The Tampa Bay Times did not provide a link to the All for Transportation (AFT) 5 page charter amendment so they were not compelled to refer to actual language in the tax hike document. This allowed the Times to run with AFT claims with no evidence to back them up and no questions asked.
Showing posts with label Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Times. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
Wednesday, December 12, 2018
To Seek The Facts Skepticism and Curiosity Are Required
Guest post from Dr. James Davison
All in all, it was a wonderful speech. I do not agree with all the points in it, but I do not think there is an American or anyone who loves liberty who could argue with its thesis that we need to be able to tell fact from fake. Separate propaganda from truth in order to remain free.
“Fact or Fake? Democracy depends on our ability to tell the difference”. It was with these words that Paul Tash, chairman and CEO of the Tampa Bay Times, summed up his commencement speech delivered at his alma mater (IU class of 1976) on May 5th of this year.
All in all, it was a wonderful speech. I do not agree with all the points in it, but I do not think there is an American or anyone who loves liberty who could argue with its thesis that we need to be able to tell fact from fake. Separate propaganda from truth in order to remain free.
Monday, November 19, 2018
Pass the $16 Billion Tax Then Ask Questions
After the $16 Billion Vinik funded rail tax passes, the Vinik bailed out Tampa Bay Times is now asking questions they should have been asking before the election.
The Times began asking what happens to the 10 year $812 million road funding plan the county commissioners had already voted to fund. The Times made endorsements in county commission races and they somehow "forgot" to ask any of the commission candidates this question. They did not ask any sitting commissioner before the election either.
The Times began asking what happens to the 10 year $812 million road funding plan the county commissioners had already voted to fund. The Times made endorsements in county commission races and they somehow "forgot" to ask any of the commission candidates this question. They did not ask any sitting commissioner before the election either.
Thursday, October 25, 2018
Our Entitled Billionaires
The billionaires are entitled. They buy off the media. They bankroll a deceptive advertising campaign for a massive tax hike that never mentions the word "tax". They want to shut down any debate about their $16 Billion rail tax boondoggle.
Friday, October 19, 2018
What NoTaxForTracks Said, What They Wrote
The NoTaxForTracks.com PAC was filed with the Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections on October 5, 2018. The PAC was established as formal opposition to the All for Transportation 14% sales tax hike that is on the ballot.
On October 17th the Times published an article about Mayor Buckhorn supporting the rail tax hike that included:
On October 17th the Times published an article about Mayor Buckhorn supporting the rail tax hike that included:
The only organized opposition to the tax is from Americans for Prosperity — an anti-tax, small government group founded by oil billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch.That was totally incorrect.
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
Debt-Ridden Tampa Bay Times Duping Employees, Subscribers , Advertisers, Suppliers
Cross Post from Jim Bleyer, Tampa Bay Beat blog
With approximately $100 million in debt and operating nowhere near profitablity, the Tampa Bay Times is in its death throes as a viable, traditional newspaper entity, Tampa Bay Beat has learned.
The pension plan is in jeopardy. Assets have been mortgaged. Filing bankruptcy could very well be on the horizon.
Some creditors know this. So-called “local investors” must be aware of it. But worst of all, Publisher Paul Tash, who also serves as board chairman of the Poynter Foundation, has been cognizant of the deteriorating financial situation for several years.
The Poynter Institute is the parent company of the Times.
Tash, the $550,000-a-year chief executive, using a three-card-Monte ploy to stave off bankruptcy, seizure of assets, and an ignominious finality to a longstanding media entity, has known for some time the company’s pension plan is at extreme risk. Times employees have a regular payroll deduction for pension benefits but it could very well be funneled into financing current operations instead of its intended purpose.
Any employee, sufficiently deranged to want to continue employment at the Times, should require an examination of its books. Hell—subscribers, advertisers, suppliers and any entity that has advanced money to the Times should demand to see the results of a forensic audit as well.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal agency, has placed liens totaling $70 million against The Times Publishing Company. The Times’ total indebtedness is believed to be in excess of $100 million.
The PBGC obtains revenue from four sources:
Insurance premiums paid by sponsors of defined benefit pension plans;
Assets held by the pension plans it takes over;
Recoveries of unfunded pension liabilities from plan sponsors’ bankruptcy estates; and
Investment income.
PBGC liens against the Times (only opens in Google Chrome):
—Oct. 15, 2015 totaling $7,610,616.
—Jan. 15, 2016 totaling $2,888,797.
—Oct. 15, 2016 totaling $10,904,192.
—Jan. 15, 2017 totaling $3,496,356.
—Apr. 15, 2017 totaling $30,476,992.
—Oct. 15, 2017 totaling $15,369,170.
On June 28, 2017, Crystal Financial signed a Satisfaction of Mortgage, releasing Poynter Institute from a 2013 loan totaling $28 million. The mortgage security released was the Poynter Institute property and the parcels of land comprising the Times printing plant.
On the same day, Encina Business Credit LLC signed a lien subordination agreement with PBGC on Encina’s $20 million loan. The agreement identifies that as of January 15, 2017, the Times has an outstanding lien from PBGC for $59,615,990.
The subordination agreement was written so as to basically replace the same subordinated lien that Crystal had with the Times. Encina is a lender of last resort, one step above Tony Soprano’s loan sharking operation.
The subterfuge, paper shuffling, and co-mingling of funds are mind boggling.
In a “distress termination,” where the plan does not have sufficient money to pay all benefits, the employer must prove severe financial distress, e.g., the likelihood that continuing the plan would force the company to shut down. PBGC would pay guaranteed benefits, usually covering a large part of total earned benefits, and make strong efforts to recover funds from the employer.
Greasing the skids for the Times was its purchase of the Tampa Tribune from Revolution Capital Group for a reported $22 million, about $22 million too much. With property, buildings, and a printing plant divested, the Times basically purchased a name, some temporarily inherited advertisers, a subscription list, and a shabby web presence.
The machinations of the Times and Tash are eerily reminiscent of events leading up to the 2009 bankruptcy filing of the Journal Register Company. It operated the flagship New Haven Register in Connecticut as well as smaller papers in four other states.
A top executive declared the company would “emerge stronger and more viable” from the bankruptcy but three years later the papers folded.
A 2012 New York Times article recounts the duplicity of John Paton, chief executive of the management company Digital First Media Group, parent of the Journal Register group. The syndicate was run into the ground and it was perceived Paton filed bankruptcy to shift the pension burden to PBGC.
Paton was quoted as saying pension benefits should be covered by the federal agency. He said he was “embarrassed” as if that mitigated him taking a bloated salary, lying to his employees and suppliers, and putting pensioners in limbo.
Sound familiar? Tash has been insisting publicly that the Times is profitable. He said this after accepting close to $15 million from influential local businessmen who, since the stopgap bailout, have been elevated to godlike status in the paper’s so-called “news” pages and columns.
One investor, Kiran Patel, was the Times “Floridian of the Year” in 2017. Out of 17 million residents, Patel, was deemed to be the shining star. But in May of last year, two of his businesses paid more than $30 millionin a settlement with the federal government after accusations of artificially inflating costs for health care. No admission of wrongdoing was part of the settlement.
Another investor, Jeff Vinik, has really gotten his money’s worth. In past trouble with the Securities and Exchange Commission on both ethical and legal grounds, Vinik tried to bleed taxpayers on a shady Museum of Science and Industry relocation.
His ineptly named downtown project, “Water Street Tampa,” is in serious trouble. Insiders say it will be ten years before it reaches fruition, if at all. But as far as the Times is concerned, the $200 million and counting in taxpayer funding to support Vinik’s “vision” is money well spent.
Steve Yzerman, general managet of Vinik’s NHL Tampa Bay Lightning never makes a wrong move, according to the Times. But he has been GM for eight seasons without a Stanley Cup. Former GM Jay Feaster, who served under a previous owner, was GM for 2 1/2 years when the Lightning won the championship.
There’s more Vinik cbicanery but adverse news regarding him in the Times is verboten.
Tampa Bay residents, who are savvy enough to glean information from alternative news sources, know better. Meanwhile, the Times continues to be nothing more than a mouthpiece for its investors and vested Poynter Foundation board members. Even the “Politifact” feature is slanted and inaccurate.
The recent plethora of Times/Poynter misadventures are codified here.
Former staff writers collecting a pension might start researching freelance opportunities. Although pensioners would stand at the head of the line, a bankruptcy would interrupt pension payments. It’s extremely questionable whether or not a sale of assets would make the retirees whole.
Current employees should have been bailing for at least a couple of years as the paper has been publicly stripped of any vestige of ethical standards. It also is difficult to fathom that anyone, paid to investigate and gather news, failed to sniff out this debacle occurring in their very own workplace.
