COMMENTARY
“Like Turner, when her Tea Party supporters are asked to propose specific spending cuts, the vehement complainers become mutes, silent in their discontent.”
MARK SCHUMANN
Faced with a challenge, our cave dweller ancestors had two choices: fight or flight. Modern humans have three options: fight, flight, or complain, as Councilwoman Pilar Turner demonstrated well during Tuesday’s special call city council meeting.
Turner not only peddles discontent as a political strategy, she herself dwells in it. At least Turner is willing to use the elixir she is peddling. It’s the mark of a good huckster.
Tuesday evening, and all through the budgeting process, Turner persistently argued that the proposed 2015/2016 budget “enlarges government.”
After haranguing her fellow council members for strengthening police protection, adding two lifeguards and two positions in finance, Turner was invited by Mayor Richard Winger to propose specific spending cuts. “I’ll leave it at that,” Turner said.
For years now, we have heard the same shallow, vague criticism of municipal government from leaders in the local Tea Party. They pontificate endlessly about the virtue so-called limited government, and about the importance of being true to the values and principles of the slave-holding Founding Fathers. Ask the Tea Party crowd to specify, though, which local government services they consider “non-essential,” and a gathering of their faithful will take on the sound of Trappist monks at mealtime – complete silence. Like Turner, when her Tea Party supporters are asked to propose specific spending cuts, the vehement complainers become mutes, silent in their discontent.
I can suggest one non-essential government service: providing health insurance for wealthy, part-time, so-called public servants like Turner. But don’t hold your breath waiting for Turner to propose eliminating that sweet little perk, and don’t expect her to make any other specific proposals for reducing government spending. The city council’s most combative member would rather dwell in complaint mode.
Given that Turner will not specify which new positions she would eliminate, it must be that she opposes all of them. One can logically conclude, then, that Turner opposes better police protection. She opposes adequately guarding public beaches. She opposes a minimal raise for city employees, the first in two years. (Since 2009, raises for city employees have averaged one percent. Over that same time, city employees have been asked to assume a larger share of the cost of their benefits. Since 2007, city staffing has been cut some 30 percent.)
If Turner were to have her way, “The City Beautiful” would become “The City Rundown and Poorly Served.”
Turner must also oppose the short-term increase in pension costs needed to convert to a defined contribution pension plan. But didn’t she push to switch from a defined benefit to a defined contribution pension plan? Finally, Turner must also be opposed to paying the four percent increase in health insurance costs, except, of course, when it comes to her own taxpayer-funded health insurance benefit.
Turner may counter that she is not opposed to at least some of the increases in spending called for in the 2015/2016 budget; but if that is so, then let her be specific, and let her explain how she would pay for those spending increases without raising taxes. Or, if the councilwoman prefers, she is certainly free to complain, complain, complain. It’s the Tea Party way.
Indian River Guardian 
I am waiting to hear from Mr Howle and Ms Moss on how they are going to reduce taxes. We know Ms turner loves to criticize the four other councilpersons,but does so without regard the the facts and truth. Until Ms Turner tells the people of Vero where and how she would lower the city budget, she should remain quiet. As I recall she did not complain when she was part of the troika. BTW did they widen her street and did she complain about the money we spent to accommodate her wishes?
Frank, early last fall, street improvements were made in Turner’s neighborhood. With limited funds for street improvement, widening the street in front of Turners home to allow more room for service vehicles was deemed a higher priority than installing more baffling boxes to filter storm water runoff before in reaches the Lagoon.
So garbage trucks are more important than clean water in Ms Turner’s world. She displays a clear double standard, one for her wishes and the other for all others. The Turner policy resembles the “let them eat cake” policy of the late great monarch of France.