CHICKEN A LA KING
Gulfport’s now famous chicken wars have been a hot topic of conversation for what seems like many months and at latest look the Council has voted to allow people to raise backyard chickens in town.
The fun, if you want to call it that, began at the December 16 meeting of the City Council when both Michele King and Mary Stull were not there, (both being excused absences). By a 2-1 vote the once accepted vote to allow chickens in Gulfport’s back yards got reversed. Alas, Gulfport was to have no chickens.
At the very next meeting on January 6, 2009, a 3-2 consensus of the Council was secured under the leadership of Vice Mayor King and Mayor Yakes that allowed the City Council to visit the whole chicken issue once again. When the vote to re-visit the issue got around to Mary Stull it was all tied up at 2-2 and Mary was on the spot after some pressure from the Mayor and steely glances from Vice Mayor King. Mary voted to bring the chicken issue back at the next meeting, (not so strange since she had never voted no on the chicken issue).
That was when Michele King went to work. Somehow she found out about an outfit in Alpharetta, Georgia called The Atlanta Pet Chicken Meetup Group and a guy named Andrew who calls himself “The Chicken Whisperer.” Apparently this chicken group is a bunch of chicken lovers who lobby for backyard chicken raising nationwide.
We got our hands on an e-mail from Ms. King that we found interesting. It was apparently not the first to the “Chicken Whisperer.” It reads:
“Hey Andrew, just got back from the council meeting and we did vote 3 to 2 to bring the chicken ordinance back. The key to it passing on the next reading will be to make sure Mary Stull votes in favor. I got her to agree to bring it back but I’m not sure when it happens if she will vote in favor or not. So…..anyone interested should call and/or write Mary Stull and get her convinced. Good luck! Michele”
Apparently this chicken issue was a lot more important than it looked on the surface or Ms. King just likes to win. Some would say her aggressiveness is commendable. Un- fortunately it is not only impolite to a fellow Council Member, it might be illegal under Florida’s Sunshine Laws, Ch. 286 F. S.
According to a summary prepared by Municipal Attorney Pat Gleason, “the Sunshine Law is applicable to any gathering, whether formal or casual, of two or more members of the same board or commission to discuss some matter on which foreseeable action will be taken by the public board or commission.” By directing a known lobbyist to target another Council Member and seek a specific position on a coming vote Council Member King is using a non-member as a liaison with another member. Use of such a liaison or surrogate is illegal under the law just as passing information on how to vote on specific issues through a friend would be illegal.
After two terms in elective office, ignorance of this law is no excuse.
Mr Nucomb and Mr Davis
Perhaps the comments section of this article was left open by accident, because comments are “closed” (Can you close something that was never open? mmm….)throughout your publication.
At any rate, I am happy to provide my name, and find it rather silly to call the two of you “Big Dog” and “Bird Dog 18,” respectively. You publication is ground breaking in many ways. First you admit that you are searching for “skeleton” in the closets of candidate in tomorrow’s election. I did not notice any skeletons, but perhaps that was because of all the mud that was thrown all over. But, most of all, I am impressed with your attempt to rewrite history.
It is amazing that you apparently think Michelle King had nothing to do with Gulfport’s human rights ordinance.
And, given what you printed in the above article, I would love to have Municipal Attorney Pat Gleason confirm that his legal opinion is that Ms. King violated Florida’s Sunshine Law by sitting alone and emailing a friend. Although I practice law for more than 15 years, mostly in DC, I can’t quite seem to follow the “logic” in the last 3 sentences of your article. In my opinion, that may be your best legal defense against any charge of libel/slander. Of course, as a private citizen, I am not all that impressed with this particular legal technicality.
It seems to me that it would have been preferable, and probably much more effective for your candidates (eg Greenwald and Stull)if you applied your obvious intelligence and all those hours to campaigning in a positive fashion.
I don’t about chickens. I suppose I would if the woman behind me decided that she wanted to have some, but I”m pretty sure she could anyway, as her religion surely protects her need for them for sacrifice.
I could live without the pigeons. They’re noisy, dirty, and they don’t belong here. Perhaps the parrots don’t belong here either, but they’re cool if a bit noisy at times. I draw the line at hogs. I hope everyone will vote against raising hogs for market in Gulfport.
Chickens Rule…
What’s so bad about them? If one is a responsable owner, as with any pet, chickens are not a problem. At least they lay eggs that provide food for the family. Unlike say…cats. Kudos to the council members who are looking forward. If you wanna live a little greener- chickens produce great fertilizer!
Well I think someone is taking the Sunshine Laws into the shadows myself.
As a representative it’s a duty to research the questions before you. If you happen to contact someone in the chicken business, the fowl association, Autobahn Society or Big Bird himself to satisfy your need for information that shouldn’t be illegal. Referring a chicken specialist to another councilman is tantamount to referring any professional, again hardly an infraction.
If you have legitimate complaint I’ll listen and review any evidence you produce, but what we have here is only hearsay, I don’t see the email posted or any documentation what so ever. At least when a dog recovers a bone he has something to show for it.
http://www.gulfportinflorida.com