Dumb And Dumber

' We've got a list of bridges, some of which are unsafe, but we won't give you the inspection reports because we don't have to. There's no law that says we do.' That's the figurative message The Citizen got when it asked for the reports of bridge inspections from the The Florida Department of Transportation. What kind of crap is that?

Doesn't that just give you real confidence in the Florida Department of Transportation? Here is a public department - a branch of state government - designed to serve the people, and it won't even let you see any reports about bridges over which you have to travel. Where, pray tell, is the leadership in that department? In this case, asleep at what is supposed to be the bridge between the Department and the public.

This dumb move to keep the reports secret and the even dumber refusal to give the reports to a newspaper doing a follow up story on the collapse of the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis is nothing less than appalling. What ever happened to common sense? Apparently the folks in the Florida Department of Transportation who made the decision not to release the reports have none.

That stupid decision is a case in point why the Florida Sunshine Law needs to be strengthened. Now, the question is: what is Governor Crist going to do about such arrogant stupidity? The wise move would be to say to the secrecy morons in the Florida Department of Transportation, "Give The Citizen and other members of the public the reports" or take a hike -- a permanent one from your job! "

TAMPOA Board Meets Again Monday

A "regular" meeting of the TAMPOA Board will be held on Monday, June 4, 2007 at 4:00 p.m at the Board offices. The agenda for this meeting appears to have been handled with more care than was the case with the Executive Session agenda. Apparently, also, the minutes for the April 30, 2007 were not approved at the Executive Session of the Board held last weekend on Memorial Day, May 28. They, along with the minutes of the Executive Session are expected to be approved by the Board on Monday.

On Monday's agenda will be a report by the Board President on the litigation with the City as well as a report on the proposal for the assisted care facility on the Truman Waterfront. Of the two items, the litigation with the City is likely to be more interesting.

We may also get a glimpse of some of the data in the year-to-date financial statements when the Treasurer makes his report, although don't expect anything earth-shattering.

The Architectural Control Committee (we love that name -- especially the control part) has been busy now that hurricane season is officially upon us. They're going to talk about what kind of policy they'll have for roll-down shutters for your front doors. The shutters have to look nice, you know. Never mind whether they're the best for keeping out the wind or, heaven help us, are the cheapest. So, the Control Committee will report on all that and whether beauty will reign at the hurricane prom. We know how that will end. But, will the resulting report be posted on the Internet like the plans for the American Embassy in Baghdad? Bet not.

The "new business" on the agenda sounds interesting. An additional set of lawyers -- you can't live without 'em can you? -- has given the Board a legal opinion on "storm drainage." That might be interesting to read, if you could get a copy of it. We suggest you ask. Couldn't hurt, even though TAMPOA may not give it to you, but who knows? If you don't ask for stuff, you'll likely never get it. That's just the way government, public as well as private, is. Just another version of "You Don't Ask, We Don't Tell."

The City wants to remove the fence around the Truman Waterfront property, so there will be a discussion of that issue. The agenda item is phrased as if the City needs to ask TAMPOA for permission. It does not, so don't think there is suddenly cooperation between TAMPOA and the City over the fence. Not a chance. The City is simply going to take down the fence if it wants. No harm in talking about it though, and it certainly does impact Truman Annex. We all know, however, that if ever the City (or someone) does start to develop the Waterfront, a fence will go back up. In the meantime, the City can play its game of smoke and mirrors and pretend it is doing something with the property.

Aside from the discussion of the legal opinion on storm drainage, the most interesting item on the New Business portion of the agenda appears to be the "review of [a] survey to expand or reduce the allowable annual rentals from 16 annually." The interesting word there is "survey." What survey? Certainly it's not the Board's survey, unless it was one among the Board itself or its friends. Of course the agenda doesn't tell you who conducted the survey or what it showed. If you didn't know better, you'd be tempted to think this piece of the agenda is one of those TV advertising ploys like "I've Got A Secret" to get you to tune in and attend the meeting so you'll learn what the secret is. Well, we'd rather know the secret up front so we can decide whether to watch or go have a Mojito.

