Palm Bay City Council to discuss resolution to audit Clerk’s Office at April 2nd meeting

City officials rip a page from Obama’s playbook

Evidently on cue from the Chief Judge, the City of Palm Bay has prepared a bizarrely worded resolution on the Brevard County Clerk’s Office. While the Clerk’s Office is currently down 50 full time equivalent employees we are working to maintain the branch service offices in Palm Bay and Merritt Island. It is quite true, and should be apparent to anyone, that if we lose another 20 to 30 employees to layoff and another 50 to 60 employees to furlough (out of an original 350) we will be unable to continue operating the branch service offices.

This is not some bogus govrenment bluff where a few jobs are threatened and the sky falls. Our losses and potential losses represent one third of the employees we began the year with. The damage being inflicted upon us by the Legislature and the Judiciary is not a flesh wound but deep cuts into the operations. I have a Chief Judge decrying cuts as well as the City of Palm Bay yet neither offers any financial relief to our projected $1.5 million revenue shortfall for this year.

I have no idea who wrote the Palm Bay resolution but through Public Records request (FS 119) if by no other way, I do expect to find out. As of tonight, NO ONE from the City of Palm Bay has EVER contacted me to verify any single item in their resolutuion. NO ONE from Palm Bay has contacted me to tell me when the resolution is to be discussed. Once again, I do not do well with sneaky people, and the manner and form of this resolution, with no effort to determine the facts, reflect nothing but pure cowardice on the part of the Palm Bay City Council.

Given the numerous errors in the resolution and opinions masquerading as facts, I can clearly see why the City would prefer no debate with me on the issue.

The resolution ‘demands’ justification for the possible closure. Rather than ‘demand’ by resolution, all anyone had to do was ask. We are projecting a $1.5 million shortfall, which could worsen based on civil filings. Palm Bay itself will further erode court revenue as they install the Orwellian Red Light cameras for the money and pull back on traffic enforcement. Rather than issue citations with teeth (points and license suspensions) the city opts for the fast track red light tickets where the city will reap four times the revenue as an authentic traffic citation.

We are already down the equivalent of 50 employees out of 250, and another 20 to 80 may follow in layoffs and furloughs based on the actions of the Legislature. If we are reduced by over one third of our expected staffing we cannot continue to man five service counters as well as support the active courts. It is an impossible task. I will be glad to take Palm Bay our expense and revenue histories and trends, they need only have asked.

The resolution ‘supports’ reasonable measures to increase efficiency of Clerk of Court operations. Well, so do I. If Palm Bay is trying to say our operation is inefficient then simply say so, and then back it up with facts and observations. I could clearly repeat the same senetence above inserting for ‘Clerk of Court’ the ‘City of Palm Bay’. Everyone supports Palm Bay being more efficient, but what would be my point?

The resolution claims ‘the Florida Legislature is considering legislation that could increase the efficient operation of the Clerks of Courts offices around the State, resulting in savings that would serve as an alternatve to closing the Palm Bay Office’ and that is just untrue. There is no such legislation to increase efficiencies, there is legislation to transfer all courts employees to the Judiciary. The Judiciary claims this will save the State $200 million out of the $500 million to be spent on the Clerks. To date, the Judiciary has provided NOT ONE spreadsheet to back up where the $200 million in savings will come from. NOTHING. If the City claims such legislation exists, let them detail the bill and the amount contained in the bill for savings. Good luck, there are no numbers and no facts, just the grossly unsubstantiated claims by the Judiciary.

The resolution requests an evaluation and audit of the Clerk of Courts be conducted by the Board of County Commissioners. I have no problems there, please be my guest. Unlike other Constitutional Officers the Clerk has always been open to anyone who desired to audit as long as it is at the other entities expense. I have no problem with Palm Bay, being as they seem to believe there is cause, paying for the audit. One obvious point missing, however, is the reason for the audit. If Palm Bay seeks to make allegations of fraud, or waste, or mismanagement, do so. Stop the weasel wording and state the desires.

Palm Bay never asked me for any information as it may ruin a perfectly ignorant resolution. Normally one checks their facts before proceeding, but evidently not in Palm Bay. Out of common courtesy one would normally tell someone they are the subject of a resolution, but again, evidently not in Palm Bay. I certainly do not blame them as this resolution would collapse if I were told of the contents and the date and time it was to be discussed. It was a good sneaky plan to be able for someone to rant and rave and grab a microphone, but forewarned is forearmed and I guarantee I will make the Palm Bay Council Meeting and get to the root of this resolution. Should Palm Bay silence me at the meeting as the issue is discussed you may rest assured it is not because they believe the facts are on their side.

My belief is the entire reason for the wording of the resolution is my opposition to the Palm Bay Works Stimulus Tax Referendum. I am not good at calling skunks canaries, and the referendum throws millions of dollars at nebulous ‘job creation’ undefined projects, while more money is to be spent putting down asphalt with a life cycle of 20 years with money bonded for 30 years. Now at least one Palm Bay Councilman tried to dispute my pointing out the obvious by claiming the asphalt bonding would be phased in. However, phasing the bonds requires bonds of length of 20 years issued in series. If Palm Bay were telling the truth they could simply vote on and issue 20 year bonds with a 20 year tax. The ballot language is specifically for 30 years. If the bonds are to be 20 year notes issued over the next ten years, of what ‘stimulus’ is a bond issued for asphalt in 2014? Are we expected to be in perpetual recession?

Palm Bay now seeks to shift the focus from their ill-planned referendum. Given my comments above on the haphazard resolution on the Clerk’s Office, I can only imagine how the money will be spent should this ill conceived bond issue be approved. The Palm Bay City and Chamber have refused an open debate on the Palm Bay Works Tax Referendum, but the Council Meeting will provide the forum for the Brevard County Clerk’s Office Works (or Doesn’t) debate.

(Editor’s Note: The Board of the Palm Bay Chamber voted in March to support the Palm Bay Works Referendum, and also voted to organize a forum with a panel representing both sides of the issue, but the details of the forum are yet to be released.)