Rick Baker and Jeff Lyash go way back

Even before Mayor Rick Baker named Progress Energy CEO Jeff Lyash chair of a new baseball coalition, the two men had a history together.

Baker named Lyash co-chair of an effort to find permanent shelter for the city's growing homeless population in January 2007.

In 2005, Lyash, then a Progress Energy vice president, contributed $350 to Baker's reelection campaign. Lyash was in good company. At least three other Progress Energy vice presidents contributed to the mayor's campaign that year.

And the Mahaffey Theater arts complex now bears the name of Progress Energy thanks to a deal brokered by Baker's staff.

Comments

[Obsbserver]

Important questions: Did the VP's also give money to other group, candidates and causes?

I for one think it is only natural that the Mayor would turn to someone he knows and trusts and who has a demonstrated track record of effective leadership.

[Kyle]

Closet negotiators go way back.

[JudyToo]

Ha! Just another good-ol'-boy deal taking shape. Baker won't give up - he kept the stadium deal secret and lost, he kept the Jabil deal secret (and hopefully gets impeached) and now...he's inviting the foxes into the henhouse for still another run at the stadium.

Fortunately for us, he won't be the mayor when this new task force reaches a conclusion (assuming they do) and we will have a chance to pick a more acceptable mayor - not saying we will, but at least we have a chance.

Voters tend to grumble a lot about the elected officials at every level from local to Washington, but in the end they don't take the time to study the candidates and the issues, so they get the same old boys (and girls) all over again (or maybe worse, like Dudley and Newton - what a joke on us!). Or maybe they are just the best we can do?

At least we have a chance to replace four of them along with the mayor, but Dudley and Newton aren't in that bunch in 2009.

The only thing that really riles up the ones who do vote is the waterfront and boy, they do get serious about that! Look what they did when Baker tried to sell out the airport, and look what they did to his stadium shenanigans.

Everything else they pretty much let slide on through, like allowing the city council to give money to a private company (corporate welfare) and most voters don't even realize it happened, or why. It may be good for us and it may be bad, who knows? Even the city council isn't sure but they gave 'em the money anyway. What we do know is it darn sure needed a lot more sunshine.

These are the disadvantages (and advantages) of living in a small town with politicians who don't know what they are doing, so they just keep bumbling along.

[mrclean]

Lyash was selected by the mayor to set up the 'Task Force' because he has the resources to do so. That's fine by me.

If he elects to set it up as a committee, such that each committee member has a vote and the power to advance 'motions' that would be good. Also, the Committee must meet on a scheduled basis and it must have a quorum to conduct business and vote. A real committee would make the task force legit.

I believe there will be no committee. It's going to be a one man show with friends. This 'Task Force' will be set up just like the Chamber's 'Task Force.' The results will be the same also .. pure crap!

All outside groups (CONA,POWW, Rays Friends ect) will be encouraged to meet amongst themselves and put together a 'task force finding' that will be ancillary to the 'real findings' of the 'real task force.'

The outside groups will not have access to the inner works of the BOCC or any other pertinent financial info.

Lyash will set up a separate financial study group (his friends)that reports only to him.

Just like the original R-owners plan, this task force is doomed. They have no authority.

The residents will take it to the streets and vote 'anti stadium' in '09.

There is absolutely nothing that this task force will uncover that hasn't been discussed on this blog.

The question is 'Has the R-owners found away of swindling $800 million out of us.

[since1962]

Oh THEY know what THEY are doing.

The "consent" agenda is often used for this very purpose.
Keeping residents uninformed is the goal with recurring assist from the media.
A newspaper with reporters who don't "get bored" before meetings end or fully inform in advance would be ideal.

[Is this free?]

Is Lyash & Co. doing this out of the goodness of their heart or is there a cost involved for this entire process?

We're talking about people's time & expense, commissioning independent financial studies, feasability studies, environmental studies, etc.

Who's paying for all this? The Rays?

[John]

Lyash did SUCH a FANTASTIC job as co-chair of that 2007 "effort" of ridding the city of its homeless population, if you haven't noticed.

Just where is that permanent home his last "effort" found for the homeless? Williams Park? Mirror Lake? Baywalk?

Nah, Lyash just told Chuck Harmon to have his officers slash all their tents and the problem would take care of itself....

What an absolute joke

[Rick K]

John, careful now.

Seriously.

The objective has never been to "rid" the City of the homeless. It has been about trying to find a better way to deal with all the other issues which come along with homeless people, so that we may actually do something about the problems, instead of just arresting people or trying to get them to go away.

Project Hope is a great success if you measure it from the perspective of what is happening, compared to what used to happen. A partnerhsip of public and private angencies now try to address all the issues which contribute to a person being homeless.

