Potent Politics: Commission’s performance reviewed

DAN DOWD
Contributing Columnist
dowd@lbknews.com

It has been four months since the election of candidates to the Town Commission; hence I think it is time for a review of their performance on that legislative body.

Let’s start with the mayor of Longboat, George Spoll. I will attest to the fact that Spoll runs a pretty effective meeting. He is a bit blustery and overbearing at times, but for the most part he is an effective presiding officer. His major shortcoming is his attempt to overpower a meeting. For example, his vindictiveness relating to the fire marshal position was evident and supercilious. He allowed personal feelings to interfere with his thinking. Generally speaking, Spoll is a more than adequate mayor.

Vice Mayor Jim Brown is a bit enamored with his own background. He, all too often, brings up his architectural and/or engineering importance. That experience is valuable to the commission, but a little less recall would result in a much more important present. Brown makes up his mind before any discussion takes place and sticks to his decision. It would be more to the benefit of the body if he would listen to the discussion and then formulate a decision. Generally speaking, Brown is a good man on the commission.

David Brenner is another commissioner who has too many preconceived notions and is far too involved with the importance of business on the Key. He should realize that the nature of Longboat is governed by the seasons—business is vibrant in the fall and winter, and very slow in the spring and summer. As a result, our community is a bedroom community, where business is secondary to the recreational activities of the area. Brenner does think things out and does express himself quite well. It would benefit the commission if he would diminish his feelings on the business aspect of life here and lean a bit more toward non-business reflection.

Lynn Larson is in a group all by herself. I hope that time and experience will bring her to the point of thoughtfulness and that she will prove to be an acceptable member of the commission. She almost always seeks guidance or acceptance from Brenner or Brown and looks to both of them just before casting an important vote. Her knowledge of what is taking place is the problem at hand. At this time, Larson is not an asset to the commission.

Phil Younger, in the short time he since he replaced Gene Jaleski, has shown ability to think and express himself. I do believe he will turn out to be a good commissioner. My objection to his appointment based on his not being approved by the voters notwithstanding, I consider him a good legislator and deserving of the position.

Hal Lenobel, the venerable commissioner, is respected and can always be counted on to think clearly and express himself with thoughts that are important to the question at hand. He is the backbone of the body whenever an important discussion will result in a more important decision. You never know where he stands until the discussion reaches finality, and then his decision may come as a surprise. I am glad he is a member of the commission, because his value is very important as a leveling factor in the group.

Bob Siekmann is a bit of an enigma. He is volatile in his decision rendering, because you never know where he stands until the final vote. Even then, you might wonder how he arrived at the decision. He is fun, because he doesn’t seem to take himself very seriously and often can be counted on for a witty remark. That aside, I wish Siekmann would act with more decorum and straightforwardness. Nonetheless, Siekmann is earnest and a valuable member of the commission.

Click here to read all of Dowd’s columns.