Buddy's Boys (and Girl)
WOW!!
.
Last night’s special meeting of the Port Orange Town Center CRA had it all. There was glitter, fantasy, smoke and mirrors–even a dead dog and an adorable granddaughter were trotted out to sell some condominiums. The performances were admirable as Buddy’s Boys (and Girls) once again held the taxpayers hostage and demanded ransom.
.
Seems like everyone in the real estate business that stands to make a dollar on the project stood up and sang Buddy’s praises while Mayor Green got most members of the Board to agree “in principle” that taxpayers should help fund the shaky $125 million deal. But since Board members come and go and Buddy needs to keep his political backing strong for a lot of years to come we also heard from the newest members of Buddy’s gang–those candidates for City Council and, future vote sellers, that he has helped along the way with $1000 campaign contributions.
.
I’d like to see their pictures on the Post Office wall and have bounty hunters after them. Introducing the new members of Buddy’s Boys:
.
Mike Gardner
618 Ruth St
Port Orange, FL 32127
Corruption in local government: demographic factors
Excerpt:
Certain demographic factors may exist within a municipality that can lead to or encourage corruption within a local government. Demographic factors pertain to demography which is the study of human population statistics, changes, and trends including personal characteristics of humans like population size, migration, age, gender, social class, level of education, race, religion, occupation, and family status. Because there are many factors that can lead to corruption in local government it is hard to study corruption patterns empirically, but recently, improved research strategies and information sources have made such studies better.
Demographic factors Causing Corruption
Socioeconomic characteristics and the size of the population of people that make up a municipality can be encouraging factors for local government officials to engage in corrupt practices. Patterns of political corruption can be found in places that have a similar demographic make-up. Demographic factors that have been known to lead to or increase the likelihood of corruption in a local government system are religion, race, class, size of the municipality, local economic conditions, education, political culture, and gender. Some factors are interrelated or can lead to other factors which may cause more corruption.
Size of a Municipality
Larger municipalities tend to encourage corruption to take place within a local government. Bigger municipalities require more local officials to represent and run the local government. With more officials, it is harder to keep tabs on each one and establish a decent administration and to monitor their activities. Large municipalities may also have inadequate or insufficient policing and prosecution of corrupt local officials. This also encourages corruption to occur in local government because there is less likelihood of either getting caught or prosecuted, therefore, more officials may become dishonest or at least be tempted to.
Condition of the Local Economy
Low economic development has been found to be an encouraging factor for political corruption. Economic practices like dependence on raw material industries and drug trades are characteristic of poorer cities and areas with increased amounts of corruption. Economic dependence on certain industries will also lead to less stable governments and less amount of money available to fund governments. Fragile economies lead to increased levels of poverty and less opportunities to get out of poverty. Poverty is a known factor that encourages corruption in local governments. Places with failing economies and poverty sometimes get loans or start aid programs to support the local economy and the people, and public officials are often able to unlawfully take the money or goods for private gain. With less money available, local officials are more likely to get lower wages which is seen as another factor that leads to corruption. Officials who get lower wages which are not enough to provide for their necessities, they will many times become corrupt and try something like embezzling money that may entrusted to them in the local treasury. Low wages can cause economic insecurity and encourage politicians to take advantage of current opportunities as a public figure of authority. On the other hand, some researchers argue that the more money a local government has to spend, the more tendency it will have to do so inefficiently, which can lead to suspicions of corruption. Overall, poorer municipalities are more often perceived to have corrupt local governments than rich ones.
Education
Lower levels of education which are often caused by poverty are seen as a factor which encourages corrupt government practices. With less amounts of education people are not informed as to how the government works or what rights they have under the government. It is easier for corrupt office-holders to conceal corrupt activities from a poorly educated public. Uneducated citizens are less likely to be aware of corruption in local governments or how to stop it, and therefore, corruption is able to remain and spread. Without some kind of political awareness, citizens will not know which candidates to elect that are honest or dishonest or other ways to prevent corruption from taking place in their local governments. This often leads municipalities to be continually governed by one or more corrupt local officials who use patronage or nepotistic practices to stay in office or keep influence in the government for long periods of time. When local political leaders are less educated, they will be less likely to find legitimate ways to make the municipality well-structured, productive, and successful.
