Okay, so check this out. It’s a sorta slow news day, so I wanted to run something by you that’s been on my mind lately. Let’s talk about what constitutes a Conflict of Interest. Several cities have enacted their own laws to deal with conflicts of interest. For example, I found this article called The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (http://www.ehow.com/about_
Oh, boy! I’m thinking we could round up quite a few politicians and send ’em to the hoosegow for violating this Act, eh? But, since a real conflict of interest is difficult, but not impossible, to prove, none of our present or former North Miami Beach elected officials have been found guilty of this crime. Yet. The wheels of justice move at glacial speed, but rest assured that your Gruesome Twosome and the Hindrances are still on the case.
In the meantime, I’d like to bring your attention to the upcoming council vote on Resolutions R2011-38A, B and C. Although no one on the council would benefit by monetarily profiting, and although there is no law that states any of them are required to recuse themselves from voting, almost all of them have something to gain by the passage of any of these Resolutions. It is my unofficial opinion that some of the council members should refrain from voting on any of one of the three, as follows:
As I reported on July 12, 2011 in my blog, OMIGOD! NOT PHYLLIS AGAIN! OY VEY (https://www.votersopinion.com/
If Resolution R2011-38B is passed, which is based on seniority, Councilman Philippe Derose and Councilman Frantz Pierre will benefit from this outcome, so they need to recuse themselves from voting.
If Resolution R2011-38C is passed, which gives the Mayor the discretion to seat the council anywhere he chooses, then three of the council members will benefit. First, Councilman Philippe Derose will benefit because the Mayor already placed Mr. Derose to his left. Councilwoman Barbara Kramer will also benefit due to the fact that the Mayor wants her to sit next to him on his right. Lastly, since this Resolution will allow the Mayor to actually run his meetings the way he sees fit, however distasteful that may be to Phyllis Smith, he will also benefit from this Resolution. Therefore, all three must recuse themselves from voting.
If ANY one of the three Resolutions pass, the ultimate beneficiary of this entire fiasco will be none other than PHYLLIS SMITH, who orchestrated this disaster for the sole purpose of being the center of attention. She actually believed that she had “earned” the right to sit next to the Mayor instead of Councilwoman Kramer by virtue of the fact that she whines a lot. Phyllis obviously subscribes to the axiom that the squeaky wheel gets the oil, but I’m thinking what she needs isn’t oil. She needs a freaking pacifier. In any event, because Phyllis stands to gain even more negative attention than she already gets by forcing the council to even deal with this non-issue, surely she must recuse herself from voting.
That leaves the only council member who won’t benefit from the passage or non-passage of any of the three Resolutions since she’s gonna sit at the end of the dais no matter what. She’s also gonna do the job that we elected her to do instead of obsessing on playing a game of musical chairs.
Therefore, Councilwoman Marlen Martell, in the Court of Stephanie Opinion, since you’re the only one qualified to vote on any of these three Resolutions, what say you?
Now, how about WE GET BACK TO THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A CITY?
Stephanie Kienzle
“Spreading the Wealth”
It amazes me that ALL politicians quickly forget their main job; to represent their constituency. Phyllis is typical of this mindset. Her biggest concern isn’t the fact that the CM is going to lay off employees with bills and family’s to support; no- her concern is where she sits.
This is a prime example of everything that’s wrong with politics; be it local, state or national- the self-serving interests that people like Phyllis have. Never mind this city is facing a really tight budget, forget about anyone being laid off, no, the big concern for Phyllis is where she sits. Once that gets ironed out maybe, just maybe (but highly unlikely) she will then maybe, possibly, sort of think about the budget? One can only hope and we all know what “hope” turns out to be, don’t we?
C’mon Phyllis, quit worrying about where you sit and do the job you were barely elected to do- represent your voters (even if there are less than 5% of them in the whole city) you still have an obligation to those 3 or 4 people, right?
Maybe next election Phyllis can use the campaign slogan “Smith- fighting for my right to sit next to the Mayor; then, time permitting, focusing on the important things”.
Frank, I don’t know how I missed your comment yesterday, but I totally agree with what you said! Funny, too. It’s hard to believe that Phyllis is that childish! And I thought no one could top Myron in the crybaby department.
Frank I could not agree with you more. With lay offs and salary cuts being talked about this nonsense is taking up most of the council meeting. I really feel sorry for the citizens and employees.
Speaking of the next council meeting, I was just reading the two agendas and saw that the City Attorney’s contract is up for review. Let’s see if the Council is really serious about cutting pay, or if they only want to pick on the little people.
I totally agree with you, Wondering! I have made no secret of what I think of Darcee’s salary. And her two assistants. AND the outside legal counsel that we pay big bucks to. The Council better consider some serious cutting in that department!!