More from the County Mayor debate
July 25, 2008 at 8:21 am by Wayne GarciaI finally got a chance to speak with Elected County Mayor PAC founder Mary Ann Stiles and opponent Jim Shirk, who has filed a lawsuit against the November referendum, too late for our print edition story, but both had interesting things to say.
Stiles sounded exasperated by what she called falsehoods about her proposal to replace the appointed county manager with an elected county executive. The biggest lie? “That it’s going to add more layers of bureaucracy and its going to increase costs. More layers? It’s a replacement, replacing it with an elected person. The structure for that person is already there.”
As for increased costs? “The mayor’s salary will be set by the board [of county commissioners, so there is accountability].” What about the fact that an elected mayor likely would have to hire a professional chief of staff/administrator anyway? Stiles countered that current County Manager Pat Bean already has a coterie of deputy county managers, any one of whom’s positions could be converted to a chief of staff. “She’s already got all those positions. I think an elected county mayor would actually cut positions.”
The second lie?
“The second one is that it transfers all the power to one person. [Our change] creates a legislative-type body and governor-type position. All we are saying is we want to elect that person.” That executive wouldn’t have more powers than the county administrator currently has, she insisted, saying that the duties are “in the statute, now in Florida statutes. The chapter 125.85 spells out the duties of the board and the county administrator.”
Stiles continued: “I am amazed that the arguments being used against us, … where you take everything and throw it against the wall and you use what sticks. That’s what is happening. I literally debated somebody who said the mayor is not going to be accessible. How do you explain three county commissioners who run countywide? Are they not accessible?”
As for Shirk, Stiles and her PAC group has previously accused him of being the tip of a shadowy opposition to her plan, a charge she stood by in her conversation with me. So I tracked down Shirk, who (to my knowledge) hadn’t given a media interview about his lawsuit that asks a judge to pull the referendum off the ballot. He laughed when I told him that he was being accused of being part of a conspiracy, launching into irony. “It’s a very shadowy group. That’s pure Republican projection. If there are any big broad conspiracies in the world, they usually have a big R behind them. I’m listed in the telephone book, and I’m pretty accessible. “
That part is true. You can also see just about his entire engineering career and scholarly publications online as well. He has spoken to a political consultant with one of the opposition groups but said the decision to sue was his own. He signed a petition to put the referendum on the ballot in 2006 but changed his mind two years later.
“By the time it came around to 2008 and they wanted to use my name, I didn’t feel the same way,” Shirk said. Why? “It seems to be the hallmark of corrupt systems to have one person in charge of things without any check on their power except for the courts. I’d rather have seven people squabbling than one person making decisions by fiat.”
Stiles and her group have intervened in the lawsuit (filed against the Hillsborough Supervisor of Elections) and will fight to keep the referendum on the ballot. “If we didn’t do it right, then we’ll just do it again. This system we have today is broken. There’s no one who can speak up as a leader. There’s seven mini-mayors. One person cannot speak up and lead that board. [The board's chairmen,] they’re ceremonial but that’s it. And certainly an appointed person is not going to stand up and speak out against their bosses.”
“Once the people vote on it,” Stiles said, “then I’ll go away.”
