Who becomes the next mayor?

[ronchamblin]

Pardon me Strider and Stephen, but must you two fill the spaces with such trivialities?  What happened to substance? 

[ronchamblin]

Please stephen.  Substance. You can do better.

[Tacachale]

It would be so easy to agree with all that believe the "devil you know" is the way to go.  But some have had a look behind the magic curtain and I for one shudder at another four years of the same people in appointed positions that caused the Federal government to announce to the world that Jacksonville "lacks the capacity" to handle the millions of Federal funds it gets. I question who is truly pulling the strings and making the decisions. 

That makes me wonder if it is not time for change even it if it is for no reason other than achieving change.  The Curry machine seems to be on a different wavelength than Brown's and so I suspect that those who actually run the government on a day to day basis will be at least mostly new.  Better?  I don't know.  Worse? Hard to have that scenario even possible for the most part.  Yes, there are a few good ones out there and I hope that as their positions are a bit more technical than most, perhaps common sense  will prevail.  But seeing some like Kimberly Scott sent back to, in her case, the  library secretarial pool,  might actually be worth having Curry as Mayor.

Heck, Curry may not be too bad as Mayor, after all, it seems that who is behind the man often makes more of a difference than who the man is itself.

Godwins Law.  Im sure that people felt the same way about Hindenburg.

Who exactly will Curry appoint, strider?  And what are his plans for the historic neighborhoods?  If you don't think that Curry would appoint the like of Jack Meeks (and remember there are far worse)  and that the developers would be calling the shots then I would suspect that myopia competes with your bitterness in a race a giant Ocean of Naivety.

I don't know who Curry would appoint.  I do know that Brown already did appoint Jack Meeks.  And got Kim Scott promoted.  And got rid of Bill Killingsworth.  And appointed Burney.  And then he also...the list goes on.  Mayor Brown's appointments have not always been exactly top notch. And I do know Mayor Brown's plan for historic neighborhoods and it isn't too good.

As far as the developers, it is you who is wallowing around in an "Ocean of Naivety" if you truly think the same issues are not here and now with Mayor Brown.  All you have to do is read the threads about him on this very forum. 

Godwin's law.....not very original Stephen ... certainly since I don't think it applied for my post in any way - so you are the one evoking it?  I am a bit disappointed.

Meanwhile, let's decide to take a chance on change and vote for Lenny Curry.  How bad can it be after a few decades of the Corrine Brown troupe?

You missed the hindenberg reference, strider?  Im the one disappointed in you then.

So, no.  You have no clue what Curry's plan is, and no clue who he might appoint.  Except that no one can be worse than Jack Meeks?  Does that sum up the response?

I don't know who specifically Curry will hire for specific positions, but that's putting the cart before the horse. He's got a good pool to tap, many of whom Brown has already alienated. At any rate, it's hard to imagine a businessman running such a weak staff as Brown. It's hard to imagine an accountant mismanaging the budget this badly. And given those two things, he shouldn't have the problem of so thoroughly alienating the City Council as Brown has.

[Tacachale]

But I agree that we have a good shot of getting the HRO passed whoever wins as mayor. But it's not a given, depending on the council elections (we need to get Anna Brosche in and Kim Daniels out). If Alvin wins, we can count on him pulling the same backroom shenanigans he did last time to keep it off his desk, which will weaken the chances the bill passes for the four years we'd be stuck with him. Curry will be less anti-HRO, and he may just come out in support.

I know that the council people who voted against the HRO keep trying to blame the mayor for having forced them to vote that way with his mythical skill of back room shenanigans.  Wonder why this same mayor, with his magical strong-arm abilities can't get them to vote for anything else?

He only had to get to one of them, Johnny Gaffney (or possibly two, with Reggie Brown). It's known that before the final vote, Gaffney was  strongly supportive of LGBT rights. He even voted for the stronger, trans-inclusive version of the bill in committee. Something made him flip to the point that he voted against the amended bill. Additionally, it's known that Gaffney could only give hilariously bumbling answers as to why he pulled a Judas.

