Metro Jacksonville

Please vote. 3 days out from a full vote by the Jacksonville city council.

Good response. Keep voting.

Expanding on your subject line would get more views. 

In far too many cases, these types of appointments are filled with less than qualified candidates whose agendas are anything but for the good of Jacksonville's citizens.  There even seems to be a trend to reduce the qualifications and experience requirements for many positions.  In almost every single case, there is never any real discussion nor fact checking, they are simply pretty much rubber stamped.

In the case of Kimberly Scott, we have a unique opportunity to begin changing all that.  As members of Preservation SOS have been digging into various concerns of gross misuse of Federal funds on the part of Ms Scott's Municipal Code Compliance Division, we know many incidents of either willful disregard for the very laws her department is charged with enforcing or complete incompetence in leadership.  In addition, we have discovered that Ms Scott has been under investigation for endangering the public over improper handling of asbestos involved demolitions and this promotion will result in her being over the very department charged with doing those investigations.

The fact that the Mayors office is supporting Ms Scott and wishing to promote her even in the face of these issues tells us something important about this administration.  How each member of City Council votes on this issue will tell us something about how they feel about the citizens of Jacksonville.  Do they care about the quality of city government or are they just in this for what they can get for themselves? 

Next year is an election year.  That is when we will get to tell the Mayor and much of city council what we think of them and their opinion of us.  That is when we get to say we want a better city and better people running it and be heard no matter what.

^Good points. Frank Denton with the TU has a great column in the TU today. Everyone is voting. You would think this is One Spark!

Quote from: sheclown on April 06, 2014, 09:00:53 AM
Expanding on your subject line would get more views. 

Thank you.

Quote from: Noone on April 05, 2014, 06:55:54 PM
Please vote. 3 days out from a full vote by the Jacksonville city council.

Actually it was deferred in Rules.  It will be voted on in Rules on the 14th and then back to full council.

Still, time is of the essence.

It seems to me Kimberly Scott should be under investigation by the FBI for misuse of Federal Funds and by the EPA for violations in accordance with lead paint and asbestos removal, not being considered for some promotion. Is it not the mayor's responsibility to ensure an investigation is being done and that he is not promoting an individual that is under investigation for such serious crimes?

Quote from: sheclown on April 06, 2014, 02:25:32 PM

Quote from: Noone on April 05, 2014, 06:55:54 PM
Please vote. 3 days out from a full vote by the Jacksonville city council.

Actually it was deferred in Rules.  It will be voted on in Rules on the 14th and then back to full council.

Still, time is of the essence.

Just went to the COJ website and under status it has ready for council.

Quote from: Noone on April 06, 2014, 06:52:35 PM

Quote from: sheclown on April 06, 2014, 02:25:32 PM

Quote from: Noone on April 05, 2014, 06:55:54 PM
Please vote. 3 days out from a full vote by the Jacksonville city council.

Actually it was deferred in Rules.  It will be voted on in Rules on the 14th and then back to full council.

Still, time is of the essence.

Just went to the COJ website and under status it has ready for council.

It certainly does....anyone shed light on this? 

http://media.coj.net/City_Council/Rules_3-31-14.wmv

speaks to Kim Scott's confirmation at 25 min into the meeting -- appears to be deferred until the 14th.

I think it goes to City Council this Tuesday as a 2nd reading only.  Rules committee will vote on it April 14 then it goes to full council for a final vote.

Keep voting. Is any other media outlet conducting a similar pole? If not. Why not?

Will be in Rules today. Keep voting.

Streaming live right now on coj.net

Doesn't matter.... Rules Committee APPROVED Kim Scott's appointment to Director of Regulatory Compliance.

I just don't know how they could do that.......

Woh sits on the rules committee?

Quote from: downtownmutt on April 06, 2014, 06:00:08 PM
It seems to me Kimberly Scott should be under investigation by the FBI for misuse of Federal Funds and by the EPA for violations in accordance with lead paint and asbestos removal, not being considered for some promotion. Is it not the mayor's responsibility to ensure an investigation is being done and that he is not promoting an individual that is under investigation for such serious crimes?

+1 The FBI needs to investigate the Backroom deals on the Waterways too. The crushing of the Public Trust.
Vince Seibold- Environmental Ethics!

Is anyone in Rules aware of this poll?

Thanks for the list. I can see who may've voted in her favor, but is there a list on which way each one voted?

Quote from: urbaknight on April 16, 2014, 02:44:41 PM
Thanks for the list. I can see who may've voted in her favor, but is there a list on which way each one voted?

Looks like they all did. 

I have a feeling the full council is going to just rubber stamp this.  I voiced my displeasure with this proposed appointment to my city council member. 


http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/CurrentYear/Rules/92-April-14-2014-LSD-Minutes.htm

8.    2014-215   A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF KIMBERLY SCOTT AS DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REGULATORY COMPLIANCE OF THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.; 3/31/2014 - Read 2nd & Rerefer

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RULES: April 14, 2014

Recommend to APPROVE.