Advertisers, subscribers, suppliers, and anyone else advancing cash or goods to the Times should be squirming. When the hammer falls, it will be 20 cents on the dollar in a rosy scenario and that group will comprise the caboose.
The Times two months ago announced it would slash printing of its totally superfluous *tbt tabloid from every weekday to once a week. Tash blamed the action on the institution of newsprint tariffs by President Trump. Ludicrous.
Meanwhile Tash has been living like a Russian oligarch. In recent years, Tash sold his posh $1.6 million, Snell Isle waterfront digs and acquired even more lavish quarters, a $1.8 million condo at Vinoy Place in downtown St. Petersburg. In late 2016, he reportedly sold that condo for $2.15 million, and is now renting a comparable crib on Beach Drive in St. Pete.
Records on file with the Pinellas County Tax Collector have been changed, no longer reflecting the name of Paul Tash when a search is conducted.
Tash continues his profiteering while drawing an immense salary and driving the company’s debt to the stratosphere through artiface and gross mismanagement.
(Tampa Bay Beat will have follow-up stories on the Poynter/Times slide into bankruptcy)
With approximately $100 million in debt and operating nowhere near profitablity, the Tampa Bay Times is in its death throes as a viable, traditional newspaper entity, Tampa Bay Beat has learned.
The pension plan is in jeopardy. Assets have been mortgaged. Filing bankruptcy could very well be on the horizon.
Some creditors know this. So-called “local investors” must be aware of it. But worst of all, Publisher Paul Tash, who also serves as board chairman of the Poynter Foundation, has been cognizant of the deteriorating financial situation for several years.
The Poynter Institute is the parent company of the Times.
Tash, the $550,000-a-year chief executive, using a three-card-Monte ploy to stave off bankruptcy, seizure of assets, and an ignominious finality to a longstanding media entity, has known for some time the company’s pension plan is at extreme risk. Times employees have a regular payroll deduction for pension benefits but it could very well be funneled into financing current operations instead of its intended purpose.
Any employee, sufficiently deranged to want to continue employment at the Times, should require an examination of its books. Hell—subscribers, advertisers, suppliers and any entity that has advanced money to the Times should demand to see the results of a forensic audit as well.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal agency, has placed liens totaling $70 million against The Times Publishing Company. The Times’ total indebtedness is believed to be in excess of $100 million.
The PBGC obtains revenue from four sources:
Insurance premiums paid by sponsors of defined benefit pension plans;
Assets held by the pension plans it takes over;
Recoveries of unfunded pension liabilities from plan sponsors’ bankruptcy estates; and
Investment income.
PBGC liens against the Times (only opens in Google Chrome):
—Oct. 15, 2015 totaling $7,610,616.
—Jan. 15, 2016 totaling $2,888,797.
—Oct. 15, 2016 totaling $10,904,192.
—Jan. 15, 2017 totaling $3,496,356.
—Apr. 15, 2017 totaling $30,476,992.
—Oct. 15, 2017 totaling $15,369,170.
On June 28, 2017, Crystal Financial signed a Satisfaction of Mortgage, releasing Poynter Institute from a 2013 loan totaling $28 million. The mortgage security released was the Poynter Institute property and the parcels of land comprising the Times printing plant.
On the same day, Encina Business Credit LLC signed a lien subordination agreement with PBGC on Encina’s $20 million loan. The agreement identifies that as of January 15, 2017, the Times has an outstanding lien from PBGC for $59,615,990.
The subordination agreement was written so as to basically replace the same subordinated lien that Crystal had with the Times. Encina is a lender of last resort, one step above Tony Soprano’s loan sharking operation.
The subterfuge, paper shuffling, and co-mingling of funds are mind boggling.
In a “distress termination,” where the plan does not have sufficient money to pay all benefits, the employer must prove severe financial distress, e.g., the likelihood that continuing the plan would force the company to shut down. PBGC would pay guaranteed benefits, usually covering a large part of total earned benefits, and make strong efforts to recover funds from the employer.
Greasing the skids for the Times was its purchase of the Tampa Tribune from Revolution Capital Group for a reported $22 million, about $22 million too much. With property, buildings, and a printing plant divested, the Times basically purchased a name, some temporarily inherited advertisers, a subscription list, and a shabby web presence.
The machinations of the Times and Tash are eerily reminiscent of events leading up to the 2009 bankruptcy filing of the Journal Register Company. It operated the flagship New Haven Register in Connecticut as well as smaller papers in four other states.
A top executive declared the company would “emerge stronger and more viable” from the bankruptcy but three years later the papers folded.
A 2012 New York Times article recounts the duplicity of John Paton, chief executive of the management company Digital First Media Group, parent of the Journal Register group. The syndicate was run into the ground and it was perceived Paton filed bankruptcy to shift the pension burden to PBGC.
Paton was quoted as saying pension benefits should be covered by the federal agency. He said he was “embarrassed” as if that mitigated him taking a bloated salary, lying to his employees and suppliers, and putting pensioners in limbo.
Sound familiar? Tash has been insisting publicly that the Times is profitable. He said this after accepting close to $15 million from influential local businessmen who, since the stopgap bailout, have been elevated to godlike status in the paper’s so-called “news” pages and columns.
One investor, Kiran Patel, was the Times “Floridian of the Year” in 2017. Out of 17 million residents, Patel, was deemed to be the shining star. But in May of last year, two of his businesses paid more than $30 millionin a settlement with the federal government after accusations of artificially inflating costs for health care. No admission of wrongdoing was part of the settlement.
Another investor, Jeff Vinik, has really gotten his money’s worth. In past trouble with the Securities and Exchange Commission on both ethical and legal grounds, Vinik tried to bleed taxpayers on a shady Museum of Science and Industry relocation.
His ineptly named downtown project, “Water Street Tampa,” is in serious trouble. Insiders say it will be ten years before it reaches fruition, if at all. But as far as the Times is concerned, the $200 million and counting in taxpayer funding to support Vinik’s “vision” is money well spent.
Steve Yzerman, general managet of Vinik’s NHL Tampa Bay Lightning never makes a wrong move, according to the Times. But he has been GM for eight seasons without a Stanley Cup. Former GM Jay Feaster, who served under a previous owner, was GM for 2 1/2 years when the Lightning won the championship.
There’s more Vinik cbicanery but adverse news regarding him in the Times is verboten.
Tampa Bay residents, who are savvy enough to glean information from alternative news sources, know better. Meanwhile, the Times continues to be nothing more than a mouthpiece for its investors and vested Poynter Foundation board members. Even the “Politifact” feature is slanted and inaccurate.
The recent plethora of Times/Poynter misadventures are codified here.
Former staff writers collecting a pension might start researching freelance opportunities. Although pensioners would stand at the head of the line, a bankruptcy would interrupt pension payments. It’s extremely questionable whether or not a sale of assets would make the retirees whole.
Current employees should have been bailing for at least a couple of years as the paper has been publicly stripped of any vestige of ethical standards. It also is difficult to fathom that anyone, paid to investigate and gather news, failed to sniff out this debacle occurring in their very own workplace.
Advertisers, subscribers, suppliers, and anyone else advancing cash or goods to the Times should be squirming. When the hammer falls, it will be 20 cents on the dollar in a rosy scenario and that group will comprise the caboose.
The Times two months ago announced it would slash printing of its totally superfluous *tbt tabloid from every weekday to once a week. Tash blamed the action on the institution of newsprint tariffs by President Trump. Ludicrous.
Meanwhile Tash has been living like a Russian oligarch. In recent years, Tash sold his posh $1.6 million, Snell Isle waterfront digs and acquired even more lavish quarters, a $1.8 million condo at Vinoy Place in downtown St. Petersburg. In late 2016, he reportedly sold that condo for $2.15 million, and is now renting a comparable crib on Beach Drive in St. Pete.
Records on file with the Pinellas County Tax Collector have been changed, no longer reflecting the name of Paul Tash when a search is conducted.
Tash continues his profiteering while drawing an immense salary and driving the company’s debt to the stratosphere through artiface and gross mismanagement.
(Tampa Bay Beat will have follow-up stories on the Poynter/Times slide into bankruptcy)
Friday, April 28, 2017
Appalling Shenanigans! Taxpayers Will Provide Knockout Punch on Transit Tax Hikes
Taxpayers should be appalled at this latest $1.5 million transit campaign and Senator Latvala's mischief making shenanigans in Tallahassee.
Taxpayers are enriching the same consultants who gave us Greenlight Pinellas, the Go Hillsborough debacle and the 2010 rail tax aka Moving Hillsborough Forward.
And surprise!
