11/16:

11/20: New Citizen Editorial from Van Conoley

11/16: Joe Braxton is back in Citizens' Editorials

11/11: Citizens Editorial about the Mayor's comments, the future of DeBary and perception is reality. It's time well spent...Citizens' Editorials.

From a DeBary Citizen:

I think it was so thoughtful of both Norm and Lenny to hold up signs on the corner of highbanks and 17/92 thanking the people who voted for them. You are very welcome. We appreciate you guys.

We're not too proud to say thanks to the people who put us there and who can take us out. To have strangers say they support you...all they ask in return is the same. Norm

Lenny Marks wants to thank those that supported him and voted for him.

"It is truly a humbling feeling to experience this moment." He would write this himself had his computer not gone kaput the last week or so.

We didn't start campaigning five months ago we started years ago by attending meetings, speaking out, hosting the candidates debate, and starting this website.

While some people voted for us, others simply voted against the status quo. We realize this.

The citizens want change.

It starts in January.

Thanks to all,

Norm and Lenny

NEW: Citizen's Editorial from Deltona Candidate, Herb Zischkau

October 29, 2007

Subject: Tillis Flyer

How about the facts? Not opinions

Let’s take care of the misinformation first.

Mr. Tillis, on his flyer, “Accomplishments”, leads off with:

“3 million back in City Reserves”. OK. But he had nothing to do with it. The money came in from property taxes, fees, and other sources. That reserve is looked at by him and the Council as their Petty Cash Pot. Can’t wait to get their hands on it for pet projects.

“Developed City wide fire hydrant program”. The fire hydrants were requested by John Likakis at a 2006 Council meeting. They were to be placed in all of “Old DeBary” and any other areas that might need them. No action was taken until 2007 except for one hydrant to be placed on Palmetto after a house burned down. Two more along Shell Road in 2007 or 2008. Also, in 2006 requested the “Grant Lady” to look for a Grant based on public safety needs for hydrants.

“Voted to reduce taxes by 9%”. Reducing taxes by 9% was mandated by the state and not by his sense of fiscal responsibility. Voted for a 57% increase in our taxes and settled for a 37% increase. Voted for a franchise fee of 6% and settled for a 4%.

“Served on County Boards.” What benefit did the City get from all the meetings attended? When asked if he submitted reports, he said, “Yes. To Maryann.” She agreed he did, but when asked if they could be obtained at City Hall, he hesitated before responding with “No”. A double header fib. No reports were ever issued.

That covers some of what was on his flier. Now – what wasn’t covered on his flier? Not listed on his “Accomplishments”:

Mr. Tillis attended a meeting on “Parliamentary procedures for Dynamic Council Meetings”. Did the meeting held by the Leadership Training Institute in Washington D.C. conclude that “Councils can set their own rules of order…” - as ours does - rather than Robert’s Rules of Order that are used in 99% of organizations large and small? Was a report submitted? No.

Also not listed among “Accomplishments” is the Skateboard Park. It went from $600,000 to $ 1.050 million to $1.7 million without explanation or public discussion for over three years. Wanted it to be part of Memorial Park. Relented only after Veterans from the VFW, American Legion, other civic groups and Citizens protested the cost and location. {Now, (according to Tillis in the Deland Beacon newspaper 10/25/07), he wants a Veterans Park.} Tillis agreed to a reduction in size to 15,000 sq feet, moved to Rob Sullivan Park and to reduce cost. Only to find out later that he and the City Manager told Warner and Fletcher (Contractor and Parks Dept.) it was OK to go back to the original 22,000sq. feet and a cost of $1.2 million. {$600,000 budgeted (your tax money); $600,000 Grant – still your money} According to the newspaper report, it was authorized by the one Councilman and the City Manager.

There’s more. But what these facts indicate is a total disregard for what the people want: fiscal responsibility; honesty and trust.

So, tell us why you should be re-elected. To proceed with your personal agendas? To use taxpayer dollars like Monopoly money? Is it something we, the unwashed masses, just don’t understand?

What we do understand is that we don’t want more of the same.

It’s time for a change.

It’s time to take back our City!

John Likakis

Norm Erickson

10/28: New Citizen Editorial asking about Lenny Marks's stance on taxes.

10/26: Two new Citizens' Editorials concerning the running of the city and the City Manager.

10/26:

A few questions for the citizens of DeBary

Enclave: to enclose, to lock up. A territorial or culturally distinct unit enclosed within foreign territory.

Think about it carefully. There’s a lot at stake.

VOTE: Cherish your right to do it.

It can and will make a difference.

************************************************************************

10/19: New Citizens' Editorial from Van Conoley to Norm Erickson.

10/13:

Foreclosure on Highbanks Marina? 
Yes, if the City Manager has her way.
It's what she said at the end of the 10/3 meeting.
How will the Council react? 

Attend the November 7th meeting to find out.
        

New POP Editorial from Norm saying thanks for support and a look to the future.

We have a new link: CITIZENS' EDITORIALS ARCHIVES 2006. If you want to re-live the days when this website started out, click on the link on the left side of the website and take a stroll down memory lane. It's amazing how some points of view have changed.

Also, in Citizens' Editorials we have some new items. One being about the pristine quality of nature down by the river. Check them out.

10/5: An incredible email from a citizen who has come to the site from the beginning, doesn't always agree with us, but decided to put his name to his words. It's in Citizens' Editorials and it's time well spent.

10/5/07

OPEN LETTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITIZENS OF DEBARY
(It's long but worth reading)

    This past City Council meeting had a little of everything that is wrong with the process of managing our City.

    Rarely, if ever, do I write about individuals or "pick on" someone.  The Council and City Manager know this.  My concerns are always "for the good of the City"; I have no personal agendas.

    Let's start with the exchange between Mr. Conoley and Mr. Fulton.  Mr. Conoley presented a number of issues, but I will limit my comments to the Evaluations submitted by each Councilman regarding the City Manager.  This is to be done annually as is the City Manger's evaluations of city employees.  This is where attitude not only when they are to be submitted but also what they should contain. This year, they trickled in beginning due from Mr. Fulton, was not made available until sometime after October 2nd.  Mr. Conoley went to City Hall on 10/1 and asked for the final evaluation and was told only the previous 4 were available.  Mr. Marks likewise on 10/2 was also told only the previous 4 were available.  City personnel were not aware that his evaluation may have arrived by fax, dated Oct. 2, 2007.  He didn't call to see if it was received?  Was it 2 months late?  3 months late?  5 months late?  There seems to be no particular date for submission as far as the Councilmen are concerned.  Is it so difficult to pick a month - any month - and make evaluations due the 1st and no later than the 10th of that month?  For those keeping score, this is a solution to this problem.  This is simply good management and it is the only way to help employees learn and grow in their positions and for the City Manager to get a feel on how he or she is handling job responsibilities.  To do otherwise is a disservice to the employees and a disservice to the taxpayers who foot the bill. 

    What was learned after all this time from this particular public document?  Yes, these are public documents.  A series of check marks - good and very good in each category - followed by the comment, "will discuss one on one".  The best comment being the one under "weaknesses" which reads, "not going to provide hate mongers any ammo on manager.  My personal views will be discussed with the manager in a respectful manner".  How's that for an evaluation?  Do those words belong in an evaluation?  Are we, who pay the salaries supposed to sit back and pay no attention to the competence of OUR employees?  When is printing the truth being a hate monger?  When is questioning the hatchet job done on an employee being a hate monger?  Is questioning trust, or lack thereof, being a hate monger?  Is it hate mongering to question the removal of Jay Erndl based on non-existing e-mails with a "set-up" to appoint Danny Allen (who is pro-growth) to the VGMC before Mr. Erndl's chair cooled?  When is it hate mongering to question if Mr. Allen isn't flirting with a conflict of interest regarding the "River Bend" project since he lives on Ft. Florida Road and would benefit directly if the project goes forward?  When a Councilman and City Manager support each other in a lie regarding the submission - or non-submission - of reports from meetings the Councilman attended - is that hate mongering or a violation of ethics?  When is it hate mongering to question placing a Skateboard Park in a Memorial park and planning to spend $2 million to build it?  The questions of Trust and Truth are not new questions.  Anyone following Council meetings knows the subjects have been brought up frequently over the years because of Council and management behavior.

    As for Mr. Meister becoming the spokesman for the Council with increasingly shrill pronouncements against what is found on the Citizen's Web Site and in presentations by citizens.  I refer him back to his own e-mails for him to see how he is playing both sides of everything.  But I leave the impression he creates with his "presentations" such as the one he read at the hearing, when the speaker following him stated: "Your Honor, I just have a few facts that I would like to present - without any accompanying histrionics."  In one recent e-mail there are - vindictive, propaganda, conjecture, mud-slinging, derision, spiteful - sprinkled throughout.  To accomplish what?  "To thine own self be true." before you succumb to the party line.

    The attempts to discredit the Citizens' Website and the people who established it began almost instantly with the first salvo being fired by Mr. Fulton when he wrote in an e-mail that "I find their comments frankly obnoxious". 

    We continued to do what we said we would do - keep a watchful eye on various happenings, commenting as necessary.  And contrary to "All they do is complain. Never offer solutions" party line, readers of the website will find a long list of subjects going back to 1999 - solutions offered and most ignored until this year interestingly enough.

    They were sure we wouldn't last.  Well, we're still here with a continuously growing readership.  Just last month there were over 4,000 hits on YOUR website.  It's because the people of DeBary are finally able to speak out about their concerns without being ignored.

    Sorry for the length of this.  I just could not let this go unchallenged - again.


To a better DeBary,

John Likakis

10/4: Citizen Judy asks why this website isn't mentioned in the City Newsletter. She raises other good points as well. Check it out in Citizens' Editorials.

10/4: Missing Vice Mayor Evaluation FOUND!

Fulton explained his missing evaluation at the meeting on 10/3:

"My report was turned in before Jack's (Lenzen, who turned his in on 9/18/07).  I guess the fax transmission failed. But the city actually does have my faxed report." 

When the faxed report was picked up, the time stamp was 10/2/07 at 06:36 am or pm was NOT noted. Regardless, the Vice Mayor did not know his evaluation had not arrived from before 9/18 to 10/1, if indeed that is when he sent it in.

Contents of his comments in his public evaluation of the City Manager:

Financial Management: “Will discuss one on one.”

Forges Compromises: “Will discuss one on one.”

Communications with Public: “Will discuss one on one.”

Honest-Fair: “Will discuss one on one.”

Strengths: “Will discuss one on one.”

And finally…

Weaknesses: “Will discuss one on one. Not going to provide hate mongers any ammo against our manager. My personal views will be discussed with the manager in a respectful manner.”

All other areas of the evaluation have no comment save for New Objectives which reads as follows: “will discuss in an open meeting for goals and objectives.”

And those are the facts of the fax according to public record.

Norm Erickson

John Likakis

p.s. additional commentary will follow tomorrow...'nuff said.

Just as an aside, where is the City Manager's evaluation for 2007? It is now three months overdue. Has it been done and I'm not aware or has it not been done and if so, why not?

10/2: ANSWER: 4 of 5 Councilmen have submitted an evaluation for the City Manger. The first was turned in on 8/1/07 by Mayor Coleman and the last was submitted 9/18/07 by Councilman Lenzen. On Lenzen's evalution the following is written for Strengths: "In this area of the evaluation it was discussed in person and I feel it is in the cities best interest to not have this disclosed to public view."

Vice Mayor Fulton has yet to turn in an evaluation for the City Manager which was due sometime in July or August as in 2006 evaluations were filled out in July. Regardless, these are all late.

Question: How is it that for the second year in a row, a City Manager can receive a raise without all five evaluations? Last year Councilman Tillis did not turn in an evaluation. This year it is Vice Mayor Fulton; is there a rotation that I'm not aware of? Isn't it required to discuss the evalutions to some degree in public? I'm not talking about an indepth discussion, but isn't it required?

