You got it, right?
Please take a look, and let our staff know what you think. The editorial board is Ana Garcia and Maria Camara.
At the Commission meeting where it was decided to reinstate Commissioner columns, there was a lot of discussion as to how much room (how many words) each Commissioner would be allowed. The maximum was finally placed at 500. Looking at these columns, appreciating their content, and seeing them laid out in the newsletter, I think less would have been better. There had been a suggestion of a 300 word maximum, but some Commissioners felt this would be stifling to them. Again, now that I see it, I don't think anyone would have been cheated by being a bit more concise.
Further on the matter of what Commissioners have to say, Anderson asks you to get in touch with him if you need anything. Ross goes so far as to list her cell phone number. I will tell you from long personal experience, each one is absolutely good for it. Whether they agree or disagree, you will hear back from them. More or less promptly. And neither will stop discussing any matter with you until you're satisfied that you were heard, and that you were taken very seriously. Sometimes you persuade them, and sometimes you don't, but you're never ever ignored by these two Commissioners. Watts lists her Village e-mail as well. Don't hold your breath, and don't expect a lengthy written reply, but you will hear back from her. She might prefer a phone conversation. Jacobs also lists his Village e-mail. In my personal experience, you might get a reply, it will read like prepared remarks, and it won't go far. But he and I aren't exactly the best of pals, so maybe someone else gets from him something closer to the time of day than I do.
To me, the glaring omissions are no column from our CrimeWatch Chairman, and no column from the Foundation. A Village newsletter should have both.
Another important omission concerns a very big change in this Village. We are about to lose someone who has had a profound effect on us. He's not a resident. Mitch Glansberg, our Police Chief, is retiring. Bizarrely, there was almost not one mention of this fact in the whole newsletter, except a closing comment from Roxy Ross. Mitch turned a dysfunctional police force into a regular award-winner, and these guys serve us magnificently well. Mitch will be very much missed around here.
Note the back page. It features three paid ads. The largest one is from Patrick Jaimez, one of our BP-specialist realtors, and a resident of BP. The two smaller ones are from Denis Murphy, a Park resident who is a roofer, and Chuck Ross, also a resident and an accountant. I don't know what Patrick spent for his ad, but Murphy and Ross each spent $50, unless Murphy spent more, because he has a logo.
I don't advertise my business like that, but I once placed an ad-sized spot with a quote I liked. I didn't even identify myself. Anyone can buy a spot for as little as $50. It's not a bad thing to do, and it's a bit of income for the Village.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Monday, August 27, 2012
Yay. For What It's Worth.
Bob Anderson called me this afternoon, to ask if I lost power at all in the storm. No, I didn't. I was surprised to hear anyone did. In fact, he told me someone on 119th west of 8th Avenue did. And someone on 115th near 8th did. He heard a few generators on 11th Place going.
I don't know if I was simply lucky, or if the area that was "hardened" by FPL was spared power loss. If that's what it was, thanks, FPL. Frankly, that's exactly what I hoped would be the result.
I don't know if I was simply lucky, or if the area that was "hardened" by FPL was spared power loss. If that's what it was, thanks, FPL. Frankly, that's exactly what I hoped would be the result.
Friday, August 24, 2012
We're All In This Together
I read today that the Romneys have been able to benefit from a reassessment of a home, so they can pay less property taxes. I don't know where the Romneys live. The last I knew, Mitt was Governor of Massachusetts, and they lived in Belmont. But evidently, they paid cash in 2008 for a house in La Jolla, California. That's a mega-upscale suburb of San Diego. They paid $12 million. Cash. The property tax for a house of that cost is... a lot. But they claimed the property values had gone down, and they wanted to pay less. After some extended dickering with the assessor's office, they got themselves a reduction of $109K. Which presumably means they're still paying a good deal more than that. But hey, anyone who can pay $12M cash for a house, which might be a second house, or a third, or who knows what, can afford the taxes. That's not how the Romneys looked at it. If they could keep the money, they wanted to. It's better in their bank account, maybe the offshore one, than in the coffers of La Jolla, California, the tony town where they wanted to own a house. It's like their federal tax returns, of which they are apparently not ashamed. They are trying as hard as they can not to support the country of which Mitt wants to be President. But not to misrepresent the Romneys, they have done absolutely nothing illegal. Shamefully unpatriotic, maybe. But not illegal.
Some time ago, I did an evaluation for an attorney. The "patient" was a man who had suffered a work injury, and he got a very large settlement. But since he couldn't work any more, he also got Social Security Disability. He also had considerable savings from his very successful career. And he would have been eligible for Medicaid, except that settlement meant that he had plenty of money and didn't need Medicaid. The proposed legal intervention was for him to set up a trust, so the settlement money would be "shielded," and it would not show as an asset for him, and then he could get Medicaid. I had to determine if he understood what he was doing. He sure did. In talking to the attorney later, I noted the little ethical quirk. The attorney laughed, and asked me if I thought this was... "un-American." Actually, yes, I told him. I did.
So here we are, occupying our municipality, which has a unique charm. That's why we like it here. It also has unique limitations, which are the other side of the charm coin. We're quiet, we're low key, we're comparatively modest, as these unique communities go, we don't have any commerce, and we don't have much money. Almost all the money we get, we get from ourselves, through property taxes and utility fees. If we want anything we don't have, we have to provide it for ourselves. Whether it's nice green spaces, a crack and esteemed police department, public art, or anything at all, it's on us, the 3000 of us who live here, to pony up to get it.
It wasn't really that hard to do when property values were inflated. Ad valorem taxes were inflated, too. But property values crashed after '07, and so did our revenues. Many of us now pay less in taxes, except those homesteaded old-timers whose taxes were so ridiculously, irrationally, and statutorily low that assessed values could halve, and those homeowners would still have a 3% increase.