Seriously, does anyone still care about the number of annual rentals? Seems to us there was a lawsuit about that several years ago. Are we going down that road again? We certainly hope not.

Doesn't TAMPOA have enough regulations -- so many in fact that no human can keep track of them all or even find them so as to publish a comprehensive "Book of Rules?" Now there's a project that would keep someone out of the sun for at least five years. Try to find all the TAMPOA rules, compile them, and publish them for the residents. Let's see a show of hands of how many Board members would "volunteer" for that project? Not a one do we see.

TAMPOA is like Congress. It just keeps passing laws (rules) usually without any thought as to how they are going to be enforced or how much they will cost. In TAMPOA's case, no one seems to know what all the rules even are or where to find them. That's why you get "I'll have to call you back" or "I'll look into that" when you call the office with a serious question about the rules. Sometimes you even get a guess. When there are so many rules that no one can recite them all, that's understandable, but that's also a sign of a system seriously in trouble.

Our view is leave people alone. That's why many folks came to Key West. If they want to rent their property they ought to be able to rent. Quit trying to be their keeper.

For those who are not tired of reading, here's the list of the ten items on Monday's TAMPOA Board meeting agenda:

"AGENDA

1. Call Meeting to Order

2. Determination of Quorum

3. Proof of Notice of Meeting

4. Approval of Minutes
April 30, 2007 Board of Directors meeting
May 28, 2007 Executive Session Board of Directors meeting

5. Reports of Officers
President’s report:
Discussion of litigation with the City of Key West
Update of proposal for assisted care on Truman Waterfront

Treasurer’s report:
Review the year to date financial statements

6. Reports of Committees
Architectural Control Committee:
Review roll-down shutter policy for front doors

7. Unfinished Business

8. New Business
Review legal opinion on storm drainage
Review proposal by City to remove the fence around the Waterfront property
Review survey to expand or reduce allowable annual rentals from 16 annually
Management items

9. Member Input

10. Adjournment"

Now, we can go have brunch and a Bloody Mary.

TAMPOA Board To Meet In Executive Session

The TAMPOA Board is having an "Executive Session" on Memorial Day at 4:00 p.m. The session was called by Board President, Tom Tukey. Executive Sessions are by definition secret. Here is the curious agenda for the meeting:

The Truman Annex Master Property Owners’ Association, Inc.
Executive Session
Board of Directors Meeting
201 Front Street, Suite 103
Key West, Florida 33040
Monday, May 28, 2007
Monday at 4:00 PM

Purpose: Conduct Business as Properly Brought Before the Board

AGENDA

1. Call Meeting to Order
2. Determination of Quorum
3. Proof of Notice of Meeting
4. Approval of Minutes
5. Reports of Officers
6. Reports of Committees
7. Unfinished Business
8. New Business
9. Member Input
10. Adjournment

* * *

This agenda appears to reflect that the meeting is to be held as an "Executive Session," that is, in secret, but raises a number of questions including the propriety of dealing with certain items on the agenda in secret.

Take item 2, "Determination of a Quorum." Why is secrecy needed for that. Either there is a quorum or there is not. If there is no quorum, the meeting is not legitimate. Of all things the TAMPOA members are entitled to be present for and to know, this agenda item ranks among the most important. What could possibly be the legitimate interest in hiding whether there is a quorum at the meeting? But, of course, we'll never know whether there was actually a quorum because the meeting is secret. In short, there is no reason to make this part of the meeting secret since, after determination that a quorum exists, the Board is free to go into Executive Session.

Take, item 4 on the agenda, "Approval of Minutes." Why the need to approve minutes in secret? The minutes likely to be approved are the minutes of a prior non-secret meeting. Why does it take a secret meeting to approve those minutes? What possible interest is served in talking about what has been written about a prior open meeting in secret? In our book no legitimate interest is served.