Of course, I don't want to just raise these questions and criticisms without a suggestion or solution. If I did that, some might accuse that this website spreads lies and rhetoric without being able to back up that allegation for the last year and nine months we've been online.

So here I go out on a limb: Maybe the evaluations should be filled out by ALL of the Council members. And maybe they should contain more than just check marks for a job that is nearing 100,000 dollars a year plus benefits. I would like to see some actual evaluating, thought, and synthesis put into the responses. And while I'm spitballing here, perhaps, just perhaps, the ANNUAL evaluations should be done on a yearly basis not 12 months one year, 15 months the next, and so on.

Evaluations are public documents and I encourage you to stop by and read the 4 that have been turned in so far. Maybe someone should ask the Vice Mayor on Wednesday night where his evaluation is.

Norm Erickson

10/2: New Citizen Editorial by Van Conoley. Check it out in Citizens' Editorials...it's a hot one.

What are the people saying about the Marina? Here are two examples from the Orlando Sentinel blog. For more examples go to the website to read/respond for yourself:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/

Look in the box labeled Talk about it. You will see the link for marinas being good or bad for manatees.

Tuesday Sep 25

debary resident wrote:

Sometimes Debary sucks!

*********************************

#2

Wednesday Sep 26

Dear Lord. I'm not even an environmentalist, but the Debary claim that a marina will actually help Manatees is truly one of the worst argument claims I have heard in a long time. Even though boats are currently there now, that is not a mandate to suggest that more should be allowed. If anything, we should consider why boats are there at all. I would be curious to know if boat parking on the banks of the river is legal.

9/29: Two new citizen editorials. Check them out.

Lenny Marks has a new POP Editorial on the facts about Councilman Tillis' record.

9/24:

Orlando Sentinel

Rachael Jackson

Sept. 23, 2007

In the crowded race, all candidates except Fulton, the incumbent, question a development proposed for the St. Johns River that could put more than 60 docks in a preserve frequently used by manatees. The Florida Department of Community Affairs, the state's planning agency, filed legal challenges to the city's land-use changes for the development.

Fulton voted for the changes in April and has said that the controversy is a "dead issue," because the marina portion has been significantly reduced since the original proposal.

He said he supported the project because it would have brought in badly needed infrastructure and the developer was willing to preserve a large portion of the 330-acre property.

For being a "dead issue" there was much discussion in both newspapers today. Indeed, there might be an administrative hearing possibly tomorrow(9/25).

First, the Orlando Sentinel and then the DBNJ.

OrlandoSentinel.com

EDITORIAL Florida's Shame Day 2: The DeBary debacle

September 24, 2007

Want to see firsthand how Florida keeps ruining the very things that make it special? Read on and weep.

June 1985: It took a while, but the Legislature finally agrees that the St. Johns River is a treasure. It declares that 20 miles near the Wekiva River will be protected as an "aquatic preserve." As well it should be. Manatees, otters and gators share the near-pristine stretch with white ibises, great blue herons and the endangered wood stork. Bald eagles soar above the swamps as Spanish moss drips from the oak trees. Eelgrasses -- food for the endangered manatees -- sway in the slow-moving waters.

Ah, it's untouched Florida. And it's right here in Metro Orlando. How lucky we are. In fact, it's one of only four inland areas in all of Florida granted this special treatment so that it doesn't become the state's next casualty.

Surely, you think, politicians wouldn't dare harm this.

Well, then you haven't lived in Florida long. Just about everything -- even this -- is up for grabs:

April 4, 2007: The DeBary City Council considers Country Estates at River Bend, a megadevelopment on the river that would sit on a 330-acre site, the same land size as Millenia Mall. It will have 250 homes.

Most important -- for the developer anyway -- it boasts a marina about the size of Winter Park Village. Its 10 acres would be big enough for 400 boats in dry storage and 50 in the water. How in the world could this happen, even in Florida's world? Marinas can't be built in these preserves if treasures such as eelgrasses, snails, clams and the endangered manatees live there.

And no wonder. Not only could all the boats destroy these fragile critters and plants, their propellers are sure to kill more manatees, which number only 3,200 as it is.

Who would want to harm this paradise?

DeBary City Manager Maryann Courson, for one. She loves the project. Everything is fine, just fine, she says, because the developer -- the developer -- has concluded that the waters don't have all the sensitive habitat. Can't argue with a developer, now, can we?

Surely this won't get any further, though, even with Maryann Courson as the head cheerleader for developer St. Johns Partners. Wrong again. The DeBary City Council unanimously OKs the project. Maryann Courson wins.

Well, it's a good thing, then, that Volusia County, where this is located, has the extra protection of a gatekeeper called the Volusia Growth Management Commission. Projects such as this must have been just what voters had in mind when they approved the panel 20 years ago. The only county in Florida to take such action, Volusia empowered the commission with the authority to halt developments that hurt another part of the county, such as this river. Only a court order can overturn it

Whew! Let's congratulate Volusia voters on their vision.

Wait a minute. Who are all those lobbyists the developer hired? Is it really the powerful firm of former state House Speaker John Thrasher and Oscar Anderson, the former chief of staff of the state planning agency? Surely the developer is wasting its money, right? After all, DeBary's appointment to the growth-management commission, Jay Erndl, is someone who will see this scheme for what it is and lead the vote against it. And if the growth commission denies the project, it pretty much ends it.

11:30 p.m. April 4, 2007: After unanimously approving the megadevelopment, the City Council suddenly gets nervous that it might run into trouble with the growth-management commission. What DeBary does next is brazen, even for DeBary. It removes Jay Erndl as its appointment to that commission. In his place: Danny Allen, who stood up earlier to support the marina project.

Huh? Is this legal? No, it's not -- even in Florida. Try as it might, DeBary can't just remove someone from a quasijudicial commission just because it's afraid he might vote against its pet project.

Whew again. The wildlife and the river once again are safe. Voters know they can trust the growth commission to protect the river, right?

Not quite. Remember, this is Florida. Nothing is ever safe from the bulldozers.

1:30 a.m. June 12: The staff of the growth commission recognizes too that the marina doesn't belong in this preserve. Deny it, it says.

Then the commission starts to vote. Oh, no. Turns out the DeBary City Council needn't have gone to the trouble of kicking Jay Erndl off after all. Even though he votes against the project, the growth panel that residents thought would protect them approves the scheme 9-5. How could this happen? Nothing to worry about, the panel says. It has pared the number of boat slips to 200 in dry storage and 50 in the water.

Pardon us if we're not boarding the party boat for the celebration. (But we'll bet John Thrasher and Oscar Anderson were.) It's still a marina in a protected preserve. And isn't that still banned? Well, Jay Erndl brings up that very point at the meeting, only to have it dismissed as something too detailed to consider.

Later that day: State planners are on the trail. Within hours, they oppose the project, saying this preserve deserves the protections granted by the Legislature.

That's not good enough for DeBary. It barrels ahead and appeals. To its credit, the state stands firm, and now there's talk of the developer ditching the marina if it's allowed dozens and dozens of docks that can be used by residents in the 250 homes. But, really, how is that so much better than the boats in a marina? If a settlement isn't approved today, the next step is a three-day administrative hearing beginning Tuesday. It's anyone's guess how that would turn out.

Sadly, this nonsense all could have been stopped -- if the growth commission had only lived up to the trust voters placed in it.

Notice that in two of the three dates cited, one was at 11:30pm and the other 1:30am. Incredible. And now from the DBNJ:

September 24, 2007

River Bend trade-off a threat to aquatic preserve

What started out as a housing/retail development proposal that could add as many as 500 boats to an aquatic preserve along the St. Johns River has been dramatically scaled back. But the plan -- the 127-acre mixed-use Country Estates at River Bend in DeBary -- is still wrong for the area. The state should not allow more boat slips in its aquatic preserve.

In April, the City Council approved an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan to allow the project. But the state's Department of Community Affairs correctly rejected the change, saying the project would stress the ecology of the St. Johns and its Wekiva River tributary. Last week, the state was reviewing a compromise -- 45 private docks for home sites and a small public boat ramp.

That's still too many for this property. The Wekiva River Aquatic Preserve is prime manatee habitat, its wetlands home to more than 100 bird species (10 of which are on state or federal endangered lists) and its banks frequented by Florida Black Bears.

Granted, no docks can be built without permits from the state Department of Environmental Protection. But the chances of approval increase after a comprehensive plan has been altered.

The good news is that the developers eliminated the wet-dry marina that had storage room for 250 boats, and instead have proposed a community boat ramp with launching and recovery docks. But the development still would have a yacht club and about 250 houses. It's not presumptuous to assume that at some point in the future, owners of some of the other home sites without docks would appeal to the state, citing property rights. The aquatic preserve and its springshed slowly could deteriorate -- one dock at a time.

DeBary officials see the project as an economic boon and are enthralled by the developers' promise to pave roads and extend sewer lines. But environmental groups (Seminole Audubon Society, Save the Manatee Club, St. Johns Riverkeeper and more) note that urbanizing this wooded riverfront land upsets the ecology of the area. They point not just to the potential destruction of wildlife habitat but also archaeological sites on the proposed development (A mound near Fort Florida Road, Thrashers Shell Pit and Goodacres Midden). Opponents also argue that the developers have asked for more than they knew they could get with the aim of settling for as much as they can. To be expected, perhaps, but nothing that state or local governments must accommodate.

DeBary's proposed comprehensive plan amendment is an example of the weakness of Florida growth-management laws. The amendment would alter the city's long-term planning document for the sake of a development that would add tax base to DeBary but have a negative impact on its neighbors along the river. The law requires state approval of comp-plan changes, but compromises can be made through negotiations, ultimately resulting in DCA approval. In this case, if the state compromises, it benefits the developer and hurts the public: No one should be negotiating away a state aquatic preserve.

For or against the Marina project?

Well...what DOES "dead issue" mean, really?

Vice Mayor Fulton voted for it.

Now it is a "dead issue"?

It isn't a dead issue to two newspapers, several citizen action groups, the State of Florida and the three candidates running for office.

***********************************************************************************

9/23: New Citizen Editorial from Van Conoley about signs, Law and Order and Patrick Fulton. It's in Citizens' Editorials. We have three additional editorials from citizens.

9/22: POP Editorial from Norm Erickson. From an "option" to "who wouldn't want to see that outcome?" the I-4 toll roads that were not a basis for an argument before Commuter Rail now are a must have item. With the support of the papers...most things are possible. Click on POP Editorial to read the articles.

9/20: "Van" Conoley sends in a Citizen's Editorial about illegal signs. As a candidate in 2005 he encountered the same problem as is happening now. Van isn't slinging mud...only facts.

FLASHBACK:

2006 BUDGET:

Below is an article I wrote in September, 2006. I complained, offered solutions, and discussed issues on the FACTS. I said it then and meant it; I still do. Be prepared to hear other versions from the Vice Mayor in the coming weeks. This year cities were forced to lower taxes by the state. Norm Erickson

NEW: 9/28:

OUR VICE MAYOR'S NON-STANCE (NONSENSE) ON THE MIL RATE AND BUDGET

by

Norm Erickson

The following is an email Patrick Fulton sent out in response to perhaps my rather loud comment after the meeting on how he could have voted against the mil rate and yet FOR the budget proposals of the mil rate. My reactions are in red. Norm Erickson

Last night was the final Budget Meeting for the City of DeBary and the  
budget passed unanimously after a lot of concessions were made by all.

I don't know what concessions Patrick made which isn't to say he didn't make any...I just don't know what they were/are. I do for the other councilmen which will be discussed below.

 I  have heard this morning that one member of the public questioned how I could  vote for
the budget and yet vote against the millage rate increase.  

