Grizzly Adams and the choir boy
The League's debate highlighted the problems
both candidates face. Calamaras has reigned over a city during its darkest
period, a period involving numerous federal and state investigations and a record-breaking
number of employee grievances and lawsuits, a period during which Calamaras did
little to nothing to stem the tide. This is some serious stuff: the FBI and the
EPA are still looking the city over in a Federal Grand Jury
investigation into unlawful spills, falsification of federal documents and
obstruction of justice that is now entering its fourth year.
Although the investigations and labor
problems are continuing, Calamaras didn't address those issues at the League of
Women Voters debate. Instead, he
deftly recited a list of accomplishments that, if taken alone, would be the
pride of any incumbent candidate.
Calamaras came off as slick but not too slick -- choir boy
clean, attentive and in control, despite some questionable facts and figures --
"Our city has the lowest budget of any city our size in the state," "we've
reduced our budget every year for the past 15 years," etc.
Which is not true. In 1993, the city's annual budget was
$29 million. In 2003, it was $56 million. The projected budget for 2004 is $64
million.
Anderson sometimes seemed like could barely keep up. Slouching slightly
next to Calamaras' perfect body posture, the challenger came off as forceful but
unkempt.
That's not to say that Calamaras was wholly confident. The
mayor's response to Anderson's call for the Venice Golf Association to come
under the provisions of the Sunshine Law put hizzonor into a stumbling
stutterfest. *
Blunders made, advantages not taken
This is a very personal battle being fought very
publicly. As such, it's an interesting race -- local politics haven't been this
interesting since... well, I can't personally remember a more interesting local race.
Both candidates are fighting fiercely. Both have an equal
amount of enmity towards each other. Both have plenty of fans and plenty of
enemies. Both are making serious campaign blunders, and neither has proven
to be particularly adept at capitalizing on them. This is not a pretty race for the
mayor's seat.
Despite Anderson's theatrical training, Calamaras has so
far displayed a better stage presence. Where Anderson comes off as grizzled and
blue collar, Calamaras comes off as clean, almost angelic, hiding the innards of
an incredibly fierce and sometimes mean-spirited political animal.
In the remaining days to the election, Anderson has an
uphill battle. He has to somehow convince voters that Calamaras was more than
passingly responsible for the past and ongoing civil and criminal legal woes
that the city has landed in, and he has to do it without sounding mean-spirited
himself.
Calamaras, meanwhile, needs all of the Teflon coating he can
get against those accusations by continuing to take credit for the city's many
good accomplishments, whether or not he was actually as responsible for them as
he claims.
Calamaras has been somewhat successful at
distancing himself from the city's current and past legal problems, and for
that, he is getting some help. At the October 12th council meeting, Councilman
John Simmonds gave a little praise to Calamaras and council and then commented
on the current crop of six candidates running for office. Simmonds stated he was
comfortable with the prospect of working on council with any of the four council
candidates and with one of the two mayoral candidates. The implication from
Simmonds was clear: there are five good people running for council, and then
there's Anderson.
It should be noted that Anderson ran against Simmonds in
the council races last year. Simmonds started out his council race last year as
a staunch supporter of George Hunt, but gradually started shifting to a less
supportive stance after Anderson repeatedly went after Simmonds for Simmonds'
support of Hunt. Anderson was rough on Simmonds about Hunt, which in turn caused
Hunt to become the major campaign issue of the 2003 elections. Two months after
the election, Hunt resigned, citing health problems and the fact that he had
become a campaign issue.
Councilman John Moore has also helped out with damage
control:
City Council member John Moore said he does not dispute the
general accuracy of Anderson's allegations, but he said the root of the problem
was former City Manager George Hunt, who resigned under pressure in January.
"Dean has done a good job," Moore said. "I'm endorsing him."
-- Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 10/08/04
Lost in the spin shuffle is the fact that Calamaras stated
at a council meeting in January that he had talked Hunt out of resigning once
and that when Hunt finally did resign, Calamaras unsuccessfully still tried to get
Hunt to change his mind.
The Eastgate free-for-all
The candidate debate held by Eastgate homeowners at city hall on October 12 was
another example of the problems both candidates face.
To call it a debate would be misleading. The event started
out as one, but quickly degraded into a town hall free-for-all in which I
strangely ended up defending council candidate Bill Willson from a series of
accusatory questions from Taxpayers League board member Roy Stout about
Willson's ties with the so-called Good Ol' Boys of Venice. Before the night was
over, a candidate's spouse advised me to get a lawyer as I was going to need a
good one due to previous articles that have appeared on this site, this after I
had merely introduced myself and tried to shake hands.
During the 'meeting,' Eastgate resident Al Veltri made his
annual complaint about the sewers in the subdivision. Veltri has been promised
new sewer lines in his neighborhood for some ten years and he still hasn't seen
the promise fulfilled. This included a promise during last year's election
season, when Veltri was told by Calamaras and Hunt that the sewers and the lift
station in his neighborhood would be repaired and/or replaced
satisfactorily within a few months.
