May 10, 2012
Local "Voter Alert"... a must read
The following is a conversation between Sue Carlton of the Tampa Bay Times and Attorney Chris Rodems on County Commissioner Kevin Beckner's Political Campaign Tactics... Astounding!
----- Original Message -----
From: Ryan Rodems
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 7:55 PM
To: 'scarlton@sptimes.com'
Subject: "Long on the mud, short on the facts": Where was your sense of outrage when Beckner spread falsehoods about Brian Blair?
Sue:
I read your column today and you seemed fairly outraged about the beginning of the mudslinging against Kevin Beckner.
You will recall I represented Brian Blair in a defamation lawsuit against Kevin Beckner. Beckner slung false statements in the last election. Let’s review the false statements Beckner mailed to voters about Blair:
· Beckner falsely stated that Blair “voted to spend $1 million of our tax money on his personal lake.” Blair did not own a lake, and the funding was for a series of lakes in the area where he lived.
· Beckner falsely stated that Blair cut “funding to shelters that help women and children . . ..”
· Beckner falsely stated that Blair “gave himself a pay raise.”
· Beckner stated that Blair “[s]upports flying the Confederate flag in our county.”
As Bob Trohn once told me, “what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.”
Sincerely,
Ryan Christopher Rodems
Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
501 East Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 790
Tampa, Florida 33602
813/489-1001 (Office)
813/205-1198 (Mobile)
E-mail: rodems@barkerrodemsandcook.com
----REPLY----
From: Carlton@sptimes.com [mailto:Carlton@sptimes.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 12:18 PM
To: Ryan Rodems
Subject: Re: "Long on the mud, short on the facts": Where was your sense of outrage when Beckner spread falsehoods about Brian Blair?
Hi Mr. Rodems,
I believe the difference is that the statements Commissioner Beckner made regarding Mr. Blair appeared (at least to me) to be sound bite versions of facts. (It would have been nice if the judge had ruled on the truth issue - gotten, as Judge Graybill used to say, to the meat of the coconut, but no such luck.) The blog post did things like accusing him of not listing his bank accounts, and I have those disclosures right here on my desk, with the bank accounts listed. That kind of thing
Nice to hear from you
Sue Carlton
-----REPLY-----
From: Ryan Rodems
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: "Long on the mud, short on the facts": Where was your sense of outrage when Beckner spread falsehoods about Brian Blair?
Sue:
I first thank you for taking the time to respond. You did not have to do that, and I am sure you must receive many e-mails. I am not sure what you intended by the phrase “sound bite versions of facts,” but I think if you look again at what happened, you will agree that what Beckner did was not make a sound bite out of facts, but made sound bites out of fabrications.
Under oath in deposition, Beckner testified that the claim that Brian “gave himself a pay raise” was based on Brian’s vote against a symbolic measure to request the Florida Legislature to impose a freeze on county commissioners’ salaries. The vote was symbolic because, under Florida law, the county commissioners do not have the power to increase their salaries; only the Florida legislature can change the pay of a county commissioner. Beckner admitted this in deposition:
Q And the Florida legislature determines the pay of county commissioners. Correct?
A They set the pay. The county commissioners can actually adjust the pay.
Q They can?
A Yes, sir.
Q Can they increase it?
A No, sir.
(Beckner depo., 12/9/2009, 77:3-13). So, Beckner’s statement that Brian gave himself a pay raise, a campaign statement not under oath, was simply false.
Beckner’s claim that Blair cut “funding to shelters that help women and children” was also false. It was based on a vote by the county commission, including Brian, to not allow the Sheriff to tender back some of his allocated funding for use by the Family Justice Center, which had failed to follow normal procedures to obtain funding. No funding was “cut.” Moreover, the Family Justice Center is not a “shelter.” The statement was not a sound bite based on facts. It was a complete misstatement.
Your column brought up a point that I think is important: It is troubling that people are willing to overlook lying in political ads. I believe it’s actually worse to fabricate something like Beckner did than for someone to imply Beckner is hiding something by not revealing his address when there is a legitimate reason for it. Beckner’s is the sin of commission (intentionally making up a false “fact”), the other is the sin of omission (not giving all of the known facts necessary to evaluate one fact). I also believe it is worse when false statements are made by the candidate rather than a nebulous group.
I think Rs and Ds should be held to the same standard. If you agree, you should consider revisiting what Beckner did and hold his feet to the fire, too.
If you would be interested in reviewing it, I’d be glad to send you a copy of Beckner’s deposition. It is a public record.
Sincerely,
Ryan Christopher Rodems
Barker, Rodems & Cook, P.A.
501 East Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 790
Tampa, Florida 33602
813/489-1001 (Office)
813/205-1198 (Mobile)
E-mail: rodems@barkerrodemsandcook.com
-----REPLY-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: "Long on the mud, short on the facts": Where was your sense of outrage when Beckner spread falsehoods about Brian Blair?