What can we do? We can raise our tax rate, as the Commission appears poised to do. That will help some, and good for them for doing it. We can voluntarily pay extra tax. What, you say? Not likely? I agree. We can donate something to the Foundation, which will use what it gets to do extra projects. The standard buy-in is $20 per household per year. Don't laugh. I know it's next to nothing. Do you want to know how many people I encounter who say they don't have $20, or need to discuss it with their significant other first? Let me just say, we don't have nearly enough twenties. Feel free to cough one up. But in reality, no one is limited to $20. If the Foundation is doing a project that particularly appeals to you, or you want to use Foundation imprimatur to support your own project, please, by all means... Just let us know.
The point is, we, the Village, need help. We need it from you, and there's no place else from where we're going to get it than from you. So please help. I know it sounds foolish, but write the Village an unnecessary check. Take out an ad, or just send a message of some sort, in the newsletter. Donate to your Foundation.
Some time ago, I did an evaluation for an attorney. The "patient" was a man who had suffered a work injury, and he got a very large settlement. But since he couldn't work any more, he also got Social Security Disability. He also had considerable savings from his very successful career. And he would have been eligible for Medicaid, except that settlement meant that he had plenty of money and didn't need Medicaid. The proposed legal intervention was for him to set up a trust, so the settlement money would be "shielded," and it would not show as an asset for him, and then he could get Medicaid. I had to determine if he understood what he was doing. He sure did. In talking to the attorney later, I noted the little ethical quirk. The attorney laughed, and asked me if I thought this was... "un-American." Actually, yes, I told him. I did.
So here we are, occupying our municipality, which has a unique charm. That's why we like it here. It also has unique limitations, which are the other side of the charm coin. We're quiet, we're low key, we're comparatively modest, as these unique communities go, we don't have any commerce, and we don't have much money. Almost all the money we get, we get from ourselves, through property taxes and utility fees. If we want anything we don't have, we have to provide it for ourselves. Whether it's nice green spaces, a crack and esteemed police department, public art, or anything at all, it's on us, the 3000 of us who live here, to pony up to get it.
It wasn't really that hard to do when property values were inflated. Ad valorem taxes were inflated, too. But property values crashed after '07, and so did our revenues. Many of us now pay less in taxes, except those homesteaded old-timers whose taxes were so ridiculously, irrationally, and statutorily low that assessed values could halve, and those homeowners would still have a 3% increase.
What can we do? We can raise our tax rate, as the Commission appears poised to do. That will help some, and good for them for doing it. We can voluntarily pay extra tax. What, you say? Not likely? I agree. We can donate something to the Foundation, which will use what it gets to do extra projects. The standard buy-in is $20 per household per year. Don't laugh. I know it's next to nothing. Do you want to know how many people I encounter who say they don't have $20, or need to discuss it with their significant other first? Let me just say, we don't have nearly enough twenties. Feel free to cough one up. But in reality, no one is limited to $20. If the Foundation is doing a project that particularly appeals to you, or you want to use Foundation imprimatur to support your own project, please, by all means... Just let us know.
The point is, we, the Village, need help. We need it from you, and there's no place else from where we're going to get it than from you. So please help. I know it sounds foolish, but write the Village an unnecessary check. Take out an ad, or just send a message of some sort, in the newsletter. Donate to your Foundation.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Read All About It. Muzzles Taken Off Commishes.
It's been at least a year, maybe more, since Commissioner columns were printed in the newsletter. It was a nasty mess, and you can blame whomever you want, but traditional Commissioner columns were suspended, and now they're to be reinstated. To be honest, when the columns were first pulled, I thought it was the right thing. I saw the two columns that were considered most offensive, and they most definitely were offensive, and I personally agreed that they had no place in a municipal newsletter. But over the many months, and with renewed interest in Commissioner columns, I rethought the matter, and I agree they should be reinstated. We no longer need them, as we did in the past, for substantive updates on what Commissioners are doing with their responsibilities, and how departments are running, because this is the Manager's purview. We definitely need such a column from her. But we elect Commissioners, and if columns let us see whom we elected, then they are a good thing. For better or worse.
The newsletter comes out in a week, and the columns have been submitted. As of today, I've seen them all.
Let's start with Commissioner Watts. Barbara, let me proofread your column next time. Great content, but could be a bit tighter. Barbara Watts has clearly made herself available to her constituents. She's interested, curious, and wants to represent them all. And she's humble. This was her strongest suit. She knows she's new at this, feels appropriately uncertain, and is practically begging to learn. Good for her. She's tentative, but appropriately so, and she's smart enough to be careful.
There's nothing new with Ross. She got an A+ before, and she gets an A+ now. A very high quality Commissioner whose newsletter submission is precisely that feel-good cheerleading her detractors so loved to demean. She tells you what the big issues are, and she lets you know what's on the bright side. She always said she wanted the Village to be a "better place to be," and it's clear she still does.
Anderson was mostly self-congratulatory, but not without reason, and he clearly keeps plodding along, trying to make one thing after another better. And he wants collaboration from all of us. He lets you know this is your job, too. A nice, if careful, submission.
Jacobs was very diplomatic. He gave a nod to most of us, and he highlighted the Boards. Like Anderson, he promotes collaboration. He added, curiously, that "There is even a committee whose entire purpose is to raise money to help fund projects: the Biscayne Park Foundation." It remains to be seen whether he'll find a way to be more supportive of the Foundation than just to mention its existence once. He might also have taken a page from Watts' book, and been a bit more humble. Do you know the one about the guy who was born on third base, and thought he hit a triple? Jacobs appears not to have figured out how he got into office, and how he got to be Mayor.
