Hi, kids!

It’s time once again to turn a jaundiced eye toward the news and newsmakers of the day who, in my cynical opinion, either contributed to our quality of life or detracted from it in some significant way:

Perpetuating Petty Mudslinging in Ormond Beach

Regular readers of these screeds know the reverence I have for local journalism.

I support both traditional, citizen, and independent media outlets that push quality news, information, and alternative opinions in an age where reportage seems limited to regurgitating the pap and fluff flowing from government spinmeisters. 

That’s what happens when so few are willing to pay a subscription fee to remain informed amid the partisan polarization and whackadoodle bias of “corporate journalism,” a system that has neutered the Fourth Estate and absorbed/destroyed countless local newspapers.

Fortunately, we are blessed with a few great local news outlets here on Florida’s “Fun Coast.”

For instance, I enjoy the local news coverage from what’s left of The Daytona Beach News-Journal.  The West Volusia Beacon – one of the last remaining community newspapers in existence – periodically runs Barker’s View in their opinion section.  I rarely agree with editor Pierre Tristam’s politics, but his FlaglerLive.com is incredibly informative with frequent deep dives on local issues, and the Ormond Beach/Palm Coast Observer is a great community resource and one of the first things I read each morning.   

Perhaps that’s why I was so disappointed in the Observer’s decision to publish a recent op/ed (if you can call it that) personally attacking Ormond Beach Mayor Jason Leslie.  In my view, the unadulterated hit piece signaled the return of the dirty tricks and politics of personal destruction that invariably taint Ormond Beach elections. 

The attacks are always well-choreographed so the candidate(s) the perpetrators support have plausible deniability of who is behind the distracting practice…

In my view, who you select to represent your family’s interests is a personal decision based upon many factors.  That’s why I don’t tell people who to vote for on this blog site.  

If you are reading Barker’s View, I naturally assume you are an engaged and informed voter, someone who stays abreast of current events, familiar with the diverse opinions and players surrounding the issues of the day.

Sometimes my take on civic happenings can be acerbic, tongue-in-cheek, even over-the-top – just one man’s opinion on the news and newsmakers – neither always right, nor always wrong, and many readers vehemently disagree with my particular take on matters important to them. 

That’s my purpose.  Generating a larger discussion of the issues is BV’s raison d’être.

This is different.  

Last week, the Ormond Beach Observer ran a hit piece launched by a former family member of incumbent Mayor Jason Leslie – apparently an estranged ex-boyfriend of Mr. Leslie’s sister (?) – who asked the question, “Who is Jason Leslie?” before smearing his character in print.

It was an ambush so ad hominem that I almost stopped reading – not because I was offended – but because it wasted my time.

The piece included accusations against Mayor Leslie based upon anecdotal recollections, raised questions about his business history and credentials, and trotted out several previously settled personal and professional lawsuits to add to the embarrassment factor.

The writer even attempted to make a vile connection to the 1700’s slave trade based upon a claim that Capt. James Ormond may have once worked for the company of a long-distant relative of Mayor Leslie – a link so tenuous that everyone who lives in the city that bears Capt. Ormond’s name could be implicated… 

In an apparent stab at fairness, the Observer identified the writer as a family member, allowed Mayor Leslie to respond, and attempted to confirm some of the odd allegations – mostly based on old family yarns – to include, “Jason claims that The Great Gatsby was written about his family. When questioned, it turned into “the idea for the Great Gatsby was inspired by Scott Fitzgerald while he attended one of Jason’s great aunt’s parties.” It seems Mr. Leslie likes to think that anyone with the last name Leslie is related to him.”

Who cares? 

What about the candidate’s position on how we improve transportation and utilities infrastructure with the specter of Avalon Park, Ormond Crossings, Archers Mill, Tomoka Reserve, et alia, on the horizon? 

In rebuttal, Mayor Leslie said, “It is disheartening that what should remain a private family matter has become public,” and dismissed the personal attacks for what they are. 

In my view, it was silly.  A sordid family squabble laid bare to humiliate a public official at election time – something I found well beneath the journalistic standards I’ve come to appreciate from the Ormond Beach Observer.

I have always respected the community newspaper for its balanced and objective coverage, and the pettiness of the Leslie smear bothered me.

Soon after, the ‘rest of the story’ became apparent…

Less than 24-hours after the hit piece appeared in the Ormond Beach Observer, a bright red sign appeared on public right-of-way at the entrance to my neighborhood which read, “LIAR LESLIE” in bold print. 

The sponsorship disclosure read, “Paid for by Ormond Residents Fed Up With Mayor Jason Leslie’s Lies.”  I don’t know if that’s a legitimate political action committee or just another gouge at Mayor Leslie…

The timing appeared choreographed – a ‘one-two’ punch – an orchestrated ambush that reeks of desperation by Mr. Leslie’s competition. 

