Maureen Rupe and the Fishkind Report

Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927

Paid electioneering communication paid for by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927

Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927. No candidate approved this advertisement.

Wow! Has Maureen Rupe ever stepped in it this time! Maureen Rupe's newest laugh-out-loud statement is (by the way, notice no political disclaimer on the page),

"Voting for me is voting for a practical, creative and common-sense approach to problem-solving. I firmly believe the truth and the voice of the people must always come first. We all know the economic pressures on our horizon are serious. I can bring our business and environmental strengths together, creating a renewed and prosperous future for District 1 and Brevard County. With extensive and advanced experience in county affairs and the strategic vision to turn our challenges into opportunities, I am the very best choice for Commissioner of District 1.

Maureen Rupe says on her "Follow the Money"/"Where did the Money Go?" page that Brevard County CRA's (Community Redevelopment Areas) are costing us $121.9 million:

"Table E5 of the Fishkind & Associates County Survey Data demonstrates the actual costs of Brevard County during the study period."

"From 2000 to 2005, the Brevard County Sheriff’s budget increased from $7 million to $17 million; a 142% increase."

"$49,528,361 / $52,402,468 / $60,744,560 / $67,051,187 / $73,223,226 / $78,270,975 / $84,174,715"

Maureen Rupe also continues,

"This can be attributed to new homeland security requirements after 9/11 in 2001, and an expansion of our jail facilities."

"Figure 29. Percentage Growth for Capital Facilities Expenses"

Also, Maureen Rupe fails to tell you that the Fishkind Study found,

"Brevard County experienced a 1,044% growth in Parks and Environmentally sensitive lands spending for a total dollar amount of $31.0 million." (page 37/38)

Maureen Rupe says that we have unfunded mandates to deal with as in the Department of Juvenile Justice, etc. The actual Brevard County, 1999-2000 up to 2005-2006 Fishkind Study Appendix numbers are on pages 1146-end:

Unfunded Mandates:	1999-2000	2000-2001	2001-2002	2002-2003	2003-2004	2004-2005	2005-2006
Department of Juvenile Justice Mandated:	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	$800,000	$2,590,222"
Department of Juvenile Justice Other:	$ -	$135,346	$169,815	$190,577	$195,030	$270,882	$269,480
Medicaid:	$2,963,609	$2,532,373	$2,641,704	$3,522,098	$3,627,107	$3,969,813	$3,637,414

Prior to that Maureen Rupe touted the costs of pensions, insurance, etc. So let's take a look at those:

Brevard County Miscellaneous Claims	1999-2000	2000-2001	2001-2002	2002-2003	2003-2004	2004-2005	2005-2006
Affordable Housing All:	$4,603,347	$3,098,513	$3,538,755	$4,723,508	$10,121,091	$1,999,171	$4,251,514
Affordable Housing Non-Grant:	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Pension:	$7,848,109	$7,842,334	$7,310,809	$7,142,952	$9,052,741	$9,109,437	$9,360,215
Employee Health Insurance:	$9,479,299	$10,825,066	$12,331,892	$14,425,273	$15,471,844	$16,429,311	$19,178,850
Property Insurance:	$1,059,679	$1,196,372	$1,853,712	$2,288,382	$2,402,197	$1,765,263	$2,173,974
Fuel Utility Costs:	$7,954,405	$8,982,674	$8,607,591	$9,576,546	$10,464,758	$11,741,197	$11,083,131
Economic Development:	$5 75,000	$740,000	$740,000	$740,000	$795,000	$940,000	$990,000
Parks & Environmental Land Operating:	$3,376,005	$2,948,694	$3,548,689	$4,625,757	$4,550,485	$7,510,159	$6,811,873
Parks & Environmental Lands Capital:	$2,922,440	$6,201,450	$7,966,847	$9,120,310	$10,083,899	$28,932,560	$33,437,533

and that's not counting the years since 2006!

In the whole of the main body of the Fishkind Study, Brevard County is delineated six times: four of those times in lists that are of all of the counties and their expenditures for certain things. NONE of these itemized listings are reflected in Maureeen Rupe's pages properly. The only other two mentions Brevard County received in the entire report (not in the Appendix, the report itself) are the EELs and Parks land mention above and as a resource for Figure 5: Central Florida Region’s Percentage of Counties Experiencing Statistically Significant Increases in the Stated Expense Category: below Figure 5 "Source: Brevard, Indian River, Lake, Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Volusia". Even in the Appendix, Brevard County is only mentioned sixty-four times: each time in a table or as Brevard County's own budget listings pages (twenty-seven of them, I believe).

Did Maureen Rupe lie, obfuscate, or mislead you? Let's go on.

And then there's the part,

"and the voice of the people must always come first."

She can bring "business and environmental" strength together to create a "renewed and prosperous future for D1"? Oh, yeah? Is that what she does by supporting purchasing all that EELs land over appraised value so that the businesses trying to come here will have land to build on? Someone said recently that if you take all of the land that is in "Conservation" or "Preservation" land status and add that to the acreage of lands that federal/state/county/city governmental buildings are on, that 65% of Brevard County is off limits to development. Sixty-five percent? Do you know, Maureen Rupe, where the land is for any business you bring into Brevard to build facilities on? Where are they going to put their people: the roof of a high school, on top the Merritt Square Mall, or on ropes above the VAB? Where are they going to go without land to build on? Are they going to function out of hot air balloons tethered to the ground, only touching down to go to the bathroom or go home? Where?