It's also known that Mayor Brown was absolutely terrified of the bill hitting his desk because he'd have to make a real decision. Doesn't take much reading between the lines. And yes, we can count on the same behavior from Brown next go-round if he's reelected.

[Tacachale]

But I agree that we have a good shot of getting the HRO passed whoever wins as mayor. But it's not a given, depending on the council elections (we need to get Anna Brosche in and Kim Daniels out). If Alvin wins, we can count on him pulling the same backroom shenanigans he did last time to keep it off his desk, which will weaken the chances the bill passes for the four years we'd be stuck with him. Curry will be less anti-HRO, and he may just come out in support.

I know that the council people who voted against the HRO keep trying to blame the mayor for having forced them to vote that way with his mythical skill of back room shenanigans.  Wonder why this same mayor, with his magical strong-arm abilities can't get them to vote for anything else?

He only had to get to one of them, Johnny Gaffney (or possibly two, with Reggie Brown). It's known that before the final vote, Gaffney was  strongly supportive of LGBT rights. He even voted for the stronger, trans-inclusive version of the bill in committee. Something made him flip to the point that he voted against the amended bill. Additionally, it's known that Gaffney could only give hilariously bumbling answers as to why he pulled a Judas.

It's also known that Mayor Brown was absolutely terrified of the bill hitting his desk because he'd have to make a real decision. Doesn't take much reading between the lines. And yes, we can count on the same behavior from Brown next go-round if he's reelected.

Sounds like a stretch to me. Sounds pretty terrifying. An HRO bill supported by 60% of the voters, the entire chamber of commerce and a few former mayors?

Sorry, but Occams Razor here.  The most likely truth is that its easy for council people to blame the mayor rather than face up to their unpopular vote.

Gaffney never tried to blame the mayor. He could only give a series of confused, contradictory answers as to why he flipped on a bill he previously supported. Someone got to Gaffney, and Alvin, who was terrified of the bill hitting his desk, is the obvious candidate. In fact, he never even denied it; he dodged the media and had DeCamp deny it for him later. Plausible deniability is a cowardly politician's best friend.

[Tacachale]

But I agree that we have a good shot of getting the HRO passed whoever wins as mayor. But it's not a given, depending on the council elections (we need to get Anna Brosche in and Kim Daniels out). If Alvin wins, we can count on him pulling the same backroom shenanigans he did last time to keep it off his desk, which will weaken the chances the bill passes for the four years we'd be stuck with him. Curry will be less anti-HRO, and he may just come out in support.

I know that the council people who voted against the HRO keep trying to blame the mayor for having forced them to vote that way with his mythical skill of back room shenanigans.  Wonder why this same mayor, with his magical strong-arm abilities can't get them to vote for anything else?

He only had to get to one of them, Johnny Gaffney (or possibly two, with Reggie Brown). It's known that before the final vote, Gaffney was  strongly supportive of LGBT rights. He even voted for the stronger, trans-inclusive version of the bill in committee. Something made him flip to the point that he voted against the amended bill. Additionally, it's known that Gaffney could only give hilariously bumbling answers as to why he pulled a Judas.

It's also known that Mayor Brown was absolutely terrified of the bill hitting his desk because he'd have to make a real decision. Doesn't take much reading between the lines. And yes, we can count on the same behavior from Brown next go-round if he's reelected.

Sounds like a stretch to me. Sounds pretty terrifying. An HRO bill supported by 60% of the voters, the entire chamber of commerce and a few former mayors?

Sorry, but Occams Razor here.  The most likely truth is that its easy for council people to blame the mayor rather than face up to their unpopular vote.

Gaffney never tried to blame the mayor. He could only give a series of confused, contradictory answers as to why he flipped on a bill he previously supported. Someone got to Gaffney, and Alvin, who was terrified of the bill hitting his desk, is the obvious candidate. In fact, he never even denied it; he dodged the media and had DeCamp deny it for him later. Plausible deniability is a cowardly politician's best friend.

hhm..  sounds like a bunch of made up nonsense.  Just think of Alvin.....cowering behind his desk, literally terrified that the Human Rights Ordinance will hit his desk.  It so like every other thing in his administration.  Terrified of the historic preservationist.  Terrified of the political fallout of the Pension issue.  Terrified of cutting government services in order to not raise taxes.

