Ah, yes! My longtime friend Frank Morelli trusts “informed voters” — also known as those voters whose position on political matters mirror his own (“Morelli Trusts Informed Voters,” Letters, June 28). The thought of “Mayor” Steven Abrams having or offering a “brilliant” idea gives me pause and makes me shudder a bit. I can see why “in the name of saving money,” a thought which eluded him in other ideas, like the recent Waste Management garbage site on Southern Blvd., but I digress.
To continue, the idea to merge the inspector general’s office with and under the control of the county clerk, or some such office, may give special interests a way to control too much “oversight” by an independent inspector general’s office, and God knows we can’t have independent oversight. It would threaten the very foundation of the “honest government” that we’ve enjoyed all these years.
I don’t believe it was an accident that the 72 percent that Judge Morelli used in his example matched the voter approval for the creation of the inspector general’s office. It was merely that Frank did not believe anyone would notice the mocked comparison. I did notice, and so did many in the 72 percent you mocked. And I, for one, do not see anything worthy of satire going on in Palm Beach County. Your observation is correct though, that most voters prefer the activities of an independent inspector general’s office be monitored by the voters and not special interests. The merger on the table (the brilliant idea of Mayor Abrams) may be cheaper than doing it another way in the short term, but in the long term, in terms of benefit to special interests, would, in my opinion, just continue the same deals that have plagued us for years.
“Republican form of government,” Frank? That’s just another coded message and double entendre. Use of the word Republican in this case presents not a form of government, but just double speak for party preference.
Opinions are like elbows, and we all have a right to them, but what we don’t have a right to is our own facts cloaked in opinion but failing the “smell test.” Mayor Abrams “brilliant” idea would cost us less. We have 14 cities suing over funding the office now. Will you guarantee that adoption of his plan will eliminate all those litigants? And who says and what evidence is there to support this conclusion?
No, Frank, what we are left with, in light of no concrete evidence or proof, is someone’s opinion cloaked as fact. And yes, it is “replete,” just not factual. I would leave it up to the 72 percent who voted for the inspector general whether they wanted an independent office, or controlled by the very people the office was created for oversight. I would leave it up to these voters whether the money spent now for an independent inspector general’s office wisely may result in a much-needed reduction in “Corruption County” of deals they will have to pay for with their taxes.
Richard Nielsen, Royal Palm Beach