Big Decisions on Homeless Locally this Week?

The city council will be meeting this week to discuss the homeless situation in the city--particularly the homeless campsite under the I-110 bridge that the city is desperately seeking to clear.

Three options have been put out, and several entities have expressed "interest" in helping.

And there is over $3Million in federal funding in play to apply toward a long range solution and/or strategy to address the issue.

I've spoken to a city council representative, and I have spoken with several experts in this space.

I believe the city should take a step back and re-evaluate their next move(s) carefully.  I believe they should work together with the county on a solution.  Thus far--there has been no coordination.

So hopefully on Wednesday, the Pensacola City Council will press the pause button and bring in County staff to the discussion.  I would not be opposed to a joint meeting on this topic specifically.

But the idea of dumping the campsite in the county with no coordination, no permits, no notice-----yeah, that's not going to happen.  It only would have happened if folks just did it commando style--unlawfully without site approvals, permits, or required permissions.

I'm told that Pensacola/Escambia should consider doing what Okaloosa County is doing on this issue--I'm told their model is "working."

I'd like to know more about it--but I'm not opposed to looking at someone else's best practices that are successful.

But for my part, in my opinion, and for my vote----I think any such facility should be far away from suburbs and existing neighborhoods.  Build a facility out in the woods, far away from any residence, business, or suburban community. 

I also think we need to define what success looks like so that outcomes can be measured.  Touchy-feely feel good platitudes don't cut it.  I want to see numbers.  I want to see outcomes.  I want to know how folks measure success.

We also need to look at how such a facility for the homeless will be funded going forward so that any such concept can stand on it's own two feet and be viable with private support--not necessarily relying on the public sector for funding.

So there is much to be discussed, much to be worked out.  And there is no reason to rush.  Anyone can circle a date on a calendar and say "This will be gone by THIS date."

But as we have seen with respect to the I-110 campground, for example, often times these dates will slide to the right.  Significantly.  Particularly if they are poorly planned and hastily organized.

What Will the District Map Look Like if Proposed and Advertised District Map is Approved by BCC December 2nd?

The map and corresponding numbers of voters for our five commissioner's districts will look like what is depicted above----if the BCC moves forward with final approval next week, on December 2nd, as I anticipate we will.

............And of course this data and much more detailed information about the redistricting is all posted on the county's website, here.

On Real News with Rick Outzen This Morning at 7:45

 

I've been invited onto the area's #1 rated morning drive news/talk program "Real News with Rick Outzen" later this morning, at 7:45.

Topics that will be discussed include 

--the PNJ cartoonist Andy Marlette's latest ridiculous attack on me in response to my calling him out for his disgusting, racist use of the "N-Word" in his cartoons--and what the county has done to deprive PNJ of revenue subsequently for legal advertisements.  (And it is a big number--could be as much as $100K yearly going forward.)

-- The redistricting and calls by some for the censure of Dough Underhill for purposely putting out misinformation/disinformation/lies at his recent series of very sparsely attended town halls last week

--My priorities going forward into the next year as I once again serve as board chairman.

Should be a great show--and once I get the podcast back from Rick, I will post it here! 

Should Doug Underhill be Censured---Again?

At least one angry citizen believes he needs to be---- based upon some misinformation that was put out by the District 2 office in last week's sparsely attended town halls... Read the email we all received, below:

"Dear Commissioners,

During the last three town halls your fellow colleague on the board put out false information on the record on video and it is now posted on your website about the redistricting process and the laws and requirement you are to follow.

As a citizen it is my belief, for you to allow that behavior to stand without a public reprimand is very poor practice for the Board of County Commissioners to allow especially at the juncture of the ten year redistricting process.

It needs to be clearly, documented in writing and in the record of what was false info and what is the truth and available to be reported in local media, published n the agenda and subsequent minutes.

It is my suggestion that you review those recordings and document, in a more concise fashion. what was said to the constituents that is untrue, write in clear language what is in fact true, put it on the agenda and up for a vote prior to the December 2 vote to adopt the published maps.

Otherwise you just have these falsehoods hanging in the public domain.

I believe the chairman viewed the videos and documented some of the outright blatant information that was put out but not yet in an official capacity, only on his blog, and he also posted the letter the attorney sent to you.

It is my thought you should not allow that to stand because it foments division and unnecessary unrest and problems for good governance in a professional manner in Escambia County. The Censure motion is appropriate because it is your duty as a government body to correct bad behavior of another member.

We are governed by rule of law and specific guidelines, not propaganda and falsehoods so please add this to the agenda ahead of time, fully documented, take the vote to Censure, then vote to adopt the map that was settled upon by the joint bodies of local government in the time frame specified by the county attorney.

To let that hang out there unchallenged should not be condoned. 

Of course some is gobbly gook rhetoric but especially that the redistricting does not have to be done or that McMillan being followed is racism by the board.

Are you really going to allow that to stand?

 Sincerely

XXXX  XXXXXXX

Escambia County Citizen"

Attorney To BCC: "We are more than 10% in population deviation between our least populated district and most populated district."

 Nevermind the sour grapes, gobldygook gibberish, and the misinformation and lies from last week's "Clown" hall meetings by D2 (and I say "clown" to describe the D2 office staff--Doug, his secretary, and his intern---- that put these sparsely attended events on--not the concerned citizens that attended or EMR staff that professionally supported these "events")----Nevermind any of that noise.  This, below, is the important factual information citizens and constituents need to know regarding the "why" we are redistricting now instead of waiting and also why McMillan and the Voting Rights Act  REQUIRE that we maintain a minority-majority district.  

Forget about the lies

Get the FACTs in this email that just arrived in our inboxes this morning:

Here's the Next Big Push: Let's Just Wait Until 2023!!

Whether smiling while they say it a la Mr. Rogers--or with a serious look on their face similar to Henry Rollins--a lie is a lie, facts are facts, and numbers don't lie......no matter how information is delivered.... 

Now, suddenly, a few people are demanding we stop the redistricting process and wait until 2023 to do it.  Interesting--- that's what I said in March, April, July and September.  Loudly, and publicly.