Yeah....its like a pattern I guess.

Or not.

Tell it to Warren Jones. He's the one who said all this in public. In better times, the local media would have been all over this story, digging deeper and getting answers. Now, our local pols just get a pass.

[Tacachale]

He mentioned the suspicion, and was the sponsor of the bill.  He hasn't spoken about it since, the version that you are repeating came out of the Bishop for Mayor campaign, the candidate that actually voted against the HRO.  A bill that was voted for by only two people on council.  Denise Lee and Warren Jones.  Both of whom are black democrats.

The version I'm repeating, and have been for three years, came from Warren Jones, and common sense. 2+2=4.

[fieldafm]

Stephen is right, it would be hard to imagine him cowering behind his desk... because he was likely in front of some camera at the time taking credit for something he probably had nothing to do with.

Stepping outside of Stephen's fantasy land, even the Mayor's supporters in their own words question his leadership.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-08-26/story/jacksonville-mayor-seen-lacking-leadership-controversial-issues

It was a common criticism of Mayor Alvin Brown during the recent push to expand Jacksonville's human rights ordinance, coming from both sides: By not taking a stand on the issue, he wasn't acting as a leader.

"In this case, he is the leader of the city. He can provide guidance," said Leanne King, who opposed the ordinance as an infringement upon people's free speech and religious rights. "It certainly would have been nice as a leader for him to stand up."

Audrey Moran, who championed adding sexual orientation to the ordinance, had similar words about Brown.

"This community needs to hear from its mayor on issues of community importance," she said. "We need to convince him how much we need his leadership on this."

It's not the first time that critique has been made of Brown, either explicitly or sotto voce.

Brown was seen by many as dragging his feet on the establishment of an independent ethics commission early this year and several City Council members said he absented himself from working with them as his downtown development legislation went through the process. He sent mixed messages when asked about a toll-financed outer beltway, saying he was for the road but against tolls.

On the other hand, Brown has put himself in the public spotlight as a cheerleader for downtown, shown most strongly Friday as he welcomed a report by consultants on ways to move forward with revitalizing the area.

After campaigning on an education-focused platform, he moved quickly to appoint an education commissioner — defying council to do so — and worked with the United Way on creating an expanded mentorship program.

Exactly how successful the mayor has been as a leader is a broad, somewhat amorphous question, with the answer depending on the issue and even the phase of his administration.

Brown declined interview requests made the last three work days of the week, saying he was too busy. On Friday evening, Brown released a statement through spokesman David DeCamp reiterating he is "against discrimination in our city." The statement did not address questions regarding the mayor's leadership on the human rights ordinance or the general importance of mayoral leadership.

Brown's reticence on the human rights ordinance struck many as unusual in a city used to mayors weighing in on a range of issue.

"I think you have to take a stand," said former Mayor Jake Godbold. "Whether it's right or wrong, you take a stand and live with it."

Due to consolidation, a large amount of power in Duval County is concentrated in one person's hands — and with that much power, the mayor of Jacksonville has to dive into a host of issues, making sure he's the voice and face of the city, Godbold said.

"It's very important in this sort of government. This is a government that was put together with some damn good people who knew what they were doing," Godbold said. "The mayor is the leader."

But "leading" — as opposed, say, to governing or managing — isn't the only part of the mayor's job. In the most recent example, some say, Brown might have been showcasing a different mayoral skill: realpolitik.

"I could argue he was brilliant if he didn't want it [the human rights ordinance amendment] passed. He didn't engage," Delaney said of the legislation that failed by one vote. "He didn't make particular enemies by picking one side or the other. One could say that's a rather brilliant political calculation."

On other fronts, a typical mayoral aspiration to lead on a River City Renaissance or Better Jacksonville project is difficult for Brown in an era of strained city finances.

"His stance of no new taxes, that limits the policy debate pretty strongly," said Matt Corrigan, head of University of North Florida's Political Science department.

