Tag: Collier County

Sleaze, slime and slander in Collier County: Accusations, falsehoods split Republicans as primary looms

Supporters of Collier County Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier march this year in the Naples, Fla., July 4th parade. Blazier has been the target of disinformation from opponents. (Photo: Author)

July 28, 2024 by David Silverberg

Updated July 30 with full image of CCREC posting.

As the days count down to the August 20 primary election in Collier County, Fla., the campaigning is getting uglier, nastier and more unforgiving.

In this overwhelmingly Republican county (139,305 Republicans, 52,342 Democrats and 66,915 others as of July 27) the Republican primary will serve as the general election for a number of important races.

As a result, the outcome is more unpredictable than usual in what is normally a quiet and sleepy tropical corner of the Sunshine State—and as the stakes rise, the discourse sinks.

In particular, there is a rift between many longstanding Republicans who say they are in the majority versus Make America Great Again (MAGA) Republicans on the official Collier County Republican Executive Committee (CCREC, henceforth referred to here as the REC).

The REC is dominated by Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III, the extremely conservative grocer and farmer, and chaired by John Meo, a Naples financial manager.

The dissenting Republicans are expressing themselves through a variety of means and organizations, most notably the Collier County Citizens Values Political Action Committee (CCCVPAC, henceforth referred to here as the PAC). (For previous coverage see “Collier County, Fla., Republican PAC breaks with Alfie Oakes and Party Exec Committee; cites ‘authoritarian stance,’ slams ‘angry, inexperienced individuals.’”)

The battle has become bitter, personal and in some cases, overtly fraudulent.

False flyers and fake texts

The Collier County Supervisor of Election race is a key contest. After all, as Josef Stalin once said: “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”—so the battle is on to be the one who counts the votes.

The race pits current Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier against challengers Tim Guerrette and David Schaffel. (For a more complete discussion of the race, see: “This is what integrity looks like: Melissa Blazier for Supervisor of Elections.”)

All are Republicans. In particular, Blazier is a member of the Naples Republican Club, Republican Women of Southwest Florida Federated, and the Women’s Republican Club. Guerrette has been a Republican for over 30 years.

But that hasn’t stopped the REC, which backs Schaffel, from sending out a text messsage accusing Blazier of being a Democrat and Guerrette of being a RINO (Republican in name only).

The REC-issued text message putting false labels on Supervisor of Elections candidates it opposes. (Image: CCREC).

The false labeling story was covered by Dave Elias, political reporter for NBC2 News in Fort Myers in a July 18 report, “Collier County voters receive election text messages with false information.”

“Tens of thousands of Republican voters received confusing and fraudulent messages meant to dupe voters,” Elias reported.

In the report both Blazier and Guerrette denied being anything other than Republicans.

However, “The attacks don’t stop there,” Elias pointed out. “Another flier went out to voters, making it appear that the Republican Party endorsed Guerrette instead of Schaffel.”

When the PAC sent out its list of endorsements on June 27 and denounced REC-endorsed candidates as unqualified for the positions they were seeking, REC Chair John Meo sent out his own text message to Republicans on July 17.

John Meo (Photo: CCREC)

In it he denounced the PAC and another conservative political action committee, Collier First PAC, which endorsed Guerrette in the Supervisor of Elections race. He also alleged that the dissident PACs were violating the law by making endorsements without REC approval.

“While these clear violations are under investigation by law enforcement and the Republican Party of Florida, I feel it is imperative to remind you that you should ONLY trust messages coming directly from the Collier County Republican Party,” he wrote.

“Unfortunately, these Never-Trump dark money groups are pushing candidates who have NOT been endorsed by the Republican Party,” he stated.

This message prompted a blistering response from Diane Van Parys, a Naples resident, president of Republican Women of Southwest Florida Federated and the immediate past president of the Florida Federation of Republican Women.

“Last time I checked, John, neither you nor the CCREC control who Republican’s vote for,” she wrote in an e-mail that was copied to 300 other local Republicans.  “In the United States the ballot and the Democratic process of elections takes place.  A primary is the process of vetting all the Republican Candidates and many of us are able to make a decision on who we choose as the best candidate(s) and vote accordingly without the CCREC’s assistance. 

“The fact that you libeled yourself by labeling a Collier County Constitutional Officer /Supervisor of Elections a Democrat is reason enough to request you to resign your position as Chairman of the CCREC.  You have proven once again that your lack of knowledge and blatant lies should not be tolerated by the CCREC any longer.  Labeling another candidate a RINO who is a 30 year registered Republican is disgraceful.”

She made a particular point of contesting Meo’s point that the independent PACs had somehow broken the law.

“Chairman Meo, the fact that you are threatening fellow Republicans –‘We trust that law enforcement will bring the perpetrators to light and expose the frauds that have been posing as our party.’Exactly who do you think you are?  You must be a liar, prove me wrong and produce the evidence of your filings on behalf of the CCREC with Law Enforcement.”

Parys also questioned the funding for the REC messages and the fact they were sent out during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, when many of the county’s top Republicans were away from Florida.

She pointed out that in neighboring Lee County, in contrast to Collier, the party executive committee was careful not to endorse candidates in contested intra-party primary elections, although other organizations were free to do so.

Meo’s allegation that “dark money” was being employed and that possible crimes were committed also opened up a whole other area for new allegations and investigation by law enforcement. Van Parys questioned the legality of REC’s spending money to promote its endorsed candidates against other Republicans legitimately seeking Party members’ approval. She also noted that while the REC was threatening the independent PACs it said nothing about Oakes’ Citizens Awake Now (CAN) PAC, which is backing the REC-endorsed candidates.

As of this writing there is less than a month to go until the primary. When it comes to the Collier County Republican Party, activities to watch are whether there will be new potential falsehoods, fraudulent propaganda, accusations, and whether law enforcement investigates possible illegal activity.

The sin of Pride?

The political bitterness has also infected the increasingly heated race for two seats on the Collier County School Board.

In this non-partisan race, incumbents Stephanie Lucarelli (District 2) and Erick Carter (District 4) are being challenged by Pamela Shanouda Cunningham and Tom Henning, both of whom have been endorsed by the REC.

Stephanie Lucarelli. (Photo: CCPS)

Cunningham, 49, who is running against Lucarelli, 50, in District 2, is advocating traditional educational principles. “I am committed to moving CCPS [Collier County Public Schools] away from its progressive educational framework and implementing a traditional educational model,” she states on her campaign website.

An earlier version of the website stated that she was an “unapologetic conservative” and claimed that Collier County children’s futures are “being sold out to big government bureaucrats who want to indoctrinate, not educate; career politicians who want to teach them what to think, not how to think.” She wanted to put “parents in classrooms, not the liberal elite” and “restore greatness to the American classroom.”

Pamela Cunningham. (Photo: Author)

In a recent campaign newsletter Cunningham targeted two Collier County parents who had received awards for their volunteer work from Naples Pride, a volunteer-based grassroots nonprofit organization supporting the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and questioning community.

Megan Titcomb and Amy Perwein had posted a photo of themselves holding awards to their Facebook page.

In a recent campaign newsletter Cunningham targeted two Collier County parents who had received awards for their volunteer work from Naples Pride, a volunteer-based grassroots nonprofit organization supporting the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and questioning community. Megan Titcomb and Amy Perwein had posted a photo of themselves holding awards to their Facebook page.

Megan Titcomb and Amy Perwein display their Naples Pride awards in the photo used by Pam Cunningham. (Image: WINK News)

Cunningham used the photo in her campaign newsletter, stating “my opponent and her supporters on the radical left are fighting to fundamentally transform our schools into centers of progressive indoctrination, meanwhile allowing true education to wither.”

Both women were outraged and alarmed by the newsletter and reached out to local media.

“Naples Pride has no affiliation with Collier County public schools,” Titcomb told Naples Daily News reporter Ellessandra Taormino. “The event where the picture was taken was not a school event, and it most certainty had nothing to do with Pam’s opponent, Stephanie Lucarelli.”

“I do not post often on social media and rarely publicly, but I could not remain silent,” Perwien said. “I spoke out because I do not want any other parents to be put in this situation; I sincerely hope that Cunningham reconsiders her campaign tactics.”

Cunningham belatedly responded to the parents in an interview with WINK TV’s Jillian Haggerty.

Of the two women, she said: “One of them was at the Naples Pride Fest this year on stage making a speech specifically naming me and my platform and asking the people at the Pride Fest to get out to vote for School Board.”

She said the two weren’t just ordinary parents but were “left-wing activists and are active volunteers for my opponent’s campaign.” Cunningham said she was sent the photos by another party, whom she did not name.

Titcomb and Perwein told WINK TV that they had filed an incident report with the Collier County Sheriff’s Department.

Cunningham’s action sparked a furious backlash in the community as reflected in letters to the editor in the Naples Daily News.

“In political contests these days, many of us believe in the phrase, ‘When they go low, we go high,”’ wrote one county resident, Lisa Freund, in a letter. “Well, in this year’s school board election, incumbent Stephanie Lucarelli’s opponent Pam Cunningham has gone lower than low in attacking two friends of mine who are parents and community advocates for equality and education, all in the service of advancing her candidacy. Attacking parents who work with and for the children of CCPS is no way to run an election campaign.”

Analysis: Don’t trust and be sure to verify

As the campaigning clock ticks down to primary Election Day, it seems clear that MAGA REC Republicans are on the defensive and increasingly relying on outright falsehoods, innuendo, intimidation and insults to achieve their ends since a significant, perhaps majority, of county Republicans are rejecting them.

This was put very clearly by PAC Republicans when they issued their own endorsements on June 27 and stated: “While Collier County enjoys competent local governance, replacing experienced officials with angry, inexperienced individuals to address national issues could undermine our community’s standards.” They also rejected the REC’s “authoritarian stance”—i.e., its insistence that Republicans vote only for REC-backed candidates.