"One member of the public"? This email was sent to an unknown amount of people based on "one member of the public"? Wow...this seque of justification is so clumsy it makes Gerald Ford seem smooth. Rather, I think this is the first in many "revisonist history lessons" we are to receive from our Vice Mayor.

Since  I have a clear conscience on this situation  - that?s an easy question to  answer.

So on issues where he does not have a clear conscience it is more difficult to answer but not impossible? I don't understand this sentence.

 I felt the millage rate itself was excessive and was being  justified by a laundry
list of pet projects (even though the projects are all  great assets for our
community).   I was against the millage rate  increase and all the miscellaneous projects being proposed - I felt we needed to  reduce the projects to what we absolutely needed and not approve a wish  list.  We were also proposing that all projects be paid for within this  budget cycle.  It was too much in a
short period of time.  

Why didn't he ask Maryann to come up wth a budget proposal for the mil rate and/or projects he felt WERE justified. Why didn't he and/or the council talk about the necessity of these "pet projects"? Why didn't he do what John Likakis did and come up with his own proposal to share with the council? They had a lot of meetings and workshops to do this. Why didn't he propose the projects that should be cut and reduce the mil rate accordingly?

He could have done any number of things.

They all could have but they didn't. I now quote from this website under the Meetings to Attend link:

It is not only for what we do that we are held responsible, but also for what we do not do.
Moliere

Patrick actually talked very little at these meetings and just stayed under the radar. He did nothing except vote "no". Lenzen actually challenged him on this point and the vice mayor had nothing to come back with because it is the truth. Vice Mayor Fulton was playing political games with the mil rate that directly impacts our citizens so he can say he didn't vote for a tax increase a year from now. At the meeting where 3.5 was voted in he was mumbling 2.5 as a potential mil rate. We now know that that mil rate would not cover the costs of running the city. With staff costs, police, fire, etc,. Lenzen said at the meeting on 9/27 the current rate would not suffice; so the Vice Mayor was wrong in even considering that mil rate. Go to the webcast for the 9/20 meeting and zip forward to the 1 hour and 44th minute or so and listen for ten minutes...it's all there...don't believe me...go listen to it...the Fulton/Lenzen exchange happens at the 1 hour and 52 minute mark...go listen to it...because if you were at the meeting you sure as heck didn't hear it.

After a lot  of discussions the wish list was reduced
down to 3 core projects 1) rebuilding  the reserves 2) Emergency Storm System and
3) a new City Hall.  All other  projects have been placed on hiatus for the
time being.  This does not mean  that the other projects aren?t worthy of being
completed it simply means ? not  right now.

Lenzen decided to move from 3.5 to 3.0 and Tillis, to his great credit, decided to move the Skateboard Park off a year and cut it out. Carson also decided to go to 3.0 knowing that his park projects would not get the funding he wanted them to get. Coleman voted for a tax increase which went against his campaign promise, but he knew the city needed the money. All four did something and moved from a position and sacrificed. Fulton did nothing, motioned nothing, offered nothing; he simply voted "no" and is now already starting his revisionist history lesson.

I know a small minority of people can?t appreciate a ?compromise?  but this
is a great thing for our city.  It?s all about mature people  putting their
own personal interests aside and compromising.

What personal interests did the Vice Mayor put to the side? What compromise did he make? Tell me...maybe I missed them...I am deaf in one ear...although sometimes at these meetings, I feel one good ear is one too many.

I know of one small minority who can't run a meeting, who can't speak into microphones clearly so the public can hear them, who can't put a budget together after having gone through the experience twice or more times, who can't say "NO" to growth, and who can't direct staff to come up with budget proposals for something other than what Maryann brings to them.

I know of an even smaller minority who will be campaigning next year on how he didn't vote to raise taxes yet will sing the praises of the three core projects listed above. If we didn't have that mil rate for that budget, you wouldn't have those three "core projects" being funded; you guys didn't come up with projects and then figure out relevance and how to fund them; you guys picked a number and let staff answer the question: "what can we do with this?"

Only a politician could vote against the mil rate, yet argue in defense of his vote on the budget based on the mil rate that he opposed. How can he say it is a good budget when it only exists because of the mil rate that was voted in? A mil rate he voted against. If, say, a 2.5 mil rate had been voted in, those "core projects" would be cut severely or out all together.

Having it both ways is a concept I gave up on when I was five...but then again when I was five, I didn't know any Vice-Mayors.

 I am proud of  my fellow council
members I think we all did the right thing last  night.

What else could you have done? The budget is due in two days, so you had little choice. In addition, the council had given staff no direction in what to cut from the budget;so what did the council actually do? You passed a 35% increase in our taxes; when the county raised your rates 66% percent you were all pissing and moaning about it, yet turned around and tried to do the same thing to your citizens with a 58% increase. And you guys knew about the county increase for 2 months. You wasted all of those summer meetings and workshops on the budget by changing your mind on the SECOND vote; that is to say, you didn't know what you wanted after all of those meetings.

 
Patrick Fulton

Perhaps, or perhaps not, you will see another side to the argument that our Vice Mayor is offering. For all of his posturing there are facts that remain: he offered no other mil rate; he offered no other proposal nor did he direct staff to come up with proposals for a different mil rate. While Mayor Coleman offered 3.0 at an earlier meeting/workshop, no direction was taken on this. It's not just Fulton who is at fault here, but the council not able to work together or really understand the process that some of them have been through so many times before. Why that is, is a mystery to me.

It's always easier to come out afterwards and do some revising but the facts remain and they remain on this website as a check against willy nilly arguments that just don't stand up to even a mediocre review which I have done here. Maybe the Vice Mayor will write in and tell me how I am wrong...which I am quite often...

In closing I quote again from this very website under the link of History: Key to the Future:

Practical politics consists in ignoring facts.

Henry Adams

We'll see what happens to this issue of our Vice Mayor's non-stance (nonsense) over the mil rate and budget. History truly is the key to the future because the Vice Mayor is concerned about the future: His.

Norm Erickson

9/18: A short POP Editorial on Patrick Fulton's illegally placed signs all over the city. By Norm Erickson in POP Editorials. All candidates will want to read it.

9/16: Find the answers to :"They only complain. They never offer solutions." John Likakis sets the record straight with facts and dates starting in 1999. Go to POP Editorials to get informed.

Click Here: POP Editorals

9/14: New editorials in Citizens' Editorials.

9/9: A citizen says "No" to Marina and development. Citizens' Editorials.

9/8: Two NEW Citizens' Editorials about that meeting with developers and miss-managing the city.

9/6: Mark Meister endorses the City Manager, Danny Tillis and Patrick Fulton. Read about it in the Citizens' Editorials.

9/4: Two new Citizens' Editorials from Mark Meister and Van Conoley.

9/1: Norm Erickson has a new POP Editorial concerning the Commuter Rail that is now NOT about a train that goes from Volusia to Osceola. Incredible, you say? Not in this town, kids. Not in this town. Go to POP Editorials...it's time well spent.

Mark Meister is in Citizens' Editorials. He responds to Erickson's editorial on Commuter Rail and Erickson replies back.

New City Hall? Check out the Citizens' Editorials.

8/31: A great editorial in Citizens' Editorials about taxes, fees, and the direction of the city.

8/23: New Citizens' Editorials to check out about issues facing the city and Mark Meister responds to Van Conoley's quiz.

8/19:

Time for a quiz. Take a look at Citizens' Editorials to read Van's article on taking stock of the city.

8/11: A citizen writes in about the house on Gem Lake. Check it out in Citizens' Editorials

Remember that the survey for the "How Shall We Grow?" did NOT include the response "No" as it related to growth or the commuter rail. It was a series of forced choices accepting growth and accepting the commuter rail. The PEOPLE were not given the choice of saying "No" to growth or the rail so the survey doesn't really reflect what people want because they didn't allow a response for what they didnt' want. And that's wrong.

On Friday, August 10 th there was a forum about “How Shall We Grow?”

Some interesting quotes from the paper:

Daytona Beach News Journal:

“The problem is going to be trying to change the directions of the public,” Bill McMunn, president of Consolidated-Tomoka Land Co. Last time I checked, it was the citizens, the PEOPLE that determined the direction government goes. This guy isn’t even elected. So first he’ll work on our elected officials and then they’ll put the screws to us.

DBNJ:

“To make room for additional people…cities and counties will need to funnel some growth into higher buildings.” Phil Lauren, executive director of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. There goes our horizon.

Sentinel:

“Curbing or stopping growth was not presented as an option.” So “How Shall We Grow?” means that the choice or will of the people NOT to grow is not available. Hmmm…

Sentinel:

David Marsh, an Orange County resident said, “this was the beginning of a groundswell to put pressure on the politicians. Local governments have to bite the bullet and say no to development.” Unfortunately, a voice in the wilderness who politicians would say just doesn’t understand the constrains and needs of the people and that growth is going to happen so we need to prepare for it.

Lastly, for the record: the commuter rail was sold to the public to alleviate traffic. Not 24 hours after being voted in by the Volusia County Council, Deland had plans for 200 homes around their station that is not even on the list and more growth in DeBary around the station to support the rail vision. We need to build hubs of growth to make the commuter rail successful. These new homes will put more cars on the road not less. Al Everson of the Deland Beacon newspaper called this bait and switch months ago…I think I’ll call him Cassandra from now on.

All of this goes to the question posed by Sandra Walter: Who is running our government? See below

Norm Erickson

Who’s driving local government?

Published 8-06-2007

Deland-Deltona Beacon Newspaper

By Sandra Walters

I bet when you went to the polls in November and dutifully cast your vote for your candidate, you thought you were having your say in the way all — or most — local decisions are made.

If you were lucky and your candidate won, then, hey, it’s all good.  

 And, I bet when you think of a city manager or a county manager, the image comes to mind of a desk-bound bureaucrat, hired and trained simply to do the bidding of those very elected officials, as they go their way doing what the voters want.

Betcha you’d be wrong.

The more one reads and hears about local governments in action, the more one becomes eyebrow-raisingly aware that a lot — repeat, a lot — of the decisions, large and small, that make the wheels of government either creak or glide, are made in conference rooms and private offices that belong to men and women who have one thing in common: Nobody elected them.

Hiring decisions? Firing decisions? What projects get voted on, objected to, green-lighted or shoved under the bus? Budgets, agendas and various official whats-its? All these important items could very well be in the hired hands of your friendly neighborhood top dog in the executive offices down at the Metropolis Mega Complex. And in the hands of his or her trusted assistants, whose names also weren’t on any ballot.

According to the Web site careers.stateuniversity.com, the median annual salary in the United States for a (city) manager in 2004 was about $89,000. The same site also says managers “are not authorized to take action on their own.” 

Operating under a general directive from elected officials, a manager researches options and presents them, for a final decision by the governing body.

Here’s where things get a bit gray. Can a manager fire a staffer without consent or input from elected officials? Or would that be considered “taking action on their own"?

Are managers accessible to the public? Should they be? Or, is it better for them to keep a low profile and work behind the scenes?

What happens when managers consolidate more power into their own hands, and the elected officials agree to help them bypass more open procedures?

As staff members, not elected officials, are managers subject to Sunshine Laws, or are their meetings and discussions private and not open to the public?

Is the public interest better served when a trained, experienced manager takes the lead in running things, or when elected, accountable officials hold the reins?

Do we even have a choice, or is this power balance decided far away from the voters’ ears and eyes? Is it a deliberate decision, or is it something that just evolves, depending on personalities, goals and opportunity? 

Don’t assume that because somebody holds an elected office, he or she has control of everything and everyone in their purview. The truth is, large and small decisions, judgments and interpretations can, and often do, come from people you might not expect to be wielding power.