Wherever Brown's reputation as a leader stands now, the coming year will be his chance to polish it — or, perhaps more accurately, a requirement that he do so.

Brown has said this will be the year of pension reform, when he moves to change the system eating up $150 million of city revenue in the coming fiscal year.

In his statement, Brown said he's taken a "thoughtful, methodical and thorough approach" to pension reform. "I had a choice on this issue — be a show horse or a workhorse," he said. "I chose to be a workhorse."

Pension changes, by law, must be negotiated with the public employees — and, by law, those negotiations must be led by the mayor, with the council playing no role until the end.

"In this particular case, it's important the mayor lead the parade," said Bishop, who is hopeful Brown will. "In this case, the mayor has to lead."
timothy.gibbons@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4103

[fieldafm]

Field, you know you are never going to get anywhere by just trying to smear other peoples careers.

Smear careers?

I have little respect for an elected official that puts their own career goals ahead of whats best for the city they were elected to lead.

I've never put my career above what I thought was right or wrong. I expect people in charge of leading the city I so deeply care for to live up to those same standards.

[Tacachale]

Tell you what, Stephen. If you can get an official, direct response from Brown - not a second-hand account from the PR guy - that he did not encourage Gaffney to change his vote and oppose the HRO in 2012, I'll let it go.

[vicupstate]

it's hard to imagine a businessman running such a weak staff as Brown. It's hard to imagine an accountant mismanaging the budget this badly. And given those two things, he shouldn't have the problem of so thoroughly alienating the City Council as Brown has.

Two words: John Peyton.

Granted Peyton wasn't an accountant, but he was the 'glamour boy businessman'. He could and should have resolved the pension crisis during his second term. He didn't, thus making it much worse. He had some investment scheme that tanked almost immediately. He had some lousy appointments as well. His relations with city council improved some over time, but were disastrous out of the gate and for several years. 

Vote for Brown, you get 4 years of mediocrity. Vote for Curry you get 8 years of irrelevant GOP platitudes and a deer in the headlights.   

[Tacachale]

Tell you what, Stephen. If you can get an official, direct response from Brown - not a second-hand account from the PR guy - that he did not encourage Gaffney to change his vote and oppose the HRO in 2012, I'll let it go.

shouldn't it properly be that you provide a direct response from Gaffney that he did?

Come on, Gaffney would never admit that he got got if it's true. And he's headed out of office anyway. Our illustrious Mayor, however, is up for re-election. It seems like the easiest way to quash the allegation would be to just to deny it. So, will you reach out to him?

[Tacachale]

it's hard to imagine a businessman running such a weak staff as Brown. It's hard to imagine an accountant mismanaging the budget this badly. And given those two things, he shouldn't have the problem of so thoroughly alienating the City Council as Brown has.

Two words: John Peyton.

Granted Peyton wasn't an accountant, but he was the 'glamour boy businessman'. He could and should have resolved the pension crisis during his second term. He didn't, thus making it much worse. He had some investment scheme that tanked almost immediately. He had some lousy appointments as well. His relations with city council improved some over time, but were disastrous out of the gate and for several years. 

Vote for Brown, you get 4 years of mediocrity. Vote for Curry you get 8 years of irrelevant GOP platitudes and a deer in the headlights.   

We'd be lucky for another Peyton vs. another 4 years of Brown. Peyton had his faults, especially at the beginning, but he wasn't nearly this bad. The City Council never had to take the budget away from him, for instance. And he did eventually come up with a workable pension plan, which Brown scrapped as soon as he got into office.

In reality, it's vote for Brown, we get another 4 years of disaster. Vote for Curry, at worst we get 4 years of mediocrity - and he just may surprise everyone and be a decent mayor.

[Tacachale]

Tell you what, Stephen. If you can get an official, direct response from Brown - not a second-hand account from the PR guy - that he did not encourage Gaffney to change his vote and oppose the HRO in 2012, I'll let it go.

shouldn't it properly be that you provide a direct response from Gaffney that he did?

Come on, Gaffney would never admit that he got got if it's true. And he's headed out of office anyway. Our illustrious Mayor, however, is up for re-election. It seems like the easiest way to quash the allegation would be to just to deny it. So, will you reach out to him?