This is not the first pushback against REC dictates. In May 2023 School Board Chair Kelly Mason (formerly Lichter), whose election had been supported by Oakes and his CAN PAC, voted to install Leslie Ricciardelli as school superintendent despite Oakes’ opposition. He called her a “traitor” for her vote and sued the school board. This year, the Collier First PAC, whose registered agent is Lauren Maxwell, wife of Commissioner Kowal who was elected with Oakes’ endorsement and support, is supporting Guerrette for Supervisor despite the Oakes endorsement of Schaffel.

The REC is clearly basing its endorsements on loyalty to MAGA ideology rather than proven competence, experience or education. As Oakes put it on the Alfiespatriots.com website and in campaign flyers: “These are the only true patriots I trust to protect Collier County and get America back on track.”

Oakes’ pursuit of ideological loyalty overrides all other considerations and he most directly stated this at his Patriot Fest on March 19, 2022 when he told the assembled crowd: “I don’t want to hear about what IQ someone has or what level of education someone has,” when it came to candidate qualifications. “Common sense and some back is all we need right now.”

In the 2022 election cycle, ideologically loyal candidates were elected: Chris Hall on the Collier County Board of Commissioners in District 2, Dan Kowal in District 4 and Kelly Mason, Jerry Rutherford and Tim Moshier on the School Board.

The result has been a flurry of ideologically-driven legislation from the Board of Commissioners, introduction of religion into the deliberations of the School Board and a variety of outlandish and bizarre notions like introducing corporal punishment in the schools.

Now the REC is trying to further install inexperienced, ideologically-driven candidates in positions that could deeply disrupt the effective functioning of Collier County government, elections and schools.

The use of false allegations, innuendo, intimidation and insults appears to be a reflection of a growing desperation by the MAGA-dominated REC. It’s very unsophisticated campaigning that seems impulsive, emotional and even childish.

It also imitates tactics debuted by Republican nominee Donald Trump in the past.

However, while these were novel tactics when Trump used them in his 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns, this year traditional conservative Collier County Republicans appear to be rejecting them at the local level. This rejection may also reflect simple weariness with the constant barrage of lies, paranoia and authoritarianism that has come to characterize MAGAism.

Ultimately, primary voters will have to exercise rigorous skepticism, discernment and alertness in trying to determine the truth of the candidates, their statements, policies and endorsements. And of course, the real test of the contest between truth and falsehood, and the strength of MAGAs versus traditional Republicans, will be rendered at the ballot box on Aug. 20.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

(Illustration: Anthony Russo)

Project 2025 would end federal flood insurance, devastate Southwest Florida and coastal communities

Florida National Guardsmen evacuate flood victims in Arcadia, Fla., in the wake of Hurricane Ian on Oct. 3, 2022. (Photo: US Army/Spc. Samuel Herman)

July 7, 2024 by David Silverberg

Project 2025, a blueprint for post-election decisionmaking in a second Donald Trump administration, is recommending termination of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

All of Southwest Florida and its residents rely extensively on NFIP for affordable insurance in the face of events like hurricanes, storm surge and flooding.

“The NFIP should be wound down and replaced with private insurance starting with the least risky areas currently identified by the program,” states Project 2025.

It’s a radical proposal that could have a devastating fiscal impact on Southwest Floridians.

A quick primer on Project 2025

Project 2025 is a sweeping, 887-page tome of recommendations for presidential and legislative changes to be made under a conservative president, in this case, upon the election of Donald Trump.

The Project is actually a continuation of an effort by the conservative, Washington, DC-based Heritage Foundation think-tank that began in 1981. Then, the Foundation published a book called Mandate for Leadership with conservative policy recommendations. These were largely adopted by President Ronald Reagan, who handed out the book at his first Cabinet meeting.

Since then, a Mandate has been published every four years.

Project 2025 is a continuation of the Mandate series, only broader, more comprehensive, more radical and entirely Trumpist. It has also expanded beyond just the book and policy recommendations to include recruitment of personnel, training for those people and a 180-day Playbook for immediate implementation should there be a change of administrations.

Because of the radical nature of its current recommendations and Trump’s avowed pursuit of retaliation, revenge and retribution, Project 2025 is getting much more attention than previous Mandates.

It is sweeping in that it includes a complete reorganization of the federal branch, installment of ideological loyalists in place of non-political civil servants and reorientation of government toward unchecked presidential rule.

A quick primer on the National Flood Insurance Program

In 1968 Congress passed the National Flood Insurance Act, spurred by losses in Florida and Louisiana caused by Hurricane Betsy and its storm surge. The bill was signed by President Lyndon Johnson and led to establishment of the NFIP to protect Americans from the financial hardships of flooding.

The program, which is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), takes three forms.

One is mapping flooding risk along rivers and coasts. By 2018, the fiftieth year of the program, NFIP had mapped all of the nation’s populated areas, or 1.1 million miles. Among other things, these maps help mortgage lenders determine flood insurance requirements.

A second goal is to mitigate risk by supporting local flood prevention and management measures. The program’s managers estimated this saves the country over $1.6 billion each year in flood losses.

The third pillar—and the one closest to everyday property owners in Southwest Florida and across the country—protects insurance policyholders from financial flood losses. In 2018, 5 million people held NFIP policies in 22,000 communities across the country.

Under NFIP, homeowners who meet its requirements can get flood insurance for most buildings and dwellings of all sorts, including condominiums, mobile homes on foundations, rental units and more. Policyholders are charged lower than market rates to make it affordable. Many commercial insurers don’t offer flood insurance and NFIP is the only option.

While homeowners are not required to purchase the insurance, some federally-backed mortgages require it if the building is in a Special Flood Hazard Area—places especially prone to flooding.

Given Florida’s susceptibility to storms, its flat terrain and its extensive coastline along the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean, NFIP is crucial to protecting Floridians and making life affordable.

In Southwest Florida, the City of Naples and Everglades City joined NFIP in 1970. Charlotte County joined in 1971. Collier County followed in 1979. Lee County joined in 1984 when it did its first flood insurance study and created maps to establish flood zones and determine elevations. Today, there are 51,103 NFIP policyholders in Lee County (statistics are unavailable for Collier and Charlotte counties).

Participation in the program “is crucial for coastal communities such as Lee County because most standard homeowner’s insurance policies do not cover flood damage, and without access to NFIP coverage, property owners would have to bear the full financial burden of flood-related losses or pay higher premiums from private insurers,” states the Lee County website.

Project 2025 versus NFIP

Project 2025 has no use for NFIP.

In its chapter on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), it deals with FEMA and dismisses NFIP in a single paragraph on page 153:

“FEMA is also responsible for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), nearly all of which is issued by the federal government. Washington provides insurance at prices lower than the actuarially fair rate, thereby subsidizing flood insurance. Then, when flood costs exceed NFIP’s revenue, FEMA seeks taxpayer-funded bailouts. Current NFIP debt is $20.5 billion, and in 2017, Congress canceled $16 billion in debt when FEMA reached its borrowing authority limit. These subsidies and bailouts only encourage more development in flood zones, increasing the potential losses to both NFIP and the taxpayer. The NFIP should be wound down and replaced with private insurance starting with the least risky areas currently identified by the program.”

Project 2025 has numerous authors and, as Edwin Feulner, founder of the Heritage Foundation, is proud to point out in an afterword, it draws on the expertise of 360 experts and 50 organizations. The recommendation to terminate NFIP is under the byline of Ken Cuccinelli.

Cuccinelli has long been known as an ideological extremist. He ran for governor of Virginia in 2013, losing to Democrat Terry McAuliffe. He had a tempestuous tenure as Virginia’s attorney general from 2010 to 2014 where he denied climate change and fought research into it, even launching an investigation of a climate scientist whom he accused of fraud for his scientific conclusions. In this case, Cuccinelli was rebuffed by the Virginia Supreme Court.

He’s an anti-immigration hardliner who has advocated repeal of birthright citizenship. Under Trump he was appointed acting director of the US Citizenship and Immigration Services directorate of DHS. However, his appointment was disputed and resulted in suspension of all his directives. At the same time he was appointed acting deputy secretary of DHS but this too was determined to be improper by the Government Accountability Office. He was the subject of whistleblower complaints for his decisions regarding handling DHS intelligence.

After Trump’s departure from office, Cuccinelli joined the Heritage Foundation as a visiting fellow and last year in Florida he launched the Never Back Down Political Action Committee on behalf of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ presidential bid.

Analysis: A fiscal fiasco

Termination of NFIP would be as fiscally catastrophic for Southwest Florida as the worst, most destructive hurricane—in fact, much worse. It’s not enough that Florida is facing an insurance crisis anyway—this would dump yet another cascade of woe and expense on homeowners.

It would immediately impoverish existing homeowners who wouldn’t be able to afford commercial flood insurance—if companies even offered it. More than likely, most would have to leave the state for less expensive areas.

It would create two classes of Floridians: the uninsured and the ultra-rich. The uninsured would be wiped out every time there was a storm or flooding event because they would have no backstop or support. The ultra-rich, already paying high premiums for property insurance, would be the only ones able to afford what would be staggering flood premiums at commercial rates. Not even the merely wealthy would be able to keep up.

Flood insurance for Southwest Florida’s most flood-prone areas, its barrier islands like Gasparilla, Pine, Captiva and Sanibel, would be astronomical. Rates for property on larger islands like Estero and Marco would hardly be better.

This would come amidst the ravages of climate change, which is incontrovertibly causing more frequent and intense storms, greater storm surge, sea level rise, tidal inundation and more frequent flooding—and nowhere is this truer than in Florida, which is perhaps the most climatically vulnerable state in the union.