Then there is item 6, "Reports of Committees." Why have reports of committees in secret? Since when did TAMPOA establish secret committees? What, we're now turning into a gulag? Unless we really have turned into a gulag, not all business of every committee likely to report can be secret. There is no reason most reports cannot be made in open session, and then the Board could go into executive session. But apparently not here, not in the closed society that TAMPOA is becoming.

There is also item 9, "Member Input." You've got to be kidding us. If the meeting is secret, what member input can or will there be? This is a joke, right? Oh, we get it, that input is for the "secret members." Who do you suppose they might be? The Board members are not secret, unless we missed something in the voting and there are little green creatures from the Pleiades in our midst.

Why meet Memorial Day? We realize that Memorial Day was originally a Northern Holiday not celebrated in some parts of the Deep South, but as far as we know Key West was always, nominally at least, a Yankee outpost. And we assume the holiday is one recognized by all but a few members of TAMPOA, including most, if not all, TAMPOA Board members. So, why meet on Memorial Day?

One can guess that it must be something fairly urgent since only three days notice was given for the meeting. What is so urgent that it couldn't wait one week until the regular meeting of the TAMPOA Board on the first Monday of the month, i.e. June?

Why is there no particular subject or reason specified for the secrecy of the meeting in the notice of the meeting or the agenda? In most executive (secret) sessions, there is at least a subject of the meeting given in the announcement of the meeting -- e.g. review personnel matters, confer with legal counsel, etc. -- things that one might expect would ordinarily command an executive session. Not here.

That raises a question of whether the notice of the meeting, which is required by law, is proper. If not, then possibly whatever action is taken at the meeting may also be improper. If the meeting and business to be conducted are such an emergency and so important that the meeting has to be held in secret on three days notice on a National Holiday, wouldn't you think the Board would want to make sure that the notice was such that it was beyond even the appearance of question? We would.

Did the TAMPOA Board leaders even think about that? We may never know since the meeting is secret. In essence virtually all the notice tells us is "Hey folks we're having a secret meeting where we can talk about anything and everything related to TAMPOA and all we're telling you is the headings found on our usual agendas without any further description of the subject of the meeting." Is that the kind of notice that gives a scintilla of the kind of information a TAMPOA member would want from a Board that is spending hundreds of thousands of the members' dollars a year? We doubt it. And since we are paying for the extravagant fiscal policies of this Board, we want more information than, "Hey folks we're having a secret meeting."

We are certain some will say, why bother, it's only one meeting. If that were all, we might chalk it up to ignorance and forget it. The problem is this conduct of TAMPOA is illustrative and symptomatic of what is wrong with many homeowners' and condo associations, and something the Florida Legislature needs to fix. It's called the tyranny of the majority.

These association boards -- and now we're talking not about TAMPOA but generally about a larger problem -- often spin out of control, become unresponsive to their members, treat those who complain like pariahs, and are very hard to remove from office because of the way voting is conducted and staggered terms of office. Moreover, they are able to meet and even spend money in secret. They are not required to put substantial expenditures to a vote of the membership, can change the rules without a vote of the membership, can make it almost impossible to force a vote of the membership on a given item, and generally can act any way they want short of committing some crime.

And sadly for some other associations, for as much as we and others have complained about our own association's foibles, some other associations have much deeper and more serious troubles of the kind we've just mentioned. Actually, when lumped into the total mix of problems TAMPOA may be one of the better run of the associations with perhaps a better board and better leaders. In that sense we are fortunate. But even though we don't have some of the serious problems of other associations, we can do better and expect more from those who would purport to lead us. With good leadership comes greater expectations.

We hope that in light of the problems with many associations now coming to light nationally that the Florida Legislature and the Congress will tighten significantly the oversight of such associations. We certainly intend to push for such reforms, and we invite others to do so.

Several reforms should be at the top of the list. The first should be an end to secret meetings except for actual face to face meetings with legal counsel that will involve attorney-client privileged discussions. Since most of these associations have some sort of corporate structure, we have been told that not necessarily every meeting with a lawyer a corporate officer or board has will qualify for that privilege, and it should not be used to avoid such a reform.