But then majority of the BCC, including Doug Underhill, wanted to plow forward and finish in 2021-- so that's what we did.  I'm happy to work at the speed the majority wants--that's called politics.

Now, at the 11th hour, 59th minute, and 59th second metaphorically speaking-- with advertised draft final maps at the county and at the school board set for adoption in the next three weeks---some folks realize they don't like the map.  

They're throwing all kinds of reasons at the wall like a Jackson Pollack artwork---hoping desperately that something will stick and stop this process.

Now they want to reverse course, do nothing and hold on to the status quo with respect to our district sizes.

But at this late stage that is an unrealistic, untenable position.

Here's Why:

Attorneys for both the School Board and the BCC have urged us—since our first joint meeting in October and in the strongest possible terms, to complete this process this year ahead of the elections of 2022 due to the fact that currently our districts are outside of the legally allowed deviation of 10% between the highest and lowest populated districts.   This, according to the attorneys, could very well trigger a lawsuit and we would be very vulnerable as everyone has been told, publicly, that we are now officially outside of the 10% allowable deviation as our districts stand currently.

 Now, I know that my counterpart from D2, Doug Underhill, and his staff intern and secretary are telling folks at their sparsely attended town halls this past week that “we are NOT outside this population deviation threshold” (47:30 of this video)---however this statement is a blatant lie.  If you look at the census data fact-sheet (pictured below) that we all received from the Supervisor of Elections David Stafford this past August-----anyone and everyone can see with crystal clarity that the numbers do not lie and we are, indeed, out of balance beyond 10% between the largest district (D1—68,158 citizens currently)   and the smallest district (D2--- 61,111 citizens currently).  This is calculated by taking what should be the ideal district size post-census provided by the Supervisor of Elections to the board (64,381 citizens), multiplying that number by 5% which equals 3,219 and adding that number to an ideal sized district of 64,381 citizens to reach the maximum allowable high end deviation size of 67,600 citizens.  To arrive at the smallest possible district's size without a 5% deviation, we simply take the ideal sized district of 64,381 and subtract the 3,219 (5%) to reach the figure of 61,162.

 

Currently—District 1 has a population of 68,158 and is above the 5% threshold district size of 67,600 citizens.

Currently---District 2 has a population of 61,111 and is below the 5% threshold district size of 61,162 citizens.

look at the data chart below, for yourself, to see the numbers.  Numbers do not lie.  Wanna still think I'm lying while you believe those that are really lying?  request this table yourself from the SOE's office.

 

The difference between these two district population sizes exceeds 10% and nobody has to be a math major to work this out.  It is what it is, no matter what any politician or his secretary or aide tells you with a serious look or a smiling face.   Facts are facts, numbers do not lie.

They (Doug and his intern) next go on to lie about the proposed population size of District 1 post-redistricting--exclaiming D1 will be "topheavey" after the process and one of the largest districts population wise. This was proclaimed at their very lightly attended "Town Hall" last night in Beulah.  Doug expounds on this misinformation with additional gobledygook and gibberish that is nonfactual drivel (beginning 49:20 of this video)--all the while knowing that in the current, most recently voted --the new D1 is the second smallest (Only D5 is smaller) of the five districts population-wise, smaller than the ideal sized district by 818 residents,  for the exact, precise reason that it makes sense to be smaller ahead of the planned growth that is coming to the district over the next 10 years.  This is a fact--do not be feeble and maleable like a human, kool-aide chugging Gumby doll and let a politician (or his secretary) look you in the face and lie to you.  Fact check them. Don't believe me?---check the data chart for the most recently proposed district maps for adoption, post redistricting, on the county website, here, and also posted below:

 

BUT EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY:  

Look at the agenda item for what it is we will be adopting on December 2nd--it is posted on the county's website---here  If adopted as it is being presented and advertised....DISTRICT 1 WILL BE THE SMALLEST OF THE 5 DISTRICTS AT JUST 61,909 IN POPULATION POST REDISTRICTING---BARELY OVER THE MINIMUM SIZE TO MEET THE 10% DEVIATION THRESHLD.  Again--don't believe me or your lying eyes--fact check me by going to the county's public site.  Dough and his secretary and intern know this stuff.  Don't let them lie to your face.

Watch out for any politician that will look you in the eye and lie to you.  When you catch them lying to you, call them out for it and ask them to explain it.  Hold them accountable.  

Otherwise get out of the way because you are an enabling water-carrier, a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

Lies, lies, lies, "clown hall" dis-informational sales jobs, potential lawsuits and a rapidly ticking clock.....  

For all of these reasons and many more that we could get into but won’t—maintaining the status quo on current district lines and sizes at this, the 11^th hour, 59^th minute, and 59^th second,  is an unrealistic, untenable option.

We must and we will move forward on Dec. 2nd.

 

Pee-Wee Football.....A Parody

When the coach demands to play even when the lightning is crashing and the rain is coming down--that coach, upon getting the game they demanded and upon  losing such a game very badly, cannot with any integrity ask for a "do over".....

There was an all important, pee-wee football tournament scheduled.

Two teams were playing the early game on a field of astroturf.

Two teams were playing the late game on grass.

And the clouds were forming.  Heavy weather was coming.....

The two coaches for the early game, and the ref, said "Let's go ahead and play, we can get the game in before the weather hits and it is important to the kids-------we can DO IT!"

The two coaches playing the late game, on grass when it would be raining, discussed the issue.

Coach one, who wore impeccable outfits and spoke eloquently with lots of wit and big words opined "We need to go ahead and play today--the kids are here, the families are here, this team and their families have EQUITIES that need to be protected, and there is no reason to wait------you're not worried about losing, are you??! he stated to his opposing coach, as he continued,,,, "Let's go ahead and just do it today--there is no reason to delay--we can get it done before the rain!"

Coach two, who was a veteran of many seasons and was  laid back, wearing flip flops and sporting a week's growth on his beard and a San Diego Padres baseball hat, said simply  "Why rush?"  He continued.. "We can wait until the week after next, the weather will be better, the fields will be better, and there will be no issues---so let's wait!"