Albert Veltri,
Eastgate homeowner at 1207 Mango, brought to Councils attention the unhealthy
hazardous conditions created during heavy rains that are caused by the lift
station with the sewer backing up and pouring out onto the street. Mr. Veltri
pointed out the problem has been ongoing since 1995, the city has been
correcting the problem on a temporary basis but it needs to be taken care of
permanently.
Mayor Calamaras stated the city is aware of the problem and
explained steps taken to correct the situation. Mr. Hunt indicated the
aforementioned lift station is part of a $12 million construction project and
will be completely redone within six months.
-- Venice City Council minutes, 10/28/03
Calamaras responded that he didn't remember those
promises. I then questioned the mayor about all of the sewer lines in Eastgate,
which John Lane had promised to repair and the problems that faced the residents
both last year and this. **
In my mind, the Eastgate residents finally received an
honest answer to a question that they have been asking for years when Calamaras
responded that the sewer system all over town was in bad shape and that he
truthfully didn't know when the Eastgate sewers could be finally replaced or
repaired satisfactorily.
Calamaras went on to say that OMI, the private management
firm that the city has hired to run the utilities department, was currently
doing an inventory of sewage and water lines in an effort to identify the city's
problem areas and to prioritize replacement and repairs.
It wasn't what the Eastgate homeowners wanted to hear, but
at least it wasn't another false promise.
Attempting to capitalize on the problems, Anderson then
spoke up in a predictable political rant about broken campaign promises, yada,
yada, yada. The Eastgate crowd didn't want to hear it -- they just want their
sewers fixed.
At least one of those promises has already been fulfilled, and Veltri,
Calamaras and myself were all unaware of it.
Veltri did state that there haven't been any sewage spills in the last year
or so, attributing that to a lack of significant rain events.
Not so, according to City Manager Marty Black when he was asked about it this
morning. Black was familiar with Veltri and his past complaints. "We've had plenty
of rain. There shouldn't be any problems out there presently as we [overhauled]
the lift station." Black went on to say that there may be follow up problems
with leaky pipes, but those will have to be addressed as they are discovered. As for the major
backups of sewage flowing up and into the streets in massive quantities -- it
hasn't happened since the lift station was rehabilitated.
So, I ended up being unnecessarily rough on the mayor over an issue that
nobody in the room knew had already been resolved, at least as far as the lift
station is concerned. An ongoing contentious issue will still be some of the
older clay pipe sewer lines and the somewhat newer (but also antiquated) asbestos-concrete sewer lines
that still service the area, combined with the residents' feelings that their
needs were ignored for nearly a decade.
Calamaras' gamble -- the $10 million
bond
One thing that Calamaras is pushing as a plus in his
column could be a big political gamble and may actually work against him with many
voters: the $10 million bond. Calamaras is taking almost sole
credit for pounding the pavement last year in an exhaustive search for votes
that surprisingly paid off in the bond's passage, and rightfully so.
So what's the problem?
The bond is anything but universally beloved. The bond
referendum passed last year by a 232 vote margin at 2,402 to 2,170. That means
that 47.5% of last year's voters were against it, which is hardly a mandate of
confidence. Of the 52.5% who voted for it, who knows how many of them have
changed their minds since seeing their tax bill?
Bottom line:
Both candidates are beatable. Both are seriously
vulnerable. Both know it.
While Calamaras can knowledgably list a number of positive changes that the
city has gone through, he offers no accountability for his actions and decisions in the past
that were heavily supportive of George Hunt and that allowed this city to become
mired in investigation after investigation by federal and state agencies.
There's still some sore feelings about Calamaras' call for the resignation of
Police Chief Jim Hanks earlier this year. Additionally, his attempt to block the
appointment of Marty Black as city manager still has some folks scratching their
heads (Calamaras and then-Assistant City Manager Jane O'Connor put on a
PowerPoint presentation at a council meeting in early 2004 that pitched a national
candidate search). In
all of these areas, Calamaras is vulnerable.
That leaves Anderson with his home-printed fliers and low budget campaign-in-a-can. Anderson sees his biggest asset as the fact that he's not Calamaras,
but the question is: will that be enough for voters to give him the nod?
The big plus for Anderson: he is passionate, and I believe it is for real,
about due process and having an open, more citizen friendly government. While
not thrilled about growth, he is highly supportive of Marty Black. Despite his
stumbles on the campaign trail, that message has come across loud and clear.
The big plus for Calamaras: despite an indefensible public service record, he
knows the system, he knows how to work a crowd, and he looks mayoral. Calamaras
is a great campaigner and campaigning is what it's all about in running for
office.
Ultimately, this race is not
about letting the best man win, it never was. This is about which candidate has the least
amount of negatives. The election, then, will be nearly totally dependent on
which candidate can make the least amount of mistakes.