Ah, Bryan. What a roller coaster. I have to admit, in the fullest candor, that I expected the very worst from Commissioner Dr Cooper. He started right off complaining about the suspension of these columns, an act which he says occurred at a "special" meeting, and which he takes personally. So I was prepared for his usual ranting and mud-slinging. Didn't happen! He started with the few obligatory swipes, but nothing terribly bad, then did his "Thumbs Up," "Questionable," and "Thumbs Down" routine. Now I have to say, he held up well, for a while. His only early squeak, as we clarinet players say, was in criticizing FPL for wanting a rate hike. Really, Bryan, you never got a raise in your life? And you don't agree to pay more for food, clothes, cars, gas, postage stamps, vacations, and everything else that crosses your path? How did you decide FPL shouldn't raise their rates? But you know what? Minor stuff. Really. And I won't fuss with him for spelling Capt Atesiano's name wrong. But at the end, when I've decided he's going to take his version of a high road, he starts to flake out. He criticizes the Commission for agreeing to a lengthy and comprehensive effort to establish rules permitting fences on corner lots, an effort made by the Code Review Committee, then complains that Village residents can't have "historical picket or other tasteful fences" (Gee, I wonder what Village resident might want a picket fence), then cites Miami Shores or Coral Gables as examples of municipalities that do allow these "tasteful" fences. But MSV and CG also allow fences on corner lots, so his citation is a little incoherent, at best.
Then, things get really wacky. He's back to his good old accusatory self. "Officials and a few supporters still seek to limit what you and I read-- attempting to ban...distribution...[of the] Biscayne Times." Yikes, Commissioner Dr. No one ever suggesting banning distribution of the BT. The request was for distribution in any form at all except dumping the paper on every yard. And as for the "still" part, the matter was raised once, was not responded to by the Commission, and has not come to Commission attention again. And what "officials?" I raised the issue, and you and the rest of the Commission ignored it. He's in his happy orbit, but around what?
He finishes with the nuttiest distortion of all. The "Commission passed an Ordinance to change our Village's 79-year tradition of stand alone elections...while giving themselves an extra year in office." You were there, Commissioner Dr. I saw and heard you. Were you not listening, or did you not comprehend the version of English in which the proceeding took place? The Commission did not pass an ordinance to change the election. It passed an ordinance to place the matter on the ballot as a referendum, so the residents could decide. This is the thing you sometimes say you want: openness and inclusion, and listening to residents. And whose terms will be extended by passage of such a change? Watts' and Anderson's, for sure. Yours, Ross', and Jacobs', if you all run and get re-elected in '13.
So a nice start, and a miserable, scrappy, raging, and pathetic finish. But I really did expect worse.
The newsletter comes out in a week, and the columns have been submitted. As of today, I've seen them all.
Let's start with Commissioner Watts. Barbara, let me proofread your column next time. Great content, but could be a bit tighter. Barbara Watts has clearly made herself available to her constituents. She's interested, curious, and wants to represent them all. And she's humble. This was her strongest suit. She knows she's new at this, feels appropriately uncertain, and is practically begging to learn. Good for her. She's tentative, but appropriately so, and she's smart enough to be careful.
There's nothing new with Ross. She got an A+ before, and she gets an A+ now. A very high quality Commissioner whose newsletter submission is precisely that feel-good cheerleading her detractors so loved to demean. She tells you what the big issues are, and she lets you know what's on the bright side. She always said she wanted the Village to be a "better place to be," and it's clear she still does.
Anderson was mostly self-congratulatory, but not without reason, and he clearly keeps plodding along, trying to make one thing after another better. And he wants collaboration from all of us. He lets you know this is your job, too. A nice, if careful, submission.
Jacobs was very diplomatic. He gave a nod to most of us, and he highlighted the Boards. Like Anderson, he promotes collaboration. He added, curiously, that "There is even a committee whose entire purpose is to raise money to help fund projects: the Biscayne Park Foundation." It remains to be seen whether he'll find a way to be more supportive of the Foundation than just to mention its existence once. He might also have taken a page from Watts' book, and been a bit more humble. Do you know the one about the guy who was born on third base, and thought he hit a triple? Jacobs appears not to have figured out how he got into office, and how he got to be Mayor.
Ah, Bryan. What a roller coaster. I have to admit, in the fullest candor, that I expected the very worst from Commissioner Dr Cooper. He started right off complaining about the suspension of these columns, an act which he says occurred at a "special" meeting, and which he takes personally. So I was prepared for his usual ranting and mud-slinging. Didn't happen! He started with the few obligatory swipes, but nothing terribly bad, then did his "Thumbs Up," "Questionable," and "Thumbs Down" routine. Now I have to say, he held up well, for a while. His only early squeak, as we clarinet players say, was in criticizing FPL for wanting a rate hike. Really, Bryan, you never got a raise in your life? And you don't agree to pay more for food, clothes, cars, gas, postage stamps, vacations, and everything else that crosses your path? How did you decide FPL shouldn't raise their rates? But you know what? Minor stuff. Really. And I won't fuss with him for spelling Capt Atesiano's name wrong. But at the end, when I've decided he's going to take his version of a high road, he starts to flake out. He criticizes the Commission for agreeing to a lengthy and comprehensive effort to establish rules permitting fences on corner lots, an effort made by the Code Review Committee, then complains that Village residents can't have "historical picket or other tasteful fences" (Gee, I wonder what Village resident might want a picket fence), then cites Miami Shores or Coral Gables as examples of municipalities that do allow these "tasteful" fences. But MSV and CG also allow fences on corner lots, so his citation is a little incoherent, at best.
Then, things get really wacky. He's back to his good old accusatory self. "Officials and a few supporters still seek to limit what you and I read-- attempting to ban...distribution...[of the] Biscayne Times." Yikes, Commissioner Dr. No one ever suggesting banning distribution of the BT. The request was for distribution in any form at all except dumping the paper on every yard. And as for the "still" part, the matter was raised once, was not responded to by the Commission, and has not come to Commission attention again. And what "officials?" I raised the issue, and you and the rest of the Commission ignored it. He's in his happy orbit, but around what?