AYES - Bishop, Boyer, Carter, Clark, Jones, Lee, Redman, ( 7 )

Boyer and Jones voting yes surprised and disapointed me. I expected it from the rest of them.

How can they possibly move this forward when CM Denise Lee instructed OGC to "put this matter to bed" by issuing a statement of the NSP funding?  If there is outstanding questions (how long have we been talking about this????) then the appointment should be delayed.  Period.

If you've not watched the video of the meeting, you should.  The way CM Lee treated strider and myself is deplorable.

Full vote by the Jacksonville city council 5 days out.

The council does not care what you think, just like they don't want to hear you voice your opinion at the meeting.  They have an agenda, and until she is convicted, they won't do anything.  If she is charged, they will say they did not not know, or thought is was not a real issue.

It better be soon, then.

Quote from: stephendare on April 17, 2014, 09:53:44 AM
Meh.  Ive seen a few nominations withdrawn over the years, mbwright.  And there is more coverage with larger details coming down the pipeline.

+1

One day out. Has Springfield given up?

Right now it is my understanding that mayor Alvin Brown is not going to withdraw his request for the appointment of Kim Scott but is in fact dug in.  Are you hearing something different Stephen?

Quote from: mbwright on April 17, 2014, 09:51:20 AM
The council does not care what you think, just like they don't want to hear you voice your opinion at the meeting.  They have an agenda, and until she is convicted, they won't do anything.  If she is charged, they will say they did not not know, or thought is was not a real issue.

Exactly.

Quote from: mbwright on April 17, 2014, 09:51:20 AM
The council does not care what you think, just like they don't want to hear you voice your opinion at the meeting.  They have an agenda, and until she is convicted, they won't do anything.  If she is charged, they will say they did not not know, or thought is was not a real issue.

+1

It's on the consent agenda. Springfield did everything it possibly could  -- short of setting ourselves on fire in the council chambers --  JaxUnicorn was up for that, but me and Joe, not so much.

There is a reason to put her in a position to regulate the environment, air and water, someone who "gets it done" regardless of the consequences to the public.   

Watch the video of the meeting.

How about Edward D. Lukacovic as a candidate for this position?

I could write another complaint here about how we were ignored, but that would not be an honest statement.  We were not ignored.  The issues we brought up here were indeed listened to.  So much so that the Mayor's office spent some amount of political capital to counter those issues.  I suspect that we were presented as a small group of nuts who simply hated Kimberly Scott because she demolished a few historic houses.  The mayor's office has the resources to do a better job of getting their message out than we certainly did.  And they won.

Unfortunately, that means we, the public, lost.  Again.  Big money, bad governing won.  There is no doubly that promoting a woman who has been shown to either willfully ignore the laws or is so incompetent that her employees without here knowledge willfully ignored the laws for years is not in the best interests of the public. It can only be in the best interest of a few who want someone like her in that important position.

The fact that the Mayor's office took this seriously and made the Rules Committee put on their little show tells me something important.  We now know that Ms Scott is not simply incompetent.  We now know she willfully has been ignoring those federal laws, willfully ignoring the asbestos regulations and willfully disrespecting the public.  That all works for the Mayor's office and for whomever wanted Ms Scott in this important position. There is indeed something coming down the pike that is will be very advantageous to have MS Scott over those departments and very willing to ignore the right thing to do.

The question now is just how much more damage can Ms Scott and the Mayors office do to Jacksonville before the public gets smart enough to election someone new? 

Quote from: strider on April 22, 2014, 08:26:42 AM
I could write another complaint here about how we were ignored, but that would not be an honest statement.  We were not ignored.  The issues we brought up here were indeed listened to.  So much so that the Mayor's office spent some amount of political capital to counter those issues.  I suspect that we were presented as a small group of nuts who simply hated Kimberly Scott because she demolished a few historic houses.  The mayor's office has the resources to do a better job of getting their message out than we certainly did.  And they won.

Unfortunately, that means we, the public, lost.  Again.  Big money, bad governing won.  There is no doubly that promoting a woman who has been shown to either willfully ignore the laws or is so incompetent that her employees without here knowledge willfully ignored the laws for years is not in the best interests of the public. It can only be in the best interest of a few who want someone like her in that important position.

The fact that the Mayor's office took this seriously and made the Rules Committee put on their little show tells me something important.  We now know that Ms Scott is not simply incompetent.  We now know she willfully has been ignoring those federal laws, willfully ignoring the asbestos regulations and willfully disrespecting the public.  That all works for the Mayor's office and for whomever wanted Ms Scott in this important position. There is indeed something coming down the pike that is will be very advantageous to have MS Scott over those departments and very willing to ignore the right thing to do.

The question now is just how much more damage can Ms Scott and the Mayors office do to Jacksonville before the public gets smart enough to election someone new?

Very well stated Strider. 

Im not sure if I missed it, but is there an active federal investigation happening yet?

Quote from: duvaldude08 on April 22, 2014, 12:21:14 PM
Im not sure if I missed it, but is there an active federal investigation happening yet?