Political Culture of the Municipality
Many local governments have an established political culture with certain expectations and practices that often determine what is seen as acceptable and not acceptable in local politics. In municipalities with an undeveloped or underdeveloped political culture, accountability and legitimacy is usually low and principles of ethics in government are not established. This can encourage corruption to take hold in the local government because citizens do not know what is considered corrupt, and local officials are not afraid to be corrupt because of the low accountability. In some places the local governments have been corrupt for so long that the citizens think that is how it is supposed to work because that is all they have been exposed to. Long periods of political instability will also lead to corruption in the government because people are unsure of how the government should operate, and thus do not know what practices are corrupt or how to stop them if they are corrupt.
Types of Corruption Found in Local Government[edit]
There are several types of political corruption that occur in local government. Some are more common than others, and some are more prevalent to local governments than to larger segments of government. Local governments may be more susceptible to corruption because interactions between private individuals and officials happen at greater levels of intimacy and with more frequency at more decentralized levels. Forms of corruption pertaining to money like bribery, extortion, embezzlement, and graft are found in local government systems. Other forms of political corruption are nepotism and patronage systems. One historical example was the Black Horse Cavalry a group of New York state legislators accused of blackmailing corporations.
Bribery is the offering of something which is most often money but can also be goods or services in order to gain an unfair advantage. Common advantages can be to sway a person’s opinion, action, or decision, reduce amounts fees collected, speed up a government grants, or change outcomes of legal processes.
Extortion is threatening or inflicting harm to a person, their reputation, or their property in order to unjustly obtain money, actions, services, or other goods from that person. Blackmail is a form of extortion.
Embezzlement is the illegal taking or appropriation of money or property that has been entrusted to a person but is actually owned by another. In political terms this is called graft which is when a political office holder unlawfully uses public funds for personal purposes.
Nepotism is the practice or inclination to favor a group or person who is a relative when giving promotions, jobs, raises, and other benefits to employees. This is often based on the concept of familism which is believing that a person must always respect and favor family in all situations including those pertaining to politics and business. This leads some political officials to give privileges and positions of authority to relatives based on relationships and regardless of their actual abilities.
Patronage systems consist of the granting favors, contracts, or appointments to positions by a local public office holder or candidate for a political office in return for political support. Many times patronage is used to gain support and votes in elections or in passing legislation. Patronage systems disregard the formal rules of a local government and use personal instead of formalized channels to gain an advantage.
Demographic factors Causing Corruption[edit]
Socioeconomic characteristics and the size of the population of people that make up a municipality can be encouraging factors for local government officials to engage in corrupt practices. Patterns of political corruption can be found in places that have a similar demographic make-up. Demographic factors that have been known to lead to or increase the likelihood of corruption in a local government system are religion, race, class, size of the municipality, local economic conditions, education, political culture, and gender. Some factors are interrelated or can lead to other factors which may cause more corruption.
Size of a Municipality[edit]
Smaller municipalities tend to encourage corruption to take place within a local government. Smaller municipalities require more local officials to represent and run the local government. With more officials, it is harder to keep tabs on each one and establish a decent administration and to monitor their activities. Small municipalities may also have inadequate or insufficient policing and prosecution of corrupt local officials. This also encourages corruption to occur in local government because there is less likelihood of either getting caught or prosecuted, therefore, more officials may become dishonest or at least be tempted to.
Condition of the local economy[edit]
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (May 2014)
Low economic development has been found to be an encouraging factor for political corruption. Economic practices like dependence on raw material industries and drug trades are characteristic of poorer cities and areas with increased amounts of corruption. Economic dependence on certain industries will also lead to less stable governments and less money available to fund governments. Fragile economies lead to increased levels of poverty and less opportunities to get out of poverty. Poverty is a known factor that encourages corruption in local governments. Places with failing economies and poverty sometimes get loans or start aid programs to support the local economy and the people, and public officials are often able to unlawfully take the money or goods for private gain. With less money available, local officials are more likely to get lower wages, which is seen as another factor that leads to corruption. Officials who get lower wages, which are not enough to provide for their necessities, will many times become corrupt and try something like embezzling money that may entrusted to them in the local treasury. Low wages can cause economic insecurity and encourage politicians to take advantage of current opportunities as public figures of authority. On the other hand, some researchers[who?] argue that the more money a local government has to spend, the more tendency it will have to do so inefficiently, which can lead to suspicions of corruption. Overall, poorer municipalities are more often perceived to have corrupt local governments than rich ones.