Tampa Bay Times posted this article stupidly titled Long-awaited Tampa Bay transit study identifies five corridors for future transportation systems reporting the premium regional transit campaign has identified transit corridors. Long awaited? This latest campaign started last October (7 months ago) and we've seen it all before.
It looks like Go Hillsborough, Greenlight Pinellas and Moving Hillsborough Forward packaged together and adding the bridge between Hillsborough and Pinellas.
According to the Times article:
It's not much of a regional mix because most of these "corridors" are in Tampa/Hillsborough. Anyone who has travelled throughout Tampa Bay for a week knows where traffic is and could have drawn these lines for FREE.
We know where traffic congestion is in Tampa Bay - that's easy. But these corridors do not equate or translate to transit ridership, especially at a time when transit ridership is declining and innovation and technology are disrupting traditional transit.
This corridor map is not even shown on the Jacobs website except in the link to the news article. Is Jacobs just feeding their media accomplices a story line? That's what PR campaigns do for favorable press.
And taxpayers are paying Jacobs $1.5 million to look backward at old studies (some decades old) so are they using old and outdated data? There's no back up data that has been provided at all by Jacobs for this map. Where's at least the daily traffic counts?
This effort was sold to the public as a feasibility study. It is not and the contract awarded to Jacobs confirms that. Jacobs and HART rebranded it as a plan but it's not that either. It is a campaign that includes the very same campaign elements we saw with the failed Go Hillsborough debacle.
Scroll down to Attachment 1 of Exhibit G in the contract that lists all the subcontractors. Lots of taxpayer money again being spent on "public involvement" using PR firms, including B2 Communications, the same PR firm for Greenlight Pinellas.
As we previously posted, B2 Communications presented their Lessons Learned about the Greenlight defeat at the 2015 Transit Initiatives and Communities Conference sponsored by the transit advocacy/lobbying group Center for Transportation Excellence (CFTE). These CFTE conferences are where transit advocates gather for advice on how to win transit ballot measures. CFTE provides information and an entire Campaign Toolkit for how to combat opposition - people like you the taxpayer. (Remember Jason Jordan who presented at a TMA meeting last year.)
Enter the mischief making shenanigans by Senator Latvala in Tallahassee which is directly tied to the regional transit campaign. Latvala attempting to force feed an unnecessary regional transit agency, requested by special interests, on taxpayers in Tampa Bay is simply egregious.
The special interests who wrote the TBARTA bill headed to Tallahassee to get Latvala to amend his TBARTA bill after the rail oversight was inserted by Senators Brandes and Lee. Latvala obliged and added an amendment, probably written by the special interests, trying to water down what Brandes/Lee inserted.
The Latvala lackey's at the Tampa Bay Times immediately wrote an editorial falsely accusing Senator Brandes of mischief making. The Times does confirm what we have been saying - this bill is all about special interests Tampa Bay Partnership, and ignoring the will of the people in Tampa Bay who have consistently rejected higher taxes for transit.
The real mischief maker who created this crony mess is Senator Latvala!
Remember the Genesis of this bill to take away local control, thwart local voters, ignore the will of the people and empower special interests. It's called tyranny.
Latvala hastily filed the crony TBARTA bill written by special interest the weekend before session started. Latvala ensured his crony bill never went thru the local delegations of the counties impacted. Latvala bent the rules of normal bill process to keep his crony bill from going through Senator Brandes's Transportation Appropriations Committee.
The Times accusing Senator Brandes of mischief making is simply a lie. But just think of the Times as a complicit partner in Latvala's crony mischief making with a byline.
The Times may have spoke too soon as Senator Brandes has added another amendment neutering some of Latvala's mischief making shenanigans.
There is still time for the TBARTA bill to die, especially in the House. There are multiple versions and they will have to be reconciled in the short amount of time left in the session to pass.
In addition, Governor Scott could veto the bill as he de-funded TBARTA in 2011.
This latest taxpayer funded transit campaign is a waste of taxpayer money but is obviously part of Latvala's crony mischief making in Tallahassee.
Did FDOT know they were funding what looks like another taxpayer funded Go Hillsborough campaign for higher taxes when they handed HART $1.5 million?
The public was misled from the get go on its intent and its timing is horrible - declining transit ridership, innovation disrupting traditional transit and good probability of no or little federal dollars for new transit projects.
The intent is all about pursuing transit projects that can get state/federal capital money. That is totally disingenuous and unfair to taxpayers.
Pursuing state and federal capital grant money does not mean those project(s) are financially sound or sustainable, especially over the long term. Just look at the fiscal mess of SunRail and the Tri-Rail mess that all FL taxpayers bail out every year. There is a huge fiscal burden of on going operating, maintenance and major rehab and replacement costs that will be borne by local taxpayers. The honest truth about these burdensome costs too often are ignored and transparency to taxpayers about them grossly lacking or nonexistent.
If Jacobs, B2, special interest, politicos, etc. are going to put their boxing gloves on to push another tax hike referendum, then the taxpayers of Tampa Bay can put their boxing gloves on too.
And this time the Taxpayers in Tampa Bay will take the knock out punch to shatter once and for all tax hike referendums for transit boondoggles.
Taxpayers are enriching the same consultants who gave us Greenlight Pinellas, the Go Hillsborough debacle and the 2010 rail tax aka Moving Hillsborough Forward.
And surprise!
Tampa Bay Times posted this article stupidly titled Long-awaited Tampa Bay transit study identifies five corridors for future transportation systems reporting the premium regional transit campaign has identified transit corridors. Long awaited? This latest campaign started last October (7 months ago) and we've seen it all before.
 |
| Jacobs Engineering transit corridors map |
According to the Times article:
The five corridors Jacobs selected are a mix of routes between Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco counties, connecting the area's densest regions and busiest road corridors:
• Westshore to Brandon through downtown Tampa.
• Downtown Tampa to the University of South Florida.
• Wesley Chapel to USF, then to Tampa and St. Petersburg.
• Clearwater to the St. Petesburg Gateway area to downtown.
• South Tampa to downtown Tampa.
It's not much of a regional mix because most of these "corridors" are in Tampa/Hillsborough. Anyone who has travelled throughout Tampa Bay for a week knows where traffic is and could have drawn these lines for FREE.
We know where traffic congestion is in Tampa Bay - that's easy. But these corridors do not equate or translate to transit ridership, especially at a time when transit ridership is declining and innovation and technology are disrupting traditional transit.
This corridor map is not even shown on the Jacobs website except in the link to the news article. Is Jacobs just feeding their media accomplices a story line? That's what PR campaigns do for favorable press.
And taxpayers are paying Jacobs $1.5 million to look backward at old studies (some decades old) so are they using old and outdated data? There's no back up data that has been provided at all by Jacobs for this map. Where's at least the daily traffic counts?
This effort was sold to the public as a feasibility study. It is not and the contract awarded to Jacobs confirms that. Jacobs and HART rebranded it as a plan but it's not that either. It is a campaign that includes the very same campaign elements we saw with the failed Go Hillsborough debacle.
Scroll down to Attachment 1 of Exhibit G in the contract that lists all the subcontractors. Lots of taxpayer money again being spent on "public involvement" using PR firms, including B2 Communications, the same PR firm for Greenlight Pinellas.
As we previously posted, B2 Communications presented their Lessons Learned about the Greenlight defeat at the 2015 Transit Initiatives and Communities Conference sponsored by the transit advocacy/lobbying group Center for Transportation Excellence (CFTE). These CFTE conferences are where transit advocates gather for advice on how to win transit ballot measures. CFTE provides information and an entire Campaign Toolkit for how to combat opposition - people like you the taxpayer. (Remember Jason Jordan who presented at a TMA meeting last year.)
B2 Communications personally targeted those who opposed rail boondoggles such as Randal O'Toole and the Libertarian think tank, the CATO Institute. We must assume they will locally target those who oppose boondoggles.
These are the same people working on this regional transit campaign.
Think B2 is using their own lessons learned medicine this go round? Their presentation at the CFTE conference indicated this time they will not be staying "above the fray". B2 will be putting on their boxing gloves [against the taxpayer]. Taxpayers should not be funding anyone with such a cavalier attitude.
 |
| B2 Communications will put on their boxing gloves |
No matter how this latest campaign is sliced and diced, transit projects that spit out will require funding. No new transit project can get any federal or state funding without committed long term local/regional funding.
Enter the mischief making shenanigans by Senator Latvala in Tallahassee which is directly tied to the regional transit campaign. Latvala attempting to force feed an unnecessary regional transit agency, requested by special interests, on taxpayers in Tampa Bay is simply egregious.
The special interests who wrote the TBARTA bill headed to Tallahassee to get Latvala to amend his TBARTA bill after the rail oversight was inserted by Senators Brandes and Lee. Latvala obliged and added an amendment, probably written by the special interests, trying to water down what Brandes/Lee inserted.