In fact, I noticed that the Lori Tolland for Mayor sign that sat directly next to Mayor Leslie’s campaign sign had been removed when the disparaging placard was erected.   

The absence of the Tolland connection was noticeable – and it spoke volumes.

I have no idea if Commissioner Tolland’s campaign is involved – or even aware – of the derogatory signage that paints her opponent in a bad light, but cui bono?

Personally, I believe the 2026 mayoral race represents the worst dilemma Ormond Beach voters have ever faced, with a field consisting of Mayor Leslie, Commissioner Tolland, and two also-rans… 

The myriad issues facing this once quaint and truly unique community – now churned into a homogenized “everyplace” by visionless elected officials, mercenary assholes with big promises, and real estate developers trying to cram 3/2 cracker boxes into every nook and cranny – are increasing exponentially. 

Sadly, in the face of these enormous challenges, the Ormond Beach City Commission often appears as a ship of fools in a Three Stooges farce, with no one on the bridge who seems to have a clue how to navigate forward…

My pointed criticism includes Mayor Leslie, who often appears out of his element, and the recipient of frequent attacks by the malleable Commissioner Tolland (of Tomoka Reserve infamy) and their equally clueless “colleagues,” whenever he tries to think beyond the status quo.

In my view, our collective challenges are far too great for cheap distractions, and this petty mudslinging has no place in Ormond Beach politics. 

I hope the Observer realizes its mistake in perpetuating it.

Volusia County Councilman Matt Reinhart Continues to Serve and Protect

Having spent the bulk of my life in law enforcement, some of the worst situations I was called to help with involved the scourge of domestic violence – a criminal act causing physical injury or death between family, intimate partners, or household members. 

It’s more prevalent than you might think.  Volusia County ranks fourth statewide in domestic violence cases…

For many trapped in the pernicious cycle of violence, stalking, and psychological abuse, it can seem inescapable. 

Tragically, for some it is. 

In 2021, 220 individuals died as the result of domestic violence homicide, representing approximately 20% of all homicides in Florida.  Nationally, over 40% of female murder victims are killed by a current or former domestic partner. 

In an effort to save lives and reverse the unacceptable number of DV cases here on the “Fun Coast,” earlier this year, Volusia County Councilman Matt Reinhart – a retired career corrections professional – proposed a searchable domestic violence registry which would consolidate available public information from the Clerk of the Court regarding convicted domestic violence offenders in a web-based database.

According to reports, Reinhart’s resolution is based on Savanna’s Law, a Tennessee registry which went into effect January 1, 2026, named after Savanna Puckett, a 22-year-old deputy sheriff who was killed by her ex-boyfriend in 2022.  The law created a public registry of “persistent domestic violence offenders,” which includes the photograph, personal identifiers, and conviction history of convicted batterers.

In Volusia County, the centralized registry to hold batterers accountable and protect potential victims as proposed by Councilman Reinhart received resounding support from several area municipalities, to include Daytona Beach, Daytona Beach Shores, Holly Hill, Edgewater, Ormond Beach, and Ponce Inlet.

On Tuesday, during an emotional hearing before the Volusia County Council, Buck James, CEO of the Domestic Abuse Council of Volusia County, spoke in support of the proposed registry and explained “domestic violence thrives in secrecy.”

To his credit, during the discussion, Councilman Reinhart made a motion in support of his previous stance that the registry should include anyone with a single conviction involving a crime of domestic violence, rather than limit the information to repeat offenders.

During the ensuing discussion, Councilman Don Dempsey couldn’t take off his defense attorney cap long enough to consider the potential lifesaving benefit of sparing families the tragic heartbreak of a loved one’s death to domestic violence, claiming that many innocent people are caught in what he described as “the net.”

To everyone’s astonishment, Dempsey left his seat and thundered away in that demented Atticus Finch routine of his – butchering quotes from Voltaire and Thomas Jefferson along the way – before arguing that the information on domestic violence offenders is already available on the Clerk of the Court’s website, then claiming DV accusations are frequently bogus, used for leverage in domestic disputes, etc.  

Councilman Dempsey – the lone member of the spousal abuse lobby – wailed that the registry would cast a “stigma” on batterers who will now clog the system by demanding a trial to avoid the potential shame…

I guess by Mr. Dempsey’s thinking, victims are forced to carry the physical and mental scars of domestic violence the rest of their lives – but those who are convicted in a court of law of the heinous act that inflicted them shouldn’t suffer undo embarrassment for their crimes?

I assume when it became apparent to Councilman Dempsey that people were staring in perplexed bewilderment over his asinine attempt to keep convicted abusers off a searchable database – he changed tack – attempting to kick the can down the dusty political trail by demanding presentations from the State Attorney, Public Defender, and Clerk of the Court before vote was taken on this important resource.

