Thank you for your research. So many of us take for granted that these officials are doing the right thing and working for the people, as they should be, without question.
I will do what I can to spread the word about Mr. Turner's self serving work ethics!

It's been my experience that Mr. Dorfman, the writer's "partner", who is running for City Commission against Mr. Turner (and hence the reason for her posting), has a much more "bullying" personality than Mr. Turner could ever have. And he is to be congratulated on stopping Mr. Caragiulo's "Strong Mayor" Charter amendment from being fast-tracked onto the ballot after just being revealed and added to the agenda that day, to the benefit of the special few arrayed in the audience to pressure the Commission into approving it. Indeed, although Mr. Turner has been very open about his support for his Charter amendment, Mr. Caragiulo refuses to say who authored and is behind his.

From your statements, Mr. Loebeck, it is apparent that you don't know me well. Yes, Dorfman comes on very strong. I met him at a fundraiser when he ran for the District 1 seat. I did not leave a donation (and he stills teases me about it today) because I got the same impression. The difference here is that I have been proven wrong. I jumped to the conclusion that Dorfman would not listen when, in fact, he does it better than most. He is not afraid of differing opinions, he carefully considers all perspectives -THEN he comes out strong. Believe me, Mr. Dorfman has heard his share of my complaints if I feel 'shushed' by him. Mr. Turner on the other hand has proven that he is not open to a differing opinion - won't even listen to the people waiting to speak. The elected Mayor (NOT Strong Mayor! That is divisive propaganda) option would have had the same chance as the Turner's referendum to be reviewed by the voting public.

All these words: 'fast-track & 'Strong Mayor' keep our beautiful city stuck in dysfunction. When you spoke at City Hall regarding water and sewer fees (residential vs 'developer' as you put it) you used some of the same divisive language. It is not Us vs Them. This is the dysfunction that MUST stop. There is always more than one perspective. It is important to hear them. I would be happy to share the perspectives of some of my clients - small business owners and others - and how these fees affect them and in turn, affect the area residents.

Regardless of Ms. Jones' relationship to Mr. Dorfman, there are larger issues being discussed. Mr Turner, the only commissioner who voted NOT to fire Bartolotta has consistently opposed the current City Clerk and was the sole vote against her appointment. Now he claims that the structure of government is the problem. Our structure works fine. The prior City Clerk served alongside many City Managers until his retirement. We didn't start having issues with conflict between charter officials until Mr. Bartolotta arrived. It isn't difficult to connect the dots.

Mr. Dorfman has admitted to going on radio programs and advancing issues without even looking into them... being embarrassed later to find out that his strongly expressed comments against others were totally off-base! That is enough for me to discount his posturing before the commissioners. With an eye to the March election, he will be taking advantage of these opportunities regularly. I notice that he boasts that he will join a "tag team" with Paul Caraguilo if he survives the election -- I think such collusion between commissioners is a violation of sunshine! Turner has had concerns with the structure since he took office, I find his approach consistent and rather straightforward, letting us know where he stands. That is much more comfortable than the dreadful indecision and flopping coming from commissioners who do not seem to know what is going on, much less have a reasoned opinion of their own about decisions before them. Valerie, how long have you been here? Rancor and rage have been the tone between clerk and manager since the days of McClellan and he taught Billy all of his dirty tricks while sitting at his knee. Not the nice guy he appears to many, Billy is perversely motivated to control city hall and he quit to make a political attack, switching from being a public servant who only could manipulate subtly to attempting to be a political master, Seeing former high-level city employees involved in the elected mayor effort shows that old suspicions were correct.

Jeri, it is up to each user for commenting to choose a screen name and they're free to use whatever they come up with.

Comment from RB...."Mr. Dorfman has admitted to going on radio programs and advancing issues without even looking into them... being embarrassed later to find out that his strongly expressed comments against others were totally off-base!"

Wow - now that is a man with integrity - admits when he has made a mistake and does everything he can to rectify it in the future.

It is important to note that I don't even know the man....I'm just impressed already!

PS: I meant 'vocal minority' in the second to last paragraph. Sheesh. I really need a proof-reader when I'm angry.