Coach one said  "No!!!!, we need to play right now, there is absolutely no reason to delay--so we should play now."

Coach two, looking back at his team, stated dryly "We're ready to go whenever-- if you want to go today, let's go, but it would be smarter to wait."

The first games on astroturf ended without a hitch, as expected, and then the rain started after that game ended and as the second game, on grass, commenced.........

Interstingly--Coach one disappeared for the first quarter of the game he wanted so desperately. inexplicably, he abandoned his team to be run by his trusted secretary and intern in his absence for the all important first quarter.   And while he was gone, coach one's team got pummelled.  They were slip-sliding all over the place on the increasingly muddy field and having the dog-snot whipped out of them.  It was ugly.  Upon his return, coach one wondered, aloud, what had transpired in the first quarter?  "What happened???" was his question to his two faithful helpers.  But they had no words----"They are running away with it, they are imposing their will on us." one of them murmured.

When the third quarter was almost over, and when  coach two's team was by then winning 56-8------Coach one suddenly changed his tune.  Curiously and unexpectedly--he climbed up on the bleachers and pleaded to the crowd of parents:

"We didn't need to play today!!!!!!!--we should have waited.  Look at this field, it's muddy, and it is not fair to these players!!!-----It's not safe!!!!!   Don't you think we need to end this game and start a new game in three weeks??????!!!!

"This is Unacceptable!!" he screamed to the crowd, who by this time wondered if this particular coach had lost his mind.

Then time out was called, and coach two walked over to coach one and stated, flatly:

"You lobbied for this game, you're losing, and now that you're losing---------NOW you want to do what we should have done--what I WANTED to do before we started----which is to play this in three weeks when the field is dry!!!"  "NO, not going to happen"  said coach two.  He continued.

"You wanted this game, you were intransigent, you're side is getting beat, and you don't get to change the rules after the game you wanted has started.  You wanted this, be careful what you wish for--you might just get it!"   Said coach two.  "Besides--you are not considering all the officials, the scorekeepers, the linesmen, and the referees.  They stayed and put in the effort to officiate this game you so badly wanted--now, you want them to just do it all over again?  That's not happening..."

After this, the clock wound down to zero, the fourth quarter ended and the final score was 62-11.

Coach one and his team were humbled--losing a game they pushed for but that they could have postponed......

Meanwhile, coach one again abandoned his players and parents as he stormed off the field in anger and haste---even refusing to shake hands with the winning coach. 

Then, something really great happened....all the players from both teams shook hands and started eating their snacks, talking to each other, and running through the "human tunnel" their parents created on the field, facing each other and grasping each others' hands.  Everyone left the field happy, even the losing team made friends with the winning team and the day ended with the sun coming out and everything was at peace.

Upon heading to the parking lot to exit the facility--Coach one, the poor sport who left in anger, was reportedly seen sitting in his truck with his secretary and intern, busily banging away on their cell phones all by themselves, with the coach chugging a bottle of Sailor Jerry rum as if it was a Gatorade and he was Michael Jordan.  

It was bizzare behavior to say the least.  It was weird--and the parents he abandoned in the stands just walked by their former coach, shaking their collective heads in disbelief...... 

It was reported that between gulps of the rum, coach one was heard mumbling and talking to himself, saying "I'm quitting!"  I'm done with being the coach, I AM DONE!

The End

*This post is a parody and not based on any real pee-wee football games or political processes or actual real people, coaches, secretaries, valets, or interns....

First Underhill "Town Hall" Goes Over Like an Exploding Dragster at the Starting Line.....

Commissioner Underhill's first town hall last night went off about as well as an exploding dragster on the starting line....

Not unlike the infamous explosion at the starting line suffered by Doug Herbert 22 years ago at Pomona--Commissioner Doug Underhill's first "Town Hall" on redistricting last night in Myrtle Grove blew up at the starting line.

Boom.

Nobody showed up, just a smattering of staff, several citizens that challenged Doug's assertions about redistricting (rightfully so) The PKA guy, Doug's compliant secretary and intern, Doug's sister-in-law, a couple of Escambia Hate Watch regulars, Flood Defender man, an angry Beulah resident, and maybe four or five others tops? Maybe a half-dozen truly concerned citizens--not insiders??

The stream was shaky and unsteady, and the whole affair lasted about an hour and a half.  Painfully off-topic rants and inaccurate statements about the process of redistricting-and an insinuation that the latest approved map rendition from the school board and the BCC was the "Bergosh" plan were part of Doug's soliloquy.  Saying the BCC's approved map is "Bergosh" plan is straight up lie.  It was actually a compromise that built on D2 School Board member Paul Fetsko's very rational map--and it was voted upon unanimously by the school board members subsequently and it received a 4-1 vote from the BCC as well.  Only Doug voted against it.

So yes, 9 of 10 elected officeholders voted for the map that Doug inaccurately portrays as the "Bergosh Plan."  (He wants people to believe he is right, and the 9 of us are wrong, I suppose.....)  Good luck with that.

Notably--during this event:

--he glosses over the fact he missed the first, all important and once per decade redistricting meeting yet he does not say why he didn't at least call in on "zoom" for the meeting or at least submit a map for our consideration before he left town.  Nope, no explanation on that.

--he bemoans the fact that "we didn't do town halls first"----- when he could have held town halls anytime after he got back from the jet ski races in Arizona and before the second joint meeting --But he didn't.  Why not?

--He makes a point to attempt to make the process a racially divisive wedge issue--knowing full well the direction from FAC and our attorney has been that we must work within the spirit of the McMillan decision and not water down the minority majority district--lest we face civil rights lawsuits/challenges to the map.

--He laments the fact that the time is running out for this process---yet he doesn't mention the fact that he wanted to rush this and finish it this year (even though we do not and did not have to).  He also conveniently does not disclose the fact that I was the commissioner, me, who warned against rushing; I wanted to wait until 2023 to do it right.