If local government is a game, as some say, then it wouldn’t hurt to learn the players — and to know what game they’re playing. Battleship? Monopoly? Candyland? But that’s a subject for the next column.

— Walters, a community activist, lives in Enterprise.

8/9: Citizen Editorials: Van on the CRA Article posted below.

Upcoming Meetings:

PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE

EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL
 REPORT SCOPING MEETING
1:00 P.M. – Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The City of DeBary will be producing an Evaluation and Appraisal Report for the city. A public meeting will be held on Wednesday, August 15, 2007, at 1:00 p.m. to identify and discuss the major issues in their community that should be addressed in the EAR.

If you would like to learn more about the EAR and participate in the process, please plan on attending this public participation meeting. The meeting will be held at the FLORENCE K. LITTLE TOWN HALL located at 12 Colomba Road, DeBary, FL 32713

8/5: Isn't this what a DeBary City Council tried to bring to our fair city with visions of the good that it would do for us?

Also, check out a Citizen's Editorial about Lenny and Norm.

CLICK HERE: Citizens' Editorials

August 05, 2007

Consider dissolving redevelopment areas

The problem is that we can't seem to figure out how to properly implement the theory to achieve real results.

Daytona Beach has five CRAs and not one has delivered any significant bricks and mortar promise to constituents within the areas. This failure persists in spite of the fact that most of the CRAs have existed for decades. The sole exception to this broad statement is the Ocean Walk development, and that project still sparks argument.

Rather than achieving needed and long-delayed infrastructure improvement, crime reduction, elimination of multi-family uses of single-family structures by encouraging conversion back to single-family use and general redevelopment and property improvement, the trust money simply sits there.

Daytona Beach is awaiting the results of an audit to chase down expenditures to date, but we all know that there has been no visible attainment of goals I have just described. All of those matters remain "just around the bend," but that bend never seems to arrive.

Worse yet, the trust funds have become a target for all sorts of proposals that require great linguistic feats to be hammered into the statutory categories defining the proper expenditures of CRA trust fund money. Sitting money invites mischief.

Someone much smarter than me defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I thus propose the following debate:

I would like to see a reasoned discussion as to whether the public would be better served by simply disbanding the five CRAs and making the accrued trust funds and future tax increment an asset of the general fund of the city. This would require the application of the trust fund and tax increment during the dissolution process to pay off all TIF bonds so that each CRA would become free of debt and therefore legally in a position to be eliminated.

This discussion would need to be accompanied by a public process undertaken by the City Commission (most likely, one of their infamous "blue ribbon" committees) to identify and prioritize a series of real projects and initiatives, every one bearing the commitment of a time line and an anticipated budget.

Each such project would have to bear the badge of accountability through timelines and monitored budgets. The funds would come from the additional revenue freed up from unlocking the CRAs and would not impact the existing general fund budget.

I believe that the whole concept of the CRA is flawed in that it is based on the notion that blight remains static over 30-year (more or less) life of a typical CRA. Some areas improve faster than others and blight does migrate independently of the borders of the CRA. The proper concept of redevelopment and improvement is that it is the right and expectation every citizen and location within the city, not just those situate in a CRA created a long time ago by a commission and circumstances far far away.

Burnett, an attorney, is a member of Daytona Beach's Mayor's Advisory Committee. He wrote this an a memo to the panel, which has been discussing CRAs, a topic to be continued at the next public meeting at 6 p.m. Aug. 28, News-Journal Center.

WHAT IS A CRA?

In 1969, the Legislature authorized local governments to set up renewal districts, called "community redevelopment areas."

A CRA must have one or more of these elements: A slum area, a blighted area, or an area in which there is a shortage of affordable housing for residents of low or moderate income, including the elderly, or a coastal and tourist area that is deteriorating and economically distressed due to outdated buildings, inadequate transportation and parking facilities, faulty lot layout or inadequate street layout.

A redevelopment authority can buy and sell property. It can construct roads, sewers, water lines, parks, public facilities and improve buildings. It cannot build general-use public buildings or use its funds for regular city or county operations, except for community policing within district borders.

To raise revenue, authorities can issue bonds and apply for grants. They can also set up tax increment financing in this way: A base is set for property-tax revenue during year one of a CRA's first year. Thereafter, increases in tax revenue above the base --with some exceptions --are channeled into a fund that can be used only in the redevelopment area.

*************************************

8/2: New Citizen Editorials...check them out.

8/1: "As I was saying..." Jack Paar

After a short absence I’ve come back to Volusia and DeBary to the following:

1. Commuter Rail has passed unanimously but not, as the Daytona Beach reports “with unanimous sentiments.”  So our elected leaders can no longer vote their sentiments or conscious much less by the facts or how they will pay for this thing.  Oh, in the Orlando Sentinel it is reported that Deland developers are already planning 200 homes around their station that is to alleviate congestion.  But don’t worry, you won’t pay for it…the City, County, State, and Federal Government will…and that’s not you, is it?

2.  Orange City had a gang related stabbing and a gun was pulled.  Are we sure we can’t afford an extra deputy or two here in DeBary?  Will the commuter rail make it easier for evil doers to commute to this area to deal drugs and cause wrinkles? It’s only going to be $2.50 to ride the rails.

3.  Flyers are being sent out by an Orlando firm looking to buy up the historic homes of DeBary.  What will happen? The historic, single story homes will be knocked down and replaced with two story monstrosities that do not fit the character of the existing neighborhoods. Will these new homes flood the homes on either side of it?  But we’re told we can’t say no to developers, who get more perks from this city than Jerry Lewis during the final hour of the telethon.

4.  We have a sign on Highbanks and 17/92 advertising the Walgreens coming to town. Boy, won’t that be a great corner to drive and walk. Wasn’t that whole area flooded during the hurricanes?  Was this even discussed by the Council?  Things just seem to happen…yet we don’t have enough fire hydrants.

5. The good news: Because the State has mandated that cities cut their taxes, we won’t have the fiasco we did last year when they went up 37%. Which leaves a question: what will be cut to lower taxes? What will they spend the money on and what won't they spend money on. And what about all of the money they collected last year? Where is it?

There is a City Council Meeting tonight…come out and watch the festivities… 

Norm Erickson

*****************************************************************

From John Likakis

And so it begins…

….the opportunity for the people of DeBary to be invited back into the affairs of the City. To have their voices heard. To help restore Trust and fiscal sanity. And it can happen this year when you vote for two new City Council members-

Norm Erickson and Lenny Marks

For the past few years, they watched and listened to a City Government going out of control-on taxes, zoning, growth and especially in their disregard to the voices of the public. I’ve been at it a bit longer-10+ years. That’s why, a year and half ago, they and I decided to set up a citizen’s website financed by the three of us. And it is why a few weeks ago, having had enough, they decided to run for City Council Seats 1 & 2. To restore Trust. To help make the City Council a Citizen’s Council. The website, www.debarypop.com: People Over Politics is to let anyone write in or click on to read Citizen’s and POP editorials, commentary and analysis on City goings-on. To date, there have been over 60,000 hits on the website. We are delighted that so many citizens are eager to finally get information on who’s doing what. We would like it even better if more citizens would write in and let us know what they’re thinking-good or bad-without fear. It’s their website.

Unfortunately, as in most elections, the amount of misinformation that will be written and spoken by the incumbents will increase. For instance, one common comment is: “All they do is complain. Never offer solutions.” Well, it proves one of our points. They don’t listen. IF they did, they would have heard-or read-dozens of solutions and/or recommendations submitted by the three of us recently and over the years. But isn’t it the job of the City Council to listen to a citizen’s comments/problems and go to work on a solution? If citizens have solutions to their problems, who needs a City Council? Go to the website and you will see editorials, suggested solutions and recommendations some of which go back years without response or acknowledgement. Here’s one: “Fix the audio system so people can hear what’s being discussed and voted on.” “Fixed” last month, after years of neglect, just in time for the elections. A “little” item, but it shows their attitude towards the public. Here’s another: Skateboard Park. Almost two years of no response to its location-Memorial Park-or the estimated cost of $2 million, despite overwhelming objections from citizens and veterans associations. Finally, last month, agreed to move it to Rob Sullivan Park-as suggested. In time for the election? How transparent can they get? And there’s more on taxes, borrowing money, zoning, etc. The information you will be getting from Norm and Lenny is based on Facts. Not conjecture. Not personal opinions. FACTS. The incumbents own words or actions which, try as they might, cannot refute what they said or did. It’s on the record. I’m just asking that you be aware of some smoke and mirrors.

If you want to see Trust and Honesty returned to City Government, you need to seriously consider the two challengers. Knowing them and working with them over the years I can only assure you they are dedicated to returning citizen respect and involvement in City matters. This is not a campaign slogan to be ignored after election. It’s a real passion and it’s not taken lightly. They are independent thinkers and will not always agree on a given matter. Nor will they rubber stamp pet projects. In seeking a solution they will both be looking for what’s good for the citizens and the City of DeBary.

This election is more important than you may think. Your quality of life is being contested. Play a role in your future.

Vote.

John Likakis

July 2, 2007

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

{Sadly, this sounds like a VGMC meeting or some City Council meetings that run into the NEXT DAY--Norm Erickson}

7/4: Water, water everywhere? Not hardly. Read Van Conoley's Citizen's Editorial in Citizens' Editorial.

FRIENDS IN FLORIDA:

7/3: New Editorial from Mark Meister on the importance of wisdom and solutions to our problems. Check it out in Citizens' Editorials...

7/1: Van Conoley is feeling his oats: He has an editorial below and in the Citizens' Editorials about DeBary Library. Both are time well spent.

Health care is a serious issue in America today. In poll after poll, health care was named by most Americans as either the first or second most important issue that relates to them. The United States is one of the few remaining industrialized democracies in the world that does not provide health care to all of its citizens. Interestingly, some smaller and poorer countries like Costa Rica, provide universal health care to their citizens. The U.S. spends more on health care than any other country in the entire world. Like our failing public school system, our health care system is the world's most expensive with very little to show for it.

XXX It is accurately estimated that 46 million people in the U.S. do not have any health care insurance. These individuals are only one serious hospital visit away from bankruptcy.

XXX The skyrocketing costs of health care are destroying many working-middle class Americans. A Harvard study found that during a recent five year period, health care insurance premiums increased by 73% while individual wages increased by only 15%!

XXX In 1991, just 16 years ago, 80% of all U.S. companies provided health care to all of their employees. Today, less than 60% of all companies provide full health insurance coverage to their employees. In a few years, it is expected and projected by analyists, that less than half of U.S. companies will provide health care to their employees. Also, many corporations are providing so little coverage today that this is the reason that employee contributions have doubled in the past five years.

XXX Just about 100% of health care economists and health care experts agree that Congress could solve our health care crisis easily and immediately with sensible legislation. So the question is: Why doesn't Congress solve the problem? The answer is extremely simple. The greedy special interest groups that fund the campaigns of our Congressional Crooks don't want the problem solved. The five special interest groups that oppose sensible health care reform are: 1) Health insurance companies, 2) many trial lawyers, 3) most medical providers, 4) pharmaceutical companies, and 5) large multinational corporations that operate in the U.S. and don't want to pay health care benefits for their employees. These five special interest groups are benefiting greatly from the present system. Their profits are obscene and each blames the other four for undermining a sensible health care program in America. XXX With all of this bad news, it seems that it can't get too much worse for the working middle class. But our Congressional Crooks have one more trick to play on the working-middle class. It seems that Congress is not concerned about our border with Mexico and illegal immigration. Hence, the most nefarious way large corporations totally avoid health care costs is to employ illegal immigrants. Not only do some corporations avoid health care costs this way, but they also sometimes avoid paying individuals the minimum wage!