He finishes with the nuttiest distortion of all. The "Commission passed an Ordinance to change our Village's 79-year tradition of stand alone elections...while giving themselves an extra year in office." You were there, Commissioner Dr. I saw and heard you. Were you not listening, or did you not comprehend the version of English in which the proceeding took place? The Commission did not pass an ordinance to change the election. It passed an ordinance to place the matter on the ballot as a referendum, so the residents could decide. This is the thing you sometimes say you want: openness and inclusion, and listening to residents. And whose terms will be extended by passage of such a change? Watts' and Anderson's, for sure. Yours, Ross', and Jacobs', if you all run and get re-elected in '13.
So a nice start, and a miserable, scrappy, raging, and pathetic finish. But I really did expect worse.
Friday, August 17, 2012
Too Much of a Good Thing
We're in the morass known as budget workshops. These are the exercises by which the community is supposed to come together to examine and make suggestions about the proposed budget for the coming year. The budget is initially estimated by our Manager, and her employees and advisors, then reviewed privately with each of the Commissioners, then presented formally at the workshops. It is the Manager's expressed fantasy, at least as she expressed it last night, that the central activity of the workshop is the solicitation of public input. You'd think she knew the Mayor better than that by now.
So to come back to the theme of this post, it's not only a good thing if Commissioners understand and inquire about the budget. It's essential. They, not anyone else, have to vote to approve it. To aid them in this responsibility, they are presented the budget in advance, given an opportunity to read it, and given all the opportunity they want to meet with the Manager, and the Finance Director, and the Police Chief, and the Public Works Director, and the Recreation Director, and anyone else they want, so the budget will be as clear to them as they could want. Now therein lies an interesting curiosity. Four of the five Commissioners did see the budget in advance. And those four did meet with Village staff. (Take a guess. The answer lies in the post entitled "Taxation Without Representation" in this blog.) So one Commissioner arrived, another story, with absolutely no advance familiarity with the budget, never having picked up his packet. Funny enough, that Commissioner also used up more time than any other interrogating Village staff about the things he didn't know. But he wasn't trying to find out. He was just criticizing and blaming. As usual. The accusations just keep on coming. (If you can't be bothered to look, and you weren't there-- only five of us were there, so you have loads of company-- I'm talking of course about Commissioner Dr Cooper, our current lead misfit.)
You can't argue with the curiosity and interest that stimulate, or should stimulate, examination of the budget, and asking questions about it. This, as I say, is a good thing. And if Bob Anderson saw that $14,500 were set aside for tree maintenance, and he thought that didn't seem to represent an important enough investment in the protection and expansion of our canopy, it would be a good thing if he said so, which he did, and suggested we dedicate more money to this function, which he also did. The problem comes when Commissioners, who are not municipal managers, not arborists, have not made calls to vendors and other municipal staffs, decide that they should direct our Manager not only to be more ambitious and concerted about tree mainenance, but they actually debate, as in take the time to express themselves, as to how many dollars should be dedicated. They admit, of course, that they don't really know, and they're just picking numbers, wondering then which other initiatives will have to be shorted. This is where the good thing goes bad. The job of the Commission is to tell the Manager that we as a Village want to devote ourselves more to maintenance of our canopy, not to make specific, and irrational, decisions for her. The word we used for this in the last Commission was micromanaging. Apparently, it's still going on. And if you had been there, which you weren't, unless you are Janey Anderson, Chuck Ross, Linda Dillon, Dan Samaria, or I, you would have seen what a dumb and aimless exercise this was. You would have heard our dear Mayor bemoan the amount of money we seem to spend cleaning up past messes, immediately after which he suggested we not be too generous with the tree maintenance part of the budget. Sort of answered your own question there, didn't you, Mayor? Or you would have heard Commissioner Dr Cooper say we caused the deaths of some of our trees by not pruning them, then immediately say he would rather see us invest in increasing the number of trees planted instead of maintaining the ones we have. Do you ever listen to yourself, Commissioner Dr? And you would have heard him extoll the superiority of the oak, the tree he has spent his whole tenure, and a little before, loving to hate and rail against.
Now it would have helped Commissioner Dr Cooper if he had picked up his packet in advance, if he had read it, and if he asked any questions of anyone. He might have known what he was talking about, and what the rest of us were talking about, if that had been his aim. It would also had helped if he had not come 1 1/2 hours late to the first workshop, if he had not left it 45 minutes early, and if he had not come over an hour late to the second workshop. Perhaps he was conscious of his lapses. Perhaps he was self-conscious about them. They do say the best defense is a good offense, and it may be just that vague sense of embarrassment that caused him, as is frankly typical for him, to launch into criticisms of others, blaming them for the usual round of poor judgment or even criminal behavior. You think I'm making this up, right? Perhaps he would have appreciated the Manager's suggestion that we need to elevate our newest employee to greater responsibility, including finding grants, instead of his raking this employee over the coals for possibly being inadequately skilled and experienced in grant-writing, as well as possibly lacking other skills and credentials. Who knew this budget workshop would turn out to be Commissioner Dr Cooper's opportunity to conduct a job interview of someone already selected by the Manager, whose job it is to hire and fire? The best defense, indeed.
And on that important topic of grants, a topic the Commissioner Dr correctly reiterated has long been near and dear to him, the Commissioner Dr was frankly outspoken in demanding we find quality grant-writers. In his completely uninformed opinion, our new employee is apparently not adequately credentialled for this task. What the Commissioner Dr conveniently forgot, and to which he did not respond when reminded*, is that one of his special offers to us when he ran for office was that he himself happened to have abundant experience in writing grant applications, and he would use his considerable talents and experience to help us write them. If he is elected. Well, he was. He fails, more commonly than any other Commissioner, to attend meetings, he does not attend other formal functions, he refuses to attend informal functions, and don't hold your breath waiting for him to step forward to help us write a grant application. His self-appointed mission is to blame and accuse others. Actually lifting a finger is not part of the job description he accepts.