Why is Mr. Dempsey always vehemently arguing for a solution in search of a problem? 

From a tax funded motocross facility, to eviscerating the perpetuity provisions of Volusia Forever, or protecting potential victims from offenders previously convicted beyond any reasonable doubt of a crime of domestic violence, “Drama Don” Dempsey seems to feed on contrived controversy…

To their credit, the Volusia County Council ultimately voted 6-1 (you guess it, Councilman Dempsey cast the lone “No” vote…) to approve creating the database of convicted domestic violence offenders that will date back a decade – in my view, a valuable means of holding batterers accountable while providing a resource for anyone seeking to make an informed decision. 

It is the first of its kind in Florida.  That’s leadership.

Kudos to Councilman Matt Reinhart for continuing his tradition of serving and protecting the citizens of Volusia County. 

Quote of the Week

“The last thing we need at this point in Palm Coast are more residential homes,” Planning Board Vice Chair James Albano said. “We have a plethora of new construction. We have more used houses days-on-market than in a long time. Yet we have no industrial. So, in my opinion, residential right now is low hanging fruit, and we keep hearing that. Well, we need rooftops in order to get commercial. Well, we don’t need another Home Depot or we don’t need another Lowe’s. We need industrial jobs. We need bigger companies with a lot of employees. I think we’re missing the boat just to try to get more people to live here, which is not going to flip the tax base. We need to flip the tax base.”

–Palm Coast Planning Board Vice Chair James Albano, as quoted by FlaglerLive.com, “Palm Coast Planning Board Unanimously Rejects 22,000-Home Western Expansion Over Unanswered Questions,” Thursday, July 16, 2026

The back-and-forth over the City of Palm Coast’s ill-thought “westward expansion” continued last week when the city’s planning board rejected staff recommendations and voted unanimously against two proposed land use changes that would, as FlaglerLive.com explained, “pave the way” (literally) for 22,000 homes west of U.S. 1.

Why? 

Because everyone agrees the project’s planning is still half-baked – with Palm Coast officials still flying blind – and much more information needed to determine how necessary public infrastructure will be funded.

The development would add 55,000 new residents at buildout in 2056.

According to the report, “The Planning Board said the proposal left too many questions unanswered and too many stakeholders–the School Board, the county, neighboring residents–on the sidelines while giving residential development a priority the city does not need right now, compared to commercial and industrial development. Board members were also concerned about the proposal’s malleability at the hands of future developers, much of it, possibly, out of public view, since it diminishes the regulatory role of the board or the City Council.”

Tragically (typically?), the city’s planning apparatus attempted to convince claustrophobic stakeholders that more residential development will be required before commercial/industrial will come…

According to the report, Palm Coast Planning Manager & Development Shill Phong Nguyen explained to board members (with a straight face), “We have to also have that understanding that even though we would like to have non-residential to come in in order to balance our tax base, but the reality kicks in is that you have to have certain number of residential development first in order to do that.”

Be careful what you wish for Palm Coast – and be wary of who plans your family’s future.   

According to reports, Nguyen also explained that the specifics of roadway improvements, and utilities infrastructure – and who will pay for it all – can be revealed during the next phase of negotiations. 

Bullshit.

Why is it “negotiations” for these massive cities within a city always seem like peeling a rotten onion – with more details only available during the next step in the process – requiring blind approvals in order to learn more about the ultimate community/environmental/infrastructure impacts?  

With the Amendment 3 tax shift looming, how communities pay for the malignant growth that the Florida legislature (and malleable local officials) has foisted on existing residents – and who will pay for the increased demand for essential local services – brings this potential fiscal disaster into crystal clear focus.

Here’s a tip o’ the cap to the Palm Coast Planning Board for having the foresight to postpone the city’s “westward expansion” until the true impacts – and ultimate costs – can be determined.   

Now, let’s wait and see what the Palm Coast City Council does on August 4 when they are faced with the question of supporting the decision of their planning advisors – or pushing forward into Palm Coast’s great abyss…

And Another Thing!

“We returned to Daytona Beach with the expectation that the market could support renewed JetBlue service; however, demand has not developed as anticipated, and the financial performance of the flight has been worsening.  Ending service will allow us to redeploy aircraft into markets with stronger demand.”

–Statement from JetBlue announcing the decision to terminate service at Daytona “International” Airport, Thursday, July 16, 2026

“The notification was unexpected, and our team immediately reached out to JetBlue to explore whether there are ways to preserve some level of service—whether through fewer weekly flights or by maintaining service to New York (JFK). We remain hopeful those conversations will continue.”