Lee County is already in a crisis because it failed to meet FEMA requirements for permitted rebuilding after Hurricane Ian and faced the loss of its discount under the Community Rating System. That’s a FEMA program providing discounts on flood insurance premiums to communities that exceed NFIP minimum requirements.

Without the discount, affected homeowners are looking at hikes of $300 to $500 in their insurance bills. Potential loss of the discount has caused distress, fear and anger among Lee County property owners and officials.

NOW IMAGINE THE COST IF THERE IS NO FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE AT ALL! THAT’S WHAT PROJECT 2025 IS PROPOSING.

This disaster wouldn’t just affect Southwest Florida: the end of NFIP would hit every community on every body of water that could flood: oceans, lakes, rivers, streams, even canals. Even places inland and as landlocked as South Dakota, Nebraska, Arizona and New Mexico would be affected.

In 2018 FEMA estimated that 13 million Americans lived in flood zones. However, that same year a study, “Estimates of present and future flood risk in the conterminous United States,” by seven scientists called the FEMA estimates too low. They put the number at 41 million. That has probably risen in the years since and is expected to rise even further in the years ahead.

The scientists also noted that “…It is evident that the absolute value of assets on the Floridian floodplain is also particularly high at $714 billion: Florida is thus a hotspot of flood exposure.”

Imagine over 40 million Americans stripped of access to affordable, government-backed flood insurance as Project 2025 envisions.

Project 2025 is scornful of NFIP’s “subsidies and bailouts” that “only encourage more development in flood zones, increasing the potential losses to both NFIP and the taxpayer.”

However, there’s another way of looking at this: NFIP policyholders are getting the benefit of the tax dollars that they paid to the US Treasury.

It always needs to be remembered that taxes aren’t a one-way street. The taxpayer puts money into the national treasury—but the taxpayer also gets benefits from the taxes he or she paid and those benefits take many different forms.

In this case, taxpayers living in flood zones get the benefit of their tax dollars in the form of subsidized federal flood insurance at lower than commercial rates. It isn’t a handout or a bailout; it’s a purchase made through taxes.

As for encouraging building in flood zones, as Lee County residents have discovered, FEMA is very strict and alert to building and construction in flood plains and communities participating in NFIP have to rigorously adhere to FEMA standards.

Rather than encouraging unregulated building, NFIP provides an incentive for communities and individuals to prepare for climate change, build resilience, strengthen homes and adhere to firm standards.

Commentary: The consequences of Project 2025

In the past, presidents and political parties didn’t rely out outside entities like Project 2025 for these kinds of sweeping proposals. Instead, they laid out their ideas for the entire electorate to see in the party platforms that they adopted through consensus and party input at their national political conventions.

In 2020 the Republican Party surrendered its political platform to Donald Trump, not bothering to adopt a set of proposals from Party members as it had in the past. Instead it stated that “the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda.” It adjourned without adopting a new platform “until the 2024 Republican National Convention.”

In the absence of a Party platform, there is Project 2025 to provide the world with a roadmap of Republican intentions.

As alarm has spread over the Project’s recommendations, Trump has disavowed any knowledge or awareness of it.

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” he posted on his Truth Social platform on July 5. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

However, as Edwin Feulner noted in his afterword to Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation Mandates have had Trump’s attention since 2016. That one “earned significant attention from the Trump Administration, as Heritage had accumulated a backlog of conservative ideas that had been blocked by President Barack Obama and his team.”

Feulner continued: “Soon after President Donald Trump was sworn in, his Administration began to implement major parts of the 2016 Mandate. After his first year in office, the Administration had implemented 64 percent of its policy recommendations.”

Since it’s safe to say that Trump lies with every breath he takes, his protestations of ignorance of Project 2025 and its origins ring hollow. Furthermore, since his word is worthless, so is any pledge he makes not to implement Project 2025.

Even if Trump has not or will not read all 887 pages (hard to imagine him reading anything longer than an X posting!), his cultists will be looking to Project 2025 for guidance if he’s elected. In keeping with the Heritage plan, they’ll seek to implement its proposals in the first 180 days of his administration, many through executive action.

This article looks at just one small slice of Project 2025 that directly affects Southwest Florida. But if implemented as a whole, Project 2025 will be a disaster for all of America. Coupled with the total presidential immunity just granted by the Supreme Court, it will result in a radical reordering of the United States and American society. It’s a roadmap aimed at enabling a total dictatorship of unchecked power enforced by advanced technologies. Or as Winston Churchill put it when speaking of the Nazis, “all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”

The world knows America is at an inflection point. The battle is on between democracy and dictatorship. Project 2025 makes clear what’s at stake—for every Southwest Floridian and every American citizen.

This is the first in an occasional series of articles examining the implications of Project 2025 for Southwest Florida and the nation.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

Collier County, Fla., Republican PAC breaks with Alfie Oakes and Party Exec Committee; cites ‘authoritarian stance,’ slams ‘angry, inexperienced individuals’

Alfie Oakes at his re-election announcement on April 4 at his restaurant, Food & Thought 2.

June 30, 2024 by David Silverberg

Two powerful groups within the Collier County Republican Party have taken opposing stands on the future of the local Party, endorsing very different slates of candidates for local positions in the Aug. 20 primary election.

In a break with past practice, the Collier County Citizens Values Political Action Committee (CCCVPAC, referred to here as the PAC) has chosen to make endorsements rather than rate candidates as it has in the past.

Many of these endorsements are at odds with those of the Collier County Republican Executive Committee (CCREC, referred here as REC), the official county body of the Republican Party of Florida.

The REC is dominated by Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III, a local grocer, farmer and extreme political activist and Donald Trump supporter.

“The local Republican Executive Committee (CCREC) has adopted a more authoritarian stance, aiming to oust many current elected officials, revoke charters of established Republican clubs, and implement divisive tactics against those with differing opinions,” wrote Mike Lyster, the PAC’s endorsement chairman, in a mass e-mail sent out Thursday, June 27 and again today. “This approach has driven away many long-standing members and could deter potential candidates, ultimately weakening our conservative representation.”

Mike Lyster (Photo: CCCVPAC)

The PAC “consists of dedicated, long-standing Republicans, including three former Republican Party chairmen and representatives from the five Collier County Republican Clubs active last year,” according to Lyster.

In response to what it perceived as the authoritarianism and lack of qualifications of the REC candidates, the PAC made its own endorsements to offer “conservative voters an alternative perspective that may differ from the CCREC. It’s important to note that the CCREC represents only a small fraction of Collier County Republicans.”

He continued: “While Collier County enjoys competent local governance, replacing experienced officials with angry, inexperienced individuals to address national issues could undermine our community’s standards.”

Chief differences between the PAC and the Executive Committee include the PAC’s endorsement of Melissa Blazier for county Supervisor of Elections over the REC’s endorsement of David Schaffel.

On the county School Board, the PAC endorsed Stephanie Lucarelli for District 2 and Erick Carter for District 4 in contrast to the REC’s endorsement of Pamela Cunningham and Tom Henning.

The PAC endorsed Vickie Downs for county Property Appraiser while the REC endorsed Jim Molenaar.

The PAC is also endorsing Douglas Rankin for state Committeeman. “We see Doug as the best opportunity to bring reason to the local party and lessen the deep divisions and rancor that currently exists locally, and also at the state and federal levels,” Lyster wrote.

Rankin served in the office from 2008 to 2020 when he was ousted by Oakes for being insufficiently pro-Trump. Oakes had intended to run for re-election to be state committeeman this year but was disqualified when he failed to file his candidate qualification forms on time.

During Oakes’ service he was criticized for missing numerous meetings. In contrast, Lyster pointedly noted that Rankin “never missed a meeting during his years of service.”

The PAC is endorsing Burt Saunders for county commission in District 3. “He stands head and shoulders above his Republican opponents,” wrote Lyster. The REC has not posted an endorsement for that seat.

It did, however, endorse Rick LoCastro for commissioner in District 1. Both groups endorsed William McDaniel for county commissioner in District 5.

The PAC also endorsed JoAnn DeBartolo for state committeewoman and Kristina Heuser for state committeewoman. Clarification from earlier reporting: Kristina Heuser was personally endorsed by Alfie Oakes, not the Collier County Republican Executive Committee.

In addition to these endorsements, the PAC endorsed:

  • Yvette Benarroch for representative, Florida House District 81;
  • Erik Leontiev for 20th Judicial Circuit Court Group 6;
  • Elizabeth Krier for 20th Judicial Circuit Court Group 28.

To receive a PAC endorsement, candidates had to receive a 60 percent vote of its members.

Efforts to reach Oakes for comment had not received a response at publication time.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

This is what integrity looks like: Melissa Blazier for Supervisor of Elections

Melissa Blazier, Collier County Supervisor of Elections, holding the election laws of Florida. (Photo: Author)

June 27, 2024 by David Silverberg

When I moved full-time to Collier County, Florida 11 years ago, I had very low political expectations.

After all, it was the deepest South, so I figured it was probably run by a bunch of good ol’ boys who arranged things for their own convenience. I expected elections to be rigged as a matter of course, just part of the culture.

But all that was before I met Jennifer Edwards, Collier County’s Supervisor of Elections. Over time I realized that this lively, energetic, outgoing woman really believed in the integrity of the election process, it wasn’t just a slogan for her. Her care and commitment infused the work of her office and staff. The statistics they produced were reliable and when elections rolled around the results could be trusted—even if I didn’t like the outcomes.

Now her legacy of electoral reliability and trustworthiness is under attack as is her deputy and protégé, Melissa Blazier, the current Supervisor of Elections.

Blazier is running this year to keep her position for another four years.

Whether Blazier can win another term in office will determine whether or not Collier County continues to have elections that are honest, accurate and lawful.