Education[edit]
Lower levels of education which are often caused by poverty are seen as a factor which encourages corrupt government practices. With less amounts of education people are not informed as to how the government works or what rights they have under the government. It is easier for corrupt office-holders to conceal corrupt activities from a poorly educated public. Uneducated citizens are less likely to be aware of corruption in local governments or how to stop it, and therefore, corruption is able to remain and spread. Without some kind of political awareness, citizens will not know which candidates to elect that are honest or dishonest or other ways to prevent corruption from taking place in their local governments. This often leads municipalities to be continually governed by one or more corrupt local officials who use patronage or nepotistic practices to stay in office or keep influence in the government for long periods of time. When local political leaders are less educated, they will be less likely to find legitimate ways to make the municipality well-structured, productive, and successful.
Political Culture of the Municipality[edit]
Many local governments have an established political culture with certain expectations and practices that often determine what is seen as acceptable and not acceptable in local politics. In municipalities with an undeveloped or underdeveloped political culture, accountability and legitimacy is usually low and principles of ethics in government are not established. This can encourage corruption to take hold in the local government because citizens do not know what is considered corrupt, and local officials are not afraid to be corrupt because of the low accountability. In some places the local governments have been corrupt for so long that the citizens think that is how it is supposed to work because that is all they have been exposed to. Long periods of political instability will also lead to corruption in the government because people are unsure of how the government should operate, and thus do not know what practices are corrupt or how to stop them if they are corrupt.
Oppressive Government
There is no entity that is more obnoxious than government. No entity kills more. No entity plunders more. No one entity violates more individual rights more often, with more impunity. And none spews more propaganda and lies. History proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Be it a monarchy, oligarchy, union of socialist republics, or a communist Nation-State like the people’s republic of china, you can rest assured that a big powerful government will be the bane of Liberty every time. It has always been this way. Government must be checked. Bureaucrats must be resisted. They must be over-ruled. Thomas Jefferson once said, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure”.
Often people think that government corruption involves certain government employees (or elected officials) breaking the law, taking bribes, or wrongfully issuing special favors to select individuals or cliques to promote their own career. To an extent, this is government corruption, but such activity only scratches the surface. It represents a small fraction of the real corruption going on. The most egregious corruption originates right in plain view in the halls of legislature. It happens routinely now, it’s just that most people don’t recognize it.
Rest assured that if the founders of this country saw how Congress — with assistance and acquiescence from the judicial and executive branches — has destroyed liberty and justice; if they were to witness the current government’s utter disregard and overt contempt for individual human rights, they would be calling for revolution in a big way. The founders were not fond of tyranny. The problem with having a revolution now is that the people have forgotten the virtues of liberty, justice, and rights. A revolution wouldn’t accomplish anything unless more people understand and desire a return to the principles on which this country was founded.
A corrupt government is one that extends unlawful jurisdiction over the people it is supposed to protect. A corrupt government is one that legislates beyond its rightful power by erecting laws that do injury to liberty, justice, and individual rights. A corrupt government believes that might makes right, and that its mission is to curtail freedom, regulate every aspect of personal and financial affairs, and tax the populace into submission while falsely claiming it is acting in their best interest.
The Constitution of the United States was ordained with the primary object being the defense of Liberty. This can be achieved by limiting the government’s scope of power. In the Constitution, specific powers are delegated to three distinct branches of government: The legislative (Congress), the administrative or executive (Presidency), and the judicial (Courts and Jurors). Congress can only create laws in the pursuance of liberty — in pursuance of the Constitution. And two conditions must be met: #1 Jurisdiction must exist and #2, Congressional act(s) must not violate the rights of any individual citizen(s). If both of the conditions are not met, any anti-constitutional decree Congress might install is not valid. It should not be enforced (gun control legislation comes to mind)! An example of a violation of a person’s rights would be a tax levied that involves taking things (like money) from one citizen or group and giving it to another (several anti-constitutional acts come to mind such as farm subsidies, social security, and foreign aid). These Congressional boondoggles violate the right to due process and just compensation.