--He disregards the wishes of currently serving ECUA board members Vicki Campbell and Lois Benson who preferred NOT to be redistricted out of their seats and requested this reasonable, well established practice and accomodation from the group putting these maps together.  Doug wanted to knock two of them out of their districts...

--He neglects to mention that his first map was bad, but his most recent one is actually worse...

Maybe 5 or 6 citzens spoke total during the meeting--other than that it was a nonstop barrage of

A Conversation with Dr. Myhuong Nguyen....Part I

This email, above, was sent to all commissioners yesterday morning by local physician Dr. Myhuong Nguyen.  At first, I thought it was a hoax job.  I was wrong though...

Board members received the innocuous looking email, above,  yesterday morning from a "Dr. Myhuong Nguyen."

It was fascinating, and had an attachment that held interesting, intriguing yet controversial opinions and data about COVID-19, vaccinations, Ivermectin,  Hydroxychloroquine, India, Africa and Israel within it.  

A lot of it looked like some conspiracy theory email strings I've received in the past.   I was natually skeptical 

Could this be real--could this be the real opinion (s) from a real local Doctor?

For a minute there, I thought I was falling for some kind of a prank job like the crass, yet iconic scene from 1980's coming of age comedy "Porky's."  But it wasn't a prank.

I looked her up on Google.  Yes, this is a real doctor in Pensacola.

But could someone  be throwing out information and just using her name?  Well, maybe.  So I emailed her back--and she responded.   She emailed me her contact information  and then we spoke.  At length.

WOW-what a bombshell conversation and an extremely intelligent individual!  (I've asked her and she has agreed to be my guest on my December Coffee with the Commissioner)

She got her medical degree from Johns Hopkins and she has spent the last 18 years as an emergency medical physician in the Ascension Sacred Heart Emergency room in Pensacola.  She left in September to start her own practice as she felt she could be doing more to help more patients in a different setting.

But the bombshell claim she makes is very intriguing:

The media is not telling the truth about the vaccines, ivermectin and alternative, yet less expensive and equally effective treatments for COVID-19.  They (the media) are not telling the story of ivermectin's success in places like sub-saharan Africa and in India.

"Ivermectin is extremeley effective at treating COVID-19 and I have been prescribing it for patients here locally, in Colorado, and Atlanta---but pharmacies are not filling the prescriptions!"  she stated flatly...

"HOW can they do that?  How can they tell a doctor what she can or cannot prescribe for her patients?" I asked.

"I had my hippocratic oath taken from me" she exclaimed angrily.

I asked her about all the media ganging up on ivermectin to poke fun at it as a horse dewormer and quack science-- which she explained as follows.  She went into great detail describing the paste form of Ivermectin that is pre-measured for animals that are 1200 pounds.  "It simply cannot be dosed accurately for humans--so people have made errors in taking this and ended up seizing and needing intubation" she described.  The media then pick these stories up and report them."

She continued:

"They [media]  know it  [Ivermectin]has been around for decades and has an impeccable safety record; it is used for river blindness and is known to have antiviral properties as well--but there is a push to downplay Ivermectin in favor of the experimental vaccines!"

"Is this all about money?" I asked.  "I'm afraid it looks like it is" she stated dryly.  "I absolutely do NOT support the vaccines for children either" she offered

I told her one of my best friends, Brad Crager, died of COVID-19 and that event led me to getting the shots.  I have had two Moderna shots.

"Are the shots effective" I asked her bluntly:  "They are experimental, and we have seen a lot of patients, even locally, harmed by the vaccines.  And we are seeing in Israel, for instance, that even with vaccination rates exceeding 87% they are having patients who are vaccinated getting sick and dying.  It is very concerning what is happening there"  She continued "And then you have parts of India where there are millions of residents and they have flattened the curve TWICE using ivermectin early in a patient's diagnosis"

Curiously--I asked her if I was a patient who had recently contracted COVID-19--what would she prescribe for me.  She asked me for my weight, 200 pounds.  

"So for you I would prescribe 18 mg Ivermectin once daily for five days, along with Zinc, D3, Vitamin C.  If after 7 days you didn't improve, I would add the hydroxychloroquine."

"I guarantee you, your friend who died last January, if he had been given these medicines, he could have survived."

Wow.  Talk about interesting.  I want to know more.

I can't wait for our follow-on conversation and our discussion on December's Coffee with the Commissioner.  Should be very interesting.

"I will bring several more doctors on the show if that is alright--two of whom are the best in our area and who are now no longer working because of the vaccine mandate"  she stated.

"By all means, bring them. The more the better--I'll send you the Zoom invitation"    

What Could Possibly Go Wrong with This Plan?? Marlette Manipulation 33

 

Andy Marlette's cartoon in this morning's PNJ attempts to draw parallels between Republican leadership in Florida and locally with the acceptance of anarchy and lawlessness in Blue cities like Seattle and Portland.  To do this, he pictures the Pensacola I-110 under the bridge homeless encampment and tent city.  Of course, his equivocation on this misses the mark like most of his cartoons do consistently.  Cities like Seattle that allowed entire chunks of downtown areas to be occupied by lawless criminals had nothing at all to do with homeless individuals desperately clinging to existence in Pensacola Florida.  Out west, it was all about ideology and certain quasi-political groups like Antifa flexing their muscle, showing what they could and would do in cities run by like-minded politicians in places like Portland and Seattle.

The homeless encampment in Pensacola under the I-110 bridge, by contrast, is not a political statement being orchestrated by partisan activists---and that's the huge difference between what is happening here and what happens in Seattle and Portland.

Insidiously--Andy conflates the two issues even as he knows they are different.

The issue under the bridge in Pensacola is about folks who are truly down on their luck and are homeless and desperate.  Sure--there is dysfunctional behavior and some criminal activity taking place in the encampment.  Yes, much of it has not been discussed publicly for political expediency as the city desperately tries to make the problem disappear by dispersing it out to the county---which is a disastrous plan nobody supports and for which nobody has even bothered to properly plan for.