The path to perdition

Collier County is not unique in finding itself in the position of a contested election for a long-obscure and relatively overlooked county office that is suddenly in the spotlight.

In this it was carried along on currents that swept the entire nation.

In 2020 when he lost the presidency, Donald Trump alleged massive vote rigging and fraud. He began a chaotic campaign to discredit all voting results and the entire election system throughout the country. When all his court challenges failed he incited a violent insurrection to overturn the election itself.

In 2020 Collier County went 61 percent for Trump and everyone agreed the state had gone resoundingly Republican. No one challenged those results statewide or in the county—except for one individual, Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III, the extreme pro-Trump farmer and grocer.

Well after the election was decided and the results accepted by all parties, in September 2021 Oakes called for a recount based on a simple suspicion of machine-counted ballots that was then sweeping extreme election-denying circles. He offered $100,000 to Gov. Ron DeSantis’ campaign if the governor would sit down for two hours to hear Oakes’ argument that the 2020 election was fraudulent. DeSantis never took him up on the meeting.

Two years later the 2022 election results went unchallenged in Collier County but Oakes was still convinced that elections were amiss. In February 2023 he told The Paradise Progressive he would be challenging Edwards as Supervisor of Elections when her term was up in 2024.

Oakes believed the Supervisor’s office was corrupt even if Edwards herself was honest, and he wanted to do away with machine counts of ballots, which he didn’t trust but which are mandated by law.

Edwards announced her retirement in April 2023 and her place was taken by her deputy of 17 years, Melissa Blazier, who was duly appointed Election Supervisor by DeSantis.

Blazier, 46, is now up for election in her own right.

Election integrity and assaults on it

Americans have a clear and unambiguous example of attempted interference, fraud and manipulation of the electoral process.

On Jan. 2, 2020 then-President Donald Trump called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. He alleged all sorts of fraud and criminality in the results that awarded the state to Joe Biden. After a lengthy, rambling tirade, he got to the real point of his phone call.

“All I want to do is this,” he said. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”

Over and over Raffensperger and the other Georgian officials in the room told Trump they had found no fraud, had recounted the ballots, certified the results and his wild accusations were false and delusional. They stuck to their data. They weren’t going to agree with any of his allegations or change the count. They also released a recording of the phone call (which even to this day provides for some shocking reading and listening).

In other words, honest election officials don’t find votes, they count them.

Today Trump is being prosecuted in Georgia for 13 charges of violating the state’s racketeering act, soliciting a public officer to violate his or her oath, conspiring to impersonate a public officer, conspiring to commit forgery in the first degree and conspiring to file false documents.

But the incident also provided a vivid example of how election interference really works; it’s not the grand conspiracy or the sweeping plot; it’s the phone call, the appeal, the threat, the request, even an outright bribe to change the results of an election.

In Collier County this year’s race for Supervisor of Elections revolves around the question of “election integrity.”

Given the example of Trump and the Georgians the question at the heart of the county race for Supervisor of Elections is this: If a rich, powerful, well-connected candidate calls the Supervisor of Elections and asks to bend the rules, will the Supervisor have the strength, the honesty and the integrity to say no?

Maybe the caller will want to find just enough votes to tip an election. Maybe the demand will be that the Supervisor bend the rules. Maybe the call will be a request to delay a certification.

The people running against Blazier are arguing that there’s something wrong with the Election Supervisor’s office and that she and the current election process somehow lack integrity.

But other than a sense of malaise and suspicion, they’re not specific about any problems.

Tim Guerrette

Timothy Guerrette (pronounced with a soft “g”), 57, a retired sheriff’s deputy with no prior election management experience calls himself “a proud patriot” for whom “God, family, and country come first!” He says that he will bring the county “safe, secure and ethical” elections. He argues that “no barriers should exist between the community and the Supervisor of Elections” and “Elections should never be held in the dark!” Under his leadership, he says, “the voting process in Collier County will ALWAYS be transparent to deter any concern of fraud and promote confidence.”  

Of the candidates, to date Guerrette has raised the most money: $110,558 in direct contributions, and $26,374 in “in kind” contributions and has spent $80,399, according to his financial reports. He’s been actively campaigning, particularly among the law enforcement officers and first responders, where he’s best known and most familiar.

But is he being as honest and transparent as he insists he will make Collier County elections?

On his campaign Facebook page Guerrette is claiming support from various municipalities throughout the county. It’s a tactic that works for unsuspecting readers but it got some pushback from at least one person with personal knowledge of it.

When Guerrette claimed that “Everglades City stands with Tim Guerrette,” Michael McComas, a city councilmember elected in 2022 snapped back: “Who gave you the authority to speak for our City? You constantly claim that you were here for our last election which you know is untrue. How do I know this[?] I am a member of the City Council who was elected to office in that election and you were nowhere in sight during that process.”

Or consider this: the sudden presence of what is known as a “ghost” candidate.

When the candidate qualifying period ended on June 14, there was suddenly an independent write-in candidate in the Elections Supervisor race: Edward Gubala, a former firefighting captain and close ally of Guerrette.

Gubala had not previously campaigned for the office, spent any money or displayed an interest in filling the position. His whole reason for qualifying was to close the primary election to non-Republicans to benefit Guerrette.

Under Florida law, once a candidate from another party enters a primary that primary becomes closed to all but registered voters of that party. So in a stroke, Guerrette disenfranchised 119,115 independent and Democratic Collier County voters, 46 percent of the total, from voting in an election that affected them all—and this from a man who claims he wants to bring “ethical” and “transparent” elections that are never “held in the dark!”

Nor was there any doubt that Gubala was ghosting for Guerrette. He has no website or campaign material. He refused to make himself available for media interviews. He even proudly posed in Guerrette regalia at a Guerrette campaign booth.

Edward Gubala in Tim Guerrette campaign regalia.

As a campaign move, ghosting is legal under current procedures—but it’s also deceptive, restrictive and unfair. Moreover, this one is blatantly obvious. Guerrette and Gubala didn’t even bother to cover their tracks.

Given these factors, voters have to wonder: if Guerrette became Supervisor of Elections and a rich, powerful, well-connected person called him and said, “Tim, we just need to find another 50 votes to make this election come out our way,” how would Guerrette respond?

But it wouldn’t even have to be someone rich, powerful and well connected. Remember that the Supervisor of Elections oversees elections for fire districts, law enforcement and tax-related matters.

What if a fire captain, old friend and campaign donor called Guerrette and said, “Tim, we just need to find another 100 votes to up this millage rate so we can get some cash into this fire district. I know the voters don’t want their taxes to rise, but do you think you could help us out?”

That’s the kind of temptation and blandishment a Supervisor of Elections faces—and make no mistake, conversations like that do take place.

Dave Schaffel

David Schaffel, 63, is a former information technology technician, entrepreneur and consultant, who has lived in Southwest Florida for the past five years. He has no prior experience, either professional or volunteer, in election management or administration.

Schaffel is running on the same malaise and suspicion platform as Guerrette.

“Was our presidential election stolen?” states the opening line in his campaign video while dark and menacing music plays in the background. “American voters deserve to know the truth. The machines: can they be trusted? Mail-in ballots: were they all really legitimate? Joe Biden: did he deserve to be President? All across the country, moms, dads, grandmas, grandpas and patriots like you are wondering: will we never have a free and fair election again?”

Schaffel calls himself “a rock-solid conservative and America First patriot.” To date he’s raised $43,027 in direct contributions, $1,004 in “in-kind” contributions and spent $31,369, according to his financial reports.

Schaffel is backed by Alfie Oakes.

Schaffel promises to “rigorously monitor the accuracy of voter rolls and introduce new proven technological advances to identify fraud” and claims “my Information Technology career gives me unique skills to mitigate risk, provide real transparency, and restore voter confidence.” It’s unclear exactly what new technologies and skills he would apply to a process that is rigorously regulated by law. His questioning echoes past Trumpist mistrust of machine counts and mail-in voting.

While Schaffel focuses his attention on broad suspicions of procedures based on the 2020 national election results, it’s hard not to imagine election integrity challenges that are closer to home.

For example, how would Schaffel react if he was Election Supervisor and a locally prominent, well-connected businessman who had funded Schaffel’s campaign and promoted his candidacy called and asked: “Dave, I filed my candidacy papers a little after the deadline and some of the spots were left blank. Do you think you could cut me some slack and maybe fill in the blanks and backdate it to before the deadline? No one needs to know. Thanks.”

Or if a prominent state politician called and asked, “Dave, I could use a little help in Collier County. All I need to do is find 200 votes and we’re in the clear. There’s a lot at stake. Can you go in there and do that? I’ll make it worth your while.”

Or, perhaps most insidious of all, if someone called and said: “Dave, we need to get another rock-solid, America First patriot on the Republican Executive Committee and all we need are 27 more votes to do it. I’m sure they’re in your database if you look.”

The voters of Collier County would always be left to wonder: will we never have a free and fair election again?

Commentary: Why I support Melissa Blazier

Interestingly, despite all their suspicions and distrust of the current officeholder, when they were at the podium of the Collier County Board of Commissioners on April 23 to discuss an election resolution (which failed), and could have leveled accusations, both Guerrette and Schaffel actually praised Blazier’s oversight of the office.

Guerrette lauded Collier County and its current election staff for their dedication to “secure, ethical elections in Collier County.”

While Schaffel argued for less use of election technology, he admitted, “Yes, I think the way elections are run in Collier County, they’re run smoothly” and the staff “are doing their jobs in that office. They do a great job of running the election according to statute. And I want to make it absolutely clear that that is the case.”

So what’s the problem?

In light of the current campaigns and candidates it’s clear that Blazier is the best choice for Collier County.