“Crime fighting” power, as is the case with war power, is the most noxious and abused power a government can exercise. The founding fathers knew this. The scope of Federal “crime fighting” jurisdiction is extremely limited. For example, in Article 1 section 8 paragraph 7, Congress is granted jurisdiction “to establish post offices and post roads”, and in paragraph 10, “to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and against the law of nations.” However, Janet Reno and her minions pretend not to know this. Note that it took an amendment to Constitution to prohibit alcohol, which, not coincidentally, was a disastrous anti-constitutional measure that had to be abandoned later due to the huge increase in real crime that it spawned. Crime fighting power within high tide lines is reserved to the individual States and to the people as jurors.
Congress lacks jurisdiction to subsidize businesses and individuals through confiscatory tax schemes. See Amendment V. Jurists (judges) can nix laws that violate the Constitution and jurors (common folk) can nullify bad laws/prosecutions that violate the conscience. We have a Bill of Rights as an additional check to protect the Liberty of the Citizens and the sovereignty of the States. At the inception of the USA, the citizens of the several states, and their posterity, were assured a maximum amount of Liberty. There was no other nation on earth that offered more freedom than the USA. This brought peace and prosperity as never seen before in history. The federal government must uphold the rights of the people. It must not usurp the just powers of the states. Congress and the executive branch are bound by the Constitution. Every citizen is guaranteed liberty and justice here. We can’t be subjugated. We people; we commoners give the government its just powers. It operates at our consent.
But Not A Democracy
Many people think that what makes our country great is that we are a democracy. Well, this isn’t a democracy. The USA is a union of autonomous Republics. But there is nothing inherently good about either form of government. There are bad republics. There are bad democracies. There are bad dictatorships and bad monarchies. What makes the US unique is that we have a limited form of government. We have a government whose power can’t lawfully extend beyond that which has been expressly delegated to it. I’ll repeat myself. If the Constitution doesn’t expressly give jurisdiction to the federal government over a certain subject, it may not act on it. Note that the Constitution had to be amended in order to punish people who traded in alcohol. We have a Constitution with checks, balances, and limitations on all branches of government. It may seem a novel concept to many, but we citizens have powerful tools at our disposal that can stop statist tyrants dead (in some cases literally) in their tracks. We’re guaranteed the right to be tried by a jury of fellow citizens; by a jury of our peers empowered to judge both fact and law. The government will not tell you this. They in fact blatantly lie about it. But the Supreme Court, every time the issue is brought in front of it, reaffirms that we citizens, as jurors, hold final veto power on any and all arbitrary laws/regulations/prosecutions. And as noted by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper #83, “trial by jury is a safeguard against an oppressive exercise of the power of taxation”. You heard that right. There are no second-class citizens in the US. No government official can carry a title of nobility. The government cannot suspend the right to petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in times of peace. Congress can pass no bills of attainder.
Citizens are Guaranteed due process if the government acts against them. With minor exceptions (mainly military and maritime jurisdiction), the Common Law is the only nationally recognized form of law. We have a right to speak our mind without fear of retribution from the government. Private property is protected. The government must return just compensation if it dispossess a citizen while in pursuit of public goals. The right to bear arms is nearly absolute. Government employees must obtain a search warrant from a judge in order to shake down a free citizen. And even then, a warrant must be obtained from a judge specifying precisely who, where, why, and how a search will take place, and exactly what is being searched for. All rights and powers not expressly delegated to national government, including those not listed in the Constitution, belong to the states and people (amendments 9 & 10). I could go on, but I would be talking about the ways things are meant to be — not how they are now.
Today, most of us are Subjects of a corrupt government. Many are involved knee deep in it. But we are not powerless. We, in fact, should not allow the government to act wrongfully against us. Most people don’t even realize how far off course our government has strayed. We can light the torch of Liberty again. But we won’t do it at the polls. It won’t be done via legislative actions. It won’t be accomplished by way of executive order/decree. Politicians and bureaucrats do not deliver Liberty, they take it! More people are beginning to understand this. It will probably take less than ten percent of us to stand tall, exercise, demand, and reaffirm our absolute right to judge both fact AND LAW in order to restore liberty and Justice. When enough are educated of this power, the Torch of Liberty will begin to shine bright again. Failure to exercise this fundamental right has brought us where we are today.
If a law doesn’t fit, you must acquit! That includes tax code prosecutions as well as excessively punitive and anti-constitutional “crime fighting” legislation. We do not need to wait for a ruling from a judge to nix an unjust prosecution. We do not need to wait for the “right” politicians to erect the “right” legislation to take back our inalienable rights. We people are the ultimate check against despotic government authoritarians. Effective use of trial by jury is deadly to government bureaucrats, politicians, and their henchman. It’s a highly efficient and bloodless form of rebellion. Shall we take back our Liberty now?