The Mayor did what the Mayor does. He took the time, lots and lots of time, to arrive at his best understanding of some of the issues. Why this didn't happen before the workshops is not known. The result was that he, and the Commission, completely monopolized the workshops. The few of us who bothered to show up were given our standard and perfunctory three minutes, and were then welcome to sit down and shut up. My guess is we were welcome to suck our thumbs, if we wished. Any other attempt to intervene or confront, when the foolishness was rampant and intolerable, was met by a suggestion that we pursue "private conversations" with Commissioners later, and outside. In fact, the Mayor protected Commissioner Dr Cooper from having to answer Commissioner Anderson's attempt to elucidate one of Cooper's more outrageous lies with the same suggestion. The Mayor was, however, more graceful than usual in making gestures of establishing consensus among Commissioners. It was a nice touch.
Commissioner Watts was generally reasonable in her approach. She became as overly detailed and specific as the rest on occasion, and during the second workshop, she launched into a speech that seemed somewhat uncharacteristic for her. If you know "Alice's Restaurant," you will remember near the end when the man at the draft office began to read endless fine print, going on and on for "45 minutes" about something no one could follow. Commissioner Watts didn't speak for 45 minutes, but the effect was the same. Words like "cocaine," and "caffeine," were mentioned by some of us. One peculiarity, just to demonstrate how we spent our time, was the Commissioner's concern about the Manager's suggestion to add 1/2 FTE to the police. The Commissioner wanted to be sure everyone agreed this was a good idea. So she asked the Chief if he agreed. He did. Then she asked Commander Atesiano. Yup, he was good with it, too. Captain Churchman? Check, Commissioner. I guess she thought you just can't be too careful before you agree to let the Manager do her job. And anyway, who would be a better judge of how to manage a municipality and its many functions, including a police force, than someone who teaches XV th century art history to college students? How about someone who teaches middle school subjects to impaired students? A library sciences professor maybe? A paralegal? What about a retiree who used to supervise people who ran a printing press?
Should our elected officials oversee the direction the Manager takes, to make sure it reflects community sentiments? Of course they should. That's why they're there. But none of us needs them to micromanage, or to try to pretend to know and make judgments on things that are not theirs to know. There is a reason the Village agreed to move from failed attempts to have Commissioners manage municipal departments, to the use of a professional manager. It's regressive and foolish to try to tell the Manager how to do her job. We should tell her what's important to us, and how much we think we're prepared to spend. It's not our job to nickel and dime her.
*Correction. My error. At the end of the second workshop, the Commissioner Dr did in fact explain his failure to help us get grants. It appears that the Village's decision not to paint lines on the streets, representing some sort of walking path, a favorite proposal of the Commissioner Dr's, led him to decide to go on strike against the Village. This is why, according to his explanation, he refuses to help us with grants, and it may be why he refuses to come to any Village events. He's punishing us for not doing what he wanted done. Just so's you know.
So to come back to the theme of this post, it's not only a good thing if Commissioners understand and inquire about the budget. It's essential. They, not anyone else, have to vote to approve it. To aid them in this responsibility, they are presented the budget in advance, given an opportunity to read it, and given all the opportunity they want to meet with the Manager, and the Finance Director, and the Police Chief, and the Public Works Director, and the Recreation Director, and anyone else they want, so the budget will be as clear to them as they could want. Now therein lies an interesting curiosity. Four of the five Commissioners did see the budget in advance. And those four did meet with Village staff. (Take a guess. The answer lies in the post entitled "Taxation Without Representation" in this blog.) So one Commissioner arrived, another story, with absolutely no advance familiarity with the budget, never having picked up his packet. Funny enough, that Commissioner also used up more time than any other interrogating Village staff about the things he didn't know. But he wasn't trying to find out. He was just criticizing and blaming. As usual. The accusations just keep on coming. (If you can't be bothered to look, and you weren't there-- only five of us were there, so you have loads of company-- I'm talking of course about Commissioner Dr Cooper, our current lead misfit.)
You can't argue with the curiosity and interest that stimulate, or should stimulate, examination of the budget, and asking questions about it. This, as I say, is a good thing. And if Bob Anderson saw that $14,500 were set aside for tree maintenance, and he thought that didn't seem to represent an important enough investment in the protection and expansion of our canopy, it would be a good thing if he said so, which he did, and suggested we dedicate more money to this function, which he also did. The problem comes when Commissioners, who are not municipal managers, not arborists, have not made calls to vendors and other municipal staffs, decide that they should direct our Manager not only to be more ambitious and concerted about tree mainenance, but they actually debate, as in take the time to express themselves, as to how many dollars should be dedicated. They admit, of course, that they don't really know, and they're just picking numbers, wondering then which other initiatives will have to be shorted. This is where the good thing goes bad. The job of the Commission is to tell the Manager that we as a Village want to devote ourselves more to maintenance of our canopy, not to make specific, and irrational, decisions for her. The word we used for this in the last Commission was micromanaging. Apparently, it's still going on. And if you had been there, which you weren't, unless you are Janey Anderson, Chuck Ross, Linda Dillon, Dan Samaria, or I, you would have seen what a dumb and aimless exercise this was. You would have heard our dear Mayor bemoan the amount of money we seem to spend cleaning up past messes, immediately after which he suggested we not be too generous with the tree maintenance part of the budget. Sort of answered your own question there, didn't you, Mayor? Or you would have heard Commissioner Dr Cooper say we caused the deaths of some of our trees by not pruning them, then immediately say he would rather see us invest in increasing the number of trees planted instead of maintaining the ones we have. Do you ever listen to yourself, Commissioner Dr? And you would have heard him extoll the superiority of the oak, the tree he has spent his whole tenure, and a little before, loving to hate and rail against.