It’s not just that she just successfully managed an election decided by a mere 22 votes for the City of Naples without any flaw or blemish, nor that she has over 18 years of experience in the field of election management, nor that she has more than ample certifications and testaments to her expertise, nor that she knows Florida election law thoroughly and completely, nor that she was taught by Jennifer Edwards, the best in the business.

The most compelling reason why Blazier should remain Collier County Supervisor of Elections is that she has actually demonstrated election integrity on the front lines when it counts.

The others talk the talk but she actually walks the walk.

She qualified Edward Gubala despite the fact that it hurt her own bid and knew it was a sham candidacy—because she adhered to the law.

But the most important example of her election integrity came on June 14 when Alfie Oakes failed to turn in his candidacy qualifying papers on time and in full. Blazier adhered to the law and disqualified him—regardless of his standing in the community and his denials, protests, insults and personal allegations against her.

That’s what election integrity looks like.

If election integrity is the main issue in this election then there’s no contest. The challengers might as well fold up their tents and slink home.

Of course, they’re not going to do that. This battle will be fought out until the bitter end, which looks like it will take place on August 20, primary election day.

In the past, in normal times, election administration was something unquestioned, a sort of distant hum in the background, like air conditioning, part of the overall environment, functioning quietly and unobtrusively.

That’s no longer the case. Election integrity is not to be taken for granted. It’s precious. It’s threatened.

But every voter in Collier County should know election integrity when it stands before them—and in this place, at this time, Melissa Blazier is what integrity looks like.

The election laws of Florida, held by Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier. (Photo: Author, June 2023)

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

Alfie Oakes vs. Melissa Blazier: A dramatic debate and dueling details of disqualification

Melissa Blazier (right) fills out her own paperwork to qualify as Collier County Supervisor of Elections in July 2023. (Photo: CCSoE)

June 20, 2024 by David Silverberg

New details and strikingly different versions of events have emerged in the increasingly heated and vehement debate between Collier County Supervisor of Elections (SoE) Melissa Blazier and Republican Party state committeeman, farmer, grocer and political activist Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III.

The argument centers on the disqualification of Oakes from the Aug. 20 Republican Party ballot for state committeeman.

To briefly recap: all qualifying documents for candidates for the Aug. 20 primary—for all parties—were due by noon, Friday, June 14. Oakes’ documents were submitted after noon. Blazier sent Oakes a letter informing him he had not qualified for the ballot.

The details of the filing, disqualification and the reasons and motivations for it are at the center of their very different versions of events.

Facts: The Oakes account

According to a June 18 statement from Oakes on Republican state committeeman letterhead:

“I filed my notarized candidate oath and qualifying documents last week during the primary election qualifying period. These documents were accepted by Collier SOE staff, and confirmation of my successful qualification was given to multiple people on my team.

“Then, approximately ten minutes before the 12:00 PM filing deadline, I received a call from the SOE alleging that my qualifying documents did not meet proper standards. Despite this being blatantly untrue, I immediately hurried to the SOE office to sign the additional documents that they requested. All documents were accepted and processed by the SOE at 12:04 PM.”

Facts: The Blazier account

According to a June 18 press release issued by the Supervisor of Elections (SoE) office and quoted here verbatim:

“The law allows candidate qualifying documents to be provided to this office 14 days prior to the beginning of the qualifying period which was noon, June 10 through noon June 14 (prequalifying began May 27). Mr. Oakes chose to wait until after 11 a.m. on the last day of qualifying (the busiest time in this office during the qualifying period) to have a third party deliver his qualifying documents. No one in the Supervisor of Elections office confirmed to Mr. Oakes or any member of his team that he had successfully qualified as a candidate for State Committeeman at that time. Handing paperwork over to a staff member is not tantamount to being qualified.

“Immediately upon discovering multiple errors with his submitted qualification documents, my staff and I made several attempts to contact Mr. Oakes and his team beginning at 11:36 a.m., as documented in our call records. The calls were neither answered or returned until 11:51 a.m. when Mr. Oakes finally returned my call. Mr. Oakes then arrived to our office at 12:04 p.m., after the qualifying deadline, to submit the correct qualifying forms which were timestamped upon completion at 12:08 p.m.”

Following the closing of the qualification period, Blazier sent a two-sentence letter to Oakes stating: “Pursuant to Florida Statute 99.061 the candidate qualifying documents that were received in the Supervisor of Elections office were not properly filed. Therefore, you did not qualify for the Republican State Committeeman position.”

Motivations and disparagement

Oakes’ account did not stop at a factual recitation. He immediately made accusations, attacked Blazier personally and disparaged what he believed to be her motivations.

“The claim by Collier County Supervisor of elections Melissa Blazier that I failed to properly file my re-election paperwork for Republican State Committeeman is a flat out lie,” he stated. “This is the latest (but not the first) act of fraud by Melissa Blazier. The simple truth is that this is nothing more than a desperate attempt from Melissa Blazier to remove me from the ballot for one of her campaign’s mega-donors. It is downright despicable.”

He continued: “The fact is this: The qualifying documents I provided during the qualifying period more than met the standard laid out by the Florida Secretary of State as well as the Republican Party of Florida. Melissa Blazier is illegally using her position to circumvent the election process in favor of her campaign mega-donor, my opponent, Doug Rankin.

“Make no mistake: this is election interference at the highest level in Collier County. It is happening before our very eyes.”

Blazier was equally direct, if more formal: “The allegations Mr. Oakes is circulating which seek to place the blame on this office for his failure to qualify for Republican State Committeeman are unfounded and without merit.”

After her recitation of facts she stated: “Mr. Oakes, now irresponsibly, is blaming this office for his shortcomings and the shortcomings of his team in getting himself qualified in a proper and timely fashion. Mr. Oakes knew precisely what needed to be done and the timeframe to do it in, as exemplified by his timely and proper filing for this same position in 2020. The law and requirements have not changed since then.

“All decisions are objective. The role of this office in reviewing candidate qualifying documents is dictated by the law. Our role is ministerial. It is either right or wrong, timely or untimely. 

“I have worked in this office for over 18 years in various capacities, including now as your Supervisor of Elections. This office has and will continue to have the highest ethical standards. Do not be fooled into believing that party rules take precedent over state statutes and state administrative rules. There is no fraud. There is no racketeering. All the actions taken by this office in this matter, and all matters, are justifiable and done in accordance with the law.” 

Electoral considerations

 Oakes, who has a long history of litigiousness, is now expected to sue the Supervisor of Elections office to get on the ballot. In the past he has sued the Lee County School Board, the Collier County School Board, and Collier County for decisions he disliked and this one is expected to be no exception.

“I intend to utilize every legal avenue available to stop this fraud and allow the voters’ voices to be heard in August,” he stated. “From top to bottom, this is the most important election in the history of our nation. We must fight back against the current corrupt administrative state that exists at every single level of government.

“We will continue our fight for our constitutional inalienable rights, and we will never back down!”

Blazier for her part was equally adamant: “As a constitutional officer, I am bound by the laws of the State of Florida. That is the ultimate responsibility in ensuring the integrity of elections. To bend to the outrageous and untrue statements being made about this matter would forever tarnish the reputation of this office and my position. The voters of Collier County expect that this office will uphold Florida’s elections laws and ensure the integrity of the electoral process, which is what my staff and I will continue to do.

“Do not be misled by Mr. Oakes’ attempt to cast aspersions on me and this office by deflecting. Mr. Oakes is ultimately responsible for his failure to properly qualify for placement of his name on the ballot.”

Analysis: Florida Rashomon

As of right now, Oakes is off the ballot and Blazier’s decision is final and supported by law.

If, as is probable, Oakes follows the example of his mentor and idol, convicted felon Donald Trump, he will proceed to court no matter how weak his case or how expensive the cost of litigation.

(It should also be noted that this is not the first time Oakes has evidenced inattentiveness to process and procedure. He has long been criticized by county Republicans for a lackadaisical approach to his committee responsibilities and missing numerous meetings, according to Party activists. At one point Party members considered writing to the state Party to call for his removal, but the letter never materialized. In Oakes’ case against the Lee County School District, it was revealed that the chief reason the District canceled his contract was because his company failed to file paperwork acknowledging that it followed any anti-COVID protocols.)

The situation is complicated by the fact that both parties are up for election to their respective positions.

Douglas Rankin, the attorney and former committeeman whom Oakes defeated four years ago, and who properly filed his paperwork and is on the ballot for the committee position, had no sympathy for Oakes.

“He is the one trying to get her to commit an election irregularity,” Rankin told Dave Elias, political reporter for NBC2 News. “The rules really do apply to everybody, including him. They had the good courtesy to move heaven and earth and call him to get his mouth down there, and do what he should have done days or weeks earlier,” he said.

Doug Rankin. (Image: NBC2)

Oakes’ other opponent, Frank Schwerin, was more forgiving: “My contention is that he submitted paperwork indicating a desire to run for a state committee position. It was notarized,” Schwerin told Elias. “The voters in Collier County should weigh in on who they want to represent them as the Republican Party of Florida. I’m running to give them a choice,” he said. (Note that Schwerin did not say the paperwork was proper or qualified.)

Frank Schwerin. (Image: NBC2)

Blazier is facing her own challenges in the race for the Supervisor of Elections job.

Until Friday she was facing two opponents in the Aug. 20 Republican primary, Tim Guerrette, a former chief of the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, and David Schaffel, a former information technology technician, who is backed by Oakes.

All were Republicans, and since the primary could have been the deciding election it would have been “universal” or open to all Collier County voters.

However, Edward Gubala, a former firefighting captain and close ally of Guerrette, applied and qualified at the last minute as an independent write-in candidate, thus closing the primary to all but Republicans.

Candidate Tim Guerrette (left) and supporter Edward Gubala (right) in Guerrette campaign regalia. Gubala qualified as an independent write-in candidate for Supervisor of Elections, thus closing the primary to all but Republicans.