How to Recall a City Mayor
A bad mayor can have a large influence on a city within a very short amount of time. When a city population bands together, it can recall a mayor who is found to be corrupt, incompetent or unfit to lead. The trend of recalling wayward mayors in the US has been steady since the 1950s. If you are looking to recall your city mayor, follow these steps to get started.
Instructions
1 Find out about laws and regulations that govern recall in your city. The regulations related to mayoral recall procedures and regulations differ from city to city. You can find the details about how to proceed with a mayoral recall in your city’s municipal code, which is available through most city agencies and public law libraries.
2 Start a movement. The only real chance you’ll have at recalling a mayor is by getting a group of dedicated and determined people together to battle for the recall. Most recall and recall attempts begin with at least a few politicians who oppose the mayor. However, you can keep the movement apolitical by involving local social and community leaders instead of politicians.
3 Collect signatures for a petition. Each city has different requirements for the number of signatures needed to recall a mayor. Find out the number of signatures and the requirements related to signature authenticity and start a well organized signature drive to validate the petition. Make sure that each signature is authentic before you submit your petition to the city council.
4 Use the media to help. Local media is generally very hungry for politically interesting stories, such as mayoral recalls. Get your local media involved so you can spread the message about the recall and enlist others to help with the cause. Also, gaining media favor on the recall issue will help place pressure on city council members to approve the recall of the mayor.
End the Corruption
Porphyry,
Port Orange reverts to State Law for removal of elected officials by way of recall. There is not a provision that I am aware of in the Charter or Code of Ordinances regarding this matter. This can be viewed for free online at Municode. Our charter directs us on terms, pay, responsibility etc. but appears to revert back to the State Statute for recall. The following link should give you all the information you would need.
http://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_recall_in_Florida
Can you say Pam Bondi? I knew you could!
On page 4 of 5 the mayor clearly abstains from voting when pertaining to Lacour. This was in 2012 and he abstained on many votes related to Mr. Lacour back then. Mr. Pohlman you were around then how did Green get back in the game? Your help would be appreciated. He certainly no longer abstains. Did they get a divorce that we are not privy to?
Thank You
https://www.port-orange.org/documents/meetings/regular/2012-10-23/items/D1.pdf
What Is A Kickback
Kickbacks are payment or offering of services with the intent to influence or gain something from a company or a person. Kickbacks may be less fancifully termed as bribes. They are often associated with white-collar type crimes, and can occur in numerous work sectors or in politics.
In politics, kickbacks might be used to secure influence over voting by offering services or even campaign contributions. This type of funding is illegal, and yet, many still employ it in one form or another. As well, in government, kickbacks may be offered to obtain government approval for projects.
Perhaps the most famous of these are kickbacks for government officials who issue permits in exchange for profits or upfront payments. In these cases, permits issued are usually done so without legal right existing for such a permit. For example, a housing inspector might issue an illegal building permit in exchange for a bribe.
Though these bribes still exist, laws regarding government officials accepting kickbacks in the US are now in place. Government officials accepting kickbacks may serve up to five years in prison. It should be noted, that there are many government officials who would never accept a kickback.
Message To Mayor Allen Green
Campaign Contribution Solicitation
•What does “solicitation” mean?
•What restrictions are placed on solicitation?
•Isn’t political activity a protected constitutional right? How can the City tell me who I can’t solicit?
•Who is subject to the City’s solicitation regulations?
•May I solicit City employees at their homes during their off-hours?
• May a candidate solicit MEA or any other labor organization for employee contributions to a political campaign?
•Does this mean that a City employee cannot contribute to my campaign?
•Does this mean that I should not accept campaign contributions from a City employee?
•I am a volunteer board member. May I solicit political contributions?
•I am a volunteer board member. Does the Ethics Ordinance protect me from being solicited for a political campaign contribution?
•I plan to send campaign solicitation e-mails and paper mailers to five thousand people. Do I have to ensure that none of the recipients are City employees?
•Does the solicitation regulation apply only to City of San Diego candidate elections?
•I still have questions. How do I get help?
What does “solicitation” mean?