But the Seattle "CHAZ" debacle is nothing like what's happening in Pensacola, and Andy knows it.

Nope-- this issue is about the city attempting to move a stubborn eyesore problem out of their viewshed.  And meanwhile--noone has reached out to the county to obtain permits or permission.  The city hasn't attempted to explain this plan to county residents in Bellview who ABSOLUTELY do not want this homeless camp in their neighborhood.

They are just planning on doing it--which I will not support and which I will actively oppose.

So the picture, above, is much more apropos than what Andy presented.  He's making a political attack out of the desperation of the homeless whereas my rendition, above, is a humorous jab at the folks who are naive and believe they can just move this camp next to an existing neighborhood and such a move will not have devastating consequences on the area surrounding such an encampment.

Remember--they are not telling the truth about the dysfunctional activities going on right now around the current site under the I-110.  They don't want you to know about the problems assiciated with this tent city.  This way, they can pat you on the head, tell you everything is alright, and mollify you into accepting this campsite in your neighborhood.  See the way this works?

Unfortunately I see right through them and their plan.  Others do, too.

Tallman McKay Circles the PNJ "Wagon" with Fake News

Andrew "Tallman" McKay ignores and does not support the real reason I strongly support depriving the PNJ of legal ad revenue.  He lies by omission.  But why?  Why does he fail to report the main reason I never want to spend a nickel with the PNJ again is because of the racist cartoons of their cartoonist, Andy Marlette.  Why circle the wagons around the PNJ and cherry pick my blog post and fail to mention the MAIN reason this is happening?  Fake news fecklessness

I'm out of the county for a couple of days, attending a conference, relaxing, getting some tennis and golf in, and enjoying beautiful weather in the 80's in south-central Florida.

It's great to get away from time to time.

But I've now heard that Andrew "Tallman" McKay on AM 1620 is making hay over the county's new practice of no longer spending tens of thousands of dollars yearly on legal ads in the PNJ.

He is really, really uptight about it, according to some folks who have reported he's talking a lot about it during his radio shows.  And apparently he did a facebook post on it as well.  (Interestingly, a majority of commenters on this topic on the other hate site SUPPORT this move by the county.  Even folks that would love nothing more than to see me drawn and quartered support this new protocol, LOL)  

That must mean something to Tallman, if he is as smart as he wants us to think he is?

Why are people negative about the PNJ and lining up in disagreement with Andrew Tallman Mckay on his own site?  

Because they know Marlette, Savage, and the PNJ are corrupted, biased, and controlled--that's why.  

Their editorials are garbage, their cartoons are horrible, and they don't cover important stories, and the stories they do cover are slanted.  This is a known fact of reality.

But here's where Tallman really gets shifty and FAKE.  He posts selected snippets from my first blog post about this new practice of depriving PNJ of revenue----but he totally ignores the main reason I support this boycott----the racist cartoons that Andy Marlette has drawn where he uses the "N-Word."  

McKay cherry picks some of my post--but ignores the most important reason why I dislike the PNJ and support yanking their revenue.  Racist cartoons by Marlette where he uses the N-word.

I havn't edited that post---read it for yourself and see for yourself.  It is my main reason for supporting the pullback of ad revenue from PNJ.

So why is Tallman so afraid of reporting this?  It was the centerpiece of my blog post that he quoted.

It's why he isn't a real journalist, he's an entertainment/talk show guy.  Because to compliantly run to the defense of the PNJ while ignoring important aspects of the story is what Fake News is all about.

Weak.

You want to quote my posts--tell the whole truth about them--otherwise you are biased, partisan, feckless and fake.

Redistricting Moving Forward--Despite One County Commissioner "Objecting"

The BCC is moving forward with final approval of our redistricting maps which 5 School Board members and 4 of the 5 County Commissioners worked diligently to finalize in a compressed timeframe. One Commissioner, one out of 10 elected officials that put these maps together, is "unhappy..." 

Tuesday the Board made a statement, approved our final redistricting map for advertising, and will advertise what was approved twice over the next four weeks. And on December 2nd, we will have our final public hearing before the BCC at which time we will vote to make the advertised map official.  That's how I see the process unfolding over the next three weeks (which will go by fast--with the Thanksgiving Holidays sandwiched between now and then.....)

Importantly--I believe in this same time period the Escambia School Board will advertise and approve an identical map so the voters will have all local offices (School Board, Commissioner, ECUA Board) running in the same geographic districts.  This will maintain a long established practice of doing this locally in Escambia County in order to assist the Supervisor of Elections and in order to diminish any voter confusion.

Now, I've heard from a smattering of diehard Underhill supporters that do not approve of the map as we voted, 4-1, to advertise for final passage.  A small number of folks who proclaim they do NOT support Underhill also have sent the same sorts of emails to me.

I have received multiple emails supporting the proposed redistricting map, too.

But---- by and large--the overall process has just not garnered a lot of public interest.  It just hasn't.

Most likely it is because folks are busy living their lives, running their businesses, going to their kids' sporting events, planning for the holidays, recovering from the last 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, returning to in-person events, going back to Church Services in person, travelling abroad, planning for the future,  etc., etc., etc......

Most of the more than 130,000 citizens that live in Escambia County's District 1 and District 2 are not hyper-focused on local (or even national) politics.  They are busy living their lives--catching some news at 10PM on WEAR, reading NorthEscambia, and listening to WCOA.  Some (a diminishing number) may even read the PNJ.  But they are not hyper-political; their entire lives and existances do not revolve around what happened at the County, or what the school board did, or what neighborhood is going to be reunited in this redistricting, or what 8 people on a Facebook Hate Site think. Or what Jeff Bergosh says, or What Doug Underhill thinks  They don't live it, they don't care, --they tune out the noise.  In short, they have lives.

So I understand outgoing Commissioner Underhill will plan a "rapid-fire" series of town hall meetings next week to denounce the work of the 5 members of the school board and 4 members of the BCC.  He'll likely attempt to convince folks that the nine of us got it wrong, but he is right..........uh,.... okay. 