In his own statement on Oakes’ disqualification, Guerrette called for an independent investigation of the incident, without drawing conclusions.

For his part, prior to being disqualified, Oakes had scheduled a discussion of election integrity for June 27 at the Naples Hilton. It is advertised as featuring Dave Schaffel, his candidate for Supervisor of Elections, and Douglas Frank, a prominent 2020 election denier and voting fraud conspiracist, who has been called “The Johnny Appleseed of election fraud.”

General admission tickets are $50.

The 2024 Collier County “I voted” sticker design by Alayna Gruber, a 7th grader at East Naples Middle School. (Art: CCSoE)

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

Collier County’s anti-choice resolution: What does it mean and will it make any difference?

Collier County Commissioner Chris Hall moves the resolution to oppose Amendment 4. (Image: CCBC)

June 17, 2024 by David Silverberg

Last Tuesday, June 11, Collier County, Fla., officially went on record opposing a woman’s right to choose abortion.

By a unanimous vote the five members of the Board of Commissioners voted to pass a resolution officially rejecting Amendment 4, a constitutional ballot initiative in Florida to guarantee a woman’s right to choose.

As a resolution the county measure does not have the force of law or impose penalties. However, it is an official expression of the county’s collective opinion.

How significant is this resolution both for voters in Collier County and in the efforts to either pass or defeat Amendment 4?

The context: Amendment 4

Titled “Limiting government interference with abortion,” the proposed Amendment 4 states: “Except as provided in Article X, Section 22, no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

When it appears on the ballot it will also note that: “This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

The amendment has been approved to appear on state ballots in the November election. If it passes by at least 60 percent of the voters, abortion will be legal in Florida. Currently, no abortion can be performed after six weeks of pregnancy.

The Collier County resolution

The county resolution, formally titled “A resolution of the Board of Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, in opposition to Amendment 4, a proposed constitutional amendment concerning abortion,” simply concludes that the Board of Commissioners “expresses its strong opposition to Amendment 4.”

It’s in the preceding paragraphs, known as the establishing clauses that start with “whereas,” that the resolution lays out its thinking and justifications. (The full, final, engrossed resolution can be read at the conclusion of this article.)

Rather than opinions, the resolution falsely asserts that Amendment 4 will put abortions in the hands of unqualified personnel, that it will end parental notification, and that it will allow late term abortions. The third paragraph states that Amendment 4 would establish a constitutional right to abortion.

The next paragraph starts with a word almost never used in resolutions or formal legislative documents: “I.”

“WHEREAS, I believe that the language of the proposed amendment is vague, deceptive, and overbroad, and would strike already enacted protections instituted by the State of Florida by broadening the definition of healthcare providers to those not medically licensed, eliminating parental consent for minors, and allowing the life of the unborn to be taken right up to the moment of birth… .”

It then goes on to state that “the Board believes that the passage of Amendment 4 would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Collier County and the State of Florida” and so it opposes it.

The debate and vote

The resolution was introduced by current Board chair, Commissioner Chris Hall (R-District 2). He is the “I believe” in the resolution.

The resolution was put on the county agenda with little to no fanfare or notice. Following public comments for and against it at the meeting the commissioners discussed its merits.

“I simply brought this forward because I believe this Amendment 4 is vague, it’s deceptive and it’s over broad at best,” Hall told the Board when they discussed the resolution. “There’s already a legislative process in place through our Florida legislators and it protects life already. And that’s the process we need to move and keep holy as representatives of the people.”

All the commissioners argued to some degree that they were seeking to “educate” voters with this resolution and were at pains to point out that people could vote any way they wished.

Commissioner Rick LoCastro (R-District 1) pointed out that the resolution was merely an opinion: “This resolution doesn’t change any laws. It merely puts us on record as to our moral compass. I personally do feel that many things at the polls are very ambiguous and very confusing,” he said.

He pointed out that during the discussion “I didn’t hear one person say the word ‘adoption,’ which is also an option for an unwanted pregnancy. He characterized himself as “pro-life,” said that was his “moral compass” and while supporting “a woman’s right to choose, my strong advice would be to choose adoption.”

Commissioner Burt Saunders (R-District 3) said that while he expected Amendment 4 to pass with over 60 percent, “I think this resolution is appropriate that it is our opinion that it is confusing, that it is overbroad, that it shouldn’t be part of the Constitution in the first place, that it is the Florida legislature that should be setting what the rules are dealing with abortion.”

“It’s a slippery slope when you start legislating a woman’s choice,” said Commissioner William McDaniel (R-District 4), meaning that choices have “life-long” consequences.

“My simple statement is: choose life in every opportunity that’s physically possible. Choose life,” he said.

Commissioner Dan Kowal (R-District 5) said that he didn’t know much about Amendment 4 initially but he learned that Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody had argued against it in the state Supreme Court and three female Supreme Court justices were confused by the language.

He asked how supporters of Amendment 4 could defend it if they couldn’t understand it.

The danger, he thought, was that “There are people out there who know how to manipulate our uneducated voters.” As he saw it: “This resolution is about educating everyone. Do your homework before you vote.”

Hall revealed that the deceptiveness he was so worried about was largely in the title and the words “limiting government interference,” which might be such an irresistible attraction to some voters that they would vote for it without reading the rest of the resolution.

As he put it: “And so in agreeing with all my colleagues to educate the voters, you can vote however you want to but I want you to be fully educated on what you’re voting on and I don’t want it to be deceptive. I don’t want you to look at it as ‘limit government control’ and think, ‘That’s awesome’ and then limit abortion and then get the results we’ve gotten. So with that I’m going to make a motion to join ourselves in solidarity and approve this resolution that says vote no on Amendment 4.”

Comment: Indoctrination versus education

The commissioners’ discussion of the resolution’s “education” is false and disingenuous.

If they truly wanted to educate voters, the resolution would have simply said: “Collier County encourages voters to study this and all other ballot initiatives carefully,” without taking a position for or against it.

But education was never the point of the resolution.

Nor was all the complaining about Amendment 4’s vagueness, deceptiveness or broadness relevant. These were the arguments that Moody put before the state Supreme Court in April.

In fact, the Supreme Court decided exactly the opposite from what the commissioners contend: the proposal met all the requirements for a constitutional amendment, it dealt with a single subject and its title and summary were sufficiently clear that any voter could understand it.

“In the end, the ballot title and summary fairly inform voters, in clear and unambiguous language, of the chief purpose of the amendment and they are not misleading. The ballot summary’s nearly verbatim recitation of the proposed amendment language is an ‘accurate, objective, and neutral summary of the proposed amendment,’” the justices wrote.

They continued: “Here, there is no lack of candor or accuracy: the ballot language plainly informs voters that the material legal effects of the proposed amendment will be that the government will be unable to enact laws that ‘prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict’ previability abortions or abortions necessary to protect the mother’s health. It is undeniable that those are the main and material legal effects of the proposed amendment.

“[W]e have also recognized ‘that voters may be presumed to have the ability to reason and draw logical conclusions’ from the information they are given.

“We thus presume that voters will have an understanding of the obviously broad sweep of this proposed amendment despite the fact that the ballot summary does not and cannot reveal its every possible ramification or collateral effect,” they stated.

Clearly the Florida Supreme Court has greater confidence in the intelligence, understanding and reasoning of Collier County voters than their Board of Commissioners.

So if the Amendment is actually clear and fairly presented, why pass this resolution?

One was Hall’s fear that the title “Limiting government interference” would prove too irresistible to some voters. However, he need not worry: not every Floridian instinctively salivates at the prospect of “limiting government,” so a stampede to approve the Amendment is unlikely on that basis.

Another obvious point of the resolution was both to put Collier County on the record opposing Amendment 4 and sway voters against it.

Because resolutions (as opposed to ordinances) are expressions of opinion rather than enforceable law, political observers tend to dismiss them as irrelevant. However, they do have some impact in expressing the collective opinion of a legislative body or jurisdiction.

But the Collier resolution doesn’t do this and it doesn’t do it in a most peculiar way: it’s that “I believe” in the third paragraph.

This resolution isn’t an expression of Collier County’s opinion as a whole; it clearly states that it is the expression of one person’s opinion and that one person is Commissioner Chris Hall.

One might have expected that “I believe” to be edited out of the final resolution, but it wasn’t.

So, although endorsed by all the commissioners, technically this resolution really expresses only Hall’s opinion, a commissioner who has openly stated that “there is no separation of church and state.”

Legislatively, it’s a poorly written and edited piece of work. There should never be an “I” in an expression of collective opinion. The “I believe” phrase dilutes its force as a legislative opinion.

Next, far from this resolution being a form of education for voters, it is an attempted form of indoctrination against a woman’s right to choose  and a major purpose, of course, was to sway Collier County voters against Amendment 4.

Endorsing Hall’s opinion enabled commissioners to pander and placate their anti-choice constituents, whether the commissioners are truly anti-choice or not. This is especially important for those who are up for election this year: LoCastro, who is running against a write-in candidate; Saunders, who is facing four challengers; and William McDaniel, who faces one. Their fates will be decided in the August 20 Republican primary.

Will the resolution sway Collier County voters come November?

There is no polling or other reliable data to gauge its impact. Voters supporting Amendment 4 are not going to suddenly switch their votes because of this resolution. Voters opposed to abortion will vote against Amendment 4 anyway.

What it may do is possibly manipulate some “uneducated” voters against Amendment 4, although these are not the sort who pay attention to county resolutions. As Kowal put it: “There are people out there who know how to manipulate our uneducated voters”—although he was thinking of very different manipulators.

Most likely, the resolution will be used as a tool by anti-choice activists in the county in their campaign against the amendment. They will cite it to give weight to their anti-choice arguments. What election monitors and election law enforcers have to watch carefully is whether they illegally tell people this resolution requires people to vote against Amendment 4, which, as the commissioners noted, it does not.