Solicitation, as this term is used in the City’s Ethics Ordinance (PDF), refers to the practice of asking a person for a contribution to a political campaign. A “contribution” can be many things, and is explicitly defined in section 27.2903 of the San Diego Municipal Code. In general, however, a contribution includes any transfer of money; any loan or forgiveness of a loan; any promise to pay; any forgiveness of a debt; any expenditure made at the request of a candidate; any purchase of tickets for events such as dinners, luncheons, rallies and similar fundraising events; services rendered without full compensation; or any granting of a rebate or discount not generally available to the public. The Ethics Ordinance regulates the manner in which City employees are exposed to requests for these kinds of contributions.
What restrictions are placed on solicitation?
The City’s Ethics Ordinance prohibits City Officials and candidates for City office from soliciting, directly or indirectly, a political contribution from a City employee with knowledge that the person from whom the contribution is solicited is a City employee.
Isn’t political activity a protected constitutional right? How can the City tell me who I can’t solicit?
The prohibition on solicitation is narrowly written to address a specific governmental concern. The solicitation prohibition is designed to prevent City employees from being pressured to give money to a candidate or measure they do not support. When such pressure comes from a supervisor or someone who works alongside a City employee, there is a potential threat of retaliation which may be perceived by the person being solicited. While political activity is indeed a protected right, the City has determined that in this instance that right is outweighed by a City employee’s right to be free from undue pressure to financially support a political campaign.
Who is subject to the City’s solicitation prohibitions?
All City officials and candidates for elective office of the City are prohibited from soliciting political contributions from City employees.
May I solicit City employees at their homes during their off-hours?
No. The Ethics Ordinance prohibits the solicitation of employees regardless of whether or not they are at work.
May a candidate solicit MEA or any other labor organization for employee contributions to a political campaign?
No. Doing so would constitute an indirect solicitation by the candidate. A candidate cannot do collectively what he or she is prohibited from doing individually.
Does this mean that a City employee cannot contribute to my campaign?
No. This restriction only pertains to the solicitation of a campaign contribution. It does not in any way restrict an individual’s right to contribute to your campaign.
Does this mean that I should not accept campaign contributions from a City employee?
No. This restriction only pertains to the solicitation of a campaign contribution. It does not in any way restrict your right to receive contributions from a City officer or employee who wishes to support your campaign.
I am a volunteer board member. May I solicit political contributions?
Perhaps. If you are required to file an annual Statement of Economic Interests because of your membership on a City board or commission, you are considered a City Official, and you may not solicit City employees for a political campaign contribution. If, however, you do not file an annual Statement of Economic Interests, then you are not considered a City Official for the purposes of the Ethics Ordinance, and there are no local regulations restricting your ability to solicit City employees for political contributions.
I am a volunteer board member. Does the Ethics Ordinance protect me from being solicited for a political campaign contribution?
No. The Ethics Ordinance (PDF) prohibition only applies to solicitations made to City employees. It does not address the solicitation of contributions from members of City boards, commissions, task forces, or advisory bodies. While a provision in the Municipal Code does prohibit members of the Ethics Commission from being solicited for political campaign contributions, there are no local regulations in place that prevent the solicitation of other board or commission members. You should be aware, however, that the San Diego City Attorney has issued a formal opinion (PDF: 40K) concluding that California law (Government Code section 3205) prohibits public officials and candidates from soliciting political campaign contributions from board and commission members who are required to file an annual Statement of Economic Interests.
I plan to send campaign solicitation e-mails and paper mailers to five thousand people. Do I have to ensure that none of the recipients are City employees?
An e-mail or paper mail solicitation made to a significant segment of the public will not violate the Ethics Ordinance if it doesn’t intentionally target any City employees, even if some City employees inadvertently receive the solicitation. For this exception to apply, you must have no reason to believe that a City employee is receiving your solicitation. Thus, if you are creating the list of recipients, you may not add someone to the list who you know to be a City employee, regardless of the size of your recipient list. For lists that you purchase, you should exercise reasonable due diligence to filter out the names of City employees. For e-mails, this means combing the list of e-mail addresses to remove those that end with a domain name associated with the City of San Diego or any of its agencies: sandiego.gov, ccdc.com, sedcinc.com, sdhc.org, sddpc.org, and visitsandiego.com. For paper mailings, it would be prudent to review the recipient list to remove the names of individuals you know to be City employees. Under no circumstances should you use the City’s Outlook address book or a list of City employees to target potential contributors.
