Angler's Lodge Three: Red Flags, Alternative Realities and Democracy In Action

Last Friday, in the bumpy wake of Thursday’s city commission meeting, we said we’d “watch the fallout and the coverage” of the Angler’s Lodge fiasco after Sissy Quinn told the commission she no longer wanted to put the Angler’s Lodge in the middle of Pine Avenue’s only remaining public green space, the Anna Maria Island Historical Society’s park. As long as the Islander and Sun fairly and accurately reported the story we were content to let Quinn’s little circus fade into its inconsequential place in this city’s history. You can refresh your recollection of the background and the facts HERE and HERE.

We won’t waste time on deconstructing Quinn’s apoplectic rant aimed at this blog, this writer, the AMIHS’s president and its director, and “a few negative people”, whoever they may be (you can read it below). What concerns us, frankly, is not so much Quinn’s sad but foreseeable spiral into irrelevancy. The real lesson here is not the “leopards don’t change their spots” inevitability of her finger pointing, blame flinging and complete denial of personal responsibility. She’ll be a footnote soon enough.

Folks, this a wake-up call, a screeching alarm, a red flag, a cold shower and a cautionary tale all rolled into one. This week’s Islander and to a lesser extent the Sun should be considered case studies of exactly why this blog serves as a necessary and vital source of information to you the reader and particularly to the citizens of the City of Anna Maria. We have been both critical and supportive of the local press but the next time you pick up one of their papers to find out “what happened” consider these items after you hit the "Please Read More" link below:

First, pay careful attention to Bonner Joy’s editorial this week. As is her habit, she refers to this “malicious” blog but can’t be bothered to substantiate her claim. No surprise there. We’ll take it as yet another indication she is having a difficult time accepting that readers are going elsewhere, as in here, in large numbers to get information; information they can confirm themselves from sources and documents provided to them. So she uses big mean words to describe us. Hey, it’s a strategy.

Second, she suggests, about a week after we did so HERE and months after the AMIHS proposed it, that City Hall’s horseshoe area is where the Angler’s Lodge should go. No argument from us, it fell on deaf Quinn ears when we tried it too. But thanks for taking the time to read and digest our material Bonner. Next time an attribution or just a mention would be appreciated and, yes, professionally proper.

Third, while Bonner’s complete discounting of the historical significance of the AMIHS park is startling (Hey Michael Miller, what do you think? And, um, Mayor Barford, perhaps a word with the Islander’s editor is in order?), her disappointment that the “parties didn’t come to the table for open discussions before blogging it all up” reveals her to be either ignorant or disdainful of the AMIHS’s public and persistent efforts to do exactly that for the last several months. Ignorant or disdainful, neither option is worthy of her title and her responsibility to her readers.

But actually, we can forgive Bonner her fun. No, really, it’s an editorial, opinion on the opinion page where opinion and advocacy belong. We may not agree with her and often do not but we understand and accept it as her domain to say the things she believes need be said, however misguided.

We cut no such slack for the news side of either local paper. And you shouldn’t either.

At least the Sun’s Laurie Krosney, to her credit, did some actual reporting since last Thursday, getting new quotes and accounts and attempting to give the story some depth. She provides some balance of perspective and point of view on the big picture and steers away from tired insinuation. Her account of the commission meeting itself, however, leaves one wondering whether she and the Islander’s Rick Catlin, seated so close to the action, exist in an alternative reality. Was Krosney at the same meeting we were at?

Catlin was definitely there. He took his usual seat up front and appeared attentive. He took notes. He sat six feet from the President and the Director of the AMIHS the entire evening and nudged past this writer as he left City Hall. He had every opportunity to talk to any of us about the night’s events. He chose not to do so. But he had several days to frame and source the story, get quotes and reactions from pertinent parties and then write and submit his report to his editor. None of us heard from him. His editor then presumably had an opportunity to do what editors do, that is, make some effort to ensure accuracy, fairness and completeness before publishing. You can read the result for yourself but let’s take a look at his version of the Sissy Quinn episode.

Catlin spends the first half of the report essentially reciting lines from the prepared text Quinn attempted to read and then hand to the clerk for filing, we assume. No fresh quotes, no insight from others in attendance, just an easy cut-and-paste job from Quinn’s written statement into his story. His report, and Krosney’s for that matter, paints a picture of a mannered, calm but pained recitation by Quinn of her supposed disappointment over the fate of the lodge.

But that’s not at all how it happened. We say Quinn “attempted” to read because both Catlin and Krosney seem to forget Quinn’s inability to maintain any semblance of the decorum and respect for the commissioners, the mayor and those watching. Quinn was barely into the second paragraph when she was loudly gaveled by Chairman John Quam for breaching the code of conduct with a personal attack on the AMIHS president. The gavel only emboldened Quinn and she simply amplified her volume and screech level as she petulantly shouted more derision, aimed this time at the AMIHS Director and this writer. Quinn was again gaveled by Quam, this time more aggressively but she barked some drivel about not using names and continued. At least one Commissioner found it necessary to shout his demand for “Point of Order” so as to be heard over Quinn, not once but twice, in an effort to halt her histrionics. Even Mayor Barford found the need to loudly and forcefully join in the chorus of elected officials telling Quinn to shut it down. Yep, that’s keepin’ it classy Sissy.

