Tempest in a coffee cup?
In what was intended to be a political puff piece, the Herald-Trib's Zac Anderson stirred up a bit more of the trouble that has already been spinning through city politics. Anderson quoted from local pundits and politicos at a local coffee shop as they yammered and hammered at city hall in what was intended to be a folksy piece on folksy folks.

The one sentence that arched more than a couple of eyebrows was only a couple of paragraphs in:

The uproar contributed to Venice City Manager Marty Black's decision to resign, effective next month, to avoid being fired.
-- A political storm, or just a tempest in a coffee cup?, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 07/28/08

That was enough to wreck Black's Monday. In response, Black fired this off to Mayor Ed Martin:

Today's Herald Tribune incorrectly states that I am leaving the city in lieu of being fired. Obviously if any member of council or yourself suggested that I may be fired, we would have a much different outcome in terms of my contract and severance. At this point in the transition, I believe that the request for correction should come through you or Nancy/Pam.
-- City Manager Marty Black, email to Mayor Ed Martin, 07/28/08

What makes that really peculiar is that council had only just recently endured a literary slime job at the hands of the two local newspapers, this due to claims from the Venice Airport Business Association that council was out to cause the death of area pilots. Black was in no hurry then to defend the mayor and council from similar attacks from the press. In fact, his office, through media whizzed kid Pam Johnson, contributed to the attacks.

Hizzoner, having been the brunt of many of these attacks with little to no support from Black or city staff, took a laid back approach to responding to Black's request. After sending Black an email that was the equivalent of an electronic yawn, Martin wrote to incoming interim city manager, Nancy Woodley:

I have not read Zac's article, but will try to get to it soon. There has been no discussion to my knowledge among council members about firing the city manager. It does not seem to have been the City's practice to respond to the newspapers about misstatements made about council members, however, if you would like to issue such a statement, Nancy, that is fine with me or Marty can reply directly as some of us have.
-- Ed Martin, to Nancy Woodley, 07/28/08

Now keep all of that in mind as the rest of this unfolds, because this gets funny fast
It's Monday morning, Black has been pasted in the press for quitting to avoid getting fired and he's already fired off the above nastygram to Hizzoner. After getting no sympathy whatsoever, he decides to get vengeance on someone... anyone... oh, who would he go after... let's see...

So out of the blue, I get an email from Pam Johnson, the city's pressed officer, no doubt on Black's angry orders.

I have no love for Johnson and I've been pretty open about that. Useless as teats on the front grill of a city garbage truck, that one. The reason for my ire (aside from the fact that she habitually pulls outrageous factual blunders out of sheer dumbness -- picture Archie Bunker in drag) is fairly simple and, I think, extremely justified: Johnson has flat out refused numerous requests by me over the years to be included on her email subscription list of city press releases. Anybody should be able to be on that list if they want, but not me. I get special rules. Her stated reason has been that I don't print news that the city wants to read.

Black has consistently backed her up on that decision. My response has been that I just can't seem to say or write enough rude things about her.

So imagine my surprise when ... waddaya know.... Pammy has sent me an email. Could it be that I am finally considered an acceptable citizen, worthy of receiving official missives from the Minister of Occasionally Accurate Propaganda?

Nope, not a chance. She was apparently obeying Black's orders in trying to take me on in a battle of wits, this over my response to a media slime job done to mayor and council by Johnson and Black with the help of VABA. Johnson sent to me what was intended to be a scathing attack on my writings. She CC'd it to members of council, just to show them that she could occasionally be on top of things.

Well hell. If you're gonna be that way about it, how about I return the favor? I replied item by item, then hit the Reply To All button after adding a few local news writers into the CC line.

Johnson's original text is in italics with >>; my responses are mingled in:

>>John:
>>    Regarding your article, "City officials and city's insurance carrier: Runway 04-22 is safe":
>>    The news release of July 11 is still posted on the city's Web site under Latest News. You might have to scroll down to see it.

     You're absolutely right. It is there right now. When I looked there before, I couldn't find it and I scrolled all the way down to June postings.

>>     The city manager and I were not asked by the mayor to "spin" anything.

     Actually, that's not true. City Manager Marty Black was asked by the mayor to provide a response to the information that had been put out by VABA as reported in the papers. Black, in turn, apparently passed the job off to you. A request for a response like that, which the mayor felt was needed to set the record straight, is a request for a spin...
     ...That the mayor was looking for some refutation of VABA's claims was a given. Either you or Marty chose to support their stance. That's a stabbing, and the pair of you did a good job on this one.

>>     We were asked to provide the public with the most recent information we had about the condition of RWY 4/22, which was the statewide airfield management program report of March 2008.

     Bulls**t. That's not what the mayor asked of Black. In fact, the mayor was totally unaware of that report until you mentioned it in your press release, this according to a follow-up email that the mayor sent to Black shortly after your press release. Again, the mayor was looking for some form of refutation. He wasn't looking for lies or untruths, but he was pretty darned sure that what VABA was stating was not entirely accurate, and VABA was painting runway 04-22 as a death trap. It turns out that the mayor was right, this from Alan Bullock's email that was published.
     You work for the city and by implication, you work for council and the mayor. You're job is assistive and supportive, to try to paint the city and council in the best light, not to be an assassin. That's my job.

