 Welcome to the week! OK, here’s how I see it. I’m talking about the County Commission stuff. Two issues: Janet Barek’s conduct with staffers, and this board’s inability to grow up. Cutting to the chase: — The county should conduct a workplace harassment investigation against Commissioner Barek, just as it would for anyone in a supervisory position who is accused of making racially insensitive remarks to a subordinate.
— Not a big fan of the other suggestions that essentially spend staff time — taxpayer money — to ensure commissioners behave as they’re supposed to. Let’s just jump right in. By now, we’re all familiar with Barek making remarks about Black students admitted to college in the 1960s because of their race, and not ability. This came up during a briefing that County Administrator Steve Howard and his staff conduct with individual commissioners before each board meeting. I wasn’t there, so I haven’t a clue what the topic could have been that led Janet to go off on that odd tangent. But one African-American in the room, tourism director Auvis Cole, was personally offended. He informed Howard, his boss, and Howard fired off an email to Barek, copied to the human resources director, telling her the comments were offensive. And Barek, as we know, doubled down on her remarks when reporters asked her about them. Now that we’re up to speed, I have a question: Why hasn’t the county conducted the simplest of investigations to confirm the veracity of Cole’s statement? That’s what would happen under any other circumstance if Barek were a regular county employee. I don’t understand why some commissioners want to ignore the elephant in the room. This is on Commissioner Barek. No one else. The HR office should interview everyone involved that day and write up a report for commissioners to consider. Now. I mentioned last week there isn’t much the board can do to rein in a colleague. One form of “punishment” is to censure, which carries the political punch as a pillow fight. However, in this case, it would send an enormous message to employees that commissioners won’t stand for this nonsense. And that’s the exact reason why I'm wary of other ideas on Tuesday’s agenda for a broader approach intended to have the same result. One commissioner suggests an independent review that would ask senior staffers if commissioners are overstepping their authority. This idea, while well-intentioned, is fraught with peril. Here’s why:
Another commissioner wants the county attorney to develop an ordinance that specifically states commissioners may only communicate with the administrator and attorney — in other words, only the people they directly hire. Here’s an idea: Stop wasting staff time on creating self-governing rules, and start behaving like the responsible political leaders we elected them to be. This is agitating to no end. Commissioners are dealing with a ton of big-ticket issues Tuesday, and silly distractions only block them from achieving true success. So, to wrap: — The county should conduct a workplace harassment investigation against Commissioner Barek so that this incident is captured in a formal way. Then, commissioners can decide how best to approach it. — Rather than legislate their behavior, or conduct broad-stroke independent reviews that lack any cohesive action, commissioners could simply follow proper decorum. Seriously…if commissioners need an ordinance to remind them of their roles, we have a problem here. And that’s how it looks this Monday. Enjoy it, friends. Join the discussion on our Facebook page. Support the blog by subscribing to JWC Inner Circle for 99 cents/month. Individual donations are appreciated through Venmo, PayPal, or Patreon. Comments are closed.
|
AuthorMike Wright has written about Citrus County government and politics for 37 years. 
Archives
December 2025
|