This resolution now joins Collier County’s anti-public health and anti-federal ordinances, its termination of fluoridation in its water and all the other measures it has taken on its march backward into an imagined better time.

As for Amendment 4, the available polling indicates that statewide it has the 60 percent support it needs to pass and become part of the Florida Constitution. A Fox News poll released June 7 showed that 69 percent of voters support it and 66 percent of voters also support Amendment 3, legalizing recreational marijuana.

In November, if the election occurs as scheduled and the votes in Florida are accurately and legitimately counted, all indications are that Amendment 4 will be approved and Florida’s women will regain the right to choose—no matter what Collier County commissioners believe.

The full, final, signed and engrossed version of the Collier County anti-Amendment 4 resolution.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

SCOOP! Alfie Oakes disqualified for GOP committeeman race

Alfie Oakes announces that he will seek re-election at an April 4 event at his restaurant, Food & Thought 2.

June 16, 2024 by David Silverberg

Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III, the prominent pro-Trump grocer and farmer and a central figure in Collier County politics, has not qualified for the Republican state committee seat he was seeking to retain.

Oakes is currently a Republican state committeeman and announced in April that he would run to keep his seat. Because he is disqualified, his name will not appear on the August 20 Republican primary ballot.

Qualifying forms for all candidates were due at noon on Friday, June 14. Oakes did not file his form until after the noon deadline.

As a result, “Pursuant to Florida Statute 99.061 the candidate qualifying documents that were received in the Supervisor of Elections office were not properly filed. Therefore, you did not qualify for the Republican State Committeeman position,” Collier County Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier stated in a two-sentence letter to Oakes.

According to one source, Oakes misfiled his forms, submitting a form for county commissioner and not correcting the mistake until 12:04 pm.

Efforts to reach Oakes by publication time were unsuccessful.

There will still be two candidates for the state committeeman seat.

Douglas Rankin will be attempting a comeback. A practicing Naples attorney specializing in elder law, Rankin began his Party activism with the Young Republicans in 1984. From 2008 to 2020 he was a Republican state committeeman until pushed out by Oakes for being insufficiently pro-Trump and anti-mask amidst the COVID pandemic.

Frank Schwerin, who will also appear on the ballot, has served as Chair of the Collier County Republican Executive Committee.

A State committeeman or woman represents his or her county on the leadership team of the Republican Party of Florida and serves a four-year term.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

ALERT! Collier County Commissioners poised to oppose Amendment 4 and the right to choose

The proposed resolution by the Collier County Board of Commissioners. (The full resolution is below.) (Document: CCBC)

June 10, 2024 by David Silverberg

Tomorrow, June 11, the Collier County Board of Commissioners is poised to consider a resolution expressing opposition to Amendment 4, a proposed state constitutional amendment guaranteeing a woman’s right to choose abortion, which will be on the ballot in the general election on Nov. 5.

In unusual wording for a county resolution, it expresses opposition in the first person, using the article “I;” meaning that it expresses a single individual’s opinion but puts it forward as the opinion of the entire county.

As quoted by the proposed resolution, the language of Amendment 4, formally titled “Limiting government interference with abortion,” states that “Except as provided in Article X, Section 22, no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

The proposed Collier County resolution then goes on to state:

“WHEREAS, I believe that the language of the proposed amendment is vague, deceptive, and overbroad, and would strike already enacted protections instituted by the State of Florida by broadening the definition of healthcare providers to those not medically licensed, eliminating parental consent for minors, and allowing the life of the unborn to be taken right up to the moment of birth; and

“WHEREAS, the Board believes that the passage of Amendment 4 would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Collier County and the State of Florida.

“NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, expresses its strong opposition to Amendment 4.”

Commissioner Chris Hall (R-District 2) currently chairs the Collier County Board of Commissioners and is expected to introduce the resolution.

Collier County residents can express an opinion on this matter by writing or calling their commissioners. The resolution is listed as agenda item 10B and residents who sign up in person the day of the meeting can speak before the Board for 3 minutes. The Commission meeting is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m.

District 1

Rick LoCastro

Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov
(239) 252-8601 

District 2

Chris Hall

Chris.hall@colliercountyfl.gov
(239) 252-8602

District 3

Burt Saunders

Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov
(239) 252-8603

District 4

Dan Kowal

Dan.kowal@colliercountyfl.gov
(239) 252-8604

District 5

William McDaniel

Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov
(239) 252-8605

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

Make sure you’re ready to vote—despite the hurricanes

A lone American flag flies over a devastated Fort Myers Beach in the days after Hurricane Ian. (Photo: U.S. Air National Guard /Jesse Hanson)

May 29, 2024 by David Silverberg

As has been well publicized by now, this year’s hurricane season, which officially begins Saturday, June 1, is predicted to be an especially active one.

There are already reminders in various media for storm preparation: buy batteries, flashlights and water, make a plan and know your evacuation zone, among other measures.

But it also makes sense to plan to vote despite any hurricanes that hit—because this year there’s so much at stake and every vote counts, whether in primary or general elections.

What’s more, in Florida there’s an extremely important primary election on Aug. 20—the date when the hurricane season traditionally kicks into high gear.

“Now, storms can get going before Aug. 20, but this is typically about when they start,” Philip Klotzbach, a famous hurricane forecaster at Colorado State University told the Christian Science Monitor in 2011.

This primary will be a “closed” primary, meaning that only registered members of a particular political party can vote for the party’s candidates. But there will also be important “universal” races at stake, where all voters can make a choice and some of the races may be decided at that point. All voters, regardless of party, should be registered and eligible to vote on these universal ballot measures. (The universal measures will be covered in a later posting.)

This article will provide links and information to check your registration and apply to vote by mail in Collier, Lee and Charlotte counties. It will then provide some historical background regarding elections and hurricanes in Florida.

Bottom line on top: Voting by mail is your best option. Make sure you do what’s necessary. Now.

Registration and vote-by-mail applications

To vote in the Aug. 20 primary, you must be registered to vote by July 22.

Check to make sure you’re properly registered. This is worth doing because there have been allegations in the past of misregistrations. To check, click on the links below and fill out the forms:

The deadline to request a mail-in ballot for the Aug. 20 primary election is Aug. 8 at 5 pm (and that hourly deadline is very important! Nothing after that will be accepted.)

The form for mail-in voting applies statewide. An English-language PDF from the Collier County Supervisor of Elections can be accessed and downloaded here. A Spanish-language version can be accessed here.

You can apply to vote by mail:

In Collier County:

  • By phone: (239) 252-VOTE (8683)
  • By email: MailBallot@CollierVotes.gov
  • By fax: (239) 252-2630
  • By mail/In person: 3750 Enterprise Ave, Naples FL  34104

(Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier provides a 3-minute, 40-second video on the vote-by-mail process and ballot tabulation here.)

In Lee County:

In Charlotte County:

Why vote by mail?

There are several advantages to voting by mail, especially in hurricane-prone Florida.

One is that you don’t have to vote by mail once you have the ballot. You can mail it back, put it in a drop box or take it to a polling station and hand it in there.

This is especially useful if voting is disrupted by weather. It gives you the flexibility to return your ballot several different ways and over a longer period of time.

Another advantage is that once you receive the ballot in the mail, you have the time and leisure to research and ponder items that you may not have previously considered, like judicial elections, amendments or more obscure, down-ballot races.

Also, by and large, voting by mail is reliable. You usually receive your ballot in the mail in a timely fashion and you can reliably return it and be confident that it will be received and properly counted—and you can check online that it has been received.

Even if storms strike, even if mail delivery is disrupted by a storm, voters can get their ballots into the system. The US Postal Service (USPS) makes strenuous efforts to deliver mail even in the wake of severe disasters.

Indeed, there have been times after disasters when the arrival of a USPS delivery truck or mail carrier on foot was the first indication of recovery and a return to normal. This dedication is a much-underappreciated aspect of USPS operations.

The Lee County Supervisor of Elections makes the point on his website that under a new Florida statute that went into effect in April, mail-in ballots will not be forwarded to an address other than the one on the voter’s registration.

(So, in other words, if you’ve requested a mail-in ballot and you’re away from your Florida address when the mail-in ballots go out, you will not receive it at any other address.)

This applies statewide.

Voting by mail only became controversial in 2020. That year it provided a safe way for people to vote despite the COVID pandemic. Then-President Donald Trump went to great lengths to disparage it as “rigged” despite no evidence that it encouraged fraud or tampering. Ironically, in prior elections, voting by mail had actually favored Republicans in Florida since so many were seasonal residents and voted from second homes in northern states. While the Republican Party tried to conceal or contradict Trump’s discouragement of mail-in voting, he created a deep suspicion of the practice that lingers to this day. So far this year he is encouraging voting by mail.

The storms of August

There are plenty of historical examples of hurricanes striking on or around Aug. 20.

In 1969, it was from Aug. 17 to 22 that Hurricane Camille, one of the most destructive storms in history, rampaged through the western Gulf coast. (For more details on this and other disasters, see the author’s book Masters of Disaster: The Political and Leadership Lessons of America’s Greatest Disasters.)

As bad as August can be, even the general election on Nov. 5 is not immune from the influence of hurricanes. For example, in 2018 Hurricane Michael struck the Florida panhandle on Oct. 10, just before that year’s midterm elections and disrupted voting. Then, just two years ago in 2022, Hurricane Ian made landfall in Southwest Florida on Sept. 28, a day short of a month before early voting began in the general election.

In both cases, voting was disrupted as people tried to dig out and recover. No doubt voting was far from their minds in the immediate aftermath of the storm. A study of Hurricane Michael found that after the storm voting rates dropped the further voters had to travel to reach operable polling places.