Neighbors Are Frustrated, Concerned, and Angry

 

Neighbors are concerned that more homeless allowed to camp near existing neighborhoods will create more blight, lowered property values, more crime, and more trash including shopping carts full of feces and trash dumped in yards...How does such a plan make neighborhoods and communities better?

My phone has been blowing up about the city's proposed homeless campsite in the County, in District 1 on Houston Avenue.

Anger, frustration, concern.  Those are the adjectives I'd use to describe what I am hearing.  I'd also add hopeless and dejected to those three words.

They don't want the camp 15 feet from their homes.

In short, they feel that if this happens, they are being used to shoulder a problem the city has right now under the  I-110 bridge.  

Thankfully--the city council put this plan on the back burner by a 5-2 vote last night.  That was a smart vote.  And they all know I am vocally and actively opposing any such plan.

Some individuals who are familiar with the issues of the existing camp in the city say a lot of the problems of the existing camp are not being shared with the public.  According to one source who is intimately familiar:  "The PPD have been called out to the camp dozens and dozens of times.  There are drug users, there have been sexual assaults, and all kind of other criminal activities in this camp.  If they get put in the county--all those calls for service will now fall on the Escambia County Sheriff's Office to handle.  Do we really need to do this?  was the rhetorical question this individual asked.

The answer is NO we don't have to.  Take them to the woods--not to suburbia.

Meanwhile--the residents in the general area of the proposed county site, with whom I have communicated, express real concern for the homeless who are down on their luck.  I've not heard one of them say anything disparaging about these folks.  They simply don't believe putting this camp right next to their neighborhood is prudent.  The below email sums up the feelings of these neighbors, perfectly.

"Commissioner Bergosh,

 My name is XXXXXXXX  XXXXXXXX and my family and I live at XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Pensacola, FL 32526 on the corner of XXXXXXXX  and  XXXXXXXXXX Avenues.

 Our property is across Houston Avenue and a few dozen feet from the proposed location to set up a homeless camp. We have serious concerns with this proposal.

 In the four years we have lived here, we have seen several unnerving activities on Houston Ave., including an abandoned car set on fire, a motorist driving on the grass attempting to run over her significant other, homeless individuals smoking what appeared to be illegal narcotics, intoxicated individuals screaming obscenities at the top of their lungs while dancing down the middle of Houston Ave., and countless tons of littering. All of these instances occured with 15 feet of our property.

 Since several homeless individuals already live at times in the proposed camp location off Houston, we have found needles and drug baggies in our lawn and have had a shopping cart full of human feces, rotten food, clothes, and trash dumped in our yard. This has occurred with only a few people living there, let alone hundreds of individuals.

 Since purchasing the house, we have worked hard to improve the neighborhood and build strong

On Pensacola's #1 Rated Morning Drive Radio Program "Real News with Rick Outzen" Later this Morning, at 8:00

I've once again been invited to appear on Pensacola's #1 rated Morning Drive Radio Program, "Real News with Rick Outzen" on the area's preeminent and highest rated radio talk station, AM 1370 WCOA.

I look forward to the discussion(s) which I believe will center on the Board of County Commissioners' soon to be completed redistricting efforts--and a couple of horrible concept drawings/plans brought by District 2 in the 11th hour, 59th minute, and 59th second of the process--both non starters--described here and here in more depth.  

Also on tap--a couple of disastrous ideas from downtown on bringing the city's homeless camp out of the city and into District 1------an idea I certainly do not support.  It's an idea nobody I have spoken with in District 1 supports.  It is a disastrous idea that I do not think will come to pass and for which I have posted a couple of Blog entries, here and here where I've proposed alternatives that are less burdensome on local neighborhoods.

Once Rick posts the podcast--It will be linked here.

66th Coffee With The Commissioner This Wednesday, November 10th!

Join us for our virtual 66th Coffee with the Commissioner event on Wednesday, Nov. 10. The live stream will take place from 6:30 - 7:30 a.m. To join the meeting, visit Commissioner Bergosh on Facebook here: www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/. 

Attendees will include Interim County Administrator Wes Moreno, Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore, and Neighborhood and Human Services Director Clara Long. Gilmore will give an update about public safety news in Escambia County, and Long will join Commissioner Bergosh for a conversation about the county's Emergency Rental Assistance Program.

Residents are encouraged to send virtual questions and comments they would like to discuss with District 1 Commissioner Bergosh during the event through Facebook. 

For more information, contact District 1 at 850-595-4910 or district1@myescambia.com. 

Doug's Second Map Fails, Too

Like a plane crashing into a mountain--D2's latest effort at a redistricting map is a disaster....

So we're in the middle of a once in a decade redistricting effort and there has been a lot of effort put into the process by 5 School Board Members and 4 of the County Commissioners.

Commissioner Doug Underhill has not put in equivalent effort, though, even as he lobbied heavily for us to complete this process in rushed fashion this year.

Doug didn't come to the first joint meeting on October 5th, he blew that meeting off.   And he didn't leave a draft map for the other 9 of us to consider, either.  

He didn't bother to "zoom" into that meeting--although he could have no matter where he was.  (School Board Member Kevin Adams, for example,  attended the meeting via Zoom--as he was on School Board Business 500 miles away)  I was subsequently told Doug was away from town at a Jet Ski race.

And between that first meeting and up until the second meeting last Tuesday evening--Commissioner Underhill  didn't submit a proposed map for our individual consideration prior to the second meeting.  

Crickets.......nothing.

Tuesday evening, five minutes before the final joing meeting, he brought hard copies of his first attempt at a  map to the group.  It went over like a lead balloon.  A total and complete, utter and epic fail--as I chronicled in detail here.  Numbers didn't balance, it knocked an existing elected official from her seat, it threw off the balance of schools between school board D1 and D2, left Myrtle Grove jigsawed between D1 and D2,  and on and on.  It was a non-starter from the get go.  

Then, last night, at the last minute, Doug submitted this disaster, below.