XXX Unfortunately illegal immigrants get sick. When they do, they go to the local public hospital emergency room for treatment. Most public hospitals, by law, must treat anyone who enters the emergency room. When the illegal immigrant can not pay, the hospitals send the bill to the government. The government then pays the bill with tax dollars that were levied mainly upon the working-middle class taxpayers!

XXX Rosa Parks started the Civil Rights movement by saying that she was not going to sit quietly on the back of the bus anymore . Soon a leader is going to arise and speak for the working-middle class taxpayers in behalf of health insurance the way Ms. Parks did for Civil Rights. When this happens, the cesspool of public corruption, known as the U.S. Congress is going to be flushed out of office.

by R. "Van" Conoley

6/30: POP Editorial by Norm Erickson on more CRA woes in Daytona. It keeps proving how right we were to defeat it here in DeBary. While some may think that bringing up the CRA is moot, it was such an insult to the citizens that it has no half-life; it has no statute of limitations. Furthermore, if someone does think that bringin up the CRA issue is wrong, it more than likely implies that they were for it when the city tried it.

6/28: A new Citizen Editorial by a new visitor to the website and Van has some sage advice for all...Citizens' Editorials

Lenny and Norm have a new POP Editorial on the Non-Action of the Council concerning the actions of the City Manager. It's time well spent...

Click here to read it: POP Editorals

****************************************************

Although packets are not ready to run for a council seat, Norm Erickson and
Lenny Marks have opened campaign accounts.  Lenny Marks will be running for
Seat 1 (Danny Tillis) and Norm Erickson for Seat 2 (Patrick Fulton).

Lenny and Norm have been heavily involved in the issues facing the City for
the past few years.  They have attended and spoken out at dozens of
meetings.  They have written dozens of editorials on DeBary POP discussing
their opinions on any number of issues.  Unlike most candidates that run for
a seat, they have not just recently been seen at meetings. They along with
John Likakis have started DeBary's first website for citizens.

The City Council needs to be re-formated into the Citizens' Council.  In the
coming months Lenny and Norm will be outlining their platform on DeBary POP.

We're not late to the party.

We've been saying it for some time now.

Go to the following links to read what Lenny Marks and Norm Erickson are on the record about. They haven't been saying this stuff because the election is coming up...they've been saying it because they care about DeBary.

Click on one of the following links:

Lenny Marks: On The Record

Norm Erickson: On The Record

*****************************************

Do we want more of the same for the next three years?

Check out this link: Vice Mayor Fulton and Councilman Tillis

6/21:

After the Council meeting on 6/20 Councilman Lenzen informed me that "big box retail" means 100,000 square feet or more. A 9,000 square foot store hardly qualifies. Councilman Lenzen thought I was being a little too cute by half and very crafty with my language. Not so. I was simply ignorant to the fact that "big box retail" necessarily means a certain amount of square footage. Councilman Lenzen is the first to serve me a dish of crow and he deserves an award from the Mayor for keeping me in line. I'll take the blame and not shift it on to someone else. For the full story on the "big box" story, scroll down below and read the story.

Norm Erickson

Afterthought: While I appreciate Councilman Lenzen setting me straight on the meaning of "big box retail", it makes the fact that he and the Council said nothing about the City Manager's mishap concerning the minutes and Jay Erndl all the more troublesome and irritating. It goes to show that while there is an ability to discern right from wrong, there isn't always the desire to discuss it much less correct it. When I make a mistake it looks silly, when the City Manager and Council makes one, it can be dangerous.

6/16:

On the agenda for June 20th:

Correction to the March 21st Minutes.

Issues:

Do we want big box retail?

Will we even be allowed to discuss it?

And will the Council have the

testicular fortitude to ask the tough

questions?

Since the Council nor the City Manager discussed the mystery of the missing minutes at the meeting, we have only the newspaper account by Tanya Caldwell on 6/8 that is found in the Orlando Sentinel. In that article the City Manager said, "...it does not matter what the minutes say because they are of a workshop and no official action was taken." {So when they have a budget workshop it doesn't mean anything?} That is true. No action was taken. But won't these decisions made at the workshop come BACK to the Council where action WILL be taken? Isn't that the point of the workshop. It is the first step and so if it wasn't discussed it can't come back to the Council.

Now, what was wasn't discussed? Well, the Dollar General Store wants 9,000 square feet of retail space. They can now only build to 5,000 square feet. In addition, Walgreens that will go across from Winn Dixie wants 14,000 square feet. These have to clear up in Tallahassee first before the city can approve their plans. If it is not done in this order, it is a violation. The change in the minutes is the first step in allowing the Dollar General and Walgreen to build big box retail. Furthermore, once this is done, there is little to stop other developers to bring big box into DeBary. How do I feel about big box retail? I don't know. What do we want as a city? Ahhh, but that discussion wasn't to be had if the City Manager had her way. She wanted that agreement to increase retail in policy 5.403 so that these two stores can go through and that is what this is about right now: THE PROCESS. The City Manager lied to the Council she doctored the minutes and its only because it was in the newspapers and not from a citizen that they are going back to change it back to reflect the record. This Council and City Manager listen only to the Fourth Estate.

The City Manager ASKED for the minutes to be amended; she wanted the policy change that the Council never discussed. The City Manager either lied to the Council or was grossly incompetent in saying they agreed to a policy change they hadn't even discussed. She can't say she made a mistake because in the paper it says that Stacy Tebo did which I find to be so transparent and feckless. Those are the City Manager's only two choices: lying or gross incompetence.

Fortunately for her, she knows our Council doesn't care either way...she knows this better than anyone. How will they respond at the June 20th meeting? Will they ask why she said they agreed to something they never discussed. Again, the City Manager said she was going to play the tapes of the Council agreeing to the policy change. Why did she say this? All of these things may be pursued in the City Manager's office but they sure as hell won't be discussed publicly. Someone will stumble through some contrived excuse on Wednesday's meeting for the mystery of the minutes. If the Council doesn't demand a explanation, perhaps someone from the citizenry will. If it had not been uncovered, then that policy change would have come back to the Council, they would have voted it through, and we would have big box retail in DeBary. If that's what people want, great. If not, great. But let us at least discuss it and not let someone run roughshod over the process before we even get to the ISSUE. It's so bad now that it isn't even the issues that we face, but the process LEADING UP TO THE ISSUE is in question. Too much of what this City does and how it reacts to issues is being hashed out in private.

As for myself, with what has been happening in this City with mystery minutes, VGMC, and the State, I'm as confused as Charlton Heston was in the Planet of the Apes when he's in the field and looks up to see the chimp on the pony. Only in DeBary, kids. Only in DeBary.

Norm Erickson

STATE SAYS "NO" TO RIVERBEND ESTATES PROJECT;

VGMC VOTES ON SAME ISSUE THREE TIMES AT 1:30 A.M. WHILE REMAKING WHAT THE COUNTRY ESTATES AT RIVERBEND WILL LOOK LIKE;

HOW GOOD ARE YOUR DECISION MAKING POWERS AT 1:30 A.M.?

AND THE WINNERS ARE:

THE LAWYERS;

6/13:

City Council is lied to and their minutes are changed without their authorization;

Council’s response: It does not matter;

Changing of records is a violation –Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation;

In the 6/8 newspaper article, the City Manager said, “…records of the workshop are not important.” Question: If the records are not important, why did SHE want the minutes amended? She introduced the change at the April 4 th meeting. I’ll ask her this at the next Council meeting so tell her to have a response ready, thank you.

The City Manager said that “…this is not a freaking conspiracy.” Who said it was? What kind of language is that for a City Manager to use? “freaking”? When was conspiracy mentioned? Besides, conspiracy intimates more than one person, Ms. Courson and you did this on your own. You said you were going to play the tapes to show the Council’s agreement. Play the tapes. Do what you said you were going to do. That would shut me up real fast, wouldn’t it? Major crow for my dinner. You said the Erndl recommendation was based on emails. Show us the emails. Oh, you don’t have them like you thought you had. And with all of this, we’re supposed to trust you on all of the other issues facing this city?

If you don’t love the King and their family, you don’t have a monarchy. If you don’t fear the dictator, you can’t have a dictatorship. And if you don’t have virtue and honesty in a democracy or republic, then you won’t have a democracy or a republic.

The Council doesn’t care if the City Manager lied and changed the minutes; they should. If the Council does not have a problem with being lied to, then it isn’t a far leap to say they don’t have a problem with lying about things themselves. Councilman Tillis did that when he told Van Conoley he submitted reports about his trips only to have Maryann try and cover for him before he admitted that, indeed, he did not file a report. Erndl was let go for that reason. Or was it the City Manager’s baseless reasons? Whatever the reason, Tillis’s seat is in jeopardy using their own logic.

Citizens of DeBary, six people are running this city and they are doing it more so in private than out in public. We truly have an oligarchy: the rule of the few. Decisions and directions are being arrived at off the record. We’re only getting 20% of the story. That’s sad. But it is up to the citizens to go to the meetings and demand change.

Norm Erickson

p.s.

This would never happen in America, right?

From the June issue of National Geographic:

China’s Instant Cities

By Peter Hessler

Lishui depended as much on construction sites as did the itinerant entertainers. Chinese cities aren't allowed to raise funds through municipal bonds or sharp tax increases, so they turn to real estate. Legally, all land belongs to the nation, but local governments can approve the sale of land-use rights—the closest thing to private ownership. Cities acquire suburban land from peasants at artificially low set rates, approve it for development, and sell for a profit on the open market. Across China, an estimated 40 to 60 percent of local government revenue is acquired in this way.

New apartment complexes were rising all around Lishui, and one of the biggest was the Jiangbin development. Formerly, the 16.5 acres (6.7 hectares) had belonged to the village of Xiahe, but in 2000 the city government bought the land-use rights for one million dollars. Three years later, Lishui flipped the land to Yintai Real Estate for 37 million dollars. Given that corruption is endemic in Chinese real estate, the actual price may have been even higher.

************************************************************************************

From Pat Hatfield's Blog at Deland Beacon Newspaper:

HERE'S WHERE TO PICK UP IF YOU ALREADY KNOW THE BACKGROUND


On May 11, two days after Courson's letter, VGMC staff — with an environmentalist in tow — developer Joe Krzys and his staff, Assistant City Manager Anthony Gonzalez, VGMC chairman Jerry Brandon and a few assorted people met on the River Bend property (formerly known as the Murphy and Egan properties) for a walk of the property and discussion. The meeting was private, and Krzys wouldn't allow this reporter to listen in, saying the property owner objected to outsiders on the property. Although, he said, I could mosey on down the way, and look at a different piece of the property while they confabbed.

The VGMC chairman arrived a little late, trying to find the place, and had to climb over the closed gate to get onto the property and look for the wandering group.

Good times.

6/5:

PUBLIC TO HAVE SAY ON MARINA RIVER PROJECT

IN DEBARY?

From the Orlando Sentinel 6/5:

"Now, because of settlement talks, DeBary is allowing the public hearing, though the city has vowed to continue fighting if the growth commission rejects the project."

Once again, to hell with what the people want. Well, I say we show up and remind them from whom their power flows: the people. I'm sick and tired of having the people's vote and input trumped by people who would have no power without the people. We tell THEM what to do. It's called...representative government if I'm not mistaken.

Furthermore, that's a hell of a way to have settlement talks: If you don't approve the project, we'll continue to fight you. No wonder the City Manager wanted to get rid of Jay Erndl because this City Staff is falling over themselves to get this through NO MATTER WHAT.

If the people don't want this then it is a no go. November really is too far away.

In addition, I'm also tired of the DeBary City Council saying opinions from "outsiders" are not as worthy as those of DeBary residents.

First, from what I quoted from the Orlando Sentinel, anyone's opinion or input will fall on deaf ears unless we shake them up.

Secondly, when the Council says they don't want to hear from outsiders, are they talking about their own City Staff, most of whom or perhaps all live outside of DeBary? I'm confused.