In the event of disasters the governor can authorize special voting arrangements like mobile polling places and emergency election stations. Following Hurricane Ian, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) issued an executive order to officials in Sarasota, Charlotte and Lee counties giving them authority to open polling places wherever feasible.

Given the threat being predicted for the 2024 hurricane season, it’s time for everyone to start preparing. We’re not just protecting our homes and communities; this year like no other, we also need to protect our democracy from all threats foreign, domestic— and climatic.

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg

Even challengers praise Collier County Election Supervisor

Collier County voters participate in the 2018 election. (Photo: Author)

April 29, 2024 by David Silverberg

Collier County’s Supervisor of Elections and her team are dedicated to providing “secure, ethical elections,” their work is “excellent,” “they do a great job” and “the way elections are run in Collier county, they are run smoothly.”

Those words of praise for county Supervisor of Elections (SoE) Melissa Blazier and her team came from—of all people—the two candidates who are trying to unseat her in this year’s Supervisor of Elections race by alleging election unreliability.

The unlikely accolades were uttered by Timothy Guerrette and David Schaffel as they testified regarding the “Resolution for a Legally Valid 2024 General Election” on Tuesday, April 23.

The resolution was introduced by Collier County Commissioner Chris Hall (R-District 2). It asserted that the 2022 election in Florida was faulty and it would have imposed new, disruptive conditions on the 2024 election count. Ultimately, the county Board of Commissioners chose not to advance it, effectively killing it.

Nonetheless, the fact that two of the candidates and the incumbent all testified at the meeting highlighted their respective policy prescriptions, qualifications and shed some light on what they might do in office.

Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier

Collier County Supervisor of Elections Melissa Blazier. (Photo: SoE)

Melissa Blazier, 46, is the current sitting SoE. She came out swinging against the resolution from the very moment it was shared with her by Commissioner Chris Hall (R-District 2).

In an April 18 message to Hall, she warned that his resolution was “deeply flawed and highly unnecessary” and “riddled with erroneous conclusions.”

Most of the resolution’s demands, she wrote, “are either already incorporated into existing law, are in direct violation of existing law or would require technology that is not yet available or authorized for use in the State of Florida” and asked him not to pass “this egregious resolution.”

She repeated these arguments when she testified remotely at the meeting.

Blazier has served as an election professional in Collier County for over 18 years.

“I was trained by the best, so for over 17 years I worked under Jennifer [Edwards, the previous supervisor] and I have no plans in changing the way that we conduct elections in Collier County, any of our voter registration, voter outreach, elections. Our goal is just to improve,” she told The Paradise Progressive in an interviewed published July 3, 2023. 

Improvements are what Blazier and her office have been steadily making during her time in office, mostly of the unheralded, back-office variety, included improving access to archived information, handling public information requests, improving security and streamlining office processes.

In addition to her years of experience in the Supervisor’s office, Blazier is certified as an Elections/Registration Administrator by the National Association of Election Officials’ Election Center and is a Master Florida Certified Elections Professional through the Florida Supervisors of Elections.

Educationally, she has a magna cum laude Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration from Hodges University. In 2010 she graduated from the Associate Leadership Collier program spring class of 2010, the 2014 Leadership Collier class and the Leadership Marco class of 2019.

Since July 2023, Blazier has raised $69,104.55 for her campaign, according to county campaign finance records. Much of it was from her own pocket.

Tim Guerrette

Tim Guerrette (Image: CCBC)

Timothy Guerrette, 56, took a cautious position during the commission debate, calling for “a” resolution rather than “this” resolution.

“I want to let you know that I support a resolution that is seeking to improve our elections here in Collier County and send a message to Tallahassee we are pro-actively seeking ways here in Collier County to improve our elections,” he said.

He praised Collier County and its election staff for their dedication to “secure, ethical elections in Collier County.”

Guerrette has no previous election experience. He’s a former chief of the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, from which he retired in 2021 after 31 years of service. He has also worked as a real estate broker and since retirement has hosted an “Uncensored 239” podcast.

He has experience in police operations and management and says in a campaign video that he will bring “competence and integrity back into the voting process.” During his testimony he said that wanted to make sure that Collier County remained the “gold standard” of elections and that once in office he’d make sure that “We are running smooth elections, there is nothing to see here.”

Since beginning his quest for office in March 2023, Guerrette has raised $113,772.93, according to Collier County campaign finance records. Many of the donations came from active and former law enforcement officers, including $1,000 from the Friends of Carmine Marceno Political Action Committee. Marceno is the sheriff in neighboring Lee County.

He also received contributions from members of the Collier County Board of Commissioners. Commissioner Rick LoCastro (R-District 1) contributed $260.25 in September 2023 and Commissioner Dan Kowal (R-District 4) contributed $600 in November.

David Schaffel

David Schaffel (Image: CCBC)

Dave Schaffel, 63, fully supported the resolution.

Schaffel presented himself as “a resident here in Collier County. I spent my entire 40-year career in the information technology field in the private sector specializing in big databases, data analysis, business intelligence and security. I’ve been a successful IT entrepreneur, investor and public company executive.”

However, nowhere in his testimony did he provide any specifics of employment, names of companies or institutions, educational qualifications, past election involvement or specific accomplishments as an entrepreneur. His website is similarly vague.

Nonetheless, he said, “In the last few years I have immersed myself in learning about the technology behind our election systems as well as the Florida election statutes that oversee the process.”

While strongly supporting the resolution, he also made the point “that this resolution in no way disparages or criticizes the excellent work of the many volunteers that work the polling places during our elections or the many hardworking public servants employed in the Collier County Supervisor of Elections office.”

Suspicion of election results is the cornerstone of his campaign. A campaign video opens with questions about the result of the 2020 election. “Corrupt, bloated and out-of-touch bureaucrats are almost always the problem and rarely the solution,” he says. He calls himself a “rock-solid conservative and America First patriot.”

In his testimony to the commissioners, Schaffel had a great many suspicions about aspects of Florida elections including voting by mail, chains of custody and machine versus hand counts of ballots, although he made no specific charges (which were included in the resolution).

He said he and other election activists had been rebuffed in Tallahassee when they tried to promote legislative change in voting procedures. They were convinced that technological vulnerabilities had led to hacking and vote-flipping. As an example, he said that a street had its addresses flipped to create undeliverable mail but he provided no specifics or sources for the charge. It was unclear whether this incident even occurred in Florida at all.

Ultimately, he opposed the use of technology in general. “As a technologist…when it comes to our elections, given our current statutes and our current lack of transparency, that less technology would be the best,” he said.

For all that, when questioned by Commissioner Burt Saunders (R-District 3), Schaffel had nothing but praise for Blazier and her office.

Asked if he was satisfied by the way elections were conducted in the county, Schaffel responded, “Yes, I think the way elections are run in Collier county, they’re run smoothly.”

While he didn’t trust election machine companies and the tendency of officials to accept their assurances, he had no problem with the office or staff.

“This is not a disparagement – they are doing their jobs in that office,” he said. “They do a great job of running the election according to statute. And I want to make it absolutely clear that that is the case.”

To date, Schaffel has received $12,447.54 in campaign contributions, mostly from his own pocket. However, one notable outside contribution came on Jan. 12 of this year: $1,000 from the Friends of Chris Hall Political Action Committee—the commissioner who introduced the election resolution.

Analysis: Making the system work

The discontent with election processes reflected in the election-alteration resolution is an echo of election denialism from the 2020 presidential election and Blazier’s two challengers reflect this.

By their own testimony they denied that there was anything at all wrong with Blazier’s performance or that of the Collier County’s elections office. They praised the volunteers and professionals who conduct the county’s elections.

Why, then, are they running? Is the SoE office so lucrative and desirable that it’s worth spending all the money they’re investing to attain it? Is it so powerful that it can change the world?

Both Guerrette and Schaffel are running on the suspicion that something is wrong in elections.

Schaffel is more specific of the two, pointing to supposed vulnerabilities in vote counting and communications and alleging hacking and vote-flipping—without providing specifics. He’s a proponent of the anti-machine wing of the election-denial movement, one that sees hand counts as more reliable, a position taken by local farmer and grocer Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III.  

But neither has any experience or relevant credentials in election administration. Guerrette comes out of the world of law enforcement and has some management experience but it’s nothing that compares with Blazier’s 18-plus years specifically in the Collier County office.

Both say they want “improvements” in election management. But the Collier County SoE has been improving steadily and incrementally throughout its history—and someone like Blazier knows where improvements need to be made. Neither Guerrette nor Schaffel would actually be in a position to make knowledgeable improvements if elected.

As was pointed out repeatedly during the commissioners’ meeting, Hall didn’t question his own election results and that’s been true with election-deniers since 2020; they’re so obsessed with contesting the top line races they ignore all the other down-ballot results. In 2022 Collier County conducted 44 different elections, from state and county officials, to constitutional amendments, to judges to bond issues, none of which have been criticized.

Given the deep-seated disbelief and mistrust among a slice of Collier County voters, there is no result and no solution that would ever allay their suspicions. Indeed, electing either of them would make Collier County elections far less reliable and compliant.

Sometimes it takes the people in place who know how to make something work to make it actually work properly. That’s the case in Collier County.

Both Guerrette and Schaffel, when pressed, acknowledged that Collier County has had clean, honest, competently administered elections. That’s the result of the experienced, knowledgeable administration of Melissa Blazier. Neither offered anything better.

The conclusion seems inescapable: When it comes to the Office of Election Supervisor in Collier County, Fla., perhaps there is no wisdom wiser than that in the old saying: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”—and by their own admission, the challengers don’t believe anything here needs fixing.

Collier County, Fla., voters line up to cast their ballots in the 2020 election. (Photo: Author)

Liberty lives in light

© 2024 by David Silverberg