This rendition, hard as it may be to believe, is actually worse than his version from Tuesday night.  The only improvement it brings over the first disastrous map is that it does bring each district's size closer to being in alignment with the ideal size of 64,381 citizens each.  

But that is the only redeeming quality of this map.

With this iteration, above, not one, but TWO (2) existing elected female ECUA board members get knocked out of their respective districts, the balance of schools between D1 and D2 on the school board is jolted out of balance, Myrtle Grove and other west side neighborhoods are still chewed up like jigsaw puzzle pieces between D1 and D2, and on and on.  Significantly:  We worked hard at the last meeting to assist D3 maintain and expand their required minority majority precinct.  The solid map we settled on Tuesday night--- the one we will be bringing forward next Tuesday morning---was carefully created with input from all participants and established a minority-majority of 1,518 Citizens for D3.   Doug's disaster plan above slashes this majority by 45% in his rendition--down to a majority just 835 minority voters.

So, to summarize, the second map commissioner Underhill has brought forward at the last minute is

Where Should the Homeless Base Camp Go? Part II: How About to a BASE Camp in the Woods--Away from Existing Neighborhoods?

Some have suggested relocating the city's homeless encampment out into the woods, deep in the woods, away from established neighborhoods with the provision of services to be "brought-out" to the camp as necessary.  Interesting idea......

Ever since the issue of the relocation of homeless individuals to the county from the city erupted like Mount Vesuvius last Tuesday----many folks have expressed opposition.  Loudly.  Forcefully.

Not surprisingly--not ONE of the folks I have spoken with has expressed any hatred, disdain, or contempt for these homeless folks camped out in the city under the bridge.  To the contrary and to a person--I have heard just the opposite.  County constituents truly have compassion and sympathy for these homeless folks.  But the sympathy, compassion, and concern by citizens in my district for these folks who are down on their luck does not equate to support for relocation of such homeless folks to areas near their neighborhoods.  And I agree.  I share this sentiment.

Now, cynics will say---They're just a bunch of NIMBY's!   

Perhaps some might look it this issue that way--but I disagree.  Allow me provide the following distinction(s):

 

As a county commissioner, I have to make tough votes for projects that follow all laws, codes, and ordinances and that provide enhancements to communities (retail stores, apartments, houses).  Even when a person, company, or entity has followed all national, state, and local ordinances to lawfully construct a "(fill in the blank)"  There are still some nearby residents who not only disapprove--but who want to rip out my throat for having the audacity to APPROVE the "(Fill in the blank)"  Even when lawful--even if BENEFICIAL.  

On the flip side of this coin is a proposed homeless encampment of 100 or more persons,  sleeping in tents near a residential neighborhood, where apparently proponents of such a "facility" have publicly voiced a plan to establish such a camp regardless and in contravention to what any neighbor might say or think and who have simultaneously NOT yet followed any of the necessary state or local ordinances to establish such an encampment.

I'll leave it to the reader to work out who the NIMBY is and who the concerned residents are in the above two scenarios....

So what should be done about this situation, then? you might ask

Look--I'm not an expert on homelessness.  It's tough and complex.  I've made efforts to help folks from time to time via volunteering time and money and resources to help these folks.  But it's a big problem.

The homeless advocate will tell you it is good to locate these folks near neighborhoods so such neighbors will view the homeless as "humans."  Additionally, the advocates will say having them near established communities will allow them to walk or bike to get groceries and supplies from nearby retail shops and ready access to healhcare, public transportation, and wrap-around services.  Fair enough.

The concerned neighbor might believe that, but might also fear that homeless nearby will engage in trash dumping, illegal drug use, prostitution, panhandling, petty theft of property from homes and stores, and urination/defecation in public.  Such homeowners worry about degredation of property values, safety and security of children and elderly, and neighborhood blight....

Maybe the advocate and the neighbor are both onto some truth.  (hint--They are!)

Regardless--location of a camp near a neighborhood will not help improve a neighborhood.  That is an axiom all can agree upon.  If it did/does--we wouldn't be discussing it right now.

So where do we put them?

Now that the city/state/regional homeless reduction task force has been given lots of taxpayer money ($3 million) to work toward solutions---how about this idea:

Purchase or lease a large parcel of land out in the woods, far away from nearby neighbors.

Set up tent sites, portable showers, portable toilets, and portable office trailers.

Twice a week (or more frequently as the budget and logistics permit), at regular times, bring in the service providers (health, dental, social work, substance abuse counseling, faith-based groups, education, job training, etc.  etc.  etc.   etc...........)

Bus in wholesome fresh fruit, vegetables, and other staples for consumption by the camp residents.

Twice daily, run a bus to the bus transportation hub (so these folks can catch a linked route bus to work or other appointments)

Twice daily, run a bus from the transportation hub back to base camp.

Pay for private security and have a zero tolerance policy for illegal drug use, violation of law, and/ or

Where Should the Homeless Base Camp Go? Part I-- Binary Choice

 

You cannot say you will achieve an unrealistic and un achievable deadline to do something by the book while simultaneously declaring  a deadline for such action that is not doable if it is indeed to be done by the book.  This is a binary choice.  You'll either do it NOT by the book, or you will do it after your stated deadline by the book or NOT by the book.  One way or the other--cannot be both.....and cannot be done in 20 days

So the city has proclaimed that by November 24th, 20 days from now, they will clear the area under I-110 of about 100 homeless men and women encamped there.  

Someone leaked to the press the locations where this group of homeless will be "relocated."

One of those locations was/is outside of the city limits--in the County.  In District 1.

Of course--I was not notified of this before it was leaked to the press and I began getting angry phone calls and emails from nearby residents who are justifiably concerned and understandably opposed to this camp site coming within a stone's throw of where they live and have purchased homes.

And I agree with these residents, and I stand with these residents in opposition.

Everyone at county planning and zoning has told me they have not received an application for the permitting of this site for such use.  Depending upon what is planned to be constructed/erected there--significant coordination and planning would be necessary to obtain the necessary permits, plans, and authorizations---not to mention the construction of the roads necessary for the trucks to service the porta potties that would necessarily be required.