Enviromental impacts do not only stay in DeBary; they impact everyone up and down the river. Moreover, the origin of a thesis or opinion is irrelevant to that thesis. The City Council does not want to respond to the voices of the people, only dismiss them based on geography. How weak, pathetic, and expected of this City Council and today's society so opposed to debate and discussion based on facts and reason.

Please attend the meeting to remind our officials that citizens shouldn't be afraid of their government...government should be afraid of their citizens.

The public hearing is set for June 11th, 7 p.m. in the County Council chambers on the second floor of the Thomas C. Kelly Administration Building, 123 W. Indiana Ave., DeLand.

Norm Erickson

6/3: POP Editorial by John Likakis

on DeBary Government

and the people's responsibility.

Click on POP Editorial to read it...it's time

well spent.

5/30: BREAKING NEWS:

Did the City Manager Dupe the Council?

City Manager Amends Minutes Without City Council’s Authorization

New Minutes Can Change Comprehensive Plan

Changes Were Not Discussed or Agreed Upon By Council

FACTS:

All dates refer to 2007:

3/21 :  Workshop on the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) Amendments. While the Council discussed many things, there was no discussion or agreement on “allowing larger retail in policy 5.403.” There was agreement to update the maps because they are practically illegible due to repeated copy making.


4/4 : In accepting the minutes for the 3/21 workshop the City Manager wanted to add something that was missing. It was her “understanding” and her “recall” that:

“The Council agreed to the text change to the Village Center Overlay, to allow larger retail in policy 5.403 and to update all the maps this year.” (This is from the minutes on 3/21)

However, the Council did not vote on these additions/changes to the minutes and held off until the tapes could be played which the City Manager said she would do at the next meeting (5/2).  The minutes were not amended, accepted or changed but postponed. Moreover, the Council did not agree to “allow larger retail in policy 5.403” at the 3/21 meeting. I’ve watched the meeting and it’s not there; it wasn’t discussed. That the City Manager wants to use words such as “her understanding” and “my (her) recall” that the Council did agree to it, does nothing, in my opinion, to strengthen her argument. This is the City Manager who said Jay Erndl was against the River Bend project only to say later she had an “inkling” that he was against it only to have our Vice Mayor say that the “inkling” was based on an email that was based on conversation that can not be corroborated.



5/2 : The 3/21 minutes were voted in with no amendments or additions/changes although Mayor Coleman asked if there were any.  All were silent for a staggering 24 seconds between the time the Mayor brought up the minutes to be voted on and Councilman Tillis making a motion to accept them. Accepting minutes and voting them through is the most common and usual piece of business a Council performs and yet it took them 24 seconds to do it. Why? The City Manager offered nothing and the Council did not ask about anything regarding the minutes. Councilman Tillis motioned and Councilman Carson seconded the vote and it passed.  Thus the minutes that were voted in and accepted on 5/2 did not have the changes the City Manager offered on April 4 th, yet when one reads the minutes from 3/21 the changes that were proposed but not voted on are in the minutes. These additions to policy 5.403 will change the Comprehensive Plan without agreement from the Council and without the changes to the minutes being approved by the Council.

Commentary on FACTS:

At best the City Manager changed the minutes without the vote of the Council. At worst the City Manager persuaded the Council to believe they had discussed and agreed to a Comp Plan change that they did not discuss much less agree on. In addition, the Council believes that they discussed and agreed to something they did not discuss or agree with which is equally troublesome.

Beyond that, the citizens of DeBary are stuck with a Council that gives away the powers given to it by the people to the City Manager who is more than anxious to wield power not her own for some reason unknown to us. Will she benefit by changing policy 5.403? In what way? Did she promise a developer this? Why? Who was the developer? All of these questions need to be asked and answered because she wanted this for some reason.

In all fairness, the City Manager may want to play the tapes of the 3/21 meeting wherein she said the Council agreed to the text change in allowing larger retail square footage in policy 5.403 because maybe I missed something.  Of course, I have watched the meeting a few times on the web cam and I heard nothing about policy 5.403.  But the City Manager said she was going to bring in the tapes from 3/21 to play to the Council, so I would like to hear what she “understood“ and “recalled“ as their agreement to increasing larger retail in policy 5.403. If she still has the tape and would like to bring it in, the next City Council meeting is on June 6 th.

How improper is it when unauthorized changes in the minutes are made? Excuses as “we forgot” or the “process was not followed” just will not cut it because she said she was going to bring in the tapes from the 3/21 meeting to play to the Council so that they could hear their agreement to allowing larger retail in policy 5.403. Moreover, the changes in minutes can result in the Comp Plan being amended without authorization from the Council.

Why is the City Manager doing these things? Because she knows she can. She knows the Council will do nothing about it. How unfortunate for the citizens of DeBary; it makes November seem so far away.

Norm Erickson

Recently debarypop.com was down for repairs...but as you can see...we are back in business. Thank you for your patience. Norm

5/30: Citizen Editorial:

River Bend Estates Project—or—The DeBary City Manager

Vs

The Volusia County Growth Management Commission (VGMC)

Who knows best? An outspoken City Manager pushing a weak City Council around or a group of weak Councilmen being manipulated by out-of-County attorneys and planners? That’s an easy decision: neither one of them. How about the people of DeBary making the decisions?

The City Manager doesn’t live in the City. Neither do the City or VGMC attorneys or the VGMC Planners. Yet all of them want to TELL the City’s residents and City Council what to do. Why not inform the residents of DeBary of the facts about this project; let them make their decisions; and then direct the Council on what would be the right thing to do. Not one-sided, manipulated and emotional decisions, but informed, factual discussions that benefit the entire City. Not just some residents. Not a decision pushed on them by the City Manager who manipulates the Council and then brags about it to developers. What is her professional background? Certainly not planning. Working with developers is one thing. Granting them free reign with zoning changes, building in marginal or sensitive land area, letting them get well along with their plans-knowing the plans don’t fit the zoning-is how the city gets into lawsuits.

The VGMC has a purpose. They just aren’t doing that job. It’s too mundane. They want to control all land use decisions in the County. But that isn’t what they were created to do. They are supposed to examine County and municipal proposed land use changes for consistency or inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plans of adjacent local governments. That is not what they are doing in this case or any other recent case before them. They exceeded their Charter directive because no one was watching them and holding them accountable attorneys continue to wring every penny from the Commission for work beyond the scope of the VGMC-because they can. Why does the Commission have the same planning staff and attorneys that they had in the 1980’s? Why not vary their advisors at least once a decade to get fresh ideas and better prices for services? Once again—too mundane.

The current situations is the fault of the City Council for always taking the direction the City Manager pushes them towards without doing their homework or any independent investigation…and…the VGMC for not doing the job they were created to do for the residents of the County. They allowed themselves to be manipulated by their staff, attorneys and Volusia County. There is plenty of responsibility in this fiasco to cover all the parties. Will any of them step forward and take their share of the responsibility? Will they all start doing their jobs as specified in the City and County Charters? Not likely. This is politics rearing its ugly head with the usual half-truths and exaggerations. The voters will have to do the job of correcting this in the Fall.

They need to make sure the two Councilmen who are the City Manger’s “yes men” are removed and to see that the City Manger be removed along with them and her developer friends—before they overbuild DeBary in the name of increased tax revenues. But not telling you about the consequences of “growth” as it pertains to traffic, water problems, infrastructure costs, school problems, additional police and so on. Kiss your life style goodbye if these changes aren’t made because “Smart Growth” as they call it for DeBary, is an oxymoron.

There are plenty of good people in DeBary who can step forward to help keep this unique City honest, solvent, and livable. Please come forward. NOW.

S.L. Smith

A Concerned Citizen

************************************

5/15:

5/13: Van Conoley discusses the opposite of progress: Congress. How lobbyists are costing all of us big money regardless of the letter after their name. And he responds to Mark Meister's email in Citizens' Editorials. Also, you will find an update on the VGMC and River Bend project sent into DeBary POP. Go to Citizens' Editorials...it does a mind good.

THE ART OF SHOVELING SMOKE

by

Lenny Marks

  What an interesting paragraph Vice Mayor Fulton wrote in an email on 4/13/07 about essentially two types of committees (boards as he likes to call them): 

Removal of a Board Member
First, anyone appointed to a board serves until removed or they decide to retire off a particular board the member serves at the will of the council.  To clarify things related to serving on boards  -  there are essentially two types of boards  -  one board provides options and possibly differing opinions to the council.  We look for people who are willing to give us new and innovative ideas to help the city grow and provide the best type of services possible to it’s citizenry.  A perfect example of this would be the Economic Development Committee.  We encourage open debate and dialogue on these types of boards and consider them to be “advisory” in nature.  However,  the other board is NOT advisory and their role is to carry out the will of the council on a particular board or committee.  Some good examples of this variety of Board/committee is WAV (Water Authority of Volusia  -  which I sit on) and VGMC (Volusia Growth Management Commission).  The members on these boards are to relay the views of the City Council and not the individuals personal v iew.  Sometimes the two views (council and the individual member) don’t agree but the council should ALWAYS take precedence.  I have had similar situations while sitting on the WAV board  -  but I know I am on the board to reflect the Councils views and not my own.   If I can’t do that then I would resign from the WAV board.  You might think of this person as being the City’s liaison or even the city’s lobbyist.  If you hire a lobbyist to do a job and they wont do it .. then you replace them.  There was some doubts relayed through Anita Gonzales to Maryann whether our representative on the VGMC would carry out our will.  Maryann asked at a city meeting in an open forum to replace him with another member  -  which was done.  

He states that one board/committee is nothing more than members who will say only YES and agree to whatever the Council’s desires are; the other is an advisory board/committee that is able to have open debate and dialogue. 

Let’s look at the advisory committee/board; he states that “We look for people who are willing to give us new and innovative ideas to help the City grow and provide the best type of services possible to its citizenry. We encourage open debate and dialogue on these types of boards/committees and consider them to be advisory in nature”. Sorry, Vice-Mayor, the only debate and dialogue that occurs, is what is allowed. For example, if the subject is Commuter Rail you better be for it because all the information you present means nothing. It becomes a monologue not a dialogue. If the subject is the CRA, you better be for it because your arguments mean nothing. So when all is said and done, it is also a YES board/committee. Select the right Chair and members and you can get whatever you want. I’m certain that anyone you appoint to serve on a board/committee must have the same mind set as you or you would not select them. Have you ever noticed how many times the City and the people disagree? It’s because certain agendas and visions are more important than the people’s agendas and visions.  

Let’s look at the YES type board/committee. What good is it to sit on a board/committee when the only option a member can do is vote YES, because that is the will of the Council. Vice Mayor Fulton forgot to mention, the committee/board that he serves on, WAV (Water Authority of Volusia), or the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) that Councilmember Tillis is Vice Chair of, the Volusia League of Cities, The Florida League of Cities and many more whether it be County, State or Federal are all ELECTED OFFICIALS appointed to the committees/boards. I wonder whose views they have to agree with. I doubt if it is the PEOPLE’S view. They are just YES board/committees. With the description he gives committee/board members are subject to the will of the Council even if they disagree with the Council’s wishes.

 Do Council members hold themselves to what the People want as strongly as Fulton would want a committee/board member to hold to what the Council wants? Indeed, our Vice-Mayor has stated twice that sometimes governments have to do what is best for its citizens even if they, the citizens, don’t want it.  While I disagree with the Vice-Mayor’s opinion, he seemingly also disagrees with himself (again) as it relates to the actions and opinions of committee/board members.  While Council members may go against the People, committee/board members damn well better not is what Mr. Fulton has argued. The absurdity is that both Council and committees should be subject to the People. Further absurdity is that Mr. Erndl’s position on the River Bend project was misrepresented by City Manager, Maryann Courson.  What about that?  What about Maryann’s actions of bringing this up at the end of meeting, ram-rodding it through not on facts but “inklings” and slurring a citizen’s character in the process.  What about that, Council?  You have yet to make a motion to right this wrong.   