Second, the Florida Sunshine Laws should be made to apply to homeowner and condo associations and members of their boards. We know that all kinds of deals and doings go on behind the scenes with such association boards just as with government entities, but we suspect there is less back room dealing because of the applicability of the Sunshine Laws than there otherwise would be. They should be made applicable to homeowner and condo associations by the legislature so association members can have half a chance of knowing what is happening with their governing bodies.

Third, the Florida Legislature should require that association meeting agendas identify, even for executive sessions, the subject of the business to be conducted. This would do away with the kind of pablum and vague formula agendas that now come out of the typical board. The association members have a right to know what the board is going to talk about in some detail in a regular session and to know at least the subject of and reason for an executive session. It is no argument to suggest that well these board members are just volunteers and don't have the time for all that formality. Hogwash. Some of the largest and best organizations in the country are run superbly by volunteers. These organizations, many of which operate on a national level, seem to have no trouble complying with complicated disclosure rules.

Fourth, the Florida legislature should require that association minutes reflect in sufficient detail and plain language what actually occurs in the meetings of the association or its board so that an absent member can know in fact what occurred. A board should not be able to make the minutes of its meetings so vague that someone who hadn't attended the meeting will have to guess at what occurred.

Well run associations should neither fear nor oppose such reforms. These associations certainly have an interest in this kind of reform; the same kind of interest good landlords have in eliminating slumlords. They spoil it for everyone else.

Is Verge Still In The Negotiation Loop With TAMPOA?

His comments in The Citizen would seem to indicate that he's part of the secret negotiations going on with TAMPOA. In an effort to prevent "leaks" TAMPOA has cut off virtually all communication with its members. Something is in the works according to Verge who says, "I think we are close." We don't think he was just talking about the Waterfront Project when he made that comment.

Of course, the City and TAMPOA have been "close" before, so no one should bet the farm on what Verge or TAMPOA is saying. The City Commission has the final say and it's any one's guess where their heads are. Some may be getting worried, though, that because of their pussy-footing around, they are heading for a loss of the Waterfront Property, just like they lost the Truman Annex.

Don't Sweat The Small Stuff

We wonder if that is the new motto at TAMPOA HQ? For instance, has TAMPOA abandoned its practice of sending the quarterly newsletter by e-mail and reverted to just a paper newsletter. Also, it seems that TAMPOA has not bothered to put the newsletter on its web site, which, as of this post, has not been updated since the new Board members' names were hastily added after the election in January.

The newsletter was finished and sent out by mail on March 15, 2007 (with the quarterly bills), but as yet has not been added to the web site. If we wanted to think conspiratorially about these lapses in efficiency, we could believe that the lack of an e-mailed newsletter is an effort to prevent broad dissemination of information in the newsletter. Of course, we don't think that way, and even if there were such a lame idea afloat, it would be totally in effective to prevent an active discussion of what is going on within the Annex.

Since some in TAMPOA have suggested that there may be no need to send a paper newsletter as everyone has e-mail, we can only assume that TAMPOA has found (as we have) that this is not the case and has decided that paper will continue for the foreseeable future, even though it is considerably more expensive. Then again, when has TAMPOA ever really worried about saving money on the small stuff?

The Trouble With Secrecy

The trouble with the lack of open records is that the secrets are bound to get out. When that happens, what was hidden always gets sensationalized and the revelation always seems worse than it probably would have been had the event not been covered up in the first place. This is almost always the case when the event ordinarily would not even command a page 20 position in the local newspaper.

While we realize that even a traffic arrest can seem like major news in Key West, in a city the size of Miami, there are hundreds of arrests in an evening. Of those, only the most serious felonies (usually involving violence or large quantities of drugs) are likely to raise a news-brow. But let an intrepid reporter even think that something is being covered up or someone is getting "special treatment" and the journalistic pheromones go into such an uncontrollable episode of heat that a hound dog could drown in the saliva generated by the panting to get the story. This appears to be true even when the "story" is more than half a dozen years old, has little relevance to any current event concerning the person in the "story," or otherwise would generate only a titter -- among the consigliere.