The Latvala lackey's at the Tampa Bay Times immediately wrote an editorial falsely accusing Senator Brandes of mischief making. The Times does confirm what we have been saying - this bill is all about special interests Tampa Bay Partnership, and ignoring the will of the people in Tampa Bay who have consistently rejected higher taxes for transit.
The real mischief maker who created this crony mess is Senator Latvala!
Remember the Genesis of this bill to take away local control, thwart local voters, ignore the will of the people and empower special interests. It's called tyranny.
Latvala hastily filed the crony TBARTA bill written by special interest the weekend before session started. Latvala ensured his crony bill never went thru the local delegations of the counties impacted. Latvala bent the rules of normal bill process to keep his crony bill from going through Senator Brandes's Transportation Appropriations Committee.
The Times accusing Senator Brandes of mischief making is simply a lie. But just think of the Times as a complicit partner in Latvala's crony mischief making with a byline.
The Times may have spoke too soon as Senator Brandes has added another amendment neutering some of Latvala's mischief making shenanigans.
There is still time for the TBARTA bill to die, especially in the House. There are multiple versions and they will have to be reconciled in the short amount of time left in the session to pass.
In addition, Governor Scott could veto the bill as he de-funded TBARTA in 2011.
This latest taxpayer funded transit campaign is a waste of taxpayer money but is obviously part of Latvala's crony mischief making in Tallahassee.
Did FDOT know they were funding what looks like another taxpayer funded Go Hillsborough campaign for higher taxes when they handed HART $1.5 million?
The public was misled from the get go on its intent and its timing is horrible - declining transit ridership, innovation disrupting traditional transit and good probability of no or little federal dollars for new transit projects.
The intent is all about pursuing transit projects that can get state/federal capital money. That is totally disingenuous and unfair to taxpayers.
Pursuing state and federal capital grant money does not mean those project(s) are financially sound or sustainable, especially over the long term. Just look at the fiscal mess of SunRail and the Tri-Rail mess that all FL taxpayers bail out every year. There is a huge fiscal burden of on going operating, maintenance and major rehab and replacement costs that will be borne by local taxpayers. The honest truth about these burdensome costs too often are ignored and transparency to taxpayers about them grossly lacking or nonexistent.
If Jacobs, B2, special interest, politicos, etc. are going to put their boxing gloves on to push another tax hike referendum, then the taxpayers of Tampa Bay can put their boxing gloves on too.
And this time the Taxpayers in Tampa Bay will take the knock out punch to shatter once and for all tax hike referendums for transit boondoggles.
Thursday, March 2, 2017
Transit Reality not Misguided Rhetoric Presents Opportunity
As we posted here, the latest $1.5 million Tampa Bay regional campaign for transit has begun.
Jacobs Engineering, awarded the $1.5 million work, presented the slide below as part of their response to get the campaign work. We can only assume that is their problem statement - they think the public is stupid.
The re-education marching orders must have gone out. The Times reporters, columnists and editors and some other local media outlets all fell in line at the same time.
The Times began their recent piling on of HART with this article. The Times reporters, editors and columnists must have been colluding because they all piled on sounding the same false alarm that the sky is falling because we don't have costly rail/transit systems and we need them and must pay for them. (Search HART, transit on the Times website for all their recent articles.)
Time to reset the rhetoric of the Times doom and gloom alarms.
FDOT's TBX project must be implemented to add interstate capacity, fix the choke points and the Howard Frankland bridge. TBX creates a major Express bus transit corridor for commuters in Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. TBX is funded by our state and federal gas taxes we already pay and tolls by those who use the managed express lanes (no new taxes needed).
Express toll lanes are being built on the Veterans Expressway that will also provide another major Express bus transit corridor in the region.
Most likely, there will be autonomous buses using these express lanes before any costly rail system could ever be built out.
The Times and others right here in Tampa Bay continue ignoring our own transportation think tank at USF, the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR). Perhaps they could at least read CUTR's Journal of Public Transportation.
The Times did not mention TBARTA's regional van pool service. This van pool program is a cost-effective public-private partnership that serves commuters in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Hernando and Citrus counties.
Ray Chiarmonte, Executive Director of TBARTA, did respond to the Times doom and gloom with his Op-Ed about TBARTA's vanpool.
HART had just completed their latest customer survey. The Eye attended the February 6, 2017 HART Board meeting where the survey results, found here, were presented and overall satisfaction from those who use HART's services is positive. Does the Times even know about HART's surveys?
HART has a dedicated funding source, a .5 mill ad valorem property tax that provides about $35 million a year to HART. HART's other revenues include their yearly federal formula funds, fare box revenue and advertising revenue totaling between $70 and 80 million a year. If they receive some state/federal grant monies, that is additional.
HART's TDP will be going through its latest update this year so why not improve it and determine how best to leverage the money HART already receives…….instead of paying more consultants to continue proposing costly transit boondoggles. The county funded HART's north-south MetroRapid BRT so could the county fund the east-west MetroRapid?
Let's look at more of these types of services, electric powered short hop shuttles - though calling them limos is a bit comical.
Why?
Because the other side of the transit coin is that transit ridership is down nationwide, including in Hillsborough County. HART's ridership 2016 numbers can be found in the February 6, 2017 Board packet (scroll down to Status Report starting at page 6-5)
The above list does not include Charlotte:
The reality is that innovation and technology is already making an impact on traditional transit. It's also making an impact on how we use our own vehicles. We can easily use Uber or Lyft to go downtown to a Lightning game or any other event and not worry about or pay for parking.
Tampa Bay taxpayers must not be put in another position likeSunRail SunFail where SunRail ticket revenue is less than ticketing expense. SunFail's ridership declined last year even though service was expanded.
The regional premium transit plan is currently looking at the CSX corridor. Let's think outside the box towards the future. Could such a corridor be more highly utilized as an AV corridor for autonomous buses, vans and vehicles instead of rail cars and tracks?
The FTA and the states will probably soon, if not already, start requiring that autonomous technology be included and addressed as part of any funding request.
The reality is choice riders are driving or using the sharing economy of ride-share, vehicle-share and bike-share.
With a new Administration in DC, there are lots of unknowns regarding the future ability to get federal grants for new transit projects. We hope federal grants for boondoggles stop.
The innovation and technology driving the future of transportation is disrupting traditional transit and how we use and will use buses, shuttles and our own vehicles. We will be able to more efficiently and effectively utilize our existing infrastructure and resources.
The private sector is leading the way and they will partner with the public sector to provide new and better services at lower costs.
Why not recover more of transit's operating costs through farebox recovery? With smart card technology we can re-think fare box recovery for how to use differentiated pricing instead of flat fares.
Why not look at a tiered farebox pricing model where choice riders pay their fare share while low income transit dependent riders receive a voucher or reduced rate. Some transit agencies in the US such as Seattle have already started implementing tiered farebox pricing.
Can we use congestion pricing for transit similar to what is now being used on managed toll lanes? What about time and distance pricing?
Other locales are stuck paying forever for costly fixed guideway/rail systems experiencing declining ridership. Tampa Bay is not stuck in these costly systems.
The reality is Tampa Bay is better positioned to partner with the entrepreneurs and innovators to leap frog over 19th century solutions, and provide cost effective transportation services people actually will use for the 21st Century.
The Times needs a reality check!
Jacobs Engineering, awarded the $1.5 million work, presented the slide below as part of their response to get the campaign work. We can only assume that is their problem statement - they think the public is stupid.
 |
| Jacobs Engineering slide included in their RFP response |
The Times began their recent piling on of HART with this article. The Times reporters, editors and columnists must have been colluding because they all piled on sounding the same false alarm that the sky is falling because we don't have costly rail/transit systems and we need them and must pay for them. (Search HART, transit on the Times website for all their recent articles.)
Time to reset the rhetoric of the Times doom and gloom alarms.
FDOT's TBX project must be implemented to add interstate capacity, fix the choke points and the Howard Frankland bridge. TBX creates a major Express bus transit corridor for commuters in Pasco, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. TBX is funded by our state and federal gas taxes we already pay and tolls by those who use the managed express lanes (no new taxes needed).
Express toll lanes are being built on the Veterans Expressway that will also provide another major Express bus transit corridor in the region.
Most likely, there will be autonomous buses using these express lanes before any costly rail system could ever be built out.
 |
| Autonomous bus |
The Times did not mention TBARTA's regional van pool service. This van pool program is a cost-effective public-private partnership that serves commuters in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Hernando and Citrus counties.
 |
| TBARTA Regional Van Pool Service (click to enlarge) |
HART had just completed their latest customer survey. The Eye attended the February 6, 2017 HART Board meeting where the survey results, found here, were presented and overall satisfaction from those who use HART's services is positive. Does the Times even know about HART's surveys?