There was an audit done a couple of weeks ago.  Someone from HUD headquarters in DC sent an auditor down for a week --  the results of that audit should be available in a couple of weeks.

The city thought it was only on the hook for 8 properties which it demolished using NSP 1 funds in the historic district without doing the proper reviews; however, the city learned that ALL properties 50 years or older demolished with NSP 1 funds without the proper procedures done will have to be repaid.  It is somewhere around 170 or so structures.

What else was discussed in the meeting after the audit, I don't know.

Quote from: sheclown on April 22, 2014, 12:50:32 PM

Quote from: duvaldude08 on April 22, 2014, 12:21:14 PM
Im not sure if I missed it, but is there an active federal investigation happening yet?

There was an audit done a couple of weeks ago.  Someone from HUD headquarters in DC sent an auditor down for a week --  the results of that audit should be available in a couple of weeks.

The city thought it was only on the hook for 8 properties which it demolished using NSP 1 funds in the historic district without doing the proper reviews; however, the city learned that ALL properties 50 years or older demolished with NSP 1 funds without the proper procedures done will have to be repaid.  It is somewhere around 170 or so structures.

What else was discussed in the meeting after the audit, I don't know.

Thanks SheClown!

Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 22, 2014, 11:34:05 AM

Quote from: strider on April 22, 2014, 08:26:42 AM
I could write another complaint here about how we were ignored, but that would not be an honest statement.  We were not ignored.  The issues we brought up here were indeed listened to.  So much so that the Mayor's office spent some amount of political capital to counter those issues.  I suspect that we were presented as a small group of nuts who simply hated Kimberly Scott because she demolished a few historic houses.  The mayor's office has the resources to do a better job of getting their message out than we certainly did.  And they won.

Unfortunately, that means we, the public, lost.  Again.  Big money, bad governing won.  There is no doubly that promoting a woman who has been shown to either willfully ignore the laws or is so incompetent that her employees without here knowledge willfully ignored the laws for years is not in the best interests of the public. It can only be in the best interest of a few who want someone like her in that important position.

The fact that the Mayor's office took this seriously and made the Rules Committee put on their little show tells me something important.  We now know that Ms Scott is not simply incompetent.  We now know she willfully has been ignoring those federal laws, willfully ignoring the asbestos regulations and willfully disrespecting the public.  That all works for the Mayor's office and for whomever wanted Ms Scott in this important position. There is indeed something coming down the pike that is will be very advantageous to have MS Scott over those departments and very willing to ignore the right thing to do.

The question now is just how much more damage can Ms Scott and the Mayors office do to Jacksonville before the public gets smart enough to election someone new?

Very well stated Strider. 

+1 Good to see you back Diane

I can't help but wonder who Kim Scott has compromising photographs of?  They must be pretty bad.

I think Kimberly Scott's history is well documented, and well known.  Also, I think at times those complaining get lumped into an anti-Jax minority in some council decisions. I have noted numerous times watching the council videos where MetroJacksonville was used as if it explained away the persons legitimate complaint/concern. However, I must say it is rare to see the entire MJ agree on the same point, and that alone assures to me that the accused is guilty. Walks like a duck, talks like a duck, guess what ... its a duck.

So, is this just a matter of the council (or Mayor or whomever makes this decision) not having a qualified alternative? I know in my job many people have stayed simply because they are more harm outside of the company than as a part of it. Which is wrong, but a fact of life I guess. I would think if there was already someone whom would be better suited to fill this position, the appointers or council would be happy to curry favor. After all, election season is now on the horizon for a lot of them. Does Jax really just not have the qualified personnel?

I suspect there are lot of qualified people around who could do a great job for us tax payers.  Unfortunately, I do not believe that was the point, to do a great job for us tax payers, but rather the opposite.  Let me put it this way.  I think Ms Scott uniquely qualified herself for the new position due to her lack of ability to follow the law and to do the right thing by us tax payers.  I think the Mayor's office knows exactly who they put in this important position.  We just have yet to learn why; what project is coming that Ms Scott's unique skill set (or lack there off) will serve the Mayor's interests best. 

Like I said, this was obviously "smart" politics on the part of the Mayor and the council but just plain bad governing. What is sad is everyone on City Council knew it and just didn't care enough to try to stop it. Or were part of it.

Now, we will have Mr Prado's appointment coming up as the new Chief of Municipal Code Compliance.   

for example, Corine Brown has been in office for a long time, and she certainly is not qualified.  I guess she is good for some.

Quote from: mbwright on April 23, 2014, 08:52:58 AM
for example, Corine Brown has been in office for a long time, and she certainly is not qualified.  I guess she is good for some.

Corrine has done an awesome job for her district and she will stand up for them no matter how people view it. Thats why shes still in office.

Corrine Brown certainly helped bring the millions of federal dollars to Jacksonville. But I am afraid that she has done that "awesome" job not for her constituents but for a select few.  It seems to me that with politicians like Brown, Lee and Gaffney, the positives seen by the average tax payers are more unintended consequences rather than the main purpose.