If he did something wrong he should pay for it.

We don’t consider ourselves “bitter people.” Irritated? Regularly. Angry? Sometimes. Disappointed? Ususally. Outraged? Occasionally.

But as far as us wanting to see Howard Frimark be “destroyed,” nothing could be farther from the truth. Frankly, we wish him a comfortable and happy retirement in Bonita Springs.

But just as we wouldn’t put up with his wheeling and dealing for himself and his cronies while he was an elected official, we won’t put up with his capers just because the voters gave him the boot – especially if he is, in fact, violating the City’s ethics ordinance.

In that vein, you should take a look at today’s post, which shows that Mr. Frimark knew or should have known that the City was involved in the insurance for the Uptown development despite his attorney’s protests to the contrary.

And in case you’re worried about us going easy on the current mayor, you shouldn’t be. Because the moment Schmidt starts pulling the same kinds of shots for which we went after Frimark, he will find himself on the very same barbecue.

How very brave of you to make your thoughts about anonymous bloggers known, anonymously.

Why don’t you anonymously print up some flyers and mail them around town…make your thoughts known to an even wider audience? I can put you in touch with somebody who has experience doing that…

Gotta love it.

In the former situation it seems the City Attorney (Buzz) makes a report, including his opinion on whether there has been a violation, to the City Council who can decide to charge/prosecute or not. And it is said that in his so-called preliminary report handed out on Monday night Buzz stated that there has been a violation of the ethic ordinance by Frimark. So in the case at hand all of the Aldermen, and the Mayor too I think, get to vote on whether to go after Howard. Ought to be interesting to see what they all do.
In the latter situation, with the complaint and affidavit to the City Clerk, it seems that the matter is turned over to Buzz who is the bound to hire a special investigator to look into the matter. The investigator would determine if there has been a violation and then if there is, apparently, recommend prosecution.

So the wheels are in motion for the matter to come before the Aldermen who will get a chance to decide Frimark’s fate… that shold be interesting since so many are his pals and benificiaries of campaign cash in the past. And anyone can put the wheels in motion for a special investigator by contacting the City Clerk, dear Betty, and determining how to file the required affidavit. I say go for it, it would be verrrrrrry interesting to see how things would unfold of the actions were taking place on parallel paths.

Of course, Frimark could short circuit all of this by fessing up that he knew exactly what he was doing, that it was a violation of the ethics ordinance that he once swore to uphold and that he will take his lumps formally and in the court of public opinion. Anybody want to bet on the chances of this happeneing?

Gotta love it.

Unless Hill says it’s not a violation, at the end of the day it’s up to the Mayor to step up to the plate on this if nobody else does, politics aside, and make sure the ordinance is enforced.

What does having a “history” with Frimark have to do with anything? For that matter, what does holding him in “contempt” have to do with this?

If he violated the ordinance, he should publicly admit it and pay the price. End of story.

Instead, he sends a smarmy legal beagle with a bunch of alibis. What a weasel.

Am I reading the ordinance wrong?