Brian:
I got another response from Sue, and she said we’ll have to agree to disagree. While we clearly do not agree, I give her full respect and admire her for responding. I believe in civilized debate when possible, and the New Testament (turn the other cheek) when possible. I also recognize that she is a columnist, not a reporter, and she has a license to write from a certain perspective.
Disagreements on political perspective or facts is fair game. One thing about her column that I feel merits more scrutiny is the idea that Beckner may now be facing these allegations because of his sexual orientation. I do not know what every other person thinks, but I know that Beckner’s sexual orientation has zero to do with why I oppose him. Had Beckner not announced it, I would not have known his sexual orientation. I no more oppose Beckner because of his sexual orientation than I oppose Obama because he is married. I am a Reagan Republican – I do not want the government regulating the boardroom or the bedroom. I believe in MLK’s words. I choose not to judge people on their color, their national origin, what language they speak, what religion they practice or which gender they choose to have intimate relations with. I judge people on factors within their control. Are they honest? Do they believe in hard work? Do they respect the rights of others? Do they follow the law, even when they disagree with it? Do they try to treat people with whom they disagree with dignity and respect?
My issues with Beckner are, number one, he lied to get elected; as his deposition testimony showed, Beckner knew good and well that his statements about you were untruthful. He knows what a “cut” is and he knows what a “shelter” is, and he knows what a “pay raise” is. He intentionally misstated the facts for political gain. You will never have to do that to be successful against him.
Second, Beckner’s agenda since day one has been to expand the size of government at a time when the economy will not support it. His first real action was to try to force the county government to pay for health insurance benefits for anyone shacking up with a county employee. This is not about equality, but about taking tax dollars from other areas of need to pay for health insurance for people who do not work for the county. He wanted to raise taxes for the commuter trains that would never pay for themselves.
Yes, 2012 is going to be an interesting election year. Beckner made the rules in 2008. Now, he must live with them.
To paraphrase Beckner’s infamous 2008 “personal lake” quote, it would be accurate to state that Beckner voted to spend millions of our tax money on his personal, unmarried, live-in domestic partner.
To paraphrase Beckner’s “greenspace” and “cut” quotes, it would be accurate to state that Beckner voted to cut tax funding for shelters that help women and children to buy freebies for his unmarried, live-in domestic partner. (Obviously, any tax dollars Beckner voted to use to buy health insurance for unmarried live-in partners could have been used for women’s and children’s shelters).
To paraphrase Beckner’s “pay raise” quote, it would be accurate to state that Beckner voted to give himself a pay raise by subsidizing his unmarried, live-in domestic partner’s health insurance. (Obviously, if Beckner might have to pay for some of his partner’s health insurance, any tax subsidy would allow Beckner to keep more of his pay, which is a “pay raise” under Beckner’s analysis in 2008 that a symbolic vote against a pay freeze is a pay raise. Also, if his domestic partner did not have to pay for his health insurance, it would increase the household income, which is, under Beckner’s definition, a “pay raise”).The following is a conversation between Sue Carlton of the Tampa Bay Times and Attorney Chris Rodems on County Commissioner Kevin Beckner's Political Campaign Tactics... Astounding!
February 7, 2011
Official Statement from Brian Blair Regarding Ethics Complaint
(Tampa, FL) - George Neimann filed an Ethics Complaint against Brian Blair in 2008 over two campaign contributions that exceeded the $500.00 limit per person by a total, of $100.00 and $500.00 dollars. When brought to his attention, the Blair campaign promptly refunded the contributions.
Mr. Neimann described himself as a watchdog Ethics Complainer in a recent article in Creative Loafing. His complaints rarely have merit and are overwhelmingly against Conservatives. Mr. Neimann has also cost the taxpayer’s of Florida, untold thousands of dollars in FEC labor and Attorney fees.
The FEC recently agreed to settle the dispute for $750.00 from Mr. Blair, without findings of intentional violation. This came after Blair won the initial hearing however the FEC appealed this case, in large part to avoid paying Mr. Blair’s legal fees. A new hearing was set for March 31st prior to the settlement.
Candidates rarely do their own campaign treasury work, which entails data entry, filing timely treasury reports that include contributions and expenses. Campaign Treasurer, Joe Chillura one of Hillsborough County's most respected people, served as Blair's Treasurer during this election; Chillura was perplexed to say the least.
“I entered thousands of contributions totaling about $250,000 and because of a software glitch that allowed 2 contributions that totaled $600.00 to accidentally be accepted -- Brian took a lot of grief for something he would never have willfully done” says Chillura and adds “I know Brian very well and he gives much more than that to charity's each year.”
Blair stated, "as soon as we realized that both contributions exceeded the $500.00 dollar limit per person and or corporation per election cycle (Primary and General), both contributions were promptly refunded"