The only other time an event generates such a journalistic feeding frenzy is when the event has the scent of sex. Then journalists (who must appear starved for it ) seem to lose all sense of restraint and don their National Enquirer waders to slog through muck to bag their quarry. Such sex-driven feeding frenzies of the National Enquirer variety usually involve quarry seeking attention, directly or indirectly. A case in point: the erstwhile "star" whose crotch recently was memorialized by the paparazzi. But arguably that story at least was a "current" event, if one can call crotch-watching an "event."

Harder to understand, much less explain, is the fascination with an almost seven year old arrest in Miami that did not result in a prosecution or a conviction. Perhaps part of a rational explanation is to be found is in the philosophy of journalism that drives any particular reporter or editor. That philosophy is usually made up of a combination of instinct, news acumen, ethics, drive, political sense, passion, and character all operating together in assessing and producing a story. Another part is whether a tip was involved.

Reporters are almost cop-like when a tip is involved, particularly when the tip comes from another reporter or a trusted source. Reporters are duty-bound to follow up on a tip for a whole variety of reasons. First, a tip is just that. You never know where it will lead. It may be nothing, but it may also be the story of the decade. A part of your job is detective work if you are an investigative reporter. Second, if your tip is from a trusted or credible source, it is journalistic malpractice to ignore it. Another reason you have to follow up on a tip, especially from a trusted source or another reporter is that if you don't, you won't get any more tips. Tips are like favors. If you ignore them, people will stop giving you favors. Your thank you for the favor is your follow-up. Your extra thank you is the resulting story. That story says to the one providing you the lead, "Well done." Your follow up and the appearance of that story is empowering to your source. It vindicates his or her notions of justice, whether or not you intended that result. So there are compelling reasons for a reporter to follow up on tips and get the facts.

What a reporter (or editor) chooses to do with those facts is another matter. That decision is often at the root of the criticism the press receives because the public is a great second-guesser and Monday morning quarterback. Many journalists (and editors) solve the "what-to-do-with-the-information problem" by simply going with the story. They prefer to err on the side of telling most, if not all, as accurately as they can while depending on the readers' ability to sift and winnow the information appropriately. Otherwise, the journalist must take on the very dilemma posed by the secrecy of the information the reporter has uncovered: whether the secrecy was appropriate in the first place. If it was not, then why is the reporter continuing to perpetuate that inappropriate secrecy by sitting on the information?

The sifting and winnowing approach seems to work fairly well and has another advantage. It keeps the press independent from influence by the rich or politically powerful and results in a more open society. The truth is that the public is a pretty forgiving lot, and is able to cut people it feels have gotten a bad rap in the media a good deal of slack, even if what was said about them turns out to be accurate. That was likely the case with President Clinton's interlude with Monica Lewinsky. What most of the public got steamed about was not his interlude but was that he was not exactly forthcoming about it. To be sure there were some who disapproved of the relationship with Monica in general, but the polling seemed to show that the public was more concerned with the denials than with the details of Clinton's Monica folly.

So will anyone really care about what really happened to Tom Tukey, or whether it (whatever IT is) happened, as Dennis Cooper portrays it? Some may, especially Mr. Tukey. However, the people we have heard from in the Annex, who are not particularly rabid Tukey supporters, seem to care little about the event, if they even are aware of it. For these folks, and perhaps others, ultimately the burning questions will be these: what does whatever happened, if it happened, in Miami on some date almost seven years ago have to do with what is happening NOW with TAMPOA? And, how, if at all, does it affect the job (yes, volunteer or not, it is a job) he does or must do in the future as TAMPOA's President? Until those questions get aired and answered, the whole event, even if it produces an abundance of back-porch-cocktail-hour tongue-wagging among the power elite at the Annex and sells a lot of newspapers, is a yawn.

The real lesson that is lost on the tongue-wagging-cocktail-set is that the story would have been a non-event, even for Key West The Newspaper, had some in the Florida justice system not tried to cover it up. That's the trouble with improper secrecy in government. The fallout is always worse than the initial event.