Now it would have helped Commissioner Dr Cooper if he had picked up his packet in advance, if he had read it, and if he asked any questions of anyone. He might have known what he was talking about, and what the rest of us were talking about, if that had been his aim. It would also had helped if he had not come 1 1/2 hours late to the first workshop, if he had not left it 45 minutes early, and if he had not come over an hour late to the second workshop. Perhaps he was conscious of his lapses. Perhaps he was self-conscious about them. They do say the best defense is a good offense, and it may be just that vague sense of embarrassment that caused him, as is frankly typical for him, to launch into criticisms of others, blaming them for the usual round of poor judgment or even criminal behavior. You think I'm making this up, right? Perhaps he would have appreciated the Manager's suggestion that we need to elevate our newest employee to greater responsibility, including finding grants, instead of his raking this employee over the coals for possibly being inadequately skilled and experienced in grant-writing, as well as possibly lacking other skills and credentials. Who knew this budget workshop would turn out to be Commissioner Dr Cooper's opportunity to conduct a job interview of someone already selected by the Manager, whose job it is to hire and fire? The best defense, indeed.
And on that important topic of grants, a topic the Commissioner Dr correctly reiterated has long been near and dear to him, the Commissioner Dr was frankly outspoken in demanding we find quality grant-writers. In his completely uninformed opinion, our new employee is apparently not adequately credentialled for this task. What the Commissioner Dr conveniently forgot, and to which he did not respond when reminded*, is that one of his special offers to us when he ran for office was that he himself happened to have abundant experience in writing grant applications, and he would use his considerable talents and experience to help us write them. If he is elected. Well, he was. He fails, more commonly than any other Commissioner, to attend meetings, he does not attend other formal functions, he refuses to attend informal functions, and don't hold your breath waiting for him to step forward to help us write a grant application. His self-appointed mission is to blame and accuse others. Actually lifting a finger is not part of the job description he accepts.
The Mayor did what the Mayor does. He took the time, lots and lots of time, to arrive at his best understanding of some of the issues. Why this didn't happen before the workshops is not known. The result was that he, and the Commission, completely monopolized the workshops. The few of us who bothered to show up were given our standard and perfunctory three minutes, and were then welcome to sit down and shut up. My guess is we were welcome to suck our thumbs, if we wished. Any other attempt to intervene or confront, when the foolishness was rampant and intolerable, was met by a suggestion that we pursue "private conversations" with Commissioners later, and outside. In fact, the Mayor protected Commissioner Dr Cooper from having to answer Commissioner Anderson's attempt to elucidate one of Cooper's more outrageous lies with the same suggestion. The Mayor was, however, more graceful than usual in making gestures of establishing consensus among Commissioners. It was a nice touch.
Commissioner Watts was generally reasonable in her approach. She became as overly detailed and specific as the rest on occasion, and during the second workshop, she launched into a speech that seemed somewhat uncharacteristic for her. If you know "Alice's Restaurant," you will remember near the end when the man at the draft office began to read endless fine print, going on and on for "45 minutes" about something no one could follow. Commissioner Watts didn't speak for 45 minutes, but the effect was the same. Words like "cocaine," and "caffeine," were mentioned by some of us. One peculiarity, just to demonstrate how we spent our time, was the Commissioner's concern about the Manager's suggestion to add 1/2 FTE to the police. The Commissioner wanted to be sure everyone agreed this was a good idea. So she asked the Chief if he agreed. He did. Then she asked Commander Atesiano. Yup, he was good with it, too. Captain Churchman? Check, Commissioner. I guess she thought you just can't be too careful before you agree to let the Manager do her job. And anyway, who would be a better judge of how to manage a municipality and its many functions, including a police force, than someone who teaches XV th century art history to college students? How about someone who teaches middle school subjects to impaired students? A library sciences professor maybe? A paralegal? What about a retiree who used to supervise people who ran a printing press?
Should our elected officials oversee the direction the Manager takes, to make sure it reflects community sentiments? Of course they should. That's why they're there. But none of us needs them to micromanage, or to try to pretend to know and make judgments on things that are not theirs to know. There is a reason the Village agreed to move from failed attempts to have Commissioners manage municipal departments, to the use of a professional manager. It's regressive and foolish to try to tell the Manager how to do her job. We should tell her what's important to us, and how much we think we're prepared to spend. It's not our job to nickel and dime her.
*Correction. My error. At the end of the second workshop, the Commissioner Dr did in fact explain his failure to help us get grants. It appears that the Village's decision not to paint lines on the streets, representing some sort of walking path, a favorite proposal of the Commissioner Dr's, led him to decide to go on strike against the Village. This is why, according to his explanation, he refuses to help us with grants, and it may be why he refuses to come to any Village events. He's punishing us for not doing what he wanted done. Just so's you know.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
"My Bad"
I apologize. I got a little caught up and a little sloppy, and I fell down somewhat on the self-appointed job. So I'm making it up to you now.
Last Saturday, August 4, we had a Village event. It was a kids' safety day. Let me just say it was a very nice event. It was well-attended by kids and their families, there were lots of activities and displays/booths, and even three of our Commissioners came. There was a bicycle training, with free helmets given out, Joe Chao put together a terrific program about preventing abduction, there were people from the public library, from the Humane Society, from law enforcement, from a branch of the County involved with wildlife (including a live snake), the Cushman school, and other presenters I can't even think of. Did I say there were lots of kids? There were lots of kids. And they brought their parents, who were as intrigued and enthusiastic as the kids. Did I say it was a very nice event? It was a very nice event.
