Ted, thank you for saying out loud what many residents have been discussing for years.
What struck me most was not any single controversy you cited, but the pattern. Grand jury recommendations are treated as suggestions. Advisory boards are asked to volunteer their time and expertise, only to see their work ignored. Actions are labeled "complete" even when the substance of the recommendation remains unaddressed.
The situation involving Todd Stoughton illustrates the problem perfectly. Moving an official into a different office with a promotion and pay increase is difficult to reconcile with the public's understanding of accountability. Residents are capable of recognizing the difference between corrective action and administrative reshuffling.
I also appreciated your comments regarding Southernmost Point Plaza and the treatment of the Morgan family. Whether one supported the project or opposed it, community voices deserve respect. When experienced residents feel dismissed, trust in local government erodes.
Your point about the grand jury deserves special emphasis. Grand jurors review sworn testimony and evidence that elected officials do not see. Dismissing their conclusions without engaging the underlying facts risks appearing more defensive than substantive.
What many residents want is actually very simple: honesty, transparency, and measurable results. Flooded streets do not care about strategic alignment. Struggling businesses do not benefit from stakeholder engagement jargon. People want to know what is being done, what is working, what is not working, and who is responsible.
The election will come and go, but the challenges facing Key West will remain. Whoever occupies City Hall next will inherit the same infrastructure issues, the same flooding concerns, and the same obligation to earn the public's trust.
I try to step back to see the common thread occurring in our city government leadership. It all points to the identical problem: This Commission majority and staff management all believe they are in power to rule, not represent. They have their special interests who get most of their attention and they vote in THEIR favor instead of the residents and voters who they should be representing. We have some responsibility in this too. Us voters need to be equipped with the information and history of the actual votes that have taken place. Because if every voter knew how this leadership continually votes against their personal interests, they would have never gotten elected.
Thank you Ted for focusing voters on the truth. May your words be read and understood.
Just like how Parks and Recreation feel, just like the Morgan’s, where citizens input is dismissed. Period. Reminds me of the discussion regarding 287(g) where around 40 people testify in a filled chamber and magically, the usual suspects had already decided not even listen or pay any attention to community. Not the only example…
Many good points, those some are made more colorfully than need be. Yes, much is "baked in" on so many issues, and the lack of responsiveness to the community is breathtaking, ICE and crosswalks being only the prime examples.
But I have something to add to the trivial (but true) laugh list of Barosso's MBA-lite lexicon. One tic baffles me. When someone asks a question and he calls on a department head to answer it, it's not "answer" or "address" or "clarify." It's "X can support that." For the life of me, I have never heard anyone support a question.
Ted, thank you for saying out loud what many residents have been discussing for years.
What struck me most was not any single controversy you cited, but the pattern. Grand jury recommendations are treated as suggestions. Advisory boards are asked to volunteer their time and expertise, only to see their work ignored. Actions are labeled "complete" even when the substance of the recommendation remains unaddressed.
The situation involving Todd Stoughton illustrates the problem perfectly. Moving an official into a different office with a promotion and pay increase is difficult to reconcile with the public's understanding of accountability. Residents are capable of recognizing the difference between corrective action and administrative reshuffling.
I also appreciated your comments regarding Southernmost Point Plaza and the treatment of the Morgan family. Whether one supported the project or opposed it, community voices deserve respect. When experienced residents feel dismissed, trust in local government erodes.
Your point about the grand jury deserves special emphasis. Grand jurors review sworn testimony and evidence that elected officials do not see. Dismissing their conclusions without engaging the underlying facts risks appearing more defensive than substantive.
What many residents want is actually very simple: honesty, transparency, and measurable results. Flooded streets do not care about strategic alignment. Struggling businesses do not benefit from stakeholder engagement jargon. People want to know what is being done, what is working, what is not working, and who is responsible.
The election will come and go, but the challenges facing Key West will remain. Whoever occupies City Hall next will inherit the same infrastructure issues, the same flooding concerns, and the same obligation to earn the public's trust.
That trust begins with accountability.
Loretta M. Di Tocco
Key West
I try to step back to see the common thread occurring in our city government leadership. It all points to the identical problem: This Commission majority and staff management all believe they are in power to rule, not represent. They have their special interests who get most of their attention and they vote in THEIR favor instead of the residents and voters who they should be representing. We have some responsibility in this too. Us voters need to be equipped with the information and history of the actual votes that have taken place. Because if every voter knew how this leadership continually votes against their personal interests, they would have never gotten elected.
Thank you Ted for focusing voters on the truth. May your words be read and understood.
Just like how Parks and Recreation feel, just like the Morgan’s, where citizens input is dismissed. Period. Reminds me of the discussion regarding 287(g) where around 40 people testify in a filled chamber and magically, the usual suspects had already decided not even listen or pay any attention to community. Not the only example…
Many good points, those some are made more colorfully than need be. Yes, much is "baked in" on so many issues, and the lack of responsiveness to the community is breathtaking, ICE and crosswalks being only the prime examples.
But I have something to add to the trivial (but true) laugh list of Barosso's MBA-lite lexicon. One tic baffles me. When someone asks a question and he calls on a department head to answer it, it's not "answer" or "address" or "clarify." It's "X can support that." For the life of me, I have never heard anyone support a question.