Some people are homeless because they are mentally ill and lack resources which have prevented them from being properly diagnosed and treated. Some of these people, because of Project Hope, have received needed care. Some now are on maintenance meds and live stable, productive lives.

Some people are homeless because they are unaware of government resources which could end their homelessness. They are out of money and out of hope. Through the effective workings of project hope many of these people received free haircuts, a free "interview" outfit, free transportation to apply for jobs, and so forth. Loads of people have found productive jobs through the assistance of Project Hope.

Many homeless people are estranged from their families. Project Hope has helped many reconnect with their families in ways that have led to significant life improvements.

Lyash, did, in fact, perform superbly in helping to spearhead the City's response to the ball of issues connected with homelessness. With his leadership, charitiable groups teamed up with government agencies to actually attack the problem, instead of merely attacking the homeless.

On THAT scorecard, it's hard to imagine a better success.

[Jon McPhee]

Got to give Rick a "K" for Konsistency -- there ain't an ANTI-populist, inhumane issue or person he can't find something good to say about.

On the other hand,

Main Entry: sy·co·phant
Pronunciation: \-fənt also -ˌfant\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin sycophanta slanderer, swindler, from Greek sykophantēs slanderer, from sykon fig + phainein to show — more at fancy
Date: 1575

Main Entry: a servile self-seeking flatterer

synonyms: see parasite.

And from the thesaurus, to add texture:

Synonyms-- fawner, flunky (also flunkey), toady

Related Words-- yes-man; hanger-on, leech, parasite, sponge, sponger; henchman, lackey, minion, satellite, slave, stooge; admirer, cultist, devotee, enthusiast, fan, groveler (or groveller), idolater (or idolator), worshipper (or worshiper), zealot; adherent, convert, disciple, follower, partisan, pupil, votary

Add courtier and maybe courtesan.

Isn't that "silly," and "very revealing?"

[John]

Umm, Rick?

It's Pinellas Hope, NOT Project Hope.

Nice Try...

Oh and Pinellas Hope was founded by the Catholic Charities Foundation, not Lyash or Progress Energy. They had nothing to do with its formation.

The only thing you got even close to correct is the fact the Progress Energy is one of about 200 "partners" who support it. But not no mo.

Oh, and one more thing. Pinellas Hope ran out of money in April. Did Lyash or P.E. step up? No, they didn't Rrrrrick, private citizen donations offered enough $$ and voluneer time to keep it open through this summer, then it's done.

Yet more nonsense from Spinster K.

[Thomas]

BOOM - Outta Here !

[since1962]

no no Ricks "informed enough"

doesn't need facts or dissent to interrupt the "discussion"

[Jon McPhee]

John, thanks for your "silly" clarification -- one might be tempted to say that it is "revealing."

Lots of petty little programs are suffering the impacts of the Culture of Greed. Like, for just one, the state's late Brain and Spinal Cord Injury Program, whose budget is essentially zeroed out by the legislature.

And just think of all those dumb motorcyle and bicycle riders and kids on playgrounds who rammed headfirst into something solid, not to mention folks T-boned or flipped out of cars, or who break their necks diving into pools and creeks.

I guess under Rick's and many others' affection for Social Darwinism, it serves them all right, and it should be up to them to be rich enough to pay for their own intensive care, rehab, and all those indelicate things and services needed to provide for the bodily functions they can no longer manage for themselves.

We should all hope we never need any help from organizations like this. Because in the New World Order, it won't be there.

[Don in St. Pete]

I agree with Jon in that there is a time and place for eveything but don't totally cut off the lifeline. Jabil curcuit gets $12.7million but 41 people still get laid off. Hard working normal joes like you and I with families to support and mouths to feed who provide valuable services to the citizens. Thank god we'll gwet a new mayor in 2010.

[To: JudyToo]

>>>(or maybe worse, like Dudley and Newton - what a joke on us!). <<<

What do you have against Dudley or Newton? Have you ever served in public office before? What is it about these two that is such a "joke"?

[Nathaniel Webster]

Jon McPhee gives us consistency too ... ALWAYS B-O-R-I-N-G

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
bore2 Audio Help /bɔr, boʊr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bawr, bohr] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, bored, bor·ing, noun
–verb (used with object) 1. to weary by dullness, tedious repetition, unwelcome attentions, etc.: The long speech bored me.
–noun 2. a dull, tiresome, or uncongenial person.
3. a cause of ennui or petty annoyance: repetitious tasks that are a bore to do.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1760–70; of uncert. orig.]

—Synonyms 1. fatigue, tire, annoy.
—Antonyms 1. amuse; thrill, enrapture.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

[Homeless Advocate]

I do not know who John is, but your posts are inconsistent. You said Lyash failed miserably in his work with the homeless project, then came right back and said that he had nothing to do with the successes. Rick K's description is right on the money. Lyash played a major role in convincing the various charitable and public agencies to join forces in building Pinellas Hope, maintaining ongoing cooperation across organizational boundaries, and continuing funding for what we all hope will be a better solution to the many community issues which accompany homelessness.