Today (Saturday), we had another Village event. It was a crime watch presentation. Chuck Ross can be a bit of a ham, and he did not disappoint. But it was pure content, and very good and informative stuff. He made plenty of room for Ray Atesiano, who brought Charlie Dayoub and Nick Wollschlager. The turnout was satisfying, given low expectation. Probably 30 residents came. It would have been good if we had had 300. More would even have been better. (More than two Commissioners, which is all that were interested today, would have been better, too. What do you have to do to interest these people in Village events? Evidently, electing them to office and paying them doesn't do it.) We learned about the safety state of our neighborhood, what can be done to improve it (not much, comparatively: more to follow), and what each of us can do. There were simple tips, and more overarching themes. The presentations were excellent, and Chuck, our CrimeWatch Chairman, put together a comprehensive and very valuable slide show. Lots of people had questions, comments, and personal anecdotes to share. It was all very relevant and valuable.
It turns out we are anomalous in the area (BP, Miami Shores, El Portal), as well as in the County and the State. The performance of our police, which is dependent in part on the performance of the citizenry of the Village, is remarkably good, with very low crime rates, and very high "clearance" rates. "Clearance" is the successful resolution of cases, including identification, apprehension, and prosecution of perpetrators. Our statistics are not in anyone else's ball park. Clearance for the first half of this year is 80%. Typical clearance for municipalites is maybe in the 20s. El Portal is trying to crack double digits. Ours is generally in the 30-50% range. There is nothing in the world a municipal police force could possibly do for its residents that ours isn't doing for us. And it's doing it way better than anyone else.
So here are the three things we need to do to perfect our environment. First, we have to see what's going on and call the police if we have doubts about anything we see. If it's a real emergency, as in we all know what a real emergency is, we should call 911. If it's anything less than a real emergency, we should use the non-emergency number, which is 305-476-5423. Why would they choose a number that is so impossible to remember? Because it's also 305-4-POLICE. Nice, huh?
The second thing to do is lock your doors, especially your car doors. When you get out of the car, lock the door. Do it with the key, not with the clicker. As it turns out, a really sophisticated method used by burglars to get valuables out of your car is that they try the door. If it's open, they take what's yours. If it isn't, they go somewhere else.
The third thing we can do is secure the border along the railroad track, between the track and our eastern border. Apparently, many mischief-makers simply cross the track and come into the Village, to make mischief. The best way to secure this border is to build a fence or wall, about 10 feet high, and cover it with something like bougainvillea.
So there you have it, and again, I apologize for not having posted last Saturday's event last Saturday.
Last Saturday, August 4, we had a Village event. It was a kids' safety day. Let me just say it was a very nice event. It was well-attended by kids and their families, there were lots of activities and displays/booths, and even three of our Commissioners came. There was a bicycle training, with free helmets given out, Joe Chao put together a terrific program about preventing abduction, there were people from the public library, from the Humane Society, from law enforcement, from a branch of the County involved with wildlife (including a live snake), the Cushman school, and other presenters I can't even think of. Did I say there were lots of kids? There were lots of kids. And they brought their parents, who were as intrigued and enthusiastic as the kids. Did I say it was a very nice event? It was a very nice event.
Today (Saturday), we had another Village event. It was a crime watch presentation. Chuck Ross can be a bit of a ham, and he did not disappoint. But it was pure content, and very good and informative stuff. He made plenty of room for Ray Atesiano, who brought Charlie Dayoub and Nick Wollschlager. The turnout was satisfying, given low expectation. Probably 30 residents came. It would have been good if we had had 300. More would even have been better. (More than two Commissioners, which is all that were interested today, would have been better, too. What do you have to do to interest these people in Village events? Evidently, electing them to office and paying them doesn't do it.) We learned about the safety state of our neighborhood, what can be done to improve it (not much, comparatively: more to follow), and what each of us can do. There were simple tips, and more overarching themes. The presentations were excellent, and Chuck, our CrimeWatch Chairman, put together a comprehensive and very valuable slide show. Lots of people had questions, comments, and personal anecdotes to share. It was all very relevant and valuable.
It turns out we are anomalous in the area (BP, Miami Shores, El Portal), as well as in the County and the State. The performance of our police, which is dependent in part on the performance of the citizenry of the Village, is remarkably good, with very low crime rates, and very high "clearance" rates. "Clearance" is the successful resolution of cases, including identification, apprehension, and prosecution of perpetrators. Our statistics are not in anyone else's ball park. Clearance for the first half of this year is 80%. Typical clearance for municipalites is maybe in the 20s. El Portal is trying to crack double digits. Ours is generally in the 30-50% range. There is nothing in the world a municipal police force could possibly do for its residents that ours isn't doing for us. And it's doing it way better than anyone else.
So here are the three things we need to do to perfect our environment. First, we have to see what's going on and call the police if we have doubts about anything we see. If it's a real emergency, as in we all know what a real emergency is, we should call 911. If it's anything less than a real emergency, we should use the non-emergency number, which is 305-476-5423. Why would they choose a number that is so impossible to remember? Because it's also 305-4-POLICE. Nice, huh?
The second thing to do is lock your doors, especially your car doors. When you get out of the car, lock the door. Do it with the key, not with the clicker. As it turns out, a really sophisticated method used by burglars to get valuables out of your car is that they try the door. If it's open, they take what's yours. If it isn't, they go somewhere else.
The third thing we can do is secure the border along the railroad track, between the track and our eastern border. Apparently, many mischief-makers simply cross the track and come into the Village, to make mischief. The best way to secure this border is to build a fence or wall, about 10 feet high, and cover it with something like bougainvillea.
So there you have it, and again, I apologize for not having posted last Saturday's event last Saturday.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
And Another Thing, Commissioner Dr...
Do you know what a brainstem response is? It's what your body and your nervous system will do if your brain has died. There are some reflexes that do not extinguish, even when you're brain dead.
Whenever someone mentions codes, or rules, Commissioner Dr Cooper exhibits a brainstem response. He cautions, in the most dire ways, about the nefarious incursions of government, and illustrates how government victimizes people. His fantasies sound like they are about particular leaders, or maybe code enforcement officers, who will hound and harass residents whom they have singled out for abuse. His usual examples, and the one he invoked last night, are about compromised people, in this case someone with cancer, and upon whom the cruel code enforcement officer (and Code Review Board?, and Commission?) descends to torment.