Mr. Fulton states that when two different views exist between the Council and the individual member, the Councils view should always take precedence. The Vice Mayor has left an important part of the equation out of the formula, that is, shouldn’t the Council be doing what the views of THE PEOPLE are. It seems the good folks are always left out, no matter how hard they try making themselves heard. The Council’s views over the PEOPLES views, how sad. No wonder our City Government is not trusted, you give little respect, take us the people for granted and are only concerned where the next taxpayer’s dollars will come from.

 The way Councilman Fulton explains how the boards/committees are set up shows us a truly flawed system, it is so stacked against the people that they can never win. It is never the will of the people; it’s always the will of others, who know much better than we do, what is good for us. Quite honestly, it stinks. It sounds like one of the requirements, if you want to on be on a board/committee, is to answer the question; how many ways can you say YES! It must be true because Councilmember Fulton has told us this is how board/committee system works. It’s hard to win with a stacked deck.  

Ask Tom Smith who was Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) if that is a true statement! The City got rid of him in a New York minute. Ask Pat Northey how fast she was shown the door as president and chief executive officer of the West Volusia Chamber of Commerce Committee. Ask Gary Libby a founding member of the advisory committee that recommends how Volusia County spends ECHO fund monies. Let’s not forget about Jay Erndl who was dismissed from the committee he served on, Volusia Growth Management Commission (VGMC) because our City Manager had an inkling he was not serving the best interests of DeBary. Mr. Erndl went in front of the Mayor and Council to defend himself and clear his name. What did the council do with this information? Nothing not even a meager apology to Mr. Erndl. Business as usual gets what you want, even if it’s wrong. THIS IS WHY THE PEOPLE CAN”T WIN. It seems that debate and dialogue are good as long as it agrees with the powers that be, but make sure it agrees with their ideas.

 If anyone has had a similar experience with boards/committees that they served on, I would like to know. If it’s been done once it’s been done many more times. It is monologue over dialogue when it comes to the public. 

This article appeared in the Orlando Sentinel 5/2/07.

Thanks to the Sentinel and Nancy Imperiale for this informative article.   

 Fates of Volusia advisers might depend on politics

 By NANCY IMPERIALESENTINEL STAFF WRITER          

   The Volusia County Council on Thursday is expected to appoint dozens of community volunteers to key advisory boards.   But these seats may not have as much power as in the past. The council has proposed several rule changes that would tie the fates of board members to the political terms of the individual council members appointing them. Another change would allow council members to boot volunteers from two boards – including the powerful Planning and Land Development Regulation Committee – without having to give a reason.   At least one government watchdog worries this will have a “chilling effect” on volunteer decision-makers. “I think it will deter some of the most able people in the community from serving, because they in fact would be perceived as a clone or a ‘yes person’ to the appointing council member,” veteran Volusia political observer T. Wayne Bailey said. “As a citizen volunteering my time, I would have real reservations about a council having the right to veto my thinking. … That’s not unusual that council members seek out persons whose positions they identify with. But I don’t think in the past they’ve sought out people who would be automations who would walk the chalk line for council-member approval.” One current board member who is reapplying for his position worries that being able to remove members without cause could send the wrong message.  “It certainly doesn’t do much for candor or giving good advice,” said Jack Crocker, chairman of Volusia’s Beach Policy Advisory Board. “It’s an advisory board. If they want our advice, don’t tell us what our advice is going to be.” 

Chairman likes proposal         

County Chairman Frank Bruno defended the proposed changes.    “I’m not saying we’re putting people of the same mind-set on boards and if they’re not of our same mind-set they’ll be removed,” Bruno said Tuesday. “But at the same time, if you have a board member that for one reason or another a council member feels does not represent him or her, they serve at the discretion of the County Council and they can be removed.”

Bruno says allowing board members to be removed without cause is designed “to save them embarrassment” from having reasons for disclosed.

            As of Tuesday evening 143 people were vying for 73 spots on nine advisory boards that make recommendations to the council on everything from multimillion-dollar land purchases to helping needy children.Such boards are the first step for important issues that go before the council.   Planning and Land Regulation members, for example, meet once a month to hear rezoning requests, review land-development plans and consider requests for changes to the county’s Comprehensive Plan. The board’s recommendations go to the council, which has the final vote on such issues.            Many of the board applicants have served, or are currently serving, on advisory boards. They include retirees, political activists, teachers, artists, Realtors, a stay –at-home mom, a wildlife biologist, financial planners, professors and general manager of a Dairy Queen. Many of the applicants grew up in Volusia, with strong community ties. Several incumbents are reapplying to serve. 

Changes to be considered         

   Among the proposed changes to be considered at Thursday’s council meeting:

* Term limits would be eliminated for the Tourist Development Council, Code Enforcement Board, Children and Families Advisory Board, Agri-Business Inter-Relationship Committee, Beach Policy Advisory Board, the Cultural Council, Volusia County Library Advisory Board, ECHO Advisory Board and Volusia forever Advisory Board. Instead, board members’ terms will expire when the council member who appointed them leaves office.

         * County Council members would each appoint their own nominee to boards. In the past, openings on boards were filled by council members on a rotating basis.

* The county chair and vice chair would be able to nominate two board members – one each from the county’s east and west sides.

         * Rules providing explicitly for removal without cause are proposed for the Planning and Land Development Commission and Historic Prevention Board.

* Members of numerous boards will be automatically removed for missing more than two meetings per calendar year.

         * A previous requirement that members of the ECHO and Volusia Forever advisory board file financial disclosure has been removed. “The disclosure of personal information discouraged members from serving,” council members said, and is not required by state law. 

Applicant withdraws name 

In another development, former County Council member Bill Long – who left office last year amid controversy surrounding his personal life – has removed his name from the list of applicants for several boards. Upon further reflection, Long said Monday, he did not want his appointment to create “any negative distraction” to the work of the boards. “I just felt, after thinking and praying about it … I would not like to be a lightning rod or distraction from any of the boards I would have been proud to serve on” said Long, who added that he plans to concentrate on his business and travel. The County Council will meet Thursday at the Thomas C. Kelly Administration Center, 123 W. Indiana Ave., in Deland. The meeting begins at 9a.m.

 **********************************************************************************************

5/11: Citizen Sounds Off on River Bend Project

Check out Citizens' Editorials

5/7/07: Van Conoley talked with Jay Erndl:

 On Saturday, May 5,2007, I spoke with Jay Erndel at his house for a
few minutes.  Jay is a soft spoken gentleman who has discharged his
duty to the Citizens of DeBary by carrying out his responsibilities
by serving on the countywide growth management council.  After
speaking with him, I am certain that he will discharge his future
duties responsibly.  Also, he was openminded about the yacht club
development and would listen to both sides fairly.  I can not find
one good reason why he was removed from his position.  


I would hope that all of the members of the Council who voted to remove Mr. Erndl
would write a short statement and tell the Public why they find Mr.
Erndl unsatisfactory, when he is so well qualified and competent.


Van Conoley



RESPONSE FROM NORM ERICKSON:


Actually, Van, we know why the council voted the way they did: they acted
on the information given to them by the City Manager.  This information 
was later refuted by Mr. Erndl.  The City Manager said she had an "inkling"
that Mr. Erndl was not in favor of the project.  Mr. Erndl rebutted that 
and our Vice-Mayor, to his credit, said he would have voted differently if he
had known the whole story.  That is to say, the City Manager did 
not give the whole story.  Moreover, she slurred a citizen's character 
based on an "inkling".  Is this what Anita Gonzalez's evaluations 
were based on? 

Is this the type of City Manager we want?  And why would the Council
trust anything else she has to recommend?

The theme is that if you're not on board with the City Manager, 
then out you go even if Maryann doesn't really know if you're on board
or not.  This makes me question the reasons Maryann gave for giving Anita
Gonzalez a bad evaluation all of a sudden when she had been earning 
very good evaluations previously.  


The City Manager is in favor of bias and prejudice not facts and reason.
 
The VGMC is to decide issues based on facts
and reasons not biases and prejudices. But the City Manager wanted the 
bias of Danny Allen on that commission. And that is why she made the 
recommendation that she did.


This is what we know. 

We also know that the Council hasn't taken any action on this issue to
keep Mr. Erndl on the commission.  They have talked about it but
they haven't done anything in terms of a motion.  


What we don't know is this: how many other issues were recommended
in a like fashion and for similar reasons by this City Manager? Are we
really to believe that this was the first and only time?


Norm Erickson

Transcript of John's speech read to council:

Council Meeting—May 2nd, 2007

$KATEBOARD PARK

While many citizens and veterans may wish to speak on this issue it, would behoove the Council to respect their right to speak even if it may be repetitious because it seems you haven’t gotten the message yet. My only comment now is to say you have shown a calloused indifference to me, to other speakers, and to your fiscal responsibilities. Mr. Carson, your only comment on the skateboard park was “we need to finish what we start.” You don’t care what it costs or where it’s built. And Mr. Fulton, you were very firm during the mil rate discussions sticking to 2.5 and repeatedly saying “We must live within our means”, voted “no” a few times only to vote “yes” for a 3.0 mil rate. And now you vote “Yes” for a $2 million skateboard park. And Councilman Tillis, you championed this project from the beginning but lately have been silent as it grew from $600,000 to $1.7 million. Are you still in favor of designing and building a $2 million dollar skateboard park? The three of you are playing loose and easy with $2 million of the taxpayers’ money. And to disregard the significance of this Memorial Park-particularly at this time in our country’s history-is shameful to say the least. You’ve heard all the reasons not to do this, yet you blindly push ahead. That is to say, you are not listening or you are listening and do not care. If so, what are your justifications to spend our money on a project that costs too much and in a location that would be disrespectful to those who have served. And if you think they don't care, you're wrong; they have decided to feature this issue of the location of the Skateboard Park on the cover of their May/June issue of the DeBary VFW Newsletter that will be sent to over a 1,000 members.

I am asking you to make a motion tonight to move the skateboard park away from the Memorial Park—there are other places you can build it—and to reduce the size and cost. Even go back to the original estimate- that is still too high-of $600,000 or less. Failure to do this is to continue down a path that is untenable and unwanted by citizens and veterans represented here tonight. If you do nothing else tonight, put a stop order on the $200,000 planning and design until this problem is resolved.

Show that you care about the veterans honored there, their families and the overwhelming will of the taxpayers of this City. Furthermore, this discussion of spending this amount of money is made even more ludicrous knowing that revenue will be severely decreased due to lowered property taxes.

Why is it that only the Mayor and Councilman Lenzen realize this?

Why is it that only the Mayor and Councilman Lenzen seem to know what it means to be responsible stewards of our money?

And I will repeat we are not against building a Skateboard Park. We are against the location and the exorbitant cost.

Let’s see if you will finally do something about it.

Thank you,

John Likakis

UPDATE:

Norm Erickson here. Although John didn't say it that evening, the Moose Lodge and the American Legion are dead set against the Skateboard Park being built at Memorial Park. You know, John asked the questions to the council and three hours later they gave their response—when most of the people had left. Tillis still wants the skateboard park but wants to work with the Veterans. Fulton said it should be put on hiatus NOT because of the cost or location but because we don’t know how much revenue we’ll have as a city with the property taxes up in the air until the Legislature convenes in June. Fulton made no motion to put the project on hiatus he just said it. The Mayor seemed to intimate that they couldn’t vote on something that isn’t on the agenda. Until about ten minutes later when a RESOLUTION was voted in that wasn’t on the agenda. This Colombo “oh, just one more thing” that city staff does at the very end of the meeting is getting to be too much and must be addressed. It just so happens I am available in June to do just that.

