Pssst! Live Chat Tuesday, Noon - 1 P.M.
I hope you'll come by between noon and 1 p.m. Tuesday for the weekly live chat here on TroxBlog. For an hour or so I'll be trading questions and comments with readers about current events in Florida and the Tampa Bay area.
To observe or take part in the chat, come back to TroxBlog at noon Tuesday and look for a new announcement with the headline, "The Sept. 18 Chat Is Open." Click on the "Comments" link of that announcement and you'll see everything that's been said so far, and a box for you to enter your own thoughts.
As always, if you can't be here live, you can click on the comments link afterward to read the transcript of the chat. If you'd like to "pre-file" a question or comment, add it to the comments of THIS item, and I'll move it over during the live chat thread.
There's plenty to talk about...

Welcome to TroxBlog, the web-home of columnist Howard Troxler, where he and readers discuss his column topics and current events. The goal here is to focus on the merits of issues, instead of personal attacks or knee-jerk partisanship.
Now is the time for the annual Coerce State Employees Campaign. Not only are they distributing the forms and suggesting amounts - anyone who doesn't turn in a form or a form with an appropriate amount is being scheduled for a "discussion" with the Deputy Division Director who has been assigned this task. The same person who is making recommendations for personnel cuts.
Posted by: | September 18, 2007 at 06:46 AM
Howard, the governor was trotting around Tampa yesterday "whipping up" support for the new super homestead exemption. For anyone who has been in their home more than five years, it just does not make sense. It is the real estate frenzy that has occurred over the past five years and is now unraveling, that has spawned the outrage. The buyers and sellers did it to themselves. This super homestead, the voters will discover, is anything but super after we get down the road a few years and the distinguished and oh so credible property appraiser raises the value of their property to whatever they need it to be to feed the hogs at the public trough. Give me the 3% CAP and in the constitution any day. That is the only way to keep a lid on it. I believe the amendment will fail and then the politicians in Tallahassee will pat themselves on the back and say "I tried to give them a tax cut but those pesky taxpayers said they didn't want one." Ain't it great in the sunshine state?
Posted by: Larry | September 18, 2007 at 08:24 AM
I heard that the companies selling voting machines are coming to the Elections Office to pitch their equipment on Sept. 25th. Everybody needs to go to ask good questions so we don't get stuck with another $15-million boondoggle like the touch-screens we voters are still paying for. Of course it's when working people can't go, but those who can should go.
Posted by: Lucia | September 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Hi Howard
Just to let you know. Seems some smut peddler has hijacked the "It's your times forums". I hope there is way to stop this person. I like many of your readers use that as a sounding board and ideas exchange. We shouldn't have to put up with vulgar or tastesless shenanigans. I did report it to the number listed on the site.
Posted by: Boo Boo | September 18, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Howard,
Referring to "Tha Last Word" blog section:
I find your comments on Commissioner Seel to be quite interesting, in fact, somewhat perplexing. Given the recent events, I’m curious as to why you feel that she, in particular – perhaps – deserves a pass.
Is it your assertion that the Smith situation was a one-time occurrence?
Is it “likeability” over “accountability”?
You make a very good point on Smith’s potential for re-election. But his is a singular position as a constitutional officer, and his is a position of (figure-head) administrative rather than policy making. On the other hand, the BOCC is a collective body with a core purpose of policy rather than administrative. The BOCC’s pattern of 7-0 unanimous support almost negates the need for a body.
In other words, if everyone agrees the vast majority of the time… why have a collective body (Board) at all? The purpose of the Board is to have discourse, debate, diversity in thought and opinion, and therefore… bring about open discussion on the issues resulting (ideally) in a consensus as to the best course of action. But if neither one of the seven opens the discussion, then how can this happen? All seven had the opportunity to stop – or at the very least question – this action… and neither of the seven did so.
That, from my perspective of course, is a real problem.
Posted by: 20/20 | September 18, 2007 at 11:28 AM