RB. I've been here long enough, longer than Mr. Turner. You are hiding behind your initials, come out and show yourself! The efforts I'm defending are the rights of the public to comment on items on the City Commission agenda and not have those rights squashed by a Commissioner. I do think that an elected Mayor would help improve the current system. I came from a city where there was a City Council, City Manager and an Elected Mayor so I have seen that in action. If you haven't lived anywhere other than Sarasota, then you wouldn't know anything other than the current system.

"what matters is that the public be allowed to speak and decisions are made from facts, public input and what truly is best for our community"

Precisely Ms. Cushman! Facts are what was missing.

That is why it was tabled by three commissioners. No one had seen the proposal, not commissioners who were being asked to vote about it, not the public -- save, supposedly, the "twenty-five" who were there to demand it be voted upon without anyone else in the city having an opportunity to examine it. Now who do you think the bullies are? How do you think those "twenty-five" could have known what was in a document of that size and complexity that was not submitted for public review until an hour or two before the commission began their meetings for the day? Why should all others be refused an opportunity to address it knowledgeably? You will notice that none of the other one hundred and fifty people in the chambers joined the "twenty-five" in complaining. I agree with Mr. Lobeck and obviously, so did a majority of the commissioners. That proposal will now be considered in the normal fashion, it is not as if it was cast put into a trash can.

three of the people on the public record who had signed up to speak are three who usually support Mr. Turner - the three neighborhood ladies... or as some call them "the shadow government"

I'd like to know if ANYONE is familiar with the detailed contents of The Turner Amendment that was approved for the ballot because enough signatures were collected (by individuals who were paid per signature collected) on a petition - NOT because there was public discourse about it.

Wow, strong stuff! I didn't know anything about this controversy except the little I saw in the paper. Generally I disagree with Mr. Lobeck on almost everything but I do respect him. I also know that Ms. Jones is an intelligent person who is not likely to leap before looking. I'm hopeful that the result of all this will be that the citizens of Sarasota will get a chance to decide the issue in a calm and considering manner.
Please don't blog angry!

Oh my... I don't think I have ever been accused of 'parroting' anyone or anything. I am assuming that you (RB) are implying that I am saying what Richard Dorfman told me to say. Unfortunately, the fact that we care for each other makes some people think that we don't have two brains - and it is usually the woman who is discounted. Richard did not see my blog until it was published. RD and I do not agree on a number of issues. One thing we do agree on - the residents of Sarasota should be heard... anyone who wants to speak. My blog is my opinion only. Thank you for yours.

And yes, I have read the Turner Amendment. I should have been clearer in my comment, I wondered if anyone who signed the petition had read it.

And Kyle: you are a voice of civilized reason. Thank you for the reminder.

Folks, I realize this is a passionate issue and continue to be. Please refrain from attacks on each other and focus on the issues or I'll have to start deleting comments, shut it down or worse, kick someone off. There's room for everyone in the sandbox.

For more on this issue, read "Viral Video Encouraging Commissioner Turner's Ouster"
http://patch.com/A-wnqK

Everyone in the know knows that this push for a Strong Mayor is simply a scheme by vested interests, principally in the development industry, and those who seek political advantage by allying with them, to gain greater power by being able to bankroll into office someone with unchecked authority they can then use to advance their agendas. Sadly, this has become something like the Frankenstein monster which will not die, despite repeated rejection at the polls by wide margins.

And as to Ms. Cushman's post, I never suggested that Ms. Jones does not have her own mind -- only that her motivation for advancing Mr. Dorfman's views in this issue may be his candidacy for City Commission.

Two Notes:
1) While I of course support Mr. Dorfman's candidacy. I respect his mind and his ability to understand complex issues and build consensus. Please re-read my blog. It was entirely written about MY experience on a Monday night at City Hall. (because I was spitting mad)

2) Had the Commission allowed for two public hearings on the ELECTED MAYOR proposal, Mr Loebeck would be able to see that this is a very different proposal than those of years past. This elected Mayor would have NO VOTE! The Commission - who would represent their respective districts would vote. The Mayor would run the city, would lead a city-wide agenda, would build a unified vision and would answer to THE PEOPLE - not to five rotating bosses as the city manager does in the current model.