But you’d never know any of that if you read Catlin’s version or even Krosney’s. Ask John Quam if he appreciated the impertinent disrespect Quinn showed the Chairman by ignoring his admonitions. Ask Mayor Barford when was the last time she found it necessary to shout down a speaker. Alternative realities are fine at theme parks and in video games but not in newspapers. It is simply irresponsible journalism.

Early in his story Catlin says Quinn dropped her Angler’s Lodge efforts because, she claims, this blog “has spread lies and untruths about her, the Angler’s Lodge project, trust members and the aims of the trust.” She said that? Really? Here’s the actual document Quinn read from word for word (click to enlarge):

Where does she mention “lies and untruths”? She doesn’t. Catlin simply made it up. And if he didn’t make it up, why didn’t he tell us what Quinn said when he asked her to enumerate those “lies and untruths.” He can’t because he didn’t ask her. If he had, and she had given him something, anything to print, you can bet the story would have been front page center instead of buried in the woodpile next to the obituaries. In the 15 months this blog has been on-line, it has never been asked to retract a single word, not one. If that does ever happen and we are wrong, we will be the first to tell you we were wrong. But there are no “lies and untruths” and Catlin and his editor clearly know that or they’d have shown you different, blown up wall size and in full color.

Catlin then says this blog “suggested Quinn and others had an ulterior motive for moving the lodge to city property.” First, look over Part One and Part Two and decide for yourself what we said. Then look in the right hand column of this page and scroll down to the “Search This Blog” widget. Now type in “ulterior motive” and you’ll get “No Results” at the top of the page. Try just “ulterior” or “motive” alone. Same result. Again, pure fantasy. We made no such suggestions. When we found facts we related facts. When we found connections we substantiated those connections with facts. Any inferences from those facts are solely up the reader. It is no coincidence that Catlin fails to say what the ulterior motives he claims we suggested may have been.

How curious do you find it that Catlin says “Betty Yanger did not apologize for her son’s blog writings.” Huh? Where in the world did he pull that one from? Apologize for what? To whom? Catlin sat and watched Quinn make a mockery of the city commission proceedings the likes of which have rarely occurred at your City Hall and Catlin has the temerity to suggest Betty Yanger or the Historical Society owes someone an apology? It is no secret to the City Commissioners, the Mayor and the thinking public that the AMIHS went above and beyond in its efforts to do Quinn’s job by seeking and offering viable locations, consulting officials, taking measurements and even offering a significant amount of money to Quinn’s company for preservation of the lodge. Apologize?

Then there’s Catlin’s take on SueLynn and her prepared statement which Bonner saw fit to manipulate and edit into a “letter to the editor” even though it was no such thing. He does not address SueLynn’s puzzling reference to people (we assume she means us) “hiding behind a blogsite that protects them from having to face the person they are attacking.” I think we can all agree this writer has hid from no one. My name or initials are on every single post I author. I have said hello to Quinn from my bicycle while she manned a recall tent recently and I sat arm’s length from her the entire commission meeting last Thursday. Hiding? I think not. But you don’t see Catlin or Bonner challenging SueLynn on her dubious assertions.

Instead, Catlin refers to SueLynn as “a member of the trust.” What trust? Did he mean Quinn’s company which we know is not a trust? Did he mean some other trust Quinn has formed? If so, true legal trusts do not have “members”, they have “trustees” and “trustors” and “beneficiaries.” It’s easy to cut and paste from someone else’s written statement but journalism involves asking questions, substantiating answers and challenging questionable references. It’s called reporting.

For instance, Catlin quotes SueLynn as saying, reading actually, “I find it’s a sad situation Sissy Quinn can’t come before this commission because of a hateful dialogue on a blog.” Wait a minute. She came before the commission July 8th and even Catlin reported the commission wanted more detail. She came before the commission again on July 22nd and, instead of seeking cooperative solutions with the city and the AMIHS, she chose to make a mockery of her organization and its supposed goals. Then she torched yet another bridge to cinders. And did Catlin report what “hateful dialogue” SueLynn was referring to? Of course not.

But Catlin saved the best for last, certainly. In a fit of bizarre hyperbole, SueLynn, referring we can only guess to this blog, says, “This city is not able to function as a democracy because someone has set themselves up as judge and jury…” and she continues ad nauseum. Anyone who was at that commission meeting will tell you that SueLynn must have been sleeping through the first two hours because it was a wonderful high school civics lesson on a functioning democracy. Lawyers baiting commissioners, commissioners debating experts, citizens voicing opinions and frustration, motions made, seconded and carried and a court reporter and videographer taking it all down to be shown later to a real judge and jury. Shoot, PAR’s lawyer even got up and, yet again, invoked the authority of the United States Constitution, by golly, right here in little ol’ Anna Maria!

And then PAR’s site plan application of the week was voted down by the commission.

If that ain’t democracy in action, what is?

Stay informed.

All the best.
 
Bill Yanger