Overall SatisfactionHART has their 10 year TDP approved by their Board that gets regularly updated. HART also defined a 10 year Vision plan during Go Hillsborough. Information regarding these TDP plans can be found here. Why is HART's TDP not mentioned by the Times? Is the Times is intentionally ignoring HART's TDP or they don't know about it? Before taxpayers feed more consultants to do more studies, HART's TDP should be looked at first.
• The percent of customers who are very satisfied with HART’s service overall has continuously increased each Wave, reaching nearly 50% in Wave 4
. • Over 95% of customers in all Waves feel that service quality has improved or stayed the same over the past year.
Customer Service
• The percent of customers who agree that HART is focused on customer service continued to increase in Wave 4
Availability
• Nearly 90% of customers in Wave 4 agree that the location of HART bus routes are convenient. • Customer satisfaction with the frequency of HART’s service increased by 16% from Wave 3 to Wave 4
HART has a dedicated funding source, a .5 mill ad valorem property tax that provides about $35 million a year to HART. HART's other revenues include their yearly federal formula funds, fare box revenue and advertising revenue totaling between $70 and 80 million a year. If they receive some state/federal grant monies, that is additional.
HART's TDP will be going through its latest update this year so why not improve it and determine how best to leverage the money HART already receives…….instead of paying more consultants to continue proposing costly transit boondoggles. The county funded HART's north-south MetroRapid BRT so could the county fund the east-west MetroRapid?
Let's look at more of these types of services, electric powered short hop shuttles - though calling them limos is a bit comical.
Why?
Because the other side of the transit coin is that transit ridership is down nationwide, including in Hillsborough County. HART's ridership 2016 numbers can be found in the February 6, 2017 Board packet (scroll down to Status Report starting at page 6-5)
December 2016 bus ridership declined 11.6% compared to December 2015 and all mode ridership is off 8.4% for the three months of FY 2017.Pinellas County PSTA's ridership is also declining. Declining transit ridership in the Tampa Bay area is no different than what is occurring in municipalities that have spent millions and billions on very costly transit projects:
The above list does not include Charlotte:
For the first seven months of the fiscal year, which began in July, local bus ridership was down 6.7 percent.
Overall, the transit system’s ridership is down 5 percent. That includes buses, the Lynx Blue Line and the streetcar.
The decline has lasted several years, however.In addition, here's the latest about Denver: Downtown Denver survey shows people are opting to drive over using public transit
The reality is that innovation and technology is already making an impact on traditional transit. It's also making an impact on how we use our own vehicles. We can easily use Uber or Lyft to go downtown to a Lightning game or any other event and not worry about or pay for parking.
Tampa Bay taxpayers must not be put in another position like
The regional premium transit plan is currently looking at the CSX corridor. Let's think outside the box towards the future. Could such a corridor be more highly utilized as an AV corridor for autonomous buses, vans and vehicles instead of rail cars and tracks?
The FTA and the states will probably soon, if not already, start requiring that autonomous technology be included and addressed as part of any funding request.
The reality is choice riders are driving or using the sharing economy of ride-share, vehicle-share and bike-share.
With a new Administration in DC, there are lots of unknowns regarding the future ability to get federal grants for new transit projects. We hope federal grants for boondoggles stop.
The innovation and technology driving the future of transportation is disrupting traditional transit and how we use and will use buses, shuttles and our own vehicles. We will be able to more efficiently and effectively utilize our existing infrastructure and resources.
The private sector is leading the way and they will partner with the public sector to provide new and better services at lower costs.
Why not recover more of transit's operating costs through farebox recovery? With smart card technology we can re-think fare box recovery for how to use differentiated pricing instead of flat fares.
Why not look at a tiered farebox pricing model where choice riders pay their fare share while low income transit dependent riders receive a voucher or reduced rate. Some transit agencies in the US such as Seattle have already started implementing tiered farebox pricing.
Can we use congestion pricing for transit similar to what is now being used on managed toll lanes? What about time and distance pricing?
Other locales are stuck paying forever for costly fixed guideway/rail systems experiencing declining ridership. Tampa Bay is not stuck in these costly systems.
The reality is Tampa Bay is better positioned to partner with the entrepreneurs and innovators to leap frog over 19th century solutions, and provide cost effective transportation services people actually will use for the 21st Century.
The Times needs a reality check!
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Merrill's Contract Extended to 2020 Two Years Before It Was Set to Expire - But Who Knew?
While everyone focused on the election, the County Commissioners were busy taking some actions that probably flew under the radar of most of us.
The October 19th BOCC meeting included an agenda item to complete the annual performance evaluations for County Administrator Mike Merrill and County Attorney Chip Fletcher. That is normal procedure.
However……who knew the commissioners would also be addressing a motion to extend County Administrator Mike Merrill's contract to 2020?
The action was led by then Chair Les Miller. These actions do not occur without prior orchestration behind the green curtain. We can infer who orchestrated it.
Let's back up to November 13, 2014. That BOCC meeting also was addressing Merrill's annual performance evaluation. At that time, Merrill's contract was set to expire at the end of 2015. According to the video/transcript of that meeting on the county's HTV website, a motion was passed that day to extend his contract for three years through the end of 2018.
Commissioner Miller initially motioned to extend Merrill's contract for two yeas through 2017 but the motion was amended by Commissioner Murman to extend for three years through 2018 which was passed unanimously.
This action in 2014 was fully reported that day by the Times (emphasis mine):
County Administrator Mike Merrill was leading the transportation initiative for a sales tax hike and in November had just handed Parsons Brinckerhoff a million dollar no bid contract to start the Go Hillsborough campaign.
Read the transcript or watch the video of that November meeting. The commissioners heaped accolades on Merrill that day including this bizarre statement by then BOCC Chair Commissioner Sharpe: "you [Merrill] just have a remarkable way of leading this county, you have a disarming personality."
"Disarming" is defined as removing feelings of distrust through charm. That statement and all those accolades of 2014 seem a bit stomach churning now after the failed, costly Go Hillsborough debacle Merrill led that created more distrust.
Back to the October 19, 2016 BOCC meeting. When the agenda item for Merrill's performance evaluation came up, Chair Miller handed off the gavel and made a motion to extend Merrill's contract, that was set to expire at the end of 2018, to June 30, 2020 - conveniently when Merrill's drop program expires.
Not one commissioner questioned why they should extend Merrill's contract more than two years before it was set to expire. Not one commissioner questioned why they should take such action right before the election of a new Board. Was that right?
But what a deal for Merrill!
Few people in Hillsborough probably know Merrill's contract was extended October 19th. We searched online but could not find any media reporting about it except for a liveblog post made by Times reporter Caitlin Johnson during the meeting.
However, Johnson never included anything about the Board's action to extend Merrill's contract in her actual Times article, nor did Steve Contorno in his Times article.
The Times wrote two articles about the October 19 BOCC meeting and the only thing reported by both was about angry transit activists showing up for public comment.
The Times made such a splash about Merrill's contract extension in November 2014 when he was leading the Go Hillsborough campaign for a sales tax hike - that the Times supported.
And last month the Times enthusiastically reported about the evaluation and salary increase of Mark Woodard, the County Administrator for Pinellas County.
Why didn't the Times consider Merrill's contract extension in October newsworthy? Why did the Times ignore real news from that meeting? Didn't the public deserve to know Merrill's contract was extended two years before it was to expire and that the action was taken right before an election that would create a new Board?
When elected officials take unnecessary important actions right before an election that would create a new Board and the media ignores the real news but creates news narratives to fit their specific agenda….
That is why Americans distrust of the media and government is so "YUGE".
The October 19th BOCC meeting included an agenda item to complete the annual performance evaluations for County Administrator Mike Merrill and County Attorney Chip Fletcher. That is normal procedure.
However……who knew the commissioners would also be addressing a motion to extend County Administrator Mike Merrill's contract to 2020?
 |
| County Administrator Mike Merrill |
Let's back up to November 13, 2014. That BOCC meeting also was addressing Merrill's annual performance evaluation. At that time, Merrill's contract was set to expire at the end of 2015. According to the video/transcript of that meeting on the county's HTV website, a motion was passed that day to extend his contract for three years through the end of 2018.
Commissioner Miller initially motioned to extend Merrill's contract for two yeas through 2017 but the motion was amended by Commissioner Murman to extend for three years through 2018 which was passed unanimously.
This action in 2014 was fully reported that day by the Times (emphasis mine):
Hillsborough County Administrator Mike Merrill earned rave reviews from county commissioners again Thursday, reinforcing his stature as one of the most powerful non elected public officials in Tampa Bay.
