Comments on: Andrade Files ECUA Term Limit Bill, Days After Salzman Withdraws Her ECUA Bill

By: Mike Smith

Mike Smith — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 03:20:18 +0000

This reminds me a lot of what Andrade did to Mike Hill over the 3 Mile Bridge naming. I remember Mike filing the bill to name it after Chappie James, and at the first sign of something not going as originally planned, he jumped in to steal the bill for him. Afterward he ridiculed Mr. Hill with outlandish claims.

I’ve read the explanations from both Sen. Broxson and Rep. Salzman, and what they’ve said makes sense. Both of them stated they planned to re-file the bill next session after the investigation and with suggestions from the audit.

It sounds like Andrade just wants press coverage to look like a savior or is really trying to prevent a more thorough examination of the ECUA policies.

By: Michelle Salzman

Michelle Salzman — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 23:58:44 +0000

I requested an operational audit and a special investigation into all water districts. I didn’t say I was done – I am just saying THAT bill was not good. The people wanted transparency and accountability. I am working on that. I’m glad some folks can see what this bill DOESNT do. A bill to check a box is NOT how I want to be known.

By: Melissa Pino

Melissa Pino — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 22:51:48 +0000

So Representative Andrade stubbornly obstructs any ECUA reform at all kicking and screaming, then begrudgingly concedes to 12-year term limits (realizing they will have no impact on the special interest he seems to support), and finally makes the puerile move of pretending he has supported reform from the get-go, while blowing his delegation up for no apparent reason (a very harmful and pointless maneuver that does nothing but hurt the interests of the citizens under his delegation). All while pretending that he doesn’t understand why the bill was pulled in favor of a deeper look at more meaningful reform, which might coincide with state-wide measures that could render the previous bill moot.

Sounds about right.

By: John Coctoastan

John Coctoastan — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 22:08:28 +0000

ECUA is grossly negligent. It says so in the grand jury report and the DCA said so in the Bear lawsuit. Term limits would be good for ECUA but 12 years amounts to no change and no controls over a broken utility. Salzman was right to pull the bill, wait for the state to do their audit, and re-file a bill to incorporate the auditor’s findings. The three long-term board members have failed us. Dale Perkins has been on that board for 26 years, never missed a meeting, and knew nothing about what was going on with their attorney and executive director. Lois Benson and Vicki Campbell knew what was going on and chose not to take any action. If you examine the timeline, it’s obvious they didn’t do anything until they had to do something or face a public stoning (figuratively, of course). As the grand jury report lays out the timeline, the attorney missed the deadline to file an appeal in the Bear suit in mid-2014. However, ECUA continued to let the same attorney who missed the email argue the case defending their actions. That took another 3.5 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. It looks like it wasn’t until after after the grand jury met in mid 2018 that the director and attorney resigned (not fired) and the board finally discussed whether they could take action against their attorney for malpractice.

Term limits are important but Andrade’s bill is short-sighted. I guess he thinks he can preemptively file something minor to stop the more severe measure presumably coming after the state audit. He seems to be driven by donor desire rather than good government. He’s seems to be another paid for politician.

By: Term Limits

Term Limits — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 21:09:34 +0000

@ coalmine

Sorta like our previous dist. 5 rep, right? 30 plus years at ECUA, voted for every rate increase, while the agency run amuck on his watch. Reference the Grand Jury report.

By: Bama54

Bama54 — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 20:15:28 +0000

It’s all about retirement for board members. The term limits should be less than retirement on the job. If you want to lend your talents to be on a board to help for the greater good of the community , do it but don’t stay long enough to be a burden on the tax payers by getting all the retirement benefits. Go back to civilian life and work and pay taxes to support the next person up!!

By: coalmine

coalmine — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 18:48:22 +0000

While term limits seem like a good idea in theory, often times they work out negatively.

1) You have a representative (in any position) who is doing an outstanding job. Unfortunately, they’re now limited to what the term limit is, and chances of getting someone equally outstanding to replace them is slim.
2) Any representative, good or bad, has a limited number of terms. During their last term, what motivation have they to do anything constructive or worthwhile? This typically applies more to political figures but could apply here as well. Chances are, someone who was already not living up to their job requirements, is going to do far less in their final term because they have nothing to lose.

–Food for thought

By: SueB

SueB — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 18:41:53 +0000

My vote is for C.L.Lewis. KUDOS!

By: SueB

SueB — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 18:40:50 +0000

TY Andrade – Salzman is already failing. Did someone get to her?

By: CJ Lewis

CJ Lewis — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:33:52 +0000

Not clearly enough mentioned in the otherwise good write-up above is that the “three consecutive full term” provision would not kick-in until 2034, only affecting those ECUA board members elected starting in November 2022 and then only after three consecutive full terms. The year 2034 seems a long way away. In truth, there should be a constitutional amendment that prohibits anyone from serving in any combination of state, county, special district or municipal elected offices for more than a total of eight years to include all past terms of office in all such elected offices. That would sure “flush” out the system pretty good and get rid of the career politicians who hop from one office to the next. Salzman seems the only sane and uncorrupted member of the local legislative delegation. She should politely refuse to sign the document and then next have a chat with the Escambia County Commission asking if they would like to begin appointing the members of the ECUA board starting in November 2022 when two members end their terms of office. Dale Perkins has done a great job and perhaps whomever is elected to represent District 4 next will appoint him. By November 2024, all ECUA board positions would then be appointed. If the Escambia County Commission adopted a resolution asking that it be done, Broxson and Andrade would be hard pressed to refuse to agree to it. The other benefit of changing to an appointed ECUA board is that it would take the partisan political politics out of picking up the garbage and providing water and sewage service. It makes no sense for ECUA board member positions to be “partisan.” As for Andrade’s support for “three consecutive full term” term limits, he should propose them for the Florida House of Representatives and make them cumulative to include all past terms of office served in the House. He should propose also that part-time members of the Florida Legislature not be allowed to participate in the Florida Retirement System. Elected office should not be a career.