And don't forget, Maureen Rupe, that you will have four other County Commissioners to vote with or against, so your promises on your pages come to nothing since you cannot guarantee that any of them will come true even if your slim to nill chances of becoming D1 Commissioner do (by some miracle of miracles) come to pass. You will not have control over the other four; you cannot promise to do anything. What if they vote against you? A one (Maureen Rupe) to four vote is not a winning situation for you.

"With extensive and advanced experience in county affairs..."

With all of the above and "...the strategic vision to turn our challenges into opportunities..." Maureen Rupe states she is, "the very best choice for Commissioner of District 1." Yeah. Right. And I'm the very best choice for leading a Quark Physics Deparment at MIT (let me give you a hint: there isn't one). She has the strategic vision to try to put all that time she spent not profiting for her volunteer work to "improve the quality of life for us all" and make herself D1 Commissioner. Yes, that's right, folks, do your twenty years of hard labor and you are entitled to be Commissioner. (If you work real hard and put your back into it, you may even be able to run for State Representative, like Amy Tidd is doing.) You, too, can move from volunteer with no previous job experience and no one to answer to, right up the ladder to Commissioner! Please just consider yourself entitled to move right in when you put in enough volunteer hours. That's right: You deserve it!

By the way, did Maureen Rupe ever tell you that she was on the Charter Review Committee the year after the CAPIT amendment was put into effect? Did she ever tell you that she got to look at the amendment after our vote on it? Did she ever tell you that during those years that she was on the Charter Review Committee she never saw enough wrong with CAPIT to speak up to the public about it? Did she ever bring it to the attention of the BOCC that there was a problem with it being "unconstitutional"? Did she ever say to Florida Today, "Hey, we have a problem here."? Where was her dissatisfaction with the "unconstitutionality" of CAPIT while she served twice on the Charter Review Committee? Was she not able to say, "Stop! That's not right!"? Or did she just need the opportunity to join others and sue the County, making you pay for the defense, and taking away your vote on CAPIT and your voice that said, "We don't want our taxes to go up higher than 3% per year!"? Whatever happened, she took away your voice and your vote and she doesn't tell the truth about things and she's having a real problem with her public image. I hope this website has helped with that to some extent.

NOTE: Correction: Maureen Rupe was on the Charter Review Committee the year after CAPIT was voted into place by 85.25% of the voters, but I had said that she got to look twice at the CAPIT amendment. WRONG. The first time she looked at it, apparently the Committee found nothing wrong with it at that time. The second time she was on the Committee, (and here is where I must correct myself) Maureen Rupe was already suing the County after a three person panel found it somewhat illegal and somewhat legal. Who took it to the three person committee, I have no idea. It was the second time she was on the Charter Review Committee that Maureen Rupe answered questions about the lawsuit that then-Commissioner Pritchard was asking her. The minutes that refer to the CAPIT issue are in a .pdf file and start on page four (4) and stops on six (6) then goes to page thirteen (13) and on to page seventeen (17). Maureen Rupe argues for Constitutionality Review of the process, but the truth is, back in 1996, they had no "Constitutionality Review" setup: and that is according to Maureen Rupe's own words on her CAPIT video on her website. Her own words,

"Good morning. Yeah. Hi. Um... Can I just say that umm... In 1996 CAPIT was approved by 85% of the voters on a 19% turnout at the polls. At that time there was no provision for constitutionality review. The County had an illegal charter. As limitations on CAPIT had already been ruled unconstitutional in three counties. In 2002, six years after it had been in ...in... um, force, these County Commission chambers were filled with people from throughout the county asking for relief from cuts in services directly related to CAPIT. In particular the Sheriff needed twenty more deputies due to 9/11 and there were proposed cuts from the operating budget that were essential to our safety and quality of life. [Pause] The 18th Circu.... Judge Evander, the 18th Circuit Court, the 5th District Court of Appeals, ruled CAPIT unconstituional. Plus the Florida Supreme Court refused to hear their appeal adding the statement not to come back, they had already ruled. Now if the people want to limit the budget to a 3% cap, then the county Commission could have done that at any time, but we cannot have an illegal charter. Um... Our county has faced many things that prevent locking the county to an arbitrary budget figure. We've had 9/11, multiple hurricanes, uncontrolled growth. Um.... The County must be able to ensure the funds are available to take care of its citizens. Now this new amendment to go.... this new proposal for an amendment to go on the ballot, if passed by a constitutionality review, I will support. It has um... provisions in there for the protection of what happened with the 1996 CAPIT. And I will support that. But the thing is, even if the people voted -- 85% of the voters -- if we have an unconstitional charter, I don't know where that leaves us Commissioners, you know, as a county or a county charter. Um... If the people voted... probably let's just say... to have no speed limits in Brevard County, just because the county vo.... the people voted for that, doesn't mean you can legally enforce it. The whole of the state of Florida voters voted on the State Constitution and we cannot be in conflict with it. Thank you."

Paid electioneering communication paid for by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927

Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927

Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927. No candidate approved this advertisement.

Now available:

Coming Soon!