Commissioners asked Merrill, 61, to stay on the job until 2018 and re-evaluated his $217,360 salary, implying he could be in for a significant raise. Merrill's contract was not set to expire until December 2015, but commissioners didn't want to wait.What was going on in 2014?
County Administrator Mike Merrill was leading the transportation initiative for a sales tax hike and in November had just handed Parsons Brinckerhoff a million dollar no bid contract to start the Go Hillsborough campaign.
Read the transcript or watch the video of that November meeting. The commissioners heaped accolades on Merrill that day including this bizarre statement by then BOCC Chair Commissioner Sharpe: "you [Merrill] just have a remarkable way of leading this county, you have a disarming personality."
"Disarming" is defined as removing feelings of distrust through charm. That statement and all those accolades of 2014 seem a bit stomach churning now after the failed, costly Go Hillsborough debacle Merrill led that created more distrust.
Not one commissioner questioned why they should extend Merrill's contract more than two years before it was set to expire. Not one commissioner questioned why they should take such action right before the election of a new Board. Was that right?
But what a deal for Merrill!
Few people in Hillsborough probably know Merrill's contract was extended October 19th. We searched online but could not find any media reporting about it except for a liveblog post made by Times reporter Caitlin Johnson during the meeting.
 |
| Times reporter blogs about October 19, 2016 BOCC organizational meeting |
The Times wrote two articles about the October 19 BOCC meeting and the only thing reported by both was about angry transit activists showing up for public comment.
The Times made such a splash about Merrill's contract extension in November 2014 when he was leading the Go Hillsborough campaign for a sales tax hike - that the Times supported.
And last month the Times enthusiastically reported about the evaluation and salary increase of Mark Woodard, the County Administrator for Pinellas County.
Why didn't the Times consider Merrill's contract extension in October newsworthy? Why did the Times ignore real news from that meeting? Didn't the public deserve to know Merrill's contract was extended two years before it was to expire and that the action was taken right before an election that would create a new Board?
When elected officials take unnecessary important actions right before an election that would create a new Board and the media ignores the real news but creates news narratives to fit their specific agenda….
That is why Americans distrust of the media and government is so "YUGE".
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Local Busybody Leytham Wants A Sales Tax Hike Boondoggle on 2018 Ballot
What was front and center during this election? Cronyism, corruption, rejection of political insiders and a huge lack of trust in our government and the media. Hmmmm,,,,Sound familiar close to home? Like the crony, corrupted Go Hillsborough campaign?
While the American electorate clearly stated they were sick and tired of the crony, corrupt political status quo, the Tampa Bay Times appears tone deaf. They recently published this article Backers of Hillsborough's failed transportation referendum see missed opportunity on Election Day
Who pushed this narrative with the Times? The backers of the proposed sales tax hike referendum? Those backers included deep pocketed special interests, the Tampa Chamber of Commerce, Commissioners Les Miller and Ken Hagan, Mayor Buckhorn, the Times editorial board and the cozy confidante of them all Beth Leytham.
Let's break this down.
The Times continues to ignore that trust, especially regarding our county budget and where the county spends our existing revenues, continues to be a big issue in Hillsborough County.
Instead of pushing false narratives from a politically well connected PR person, the Times should be interrogating our county budget. The Times continues to refuse to ask our county commissioners tough questions about our budget or hold them accountable. They would better serve their readers if they stopped regurgitating talking points from an unelected bureaucrat, County Administrator Mike Merrill.
The Times once again goes to the losers to start creating a new narrative while intentionally avoiding the winners who can shatter that narrative. Remember Leytham was told during the Go Hillsborough campaign to mute NoTaxForTracks….(The reality today is "they" can't.)
The public is well aware of the politically well connected Leytham's very cozy relationship with the Times, Commissioner Hagan and Mayor Buckhorn, all who support a sales tax hike. Leytham serves as an information traffic cop between the media and numerous political elites and special interests.
So hold onto your wallets because Leytham, our highly paid local busybody Gladys Kravitz, wants to put another sales tax hike boondoggle on the 2018 ballot.
Since busybody Leytham has been on the losing side of every sales tax hike initiative in Tampa Bay, why does her opinion matter?
While the American electorate clearly stated they were sick and tired of the crony, corrupt political status quo, the Tampa Bay Times appears tone deaf. They recently published this article Backers of Hillsborough's failed transportation referendum see missed opportunity on Election Day
Backers of the referendum now lament what they see as a missed opportunity to capitalize on an electorate they believe would have viewed the referendum favorably.
Before it failed, proponents said internal polls showed support as high as 65 percent. And it had backing from business groups like the Greater Tampa Chamber of Commerce.
"When I saw Hillsborough County vote for Hillary Clinton, when I saw Hillsborough County elect a new Democratic state attorney, when I saw those types of votes, I truly believed that if it was on the ballot we would've passed it," County Commissioner Les Miller said.
Well…..the Times did have to backtrack a bit on their narrative
It's entirely possible Hillsborough's proposal, dubbed Go Hillsborough, would not have survived a negative campaign and grassroots opposition from anti-tax and anti-rail factions, just as they helped defeat a 2010 referendum and a similar 2014 ballot initiative in Pinellas County. It faced headwinds, too, from some traditionally liberal groups who felt the proposal lacked a substantive transit investment.Of course, the Times refused to name the grassroots opposition who led efforts to defeat the 2010 and 2014 sales tax hike boondoggles - NoTaxForTracks. The Times refused to speak with those who have been consistently publicly fighting for fiscal responsibility and opposed putting the sales tax hike on the 2016 ballot.
The Times tries to create a false narrative that equates the schizophrenic voting in Hillsborough County as a missed opportunity that local voters would vote for a sales tax hike……
Really?
Who pushed this narrative with the Times? The backers of the proposed sales tax hike referendum? Those backers included deep pocketed special interests, the Tampa Chamber of Commerce, Commissioners Les Miller and Ken Hagan, Mayor Buckhorn, the Times editorial board and the cozy confidante of them all Beth Leytham.
As demonstrated by Tuesday's election, Hillsborough is inching from purple to blue in ways that should embolden leaders to push for it sooner rather than later, said Beth Leytham, the public relations consultant who worked on Go Hillsborough.
"You can't go back, but I do believe it would've passed," Leytham said, "And what we just saw gives you a really good reason to look at 2018 instead of 2020."Can't make this stuff up. The very person who led the failed, crony and corrupted Go Hillsborough campaign thinks a sales tax hike would have passed this election. There is no evidence to support such hypothetical as even deep Blue Broward County rejected a tax hike.
Let's break this down.
The Times continues to ignore that trust, especially regarding our county budget and where the county spends our existing revenues, continues to be a big issue in Hillsborough County.
Instead of pushing false narratives from a politically well connected PR person, the Times should be interrogating our county budget. The Times continues to refuse to ask our county commissioners tough questions about our budget or hold them accountable. They would better serve their readers if they stopped regurgitating talking points from an unelected bureaucrat, County Administrator Mike Merrill.
The Times once again goes to the losers to start creating a new narrative while intentionally avoiding the winners who can shatter that narrative. Remember Leytham was told during the Go Hillsborough campaign to mute NoTaxForTracks….(The reality today is "they" can't.)
The public is well aware of the politically well connected Leytham's very cozy relationship with the Times, Commissioner Hagan and Mayor Buckhorn, all who support a sales tax hike. Leytham serves as an information traffic cop between the media and numerous political elites and special interests.
So hold onto your wallets because Leytham, our highly paid local busybody Gladys Kravitz, wants to put another sales tax hike boondoggle on the 2018 ballot.
 |
| Nosy busybody Gladys Kravitz |
Perhaps busybody Leytham wants to jump start a PR campaign for 2018 now so the Times, who wants a sales tax hike, obliges with this article.
Maybe busybody Leytham, who was paid hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars leading the failed crony Go Hillsborough campaign, is looking for another lucrative PR contract another campaign could land her.
But….Busybody Leytham is the epitome of the crony political insider this election clearly rejected.
And the Times appears to not get it.
Friday, September 18, 2015
New Take on that Rashid Rant
We condemn Sam Rashid's and anyone else's misogynist, sexist and other needless derogatory comments.
But he did raise some points the media chose to ignore despite their never ending coverage of the rant, until WTSP's Noah Pransky independently broke the story that was the subject of Rashid's rant. Rashid's comments were directed about Beth Leytham's behind the scenes cronyism, much of which has been covered in this blog over the last year. However, Rashid's language overshadowed the subject of his comment.
Which got us thinking... there might be a few more dots to connect that no one else has explored.
It did occur us the last week of so during the Sam Rashid kerfuffle, the local media was hyperventilating over a hot-headed, personal comment Rashid made on Facebook, obviously not intended for wide public consumption. It's not the first time for Rashid, who got in hot water earlier for some comments about Facebook posts on judges.