So the outgoing politician has more reason to lie than the one running for reelection?  Come on, Taca.  Thats silly on the face of it and you know it.  Produce one credible direct statement that the mayor caused 17 council people to vote against it, or do the decent thing and stop repeating Jimmy Midyette's ridiculous claim.

As I said twice already, the claim I'm repeating is from Warren Jones: that someone got to Gaffney (just one councilman) and got him to flip, and the likeliest suspect is the Mayor. Now, we can go around in circles, or you can just ask the Mayor to settle the question once and for all.

[Tacachale]

Tell you what, Stephen. If you can get an official, direct response from Brown - not a second-hand account from the PR guy - that he did not encourage Gaffney to change his vote and oppose the HRO in 2012, I'll let it go.

shouldn't it properly be that you provide a direct response from Gaffney that he did?

Come on, Gaffney would never admit that he got got if it's true. And he's headed out of office anyway. Our illustrious Mayor, however, is up for re-election. It seems like the easiest way to quash the allegation would be to just to deny it. So, will you reach out to him?

So the outgoing politician has more reason to lie than the one running for reelection?  Come on, Taca.  Thats silly on the face of it and you know it.  Produce one credible direct statement that the mayor caused 17 council people to vote against it, or do the decent thing and stop repeating Jimmy Midyette's ridiculous claim.

As I said twice already, the claim I'm repeating is from Warren Jones: that someone got to Gaffney (just one councilman) and got him to flip, and the likeliest suspect is the Mayor. Now, we can go around in circles, or you can just ask the Mayor to settle the question once and for all.

Warren Jones detailed that Johnny (and all the council people) had been under pressure and intense communications for three months.  Something we all saw on television and in the room with the crowds there to speak.  He said that he 'doubted' that it had much of an impact on Johnny.  and he 'suspected' that the mayor spoke with him as well.

But nothing about this whole 'terrified of the bill' and nothing definitive, just a suspicion which he has never repeated.

The mayor was clearly very happy the bill didn't get to his desk. Warren Jones' actual quote was "I know the mayor is glad it didn't land on his desk."

And yet here you guys are repeating this hoary tale of a mayor in crisis, blackmailing or bullying every available councilperson, and then going through byzantine coverups to keep the 'real truth' from the public.  Its absurd.

I said at least three times in this thread alone that I only believe the mayor got to one councilman, Gaffney, or at most two, Reggie Brown.

A Civil Rights bill, introduced by black democrats, endorsed by republican mayors, and an overwhelming host of the business community.   What would you say the mayor would 'fear' from that bill landing on his desk?

Conceivable, the mayor feared the bill hitting his desk where he'd have to either pass it or veto it, meaning he'd have to make a decision on an ostensibly controversial issue. This is apparently true, whether Jones' claims are true or not. But either way, three of the six democrats in the council ultimately voted against "a Civil Rights bill, introduced by black democrats, endorsed by republican mayors, and an overwhelming host of the business community." One of them, Gaffney, had always been supportive on LGBT issues before and was considered a lock. So what happened?

I expect this kind of reasoning from Jimmy, but considering that the vote was 17-2 against the HRO, even if Alvin Brown promised to eat Johnny Gaffney's liver while ass raping his pet dog, it literally would have had no effect on the outcome.

The vote I'm talking about, as I think you know, is the 10-9 vote against the compromise bill. Gaffney was the deciding vote that defeated it.

Gaffney even admitted that if the vote had been closer he would have voted the other way.

Which by the way is tendentious of Gaffney. He has spoken out of both sides of his mouth on every issue that has confronted springfield.

Yes, as I say, Gaffney gave several inconsistent answers as to why he flipped, none of them very convincing.

But really, the mayor is 'speaking through underlings'?  David DeCamp is actually employed to do that you know. There is a reason why he's called a press secretary, lol.

If the press secretary gave you a response with the mayor's signature on it, that would be fine with me. But if it's just another, "the mayor isn't, uh, available right now, but, uh, I think it's false," then...