>>     See that portion of the news release below:
>>     A statewide airfield pavement management program report, sponsored by the Florida Department of Transportation, was issued in March 2008 regarding the Venice airport. The report was produced by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc., a pavement expert consultant, and URS Corporation Inc. The report states that Runway 4/22 is functionally in "very poor" condition.

     Yup. That's what I read originally. I'd have to go back and look at your original release to see if that was the original wording. Oh wait... you have a stated policy that refuses to put me on that email list. So I guess I can't tell you if you are telling the truth or not because you didn't provide me with the original emailed press release.

>>     As was stated at the press briefing you attended, the runway is safe for aircraft that do not exceed certain weight limits, but it has been deteriorating for several years and continues to deteriorate. The release did not say it was unsafe.

     And that is not at all what you implied in your press release, nor is it even remotely indicated. The mayor asked for a response and a clarification, you stated, in unsubtle implication, that VABA was right and that throws support to VABA's claim that city hall is out to murder the pilots. I don't know why you did it, but there are only two reasons: either you intended to stab the mayor (which, if you look at his emails, I specifically warned him you would do this just prior to your news release) or you are a total public relations idiot who cannot understand how the public and media will perceive and react to your words.
     Which brings the question back to you: did you do this maliciously or out of stupidity? Stupidity can be forgiven.
     Why do you think Bullock sent out his email -- to set the record straight. It was needed to be addressed because between your release and VABA's press conference, mayor and council were painted out to be a bunch of fools. It is all very fine for you to hold that opinion, but when you are working at their pleasure, it does not bode well when you state so publicly.
     Personally, I think the mayor was a fool to allow you to put him into the position that he landed in, and I said so both before and after you skewered him. So far, I'm the only one who has addressed Bullock's comments, the Gondo and the Herald-Trib were quite happy to roast Hizzoner based on the info you provided to them, and I'm seeing zero effort on your part so far to set the city's stance straight.
     Thank you for the attempt to defend yourself, but from where I'm sitting, what you did is fairly indefensible. It was devastatingly effective, though, so props to you on a job well done.
     Have a nice day.
-- John Patten, 07/28/08

 

Pam on the run
That must have sent her running to Black, as he followed up in a lame attempt to rush to her defense while sticking with the idea that neither he or Johnson were out to slime the mayor:

     Alan Bullock put out the information from the Insurance carrier because I asked him to review the issue with the city's carriers and when Alan provided me with hand written notes about the results of that conversation last week, I asked Alan to formalize the information in a memo to Mayor and City Council. (Alan should still have his note to me since I returned it to him).
-- Marty Black, 07/28/08

 

Cough. What the hell was that? You really wanna play this game, Marty? OK.

     OK. So that changes... what, exactly?
     Fred Watts told me, in unequivocal terms, that 04-22 is safe for lighter aircraft, which is pretty much what the insurance guy stated and that Bullock commented on. You already had that info, Bullock's comments merely gave it a further imprimatur of authority.
     But that's not how city hall responded to VABA. They called you murderers laying in wait. Your initial response from Johnson was the PR equivalent of "Quite right, mea culpa."
     While Johnson might be able to believably claim that she had no idea her release would be interpreted that way, you have a few more simultaneous neurons firing -- there's no way you could have missed that. Lo and behold -- what story did the papers run with? That VABA is fighting for pilots' lives and that city hall doesn't care if a few lives are lost and... look... here's Pam Johnson to agree.
     Why, exactly, are you and Pam are even bothering to try to counter-spin your own spin? Are you trying now to undo the damage? How stupid do you think the public is? Or is this the pair of you kicking a pebble trying to convince mom that you didn't mean for anything bad to happen -- after all, how were you to know that sticking a peanut butter sandwich into a VCR would gum things up?
-- John Patten, 07/28/08

 

Black was still sticking with the claim of innocence
A bitter, single-sentence email followed:

I should know better than to just give you facts...
-- Mart Black, 07/28/08

 

And that's about when I hit the roof:

     Why start now?
     I was kind of wondering myself why you were bothering to send me any of this. Johnson has made a career decision of trying to keep me out of the loop as much as possible. You rarely give straight answers to the tough questions that might embarrass your favorite employees. Suddenly you are a fountain of info.
     You yourself recently wrote that it is not your job to make sure that whatever I or anyone else prints is... well, you left the thought unfinished, but the meaning seemed obvious.
     Nevertheless:
     Your "facts" do not change the coverage that you received from the newspapers over this mess.
     Your "facts" do not change the tone of Johnson's press release.
     Your "facts" do not change the fact that you willingly contributed to the rain of sparks that is falling on the mayor and council -- ya know, the guys and gals that you work for? Remember them?
     Instead, the info that came out looked more like the handiwork of VABA and the Boones. Gee -- odd, that. Probably just a coincidence.
     You had control of the message. That message was broadcast by two newspapers and not by me. Feel free to cast blame on me for that What I wrote came from Bullock and tended to support Bullock, Watts, and the mayor.... yes, it was spin. As was Johnson's press release. As was VABA's press conference.
     To be honest, I can't figure out exactly what you two are angry about. I'm beyond caring. If you don't want to get a spanking, don't steal the cookies or be smart enough not to get caught. You've got Oreos on your teeth -- dead giveaway, that.
-- John Patten, 07/28/08

 

John Patten is the head of Web Operations for Creative Pages, and has worked in broadcasting for over 12 years. He can also be incredibly rude at times.