The Tribune and Times were all over the story, each publishing several articles.
The Tribune published lead editorial, a Joe Henderson column, and 5 other articles all critical of Rashid's misogynistic language and generally supportive of Leytham and Go Hillsborough.
Only to be beat out by the Times, which is now up to 11 articles and counting including an editorial and an Ernest Hooper column, John Romano commentary, and Sue Carlton.
Fair enough if a bit more than overdone.
In this day and age, this once again shows anything you say can and will be used against you in any way if it's convenient to do so by your opponents.
This time, and this timing, it was very very convenient to do so.
But neither the Tribune nor the Times ever discussed the merits of Rashid's statement, which that Beth Leytham is behind much of the mess that is Go Hillsborough, pulling the levers of power behind the scenes, crossing the gray lines between lobbying, activism, and policy, and political campaigns.
Now let's open up a few more questions about the Rashid kerfuffle.
Who was trolling Rashid's Facebook page, and leaked it to the media?
It is rather interesting that someone saw that and it conveniently found its way out to the media.
Would it have been leaked without Rashid's use of language?
Was the leaker aware of Pransky's investigation and upcoming report?
Pranksy stated he had been working on the report for a year, so with all his investigation, the principals in the report knew something was up, and he stated so in his report. Pransky claimed that Leytham and Connect Tampa Bay's Kevin Thurman tried to tarnish him with the Rashid statement.
But he did raise some points the media chose to ignore despite their never ending coverage of the rant, until WTSP's Noah Pransky independently broke the story that was the subject of Rashid's rant. Rashid's comments were directed about Beth Leytham's behind the scenes cronyism, much of which has been covered in this blog over the last year. However, Rashid's language overshadowed the subject of his comment.
Which got us thinking... there might be a few more dots to connect that no one else has explored.
It did occur us the last week of so during the Sam Rashid kerfuffle, the local media was hyperventilating over a hot-headed, personal comment Rashid made on Facebook, obviously not intended for wide public consumption. It's not the first time for Rashid, who got in hot water earlier for some comments about Facebook posts on judges.
 |
| Sam Rashid |
The Tribune published lead editorial, a Joe Henderson column, and 5 other articles all critical of Rashid's misogynistic language and generally supportive of Leytham and Go Hillsborough.
Only to be beat out by the Times, which is now up to 11 articles and counting including an editorial and an Ernest Hooper column, John Romano commentary, and Sue Carlton.
Fair enough if a bit more than overdone.
In this day and age, this once again shows anything you say can and will be used against you in any way if it's convenient to do so by your opponents.
This time, and this timing, it was very very convenient to do so.
But neither the Tribune nor the Times ever discussed the merits of Rashid's statement, which that Beth Leytham is behind much of the mess that is Go Hillsborough, pulling the levers of power behind the scenes, crossing the gray lines between lobbying, activism, and policy, and political campaigns.
Now let's open up a few more questions about the Rashid kerfuffle.
Who was trolling Rashid's Facebook page, and leaked it to the media?
It is rather interesting that someone saw that and it conveniently found its way out to the media.
Would it have been leaked without Rashid's use of language?
Was the leaker aware of Pransky's investigation and upcoming report?
Pranksy stated he had been working on the report for a year, so with all his investigation, the principals in the report knew something was up, and he stated so in his report. Pransky claimed that Leytham and Connect Tampa Bay's Kevin Thurman tried to tarnish him with the Rashid statement.
And when a member of the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, Sam Rashid, made sexist remarks about Leytham in a Facebook comment, Leytham and Kevin Thurman from Connect Tampa Bay repeatedly tried to tie 10 Investigates to the story.
Rashid was not one of 10 Investigates’ more than two dozen sources for this series, nor did WTSP communicate with Rashid during the research or writing of this investigation. Rashid has since removed his comment and apologized to Leytham, but as news of the investigation spread through Tampa-area political circles, Rashid told the Tampa Bay Business Journal he won’t resign from his board position until after 10 Investigates’ story is published.
Despite repeated assurances that there was no WTSP/Rashid relationship whatsoever, Thurman tried to “withdraw” a quote he provided until it was explained to him if Rashid was a source for our report. Leytham sent numerous text messages, e-mails, and voicemail messages to media outlets in Tampa Bay suggesting the upcoming investigation had no credibility because Rashid was awaiting it.
We can conclude that Leytham and Connect Tampa Bay's Kevin Thurman definitely tried to use the Rashid rant to blunt Pransky's critical report.
What is the Tribune's and the Times relationship with Leytham? She claims in her practice as a PR firm to have relationships in the media, including the editorial boards on both papers. We know for a fact she has met with the editorial boards regarding Go Hillsborough. Her relationship with the editorial staff is something she has stated as one of her qualifications for PR work.
Why did neither the Tribune nor the Times editorial writers disclose their relationship with Beth Leytham?
Were the Tribune and the Times played for gullible pawns in this power play? How much of their blind support for Go Hillsborough has been influenced by Beth Leytham?
Leytham claims to be good at what she does, including crisis management. What is the real crisis here?
Is it Sam Rashid's rant?
Or is the real crisis the failing message behind Go Hillsborough?
Who is responsible for that failing message?
Did Leytham or other Go Hillsborough supporters use Rashid's rant to attempt to preempt Pransky's report critical of her relationships and her work on Go Hillsborough?
After all, preemption and redirection is a well known PR and crisis management technique.
Leytham's good at what she does. Just ask her. She is the Queen of Damage Control.
We're not prone to conspiracy theories when sheer incompetence will explain the mess.
This time, we're not so sure.
Disclosure: We have met Sam Rashid, or at least been in the same room, but have no ongoing relationship. We have met Beth Leytham, or at least been in the same room, but have no ongoing relationship.
 |
| Beth Leytham |
Why did neither the Tribune nor the Times editorial writers disclose their relationship with Beth Leytham?
Were the Tribune and the Times played for gullible pawns in this power play? How much of their blind support for Go Hillsborough has been influenced by Beth Leytham?
Leytham claims to be good at what she does, including crisis management. What is the real crisis here?
Is it Sam Rashid's rant?
Or is the real crisis the failing message behind Go Hillsborough?
Who is responsible for that failing message?
Did Leytham or other Go Hillsborough supporters use Rashid's rant to attempt to preempt Pransky's report critical of her relationships and her work on Go Hillsborough?
After all, preemption and redirection is a well known PR and crisis management technique.
Leytham's good at what she does. Just ask her. She is the Queen of Damage Control.
We're not prone to conspiracy theories when sheer incompetence will explain the mess.
This time, we're not so sure.
Disclosure: We have met Sam Rashid, or at least been in the same room, but have no ongoing relationship. We have met Beth Leytham, or at least been in the same room, but have no ongoing relationship.
Friday, March 28, 2014
Bias, Ignorance or Incompetence?
Recently our local media reported about a survey regarding Greenlight Pinelllas conducted by an organization called "People's Budget Review". We're looking at how this unscientific survey done on Facebook and email was reported by the media compared to an actual poll done of "likely voters" in January by a polling firm.
Here's are recent media articles about the People's Budget Review survey
Tampa Tribune: Group hopes to focus Greenlight Pinellas debate on bus improvements
Tampa Bay Partnership blog: Support for Greenlight Pinellas Continues
In January, this actual poll was conducted by the SunBeamTimes blog: 61% say “No Tax Hike” for Pinellas Rail. Few Will Ride the St. Petersburg-Clearwater Train.
The Tampa Bay Times reported that People's Budget Review is
We're not sure where the Right to public transit is found. Obviously, the People's Budget Review supports public transit even if they haven't publicly endorsed Greenlight Pinellas. Are they really serious about wanting better bus service, especially for the low income who need it to get to their jobs? Fixing Pinellas bus service can be done without building a $3 Billion train that most likely will require another new revenue source such as higher taxes, cutting bus service or robbing other services or projects - robbing Peter to pay Paul.
So why did the People's Budget Review unscientific survey that used Facebook and email showing support for Greenlight get so much local media attention? Why did the local media insert so much pushback in their report of McKalip's professional poll of likely voters that showed large opposition to Greenlight?
We know the local media is highly biased in support of a costly rail agenda in Tampa Bay. We are subject to their consistent and on-going pro-rail editorials that coincidentally occur the same day a rail article in their news section is published.
The Tampa Bay Times even did an editorial referencing the People's Budget Review group after they launched in 2012:
You absolutely cannot make this stuff up - it's a simple Google search away.
Bias, Ignorance or Incompetence?