[Critic]

Jon McPhee is, to borrow someone else's analogy, marooned on Fantasy Island. Rick K has never indicated he believes in social Darwinism.

[Don Mott]

Sheee's back. Sybil take a pill!

[John]

Homeless Advocate (AKA Rick K)

If you wish to cheerlead yourself, at least do it with facts and use your real name.

And stop lying to your other personalities.

You look silly.

Denizens here more like Gilligans Isle

Professors and Gilligans abundant.

The "girls" notably supporting roles.

Safest harbor:Skipper with a soupcon of Lovey.

[Rick K]

Again, I would love to have $100 for each time these people accuse me of posting as someone else. I'd be rich!

[Kathleen]

There is currently an existing contract between the City and the Club (Rays). Only the City Council has the authority to initiate a change in this contract. Neither Baker nor Lyash have the power to legally interfere with this contract. Baker does not have that power under the Charter to renegotiate an existing agreement or delegate those negotiations to a third party absent policy direction from City Council which is lacking. It is all bogus. Unfortunately, it is an interference with an existing business relationship for any non-party to become involved in any "new agreements" absent council authorization. Who is looking out for the best interests of the City?

[since1962]

the NEXT city council?

If I KNEW above information
I would CAMP at the TIMES until they printed it.
After Thursdays meeting Times may be a bit more receptive.

Some of you will need to SEEK and WIN election to Council/Mayor

[Rick K]

Kathleen is incorrect.

The City Charter CLEARLY empowers the Mayor and City Staff to negotiate with the Rays regarding their business objectives and how the City may play a role in that.

It is only interference with a contract when those who engage in activities do so and end up HARMING someone.

The City Charter REQUIRES the Mayor and city staff to return the Rays phone calls and listen to whatever proposals the Rays wish to make regarding their future in this city.

I hate to make this personal, but when
Katlheen insists otherwise, she is promogulating untrue propaganda which was created to deceive people.

Anyone who can read the City Charter and the City Budget know that Kathleen is must making up crap that is not true!

[Don Mott]

RRRRick, the spinmeister. Kathleen DID NOT say the Mayor could not negotiate with and or listen to proposals from The Rays. Read her post AGAIN spin man.

[since1962]

yes and do rewrite the history of Snell and Straub on this thread too while you"re at it. Please include the elimination of Spring Training and decimation of 100 year waterfront baseball tradition for greed by Skippy "Perry" Kalt. Will you do that for us your imbecilic inferiors professor K?

[Don Mott]

RRRick, the only person I have read here trying to deceive people is YOU!

[Rick K]

Don, it is you who should re read.

She said, "Only the City Council has the authority to initiate a change in this contract"

That claim is untrue. The other party to a contract may always seek to renegotiate it, unless the contract specifically bars doing so, which the Rays contract with the City does not do.

So Kathleen made that untrue lie up from whole cloth.

She ALSO said, "Baker does not have that power under the Charter to renegotiate an existing agreement or delegate those negotiations to a third party absent policy direction from City Council which is lacking. It is all bogus."

Again, she is wrong AND lying.

The Charter SPECIFICALLY charges the Mayor with implementing the annual budget ordinance, as well as supervising the various subordinate directors and departments on City Staff, which are authorized by Council, via the Budget Resolution and other documents, to carry out their assigned jobs.

The Department of Development is specifically charged with contacting businesses in the City to discuss what the City might do to help the businesses achieive their future plans.

That is the Mayor's job under the City Charter.

So Kathleen makes at least two assertions (as fact) which are both incorrect and dishonest.

Thanks.

[Rick K]

Don, I am not sure what alternate universe you live in. And it isn't important.

You have just indicated that you are unworthy of any future attempts by me to personally communicate with you.

That you can view the many rantings of POWW, which are more false than true, and not see that for what it is, indicates you are beyond help.

Pity.

[Don Mott]

"That claim is untrue. The other party to a contract may always seek to renegotiate it, unless the contract specifically bars doing so, which the Rays contract with the City does not do". RRRick, renegotiate and change are two different animals. Kathleen said CHANGE not RENEGOTIATE! "The Charter SPECIFICALLY charges the Mayor with implementing the annual budget ordinance, as well as supervising the various subordinate directors and departments on City Staff, which are authorized by Council, via the Budget Resolution and other documents, to carry out their assigned jobs". Can you tell me what exactly that has to do with renegotiating contracts? Spin some more RRRick! BTW, What do I have to do with POWW? I've never even been to their web site. You went overboard a long time ago and have yet to realize it!

[Don Mott]

Can you tell me what exactly that has to do with renegotiating contracts? Correction; I meant changing contracts.