Attack of the live chat, noon - 1 p.m. Tuesday

I hope you'll join me Tuesday between noon and 1 p.m. for the weekly live chat here on TroxBlog. For an hour or so I'll be taking reader questions and comments on current events I figured since next Tuesday is election day, we might kick around the presidential primary and the property-tax amendment for starters, but feel free to bring up any topic you'd like.

To observe or take part in the live chat, come to TroxBlog between noon and 1 p.m. and look for a new item with the headline, "The Jan. 22 chat is OPEN." Click on the "comments" link of that announcement and you'll be taken to a page with everything that's been said so far, and a place for you to add your own question or comment. Keep refreshing the comments page to see the latest.

As always, if you can't be here live and would like to "pre-file" a question or comment, use the "comments" link of THIS announcement just a few lines below. I'll try to work it in with a response during the live chat. And remember that after the chat is over, you can always come back later to read a transcript and see what folks had to say.

I hope to see you in the chat!

Comments

[Mark]

Howard, In case you missed it, the Times reported (in a small article right next to the obits) that a grievance committee appointed by The Florida Bar had completely exonerated Susan Churuti. Although the Times consistently reported otherwise, the committee by a 6 to 0 vote found that there was no dual representation of Jim Smith and the County. Churuti was at all times acting on the County's behalf. The only person who believed otherwise was Spratt and his belief was "unreasonable" (which is a polite way of saying he made it up). Doesn't this undermine a crucial part of the Times' whole scandal coverage? Shouldn't the paper come clean and tell the truth to its readers?

If you haven't read the committee's written report, you should. Believe me when I say that the Bar takes this kind of stuff very seriously. They initiated the investigation themselves and assigned it to a committee in Hillsborough to remove any political considerations.
By its very nature, this is the final word on the subject and far more meaningful that the grand jury presentment. A grand jury proceeding does not give the accused any right to call witnesses or present evidence. Of course, the presentment exonerated Churuti as well but was critical of all the public confusion generated over the conflict waivers. And wasn't it the Times that created all that public confusion in the first place by reporting "as fact" that Churuti was engaged in the dual representation of Smith and the County?

[Bob]

Despite Mark's continued defense of all the public officials who brought shame to the term "good government" in Pinellas County, I’d like Howard's thoughts on if any serious effort or progress is being made to restore the public’s trust and confidence in the Property Appraiser’s office and/or the County Commission.

All seem content to just "ride out the storm" and run again with the exception of Smith who instead offers up his long time chief deputy and retires with a pension of $80K a year for life.

Does that do it? Just re-elect the Commission and promote Smith's most “trusted” aid.