Cheers,

Norm Erickson

4/30: Citizens continue to say "NO" to $kateboard Park. Check out Citizens' Editorials.

4/28: New Citizens' Editorials...it's time well spent.

Norm Erickson has a POP Editorial and asks the question: should we put 100,000 dollars into art for some or another deputy providing protection for all?

$kateboard Facts:

Thank you for responding to our flyer on the Skateboard Park. The following information contains the facts as of this moment. A more in-depth article can be found in the POP editorials headlined "Its Time" which is reprinted below.

Fact 1 :- Inspite of what you may hear from our City representatives, such as, "We've only committed to the conceptual design stage." The fact remains that the most recent "concept" shows an elaborate skateboard park that intrudes into the Memorial Park. You don't authorize  a designer /contractor  to spend $200,000.  for something he is not going to  do. And detailed budget sheets show  $1.7 million  already allocated .

Fact 2:-  We have six City Parks.  Two of them each have 3 baseball fields.  If the City feels that a skateboard park is essential for our kids, they can convert one ballfield and the skateboard park will be right where it should be. In a recreation area.

Fact 3:-  We never said we shouldn't have a skateboard park in DeBary. Never. We don't know how many skateboarders there are in DeBary who will use. What we have said - over and over - is not for $2 million dollars and not next to the Memorial Park.

Fact 4:-  The Council has never explained to the public what they are doing and how they went from $600,000. to $1.7 million + . They almost put us into hock for 40 years with the Partnership Center.  So, who  should we trust.

Fact 5:-  Only two Councilmen understood the fiscal peril of not only committing to this project but questioned continuing maintenance cost involved. To no avail. Mayor Coleman and Councilman Lenzen were the only ones with any foresight.

You're welcome to go to the more detailed article that was presented to the Council  at the last meeting.  And thanks again for visiting our website.  Actually, it's YOUR website and we look forward to hearing from you.

John Likakis

Lenny Marks

Norm Erickson

IT'S TIME

The following article is a copy of the presentation to the City Council on 4/4/07 by John Likakis. Even if you were there, chances are you may have heard a small portion of this and other presentations, Council conversations, voting and the City Manager’s comments.

It is shameful after all these years of miserable audio at Town Hall that the City has not and will not do anything about it. They can squander money elsewhere but to spend some for the good of the Citizens who do come to the meetings doesn’t seem to be one of their “DO” items. Maybe they don’t want us to hear what’s going on.

IT’S TIME-TO LET THEM KNOW THE PUBLIC DESERVES SOME RESPECT.

City Council Meeting – April 4, 2007

At the last meeting, I voiced some concerns about the Skateboard Park. It’s cost, its location. Not to mention our loss of revenue for this coming fiscal year. Those who voted for it showed an inability – or indifference – to the consequence of their action. The stubbornness to consider anything but what you have been blindly pushing since it was pork barreled with the Partnership Center a few years ago. When with one vote, without public presence, you voted in two things – one, something no one wanted and two, a skateboard park very few people knew about. In the intervening years, did anyone take the time to look for other available vacant parcels that could be used? Did anyone consider placing it in one of our existing parks? Were other bids asked for? Not the current Taj Mahal of skateboard parks, but a reduced version. If it is important enough to do – then put it in Bill Keller Park or Rob Suvllivan Park. The natural place to put a skateboard park, in a recreation area. At your last meeting you spoke about adding another ball field or soccer field in Sullivan or Keller Park and said it would be better at Keller. Right now there are six (6) baseball fields, three (3) in each. Do we also want to be the Little League capitol of Volusia County. Well, why not a skateboard facility? If it’s so important, take out a ball field or soccer field. But that might interrupt a personal agenda.

The way this park has been handled leaves an awful lot to be desired. We are not a City of idiots who have to be led around by “Father Knows Best”. You keep hoping that no one is paying attention to what you do. But there are those who are watching and the number is growing. Yes, the public is not appearing at Council meetings as they should. But that is no excuse for not keeping them informed in any way you can. Besides the exorbitant cost – which will exceed $2 million – not including routine maintenance costs – even if you spread it over four (4) years, the taxpayer will still have to pay for it. And with costs increasing every year, who knows what the final cost will be.

What you’ve done with the parcel bought from the Chamber of Commerce is even more disturbing. Here is the purchase outline on the Team Pain Page. The plans submitted on 9/4/05 fit into this area. Another plan dated 12/12/06. Yet another plan on 2/7/07 showing an intrusion of approximately 90 feet, or 160 feet, depending, which map scale is being used, and providing Gladding Jackson hasn’t been given Carte Blanche for the entire park. When did all these changes take place? Where is the beautiful evergreen sign shown in front of the airplane? Is the letter of agreement dated 4/26/06 still valid? It’s based on a 9/5/05 design, etc. You, in effect have turned the Memorial Park into Debary Skateboard Park. It’s an affront to the 2 (two) men honored there, to their families and to veterans everywhere. The fact that you now own that property does not give you the right to do as you please to fulfill personal agendas. And to say some kids will get to see a bit of history and patriotism is stretching it a bit. You know little about me and I prefer it that way, but don’t lecture me on patriotism. I served in Europe and the Korean War; I am secretary of the Lake Helen Chapter of the Korean War Veterans Association and take a dim view of what you are doing. We have already spent double what other larger cities have spent, $400,000; $200,000 planning, $200,000 land. Deland spent $120,000 for a complete park. Other Cities average $200,000 - $250,000 for complete parks. Is Team Pain one of the best skateboard park builders? Yes. But do we need a Lamborghini or would a Lincoln fit our pocketbooks better and still give the kids a very good park.

Only two Councilmen had the wisdom, courage and understood the fiscal danger to City and its taxpayers to vote against spending $2 million for a skateboard park. They are Mayor Coleman and Council member Lenzen. 

The lack of fiscal responsibility – not only on this project, but many others, is almost unbelievable. Yet you ask us to trust you. When I asked about an additional 1.5 acres that were added to the park, I was told it was a rumor and you didn’t know anything about it. Let me refer you to page 3 of your letter of agreement dated 4/26/06. In brief it states “…Memorial Park and a 1.5 acre addition.”

There is an expression that goes: “The most delicious of all privileges is spending other people’s money.” You do it well, but it’s not delicious if you’re the taxpayer…and we are. I suggest again that you find another place for the Skateboard Park, reduce the cost, get it done faster, and keep the people informed of your plans before they are cast in bronze. I am not the villain here. YOU ARE! Because you and previous councils promised the kids a skateboard park more than four (4) years ago and have delivered nothing. I feel sorry for them.

John Likakis

DeBary, FL

Volusia County Growth Commission Meeting:

4/24: Check out a new Citizen's Editorial in Citizens' Editorials about the $kateboard Park.

4/21: Vice-Mayor and City Manager wrong in so many ways

The kid stays in the picture: Jay Erndl will remain DeBary board member for the Volusia County Growth Commission; it was like a thunderbolt in my Cheerios this morning.

The day after Hitler's birthday we learn that DeBary city staff and city council do not even know the rules of the Volusia County Growth Commission. The Commission's lawyer sent a letter to our fair city saying that Jay Erndl did nothing to allow the city to remove him from the Commission. Is this blunder brought to the city council the final straw for our City Manager? Should she resign? This is what happens, as we've been saying and now the Orlando Sentinel echoes it, when you bring up issues casually at the end of meetings to push them through. Vice-Mayor Fulton in an email last week said, "anyone appointed to a board...serves at the will of the council." WRONG.

He also recognized that Erndl was perhaps taken off without getting all the facts from Maryann...but what did our Vice-Mayor do? Nothing. Did he make a motion to keep him on the Commission? NO. Did any of our council? No. Why? Because they want this development so damn bad they will run roughshod over not only the rules they know about, but also the rules they don't know about. It is against public policy to subject public officers (like Erndl) to the fear of removal from office without cause and that is why you can't just take them off the commission for an "inkling" that is raising the hairs on the back of the neck.

Perhaps Erndl should sue the city for slurring his character and alienation of affection. Citizens voted more power to this Growth Commission yet our city does not want to hear from them under any circumstances. They have no legal authority to remove Erndl for the "reasons" mentioned and they are suing the commission to prevent them from having a meeting.

Ladies and gentlemen, our city is out of control making decisions without reason, regard, or research. What can we do? Well...it's an election year see...but that is another editorial for later...

Norm Erickson

*******************************************

4/19: Van Conoley has one of the best, shortest editorials ever sent. Check out Citizens' Editorials.

A Triple Threat...er...Treat: John, Lenny, and Norm:

The Unholy Trinity

Where to begin?

They say good things come in threes.  Unfortunately, not in DeBary.

I waited this long to let my mind - identified as weak by our Vice-Mayor - to settle down from the past week’s turmoil.

If the intent of the DeBary trio - Koslow of the News Journal, our City Manager and our Vice-Mayor - were to make certain that an individual would have a most difficult time of ever finding a job after leaving City employment, then they succeeded wonderfully.

I have never, in over 40 years in the business world, seen such a hatchet job done on an individual.  I've never seen a Corporation or client ever publish anything more than the name of a person that has “resigned for personal reasons." Sometimes followed by "we wish them well in their new endeavors." Regardless of the reason why the individual was leaving or was asked to leave.

Mr. Koslow's article combined with the City Manager's quotes was as vicious as it could be. And then to have the Vice-Mayor follow it up with a 300+ word e-mail stating how right this was to do,  the many reasons there were - some questionable it turns out - and how he discussed this with the City Manager at the Tornado Relief Concert. Shouldn't the Mayor get first shot at this? Yes, she can hire and fire, but common courtesy and moral ethics call for informing the Mayor on what she is intending to do and why.  This trio failed these simple business and personal ethics miserably. I am particularly dismayed with our City Manager who I personally recommended to the City Council when they were looking for Mr. Diamond’s replacement.  Mr. Koslow and his Editor leaped on an opportunity for some sensational journalism without taking the time to examine the facts or consider the impact on the individual concerned.

The same hatchet job was done on Mr. Jay Erndl who works - worked - for the Volusia County Growth Management Committee. This committee works with Cities to review and assist with all the various clearances required for new developments. He didn't even know he had been released until he got to work. Or for what reason. He came to the City Council meeting on April, 16th  - for a hastily called meeting the Friday before - to present his side of the story. He said "I don't like what's being said about me" and proceeded to present to the Council the half-truths and misinformation that were being supplied by the City Manager and the Vice-Mayor.  Enough to convince the Vice-Mayor- who likes to consider himself as never wrong - to reconsider his position against Mr. Erndl.

What is going on? A Council fraught with personal agendas. A Council that has the City embroiled in another law suit. A Council that stated during the discussions that "we are not here to take a vote on anything" and then proceeds to do just that. A subject so important that a full Council should be present - not just 3 members. And they are suing the VCGM - the people who can help keep them from getting hung up in problems before it is too late to do anything. Two members said they would like to hear and discuss any information that the VCGM could give them. But our City Manager insisted the City proceed with a law suit and the developer's attorney threatened a law suit if they allowed the hearing to be held. Our City Manager said, "If we let them have the hearing, they could come up with things that could change what we've agreed to do" ;. Gee, isn't that better than getting knee deep in trouble at a later date? Vote: 3-0 to sue.

Is the City's thirst for more tax revenue so great that nothing else matters? Should every bit of open space be filled no matter what? Should zoning be manipulated to suit the developer? Who's running this City? The Council will get a "wish list" to ask for what they want in next year's budget. How about one from the citizens of DeBary? What would they like to see from the City - besides TRUST....HONESTY ...fiscal responsibility?

I don't like what's happening to DeBary. And I am not alone.


John Likakis