Here's are recent media articles about the People's Budget Review survey
Tampa Tribune: Group hopes to focus Greenlight Pinellas debate on bus improvements
most Pinellas voters associate Greenlight only with its more controversial light-rail element and are in the dark about the plan’s bus improvements, according to a new survey of 1,600 residents by the People’s Budget Review, a group that includes local trade unions, activists and neighborhood associations (emphasis mine).Tampa Bay Times: Local group says many don't know proposed transit tax would expand Pinellas bus system
With less than eight months remaining before Pinellas voters decide whether to support a tax increase for bus and rail, a St. Petersburg-based group's survey has found that most voters don't know the details of the proposal.
But an unscientific survey of 1,600(emphasis mine) registered voters in Pinellas conducted by the group People's Budget Review found most respondents were familiar only with the rail portion of the plan.
Distributed via Facebook and email, the group's survey (emphasis mine) did not target people of different backgrounds or likely voters.SaintPetersblog: People’s Budget Review: Most people unaware of Greenlight Pinellas details
…a new survey (emphasis mine) by St. Petersburg civic activists at the People’s Budget Review…
The People’s Budget Review is an alliance of community advocates, local business owners, union members and residents working to ensure all residents have a voice in how local tax dollars are spent.Creative Loafing: Pinellas' People's Budget Review to conduct their own education plan around Greenlight Pinellas
"Our main priority is that, this is going to be on the ballot — do people even know what it is? And after informing them a little bit about what it is, would they vote for it? That's our primary take right now," says Hunt of Awake PInellas (emphasis mine), one of a myriad of activist and neighborhood groups who make up the PBR, which formed a couple of years ago to help ensure citizens' having a voice on the budgeting process in the city of St. Petersburg.
….their survey (emphasis mine) of over 1,600 people….Awake Pinellas's Facebook page states:
Awake Pinellas' mission is to be a networking center for organizers to manifest a progressive (emphasis mine) agenda.WTSP Channel 10: Bus riders surveyed on knowledge of Greenlight Pinellas
A local group, called the Peoples Budget Review, has been surveying (emphasis mine) riders for three weeks about their knowledge of a November ballot referendum called Greenlight Pinellas: the mass transit plan
"We are being careful not to sway voters, but to make them aware of this ballot and its details," said Bob Lasher, spokesperson for the PSTA.Oh my - let's digress a moment on PSTA's Greenlight Pinellas campaign: Making people aware of the ballot doesn't require chip clips, pens, refrigerator magnets and goodie bags and spending almost a million taxpayer dollars.
Tampa Bay Partnership blog: Support for Greenlight Pinellas Continues
A recent poll, (emphasis mine) sponsored by the grassroots organization (emphasis mine) People’s Budget Review shows 57 percent of those surveyed support Greenlight Pinellas while only 30 percent said they would vote “no.” According to the survey, Greenlight is most known for its long-term plan to link downtown St. Petersburg and Clearwater through light rail, and the fact that 65 percent of respondents associate Greenlight with light rail is not a good sign for those who have made “No Tax for Tracks” the rallying cry to defeat the referendum at the ballot box this November.
The Sun Beam Times poll was conducted through the respected polling company St. Pete Polls.
The Sun Beam Times poll was conducted only among Pinellas County registered voters who voted in the off-year 2010 election – likely voters in 2014.
Here's local media on McKalip's poll:
Tampa Tribune: Rail backers say Pinellas poll skews results
A new poll on the Greenlight Pinellas campaign to build a light-rail system and put more buses on the road has sparked controversy about whether the survey misled residents.
But transit supporters say the questions written by McKalip were designed to skew the results
Creative Loafing: David McKalip touts new poll on Greenlight Pinellas, but were the questions misleading?
A new poll published on Monday finds large opposition to raising the sales tax in Pinellas to improve the county's transportation system, but critics say the questions asked prevented an accurate measurement of public sentiment.
But as Creative Loafing’s Mitch Perry noted today, the referendum’s supporters will just as readily dismiss these survey results as skewed.
In addition, in much of the media reporting about the McKalip poll, they included a previous poll by Tampa Bay Times/BayNews9 reflecting a 56% support for Greenlight. No such reference to McKalip's poll showing large opposition to Greenlight was made in the media reporting of the People's Budget Review survey.
David McKalip is a neurosurgeon in St. Petersburg, a previous candidate for St. Petersburg CIty Council who opposes Greenlight Pinellas and supports the grassroots organization NoTaxForTracks. Were there attempts in the local media to discredit McKalip's professionally done poll?
David McKalip is a neurosurgeon in St. Petersburg, a previous candidate for St. Petersburg CIty Council who opposes Greenlight Pinellas and supports the grassroots organization NoTaxForTracks. Were there attempts in the local media to discredit McKalip's professionally done poll?
We found no such discrediting in the reporting of the People's Budget Review survey. So why was so much credibility given to the People's Budget Review unscientific survey? Who is the People's Budget Review organization?
A simple Google search landed here announcing their launch in 2012:
Florida Public Services Union (FPSU) is not just a bargaining unit for thousands of workers in the city governments and schools but also an integral part of the community
FPSU collaborated with the Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (CONA), Suncoast Sierra Club, League of Women Voters, Agenda 2010, NAACP and many other local organizations. It resulted in Peoples Budget Team.
 |
| Darden Rice, now a St. Petersburg City Councilwoman, and ardent supporter of Greenlight Pinellas announces People's Budget Review in 2012 |
A coalition of neighborhood groups, civic groups and union members, the People's Budget Review is primarily funded and organized by the Florida Public Service Union (emphasis mine), which represents 1,200 workers in St. Petersburg.The Florida Public Service Union is associated with the huge SEIU union.
- SEIU Florida Public Services Union represents 19,000 workers in eight counties, 16 cities, three Head Start agencies and four school districts across Florida.
- SEIU Florida Public Services Union members are the driving force behind reliable public services and the voice of public employees throughout Florida.
- SEIU public services members are the driving force behind reliable public services and the voice of public employees throughout Florida.
The Tampa Bay Partnership is absolutely wrong in misrepresenting People's Budget Review as a grassroots organization and in calling their unscientific survey a "poll".
Since when did a well funded government labor union representing government employees become grassroots? SEIU/FPSU is not a grassroots organization. The People's Budget Review is largely funded by and associated with the FL FPSU union, an arm of the huge and powerful SEIU union. The People's Budget Review organization is part of a professional political activist organization active in voter registration, electing candidates where their members can contribute to the campaigns of pro-worker candidates.
 |
| FPSU-SEIU primarily funds People's Budget Review |
The People's Budget Review website states:
The groups who typically speak the loudest are special interests, while tens of thousands of everyday people remain on the sidelines. The People’s Budget review seeks to give those silent thousands a way to speak out
We want to get you the facts and find out how expanding public transit can work for all residents. After all, it’s our money.Their website also includes a post titled Driving is a Privilege, Public Transit is a Right
In a 2013 Ted Talk, Enrique Peñalosa, former mayor of Bogata, Columbia, smartly stated, “In terms of transport, an advanced city is not one where even the poor use cars, but rather one where even the rich use transit.”
We want to know your priorities around the issue of public transportation, and find out how expanding public transit can work for all residents.
 |
| People's Budget Review website has pic of Greenlight Pinellas supporters on transit referendum issue |
So why did the People's Budget Review unscientific survey that used Facebook and email showing support for Greenlight get so much local media attention? Why did the local media insert so much pushback in their report of McKalip's professional poll of likely voters that showed large opposition to Greenlight?
We know the local media is highly biased in support of a costly rail agenda in Tampa Bay. We are subject to their consistent and on-going pro-rail editorials that coincidentally occur the same day a rail article in their news section is published.
The Tampa Bay Times even did an editorial referencing the People's Budget Review group after they launched in 2012:
Complaining about special interests' hold on government is easy. Doing something about it, much less so.
Similarly, a coalition of community groups is pledging to take on the complexities of municipal budget writing in St. Petersburg. The People's Budget Review said this week it hopes to collect at least 10,000 residents' responses to questions about how they would like the city to prioritize spending on public safety, parks and recreation, and economic development. The results won't be scientific (emphasis mine) but will likely be far more extensive than what Mayor Bill Foster and the City Council would normally collect in the annual budget process.
The right laid out in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to petition the government for redress of grievances is what sets this nation apart. And while much more attention may be given to large, amorphous campaigns like the Occupy movement (emphasis mine), these groups have a chance to make a real impact by tackling specific policy issues in their local communities. This is how democracy is supposed to work.When do you think the Times or any other local media will acknowledge that the Tea Party has been targeting cronyism, wasteful spending and special interests, regardless of political party or ideology, for over 5 years?
You absolutely cannot make this stuff up - it's a simple Google search away.
Bias, Ignorance or Incompetence?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)