All of which creates the apprehension that this deadline cannot be met utilizing the county's Houston Avenue site---unless somebody facilitates the mass migration (bus caravans, trucks, etc.) from I-110 site to Houston site----without getting the permits first.  This is what has me and my constituents concerned.

You're either: 

---being fallaciously unrealistic by publicly proclaiming you'll have the "area in the city under I-110 cleared out before Thanksgiving"

OR

--you fully intend to make the unachievable deadline and simply take the NIKE approach and (Just DO IT) ----regardless of the status of permits, licensess and authorization.

It's one or the other---can't be both.  Binary choice.

So, task force and city of Pensacola---which is it?

The Peacock Proposal

Downtown businessman John Peacock has sent the board members the below, 7-page document for discussion at our November 9th Committee of the Whole.

I believe he will be seeking the Board's "blessing" on the formation of a charter study committee.

As I have stated publicly---I'm willing to listen to what is presented--but I do not support a "strong" elected County Executive---nor am I necessarily "sold" on the idea that Escambia County needs to be a charter county.

There are plusses and minuses to both forms of county governance.

So if the committee wants to form and present options and ideas that are non-binding recommendations they can do so anytime;  they don't need our permission to do so--and to request a board vote on this or a straw vote should in no way signify support for whatever such a committee pulls out of the process....

Nevertheless, I look forward to the discussion.  See his proposal to start their process, below.

Doug's Map Fails: It Was a Disaster

Doug's Underhill's redistricting proposal map he presented last night had numerous, fatal flaws.  It died shortly after it was presented--receiving zero support for obvious reasons...

At last night's second joint County Commission/School Board Meeting-- Commissioner Doug Underhill brought a rendition of what he thought the new district lines should look like between District 1 and District 2 in Escambia County.

It received no play whatsoever among those of us who were there and serious about the work at hand.

Doug's map was ill-conceived--- and a total and complete, unmitigated disaster....

His map (above) had so many flaws that were readily apparent--I'm astonished he even brought if forward.  It was not unlike a rocket exploding on the launch pad.

As I discussed with him just a few of the glaring problems (minute 46:27  of this video)  I noticed upon just receiving it 5 minutes before he pitched it to the dais members---he didn't acknowledge any of the serious shortcomings of his proposal.  Instead-- he simply doubled down on it, with a steaming, rancid helping of gibberish and gobldygook about "equities" being lost and neighborhoods being separated----while ignoring the fact his map kept Myrtle Grove carved up like a jigsaw puzzle---not fixing the precinct 99 issue as every other map presented has.

Just a few of the MAJOR flaws with the Underhill map that quickly relegated it to the trash recepticle.

---It left District 1 an astonishing 5,584 citizens short of the ideal district size of 64,381

---It left District 1 even 2,365 citizens short of the required 5% statutory minimum deviation below the ideal size

---It boots a duly-elected ECUA Board member out of her seat for which she won election less than one year ago (which would have, for more than the next three years,  served to disenfranchise voters who put this official into office)

---In a complete and total snub to the District 1 School Board Member, Kevin Adams, the Underhill plan would have knocked three schools (Bailey Middle, Helen Caro Elementary, and Blue Angels Elementary) out of District 1 against the wishes of this sitting school board member.

I could go on but why?  It was a drammatic fail, it was a feckless attempt at actual gerrymandering, and it died upon arrival at last night's meeting.  DOA.

But at least he showed up with something.  It just wasn't anything useful to the task at hand.  At all. 

(On) "Houston, We Have a Problem...."

Some folks have come up with the brilliant idea to move a massive homeless camp out of the city and now into the county, in District 1.  Oh, and they haven't talked with the nearby residents, the planning and zoning department, county administration, or anyone else at the county.  They just went straight to the press with the plan.  😏 

 

As I discussed in part II of Dumb Ideas that will likely be DOA (Dead on Arrival) the issue of establishing a homeless encampment very near existing neighborhoods was the topic.

That post got instantaneously crushed with hits, and the phone calls came subsequently.

I have now heard from and had the opportunity to speak with one individual in particular with intimate knowledge of the topic and the locations the homeless task force had been scouting.

And first off--full disclaimer:  I support the work of the homeless task force, I support doing whatever we can to assist folks who are down on their luck and not homeless by choice.  But it has to be planned, transparent, and most of all----in an appropriate location that will not negatively impact existing neighbors.  (preferrably way out in the woods away from other existing neighbors)

According to this trusted source with whom I spoke Saturday, the announcement came prematurely.  "We all knew they were looking at multiple sites--but they should not have given the specific site locations so prematurely.  Congratulations--now they have doomed this site!" said this individual, who continued "Look, that (Houston Avenue, County District 1) site is a good location;  It is large and has some nearby ammenities that these folks need--but I disagree with them putting this out so early.  It's like, they have asked for my opinions, I give them, and then they do not listen and do the exact opposite!"  this individual stated.

So, in doing additional research on the site that will apparently be the frontrunner for these downtown interests for the homeless camp they want out of the city--it appears there could be some problems. 

 Zoning, while it apparently meets the initial zoning--it may not meet the size requirement nor the locational criteria.  More to come on that.

But the truly insidious action would be if this group---or any group---just simply starts moving folks to this parcel of land without proper permits, licenses, and approvals.  And with the self-imposed, city proclamation of having these individuals cleared out from under the I-110 bridge by 11-24-21-------This appears to leave only 23 days for any group desiring to use this parcel as a homeless camp to get ALL necessary state and local health and operational permits to do a camp at this location.

Staff has not been approached and know NOTHING about this.

The County Administrator has not been approached and tells me he knows NOTHING about this.

Of course--nobody has called the commissioner of that district nor has anyone bothered to talk to the actual constituents who live in that neighborhood.  But those constituents were blindsided with this plan in the press, and have subsequently voiced their collective displeasure with this idea via multiple angry calls to my office.

23 days is simply not doable if these folks intend to ram this through and do it with appropriate