH THE 491 ISSUE?

You see, Commissioner Bays was working on her OWN to send appropriations requests to Tallahassee to get funding for 491. She worked outside board direction. She did it on her own and never once brought it to the board. There were 5 or 6 meetings since all that started earlier this year and never once mentioned she was working on it or involved. Never once mentioned she had Howard submit forms to Tallahassee that were false. Never once mentioned she was working with former commissioner Schlabach (now lobbyist) to get the appropriation in Tallahassee.

Remember these text messages (Bays is in blue)?

It is almost like they do not exist and do not matter. She broke county rules/regulations by doing all of this on her own. Where was the resolution for that? I certainly asked for one. Commissioners Finegan and Barek also asked for one.

Here is the code that Bays violated... Section 2-208 - Non-Interference (here is the ordinance).

"(a) The board of county commissioners hereby reaffirms its role as the governing body of Citrus County, responsible for establishing fiscal and legislative policy for the county. The board shall do so only when acting as a deliberative and collegial body, and not through the acts or communications of individual commissioners."

Clearly, Bays working on her own behind the scenes is a violation of this ordinance, yet, nothing? I believe the word Kinnard used back then was "Absurd". Bays herself said "give me 1000 lashes with a wet noodle".

But now we want to enforce ordinances? Now we want to take a stand? Is it perhaps that they don't like Commissioner Barek and this is a way to get at her because they are annoyed by her.

I get wanting to protect staff, and they should, but they watched their administrator throw staff under the bus with the 491 incident and nothing happened there.

Again, I am not against this resolution. I just find it difficult to believe that they would do it to one commissioner when she was wrong and ignore another who also violated rules and procedures. Be consistent. Selective enforcement is not a good look, especially when it looks like they are playing favorites.