Northpinellas: Is political paralysis catching?

A Times Editorial

Is political paralysis catching?

Is political one-upmanship, a la the presidential election, contagious? We may have seen it practiced at Thursday's Clearwater City Commission meeting.

Only four members of the normally five-member commission were there Thursday to consider important issues like a hotel development proposal for Clearwater Beach and a study of building an advanced-

treatment water plant in Clearwater. The chair that had been occupied since 1996 by Ed Hooper was empty. In July, Hooper resigned his seat, effective on Election Day, Nov. 7, to run for the state House of Representatives, but lost the election.

The city charter, which is like a constitution for local government, says there "shall be a City Commission composed of five commissioners." The charter also says that if the commission loses a member, the remaining members "should" appoint a replacement within 30 days.

Thursday night, some commissioners seemed more focused on figuring out a way to avoid that simple directive. They were reduced to debating whether "should" means must or "should" means try. And if "should" means try, how hard must they try?

Before Thursday night, Commissioner J.B. Johnson had said publicly that the commission could carry on just fine with only four members until voters choose a permanent replacement for Hooper in the regular March city election. But Johnson said that if the charter compelled them to appoint a replacement, he would support reappointing Hooper to serve until March.

Mayor Brian Aungst and Commissioner Bob Clark seemed to lean toward appointing a permanent replacement and making that person Hooper. Commissioner Ed Hart had not indicated, at least in public conversations, where he stood.

On Thursday night, Clark nominated Hooper. Clark and Aungst voted "yea." But Hart and Johnson voted "nay." The commission was deadlocked.

Aungst asked for another nomination, but no one was named. Aungst questioned whether taking one vote on one name was making a good-faith effort to fulfill the charter requirement. When Johnson challenged him to "put up your man," Aungst threw out a name: Melody Figurski. Figurski is a longtime community volunteer who has been a friend to more than one commissioner. Yet when the vote was taken, it still was 2-2, with Hart and Johnson voting no and still offering no nominee of their own.

Not only did the commission fail at what seems a fairly simple task -- especially since commissioners have had since July to prepare for it -- but Hart proceeded after the meeting to rip his former colleague Hooper. About the nicest thing he had to say was that Hooper didn't scrutinize city business enough before voting.

Was the goal of the nay voters Thursday night to keep Hooper off the commission and prevent a commission majority block of Hooper, Clark and Aungst? Those three commissioners sometimes appeared to be philosophical allies, but a look back shows that not all of the commission's rare 3-2 votes were Hooper, Aungst and Clark on one side, Johnson and Hart on the other.

For instance, in August 1999 the commission split 3-2 on whether to offer city help to a developer wanting to build condominium towers on Clearwater Beach. Hart, Aungst and Hooper voted yes, while Johnson and Clark voted no.

The previous month, there was a 3-2 vote on vacating a road to allow construction of a self-storage business on a prominent downtown corner. Hart, Clark and Johnson approved; Aungst and Hooper said no.

Perhaps the intent instead was to keep anyone from filling the fifth seat. Whatever the motivation for Thursday night's charade, this is the practical effect: Each remaining commissioner is now a little bit bigger fish in a little bit smaller pond; Clearwater residents will get the benefit of only four representatives, rather than five, debating and reaching decisions; and two commissioners can now block action on anything, just by locking it up with a tie vote.

Because of the holidays, the City Commission fortunately has a reduced schedule of meetings between now and March. But unfortunately, there are some important decisions to be made during that period. Time will tell whether the commission's recent positive momentum will come to a screeching halt.