“While we understand airlines must make business decisions based on their network needs, this news is especially disappointing because of the incredible support our community showed for JetBlue.  From day one, residents, businesses, and visitors embraced the convenience of nonstop service to Boston and New York, and that support demonstrated the strong demand that exists in our market.”

–Statement from Daytona Beach “International” Airport on JetBlue’s decision to terminate service at DAB, Thursday, July 16, 2026

The grossly contradictory statement issued by senior officials at Daytona “International” Airport makes it clear they know nothing about how air carriers make business decisions – and the conflicting hype and spin (“incredible support” and “strong demand”) – diametrically contradicts JetBlue’s explanation that “…demand has not developed as anticipated, and the financial performance of the flight has been worsening.” 

Yeah.  I know.  It’s a damnable lie presented as fact to lessen the blow – and mitigate repeat mistakes.  

That’s just one reason we no longer believe anything coming out of Volusia County government.

Regardless, this story is getting old… 

In 2018, just three-years after Volusia County’s economic development types ponied up some $2.3 million in “public incentives” to lure JetBlue to Daytona “International” Airport – area residents were left holding an empty bag when the carrier fled DAB for more lucrative markets by announcing JetBlue was “consolidating underperforming routes.”

This time they skedaddled in just seven-months…

Nearly a decade ago, in an effort to attract the airline to Daytona Beach, Volusia County officials went so far as developing a “travel bank” comprised of local companies – to include Brown & Brown, the former Consolidated-Tomoka Land Company, International Speedway Corporation, and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University – which were required to spend a quarter-million dollars over two-years with JetBlue. 

In exchange, the budget airline agreed to originate one flight per day to New York’s JFK from Daytona Beach.

Add thousands of dollars in marketing support from area advertising authorities, waived fees, and free upgrades to the airline’s gate location at the DAB terminal, and it was a surprisingly good deal. 

For JetBlue, anyway…

Does anyone over at the Thomas C. Kelly Administration Building ever do that for your small business? 

Just curious…

When the carrier left us rubes in their jetwash, I cynically called it another so-called “investment” of public funds in a private/for-profit enterprise that never panned out, but that doesn’t seem to dissuade Volusia County officials from making the same mistake.

Repeatedly…  

In fact, the history of corporate welfare and government largesse in Volusia County – artificially skewing the playing field for the well-connected in the form of “public/private partnerships” – dates back decades. 

(As you read this, the Volusia County Council is preparing to get taxpayers in the motocross business using the same skeevy sham…)

At DAB, similar incentives have been used to entice low-cost airlines like Silver Airways, Sunwing, Avelo, and Breeze – with some receiving ludicrous “minimum revenue guarantees” to ensure income for the airlines.

To sweeten the pot, in 2025, the Volusia County Council approved a request by airport officials totaling $400,000 in additional public incentives for JetBlue.    

According to a News-Journal report at the time, “The incentives consist of a waiver of all terminal rent fees, landing fees, marketing/advertising support up to $200,000 per market, and inclusion in the annual advertising program ($350,000 approx. value). A transfer of $400,000 from reserves will be executed upon approval of this agenda item to cover the remaining costs of marketing and advertising support.”

What? Volusia County isn’t offering your mom-n-pop a ‘revenue guarantee’ either?

I didn’t think so…

In December 2025, Volusia County celebrated the triumphant return of JetBlue to DAB. 

There were elaborate balloon arches welcoming passengers, a water cannon salute, and hyper-enthusiastic elected and appointed officials who gushed with accolades like “Significant win!” and “Carrying on the momentum!” accompanied by plenty of backslapping and “It takes a village (and a lot of our money) to make this happen!” horseshit… 

It was the perfect example of Volusia County’s penchant for ignoring the lessons of the past – which means history always repeats around these parts – another reckless and irresponsible waste that left many area residents shaking their heads… 

You guessed it.  Last week, JetBlue announced it was (once again) winging its way out of Daytona Beach as the carrier said it is “ending service on several underperforming routes,” to consolidate service at Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood.  

Sound familiar?

According to published reports, JetBlue will end service at DAB on September 9.

In the highly volatile world of commercial aviation, carriers analyze demand, study costs, and consider logistics, then identify where they can be competitive, selecting routes based on their profitability in keeping with the carrier’s strategic route expansion/contraction. 

The fact Volusia County held out another lucrative goody bag to “lure” JetBlue back to this Hooterville market simply proves the old idiom, “A fool and our money are soon parted.” 

I often wonder if those economic development shills who gamble fast and loose with publicly funded spiffs would be so quick to shower the same “incentives” if they were playing with their own money? 

You know that old proverb, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

Whatever…

Despite what we are told, repeating mistakes with public funds – time after time – isn’t normal, logical, or ethical. 

That’s not “economic development,” it’s the textbook definition of insanity… 

That’s all for me.  Have a great weekend, y’all!