Does the solicitation regulation apply only to City of San Diego candidate elections?
No. The Ethics Ordinance ban on soliciting City employees pertains to requests for campaign contributions for any political matter. A City Official may not knowingly solicit a contribution from a City employee even if the contribution is for a ballot measure or for a candidate seeking county, state, or federal office.
I still have questions. How do I get help?
The Ethics Commission is available to provide telephonic or written advice regarding these matters.
Message To Mayor Allen Green
Powerful-mayor government
does not serve public interest
By David B Levy*
8 December 2009: Following the conviction of Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon on one count of embezzlement, David B Levy, the author of this article, argues that to a greater degree than many people in the city realize, the structure of Baltimore’s municipal government contributes to the stream of painful news stories about how ‘inside’ influence affects government decisions.
The strong-mayor system, in which all key policy and management decisions flow from the mayor’s authority, was eliminated from thousands of US local governments in the 20th century, beginning with the ‘good government’ reforms of the Progressive Era. However, Baltimore’s government never experienced those reforms, meaning that Baltimoreans still live in a ‘boss’ system where almost all hope, credit and blame end up singularly associated with the mayor.
It is clear that developers and other interest groups perceive – probably correctly – that the best method to gain decisions in their favor is to ‘grease’ the pathway. Sometimes that grease is pure corruption. More frequently, it is some version of interest peddling that does not quite rise to the level of outright corruption. Either way, it bends governmental decisions away from the public interest and toward the private interest of those doing the greasing.
The best-managed and cleanest local governments in the United States are not strong-mayor governments; they are council-manager governments. This is the structure of almost half of the local governments in the US. There are a few varieties of this form of government, in terms of the roles of the mayor and the city council; In all of them, however, the job of the mayor is not to be the chief executive officer, with responsibility for day-to-day management and decision-making. That job is handled by a professional city manager hired by the mayor and city council. There are universities that train these managers, who would bring expertise in management/administration and an ethic of clean and efficient government.
In this system, the mayor and the city council together set policy, make laws/ordinances, and establish and approve the budget. They also provide oversight of operations, holding the city manager to account. The city manager is responsible for hiring and management.
One way to think of this structure is that the mayor and the city council would be like a board of trustees, with the mayor chairing the board and the city manager as the hired CEO.
One great advantage of this system is that it insulates day-to-day management from the intrusion of politics. There would be no benefit of ‘greasing’ decisions with the mayor or with individual council members, because they would not have that sort of power. Of course, there would be a risk that this influence greasing would move over to the bureaucracy staff, but that is not how it has turned out. Experience around the country is that council-manager systems tend to be far cleaner.
In order to change over to the system that such large cities as Phoenix, San Jose (California), and Austin (Texas) have, the movement will need to come from the citizens, who would need to be ready to get rid of the concept of the mayor as municipal savior. Such a charter-reform movement would have the goal of overcoming the cynicism that pervades conversations about Baltimore’s city government and have the ideal of creating a government about which the citizens could be proud – but would still be vigilant.
*David B. Levy is a former employee in the Baltimore Housing and Community Development and Planning departments. In the early 1990s, he served as Special Assistant to the Mayor of Quito, Ecuador. He also advised other local governments, both in the US and in Latin America.
This is Allen Green’s theme song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i6OrOZwtmA
Riverwalk Project Area
Community Redevelopment Agency for Port Orange Town Center
Allen Green Construction CO
LaCour And Company
Real Estate Development
Navigation
Home Page
Riverwalk
New Port
809 Louisville
Gulfstream Village
Spruce Creek Commons
Palmetto Pointe
Contact Us
Thank you for visiting us here on the web. We have some exciting new projects in the works, and hope that you find the above links helpful in answering your questions. If you need further information on any of our projects, don’t hesitate to contact us.
Links
Port Orange Riverwalk
McGurn Investments
City Of Port Orange
County Of Volusia
A privately held company in Port Orange, FL. Is this your business? Claim This Profile
More Details for Allen Green Construction CO
Categorized under Building Contractors. Our records show it was established in 1979 and incorporated in Florida. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $2.5 to 5 million and employs a staff of approximately 10 to 19.
Products or Services
Companies like Allen Green Construction CO usually offer: Architecture Building Construction, New Building Construction, Green Building Construction, Modular Building Construction, Steel Building Construction.