+ Longboat Key should hire an attorney for all
With the resignation of Town Attorney David Persson, perhaps it is indeed time for a change.
Not merely changing the honorable man who has served us faithfully for 22 years, but we should consider changing the overall manner in which our town obtains legal counsel.
It has been quite evident that during Persson’s tenure, he was strictly responsible to the town commissioners and not to “We the People,” who were actually paying for his services.
In all candor — and with a fervent desire — the replacement for Persson must be directly on town of Longboat Key staff. In that situation, as is the case with our many other exceptionally qualified town-employed professionals, he would be directly responsible to the town manager and thence to the town commissioners and the same “We the People,” who are paying for these services.
Then, he would truly be the town’s attorney — and not just the attorney of the Town Commission.
Of course, it would be a significant savings, but — and of ever greater importance — we would then be sure of full-time attention and loyalty, without the threat of a potential conflict of interest by engaging another still-practicing local attorney who could still have other clients and interests in our greater community.
Editor’s note: Apologies to Mr. Saivetz. In last week’s editorial on the resignation of Town Attorney David Persson, we mischaracterized Mr. Saivetz’s inquiry to the town for legal fees. His request was to determine whether the town has incurred unreimbursed legal expenses to which it is entitled, not to question Persson’s expenses.
+ New system breaches residents’ privacy
Longboat Key Association, personified by its president, Bob Goodman, is in the process of installing a new electronic gate control system on both ends of Longboat Club Road. This was done in the face of objections by many residents who will be forced to live with multiple problems of this very user-UNfriendly and expensive system.
The most galling feature of the new arrangement is the fact that the system monitors and records — by name and precise time — the movement of the residents through the gates.
Incredible? Yes, but true! Every time one of us goes through the gate, Big Brother records exactly who and when we crossed the gate. When asked the reason for this unauthorized spying, Goodman’s explanation was: “enhanced resident security.” That is as disingenuous an excuse as one can dream up, considering that the gate attendants routinely wave through any and all strangers and records are kept only of residents.
It all makes us wonder: on whose behalf is this assault on our privacy being perpetrated? And what other use will Big Brother (and the third-party contractor doing it) make of the information collected without the targets’ permission?
Fred D. Ross