But apart from the particular heart-rending horror stories, there is a broader theme. An overarching complaint. Can't people live in peace, wonders the Commissioner Dr? Must their lives be regimented, and their liberties and even freedom of expression be curtailed? What if they like their landscaping, and their home maintenance, like that?
The answer is this, Commissioner Dr Cooper: No, they cannot live in the peace you fantasy. Yes, something in the maintenance of their properties must be regimented. If they can't cut their grass or control their plantings, because they're sick, or poor, or just don't particularly feel like it, someone will do it for them. And as of last night, who does it for them, which is the Village, will be compensated.
We live together in this home we share. We chose it this way. At some level, and in some ways, we are answerable to each other. If we can't be bothered, or make the expense, to do something about chipping paint, or unfinished roofing, that's not OK with our neighbors. It's part of the cost of living with other people, in a municipality.
But there is an answer to this problem. None of us has to live with the rest. Any of us can choose to live out in the country, not in a municipality, where no one will tax us, or make rules. We don't have to cut the grass, or repaint, or do any repairs, unless we feel like it. God created Montana for a reason.
Whenever someone mentions codes, or rules, Commissioner Dr Cooper exhibits a brainstem response. He cautions, in the most dire ways, about the nefarious incursions of government, and illustrates how government victimizes people. His fantasies sound like they are about particular leaders, or maybe code enforcement officers, who will hound and harass residents whom they have singled out for abuse. His usual examples, and the one he invoked last night, are about compromised people, in this case someone with cancer, and upon whom the cruel code enforcement officer (and Code Review Board?, and Commission?) descends to torment.
But apart from the particular heart-rending horror stories, there is a broader theme. An overarching complaint. Can't people live in peace, wonders the Commissioner Dr? Must their lives be regimented, and their liberties and even freedom of expression be curtailed? What if they like their landscaping, and their home maintenance, like that?
The answer is this, Commissioner Dr Cooper: No, they cannot live in the peace you fantasy. Yes, something in the maintenance of their properties must be regimented. If they can't cut their grass or control their plantings, because they're sick, or poor, or just don't particularly feel like it, someone will do it for them. And as of last night, who does it for them, which is the Village, will be compensated.
We live together in this home we share. We chose it this way. At some level, and in some ways, we are answerable to each other. If we can't be bothered, or make the expense, to do something about chipping paint, or unfinished roofing, that's not OK with our neighbors. It's part of the cost of living with other people, in a municipality.
But there is an answer to this problem. None of us has to live with the rest. Any of us can choose to live out in the country, not in a municipality, where no one will tax us, or make rules. We don't have to cut the grass, or repaint, or do any repairs, unless we feel like it. God created Montana for a reason.
I'm Not Deaf, Blind, and Stupid, You Know.
I know how this looks. So many posts, like so many others. They appear stark, two-dimensional, caricaturish.
Ross and Anderson, reasonable, level-headed, goal-directed, grounded. Watts, out of her element, self-conscious, tangential at first, then growing a perspective, and even an inchoate wisdom, offering sound reasoning and argument. Cooper, in some weird, unfathomable orbit, rarely connecting with anything approaching a reality base, relying mostly on strange and unimaginable, to anyone but him, hypotheses and what-ifs. There is no big picture. There is no forest. Only fantastical trees, growing upside down. And Jacobs, who often appears to think Cooper, and everything else, orbit around him. Stumbling, bumbling, feeling his way very much in the dark, and trying desperately to suppress and control everything around him. Whose favorite refrain, when he has had enough of the meaningless chatter of other people is "I'm calling the question."
I know how this sounds. I know what you're thinking. It's mean-spirited, there is a wretched quality about it, and it's intensely slanted. These people are not like this. Jonas is off on some tired rant. I know. It looks like that when I read it myself.
So please (PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!) come to meetings. See what this really looks like. And when you see how mistaken I am, just let me know, and I will turn this blog over to you, so you can post your own summary. You tell it like it really is.
Look, we were all given an explanation for what has happened to Commission meetings in Biscayne Park. Steve Bernard described it painfully clearly, on many occasions. We were under the influence of suppressing brutes, the majority of the last Commission, and no one could function, or breathe, because the vile beasts were controlling the air. People gave up completely, and even stopped coming to Commission meetings. And it was true. People had, over a few years time, perhaps even before the tenure of the culpable Commissioners, stopped coming. But Bernard explained it as he saw it, and he only wished, on behalf of all of us, that we could have a new, kinder, more open regime. Well now, we have one. And the attendance is more pitiful than ever. The usual suspects were there last night-- Janey Anderson and Chuck Ross, the long-suffering spouses, of course-- and I was there, and so was Barbara Kuhl. Dan Samaria, Linda Dillon. Karen Cohen and Linda Brewer. As I say, the usuals. But we did have one most unusual guest. The First Lady herself, Mme Elizabeth Jacobs. It was never clear what that was all about. But we have never gotten the promised, or at least implied, neighbors back. And no explanation, either.
So please, straighten me out. Straighten out this column. I need some help here.
Ross and Anderson, reasonable, level-headed, goal-directed, grounded. Watts, out of her element, self-conscious, tangential at first, then growing a perspective, and even an inchoate wisdom, offering sound reasoning and argument. Cooper, in some weird, unfathomable orbit, rarely connecting with anything approaching a reality base, relying mostly on strange and unimaginable, to anyone but him, hypotheses and what-ifs. There is no big picture. There is no forest. Only fantastical trees, growing upside down. And Jacobs, who often appears to think Cooper, and everything else, orbit around him. Stumbling, bumbling, feeling his way very much in the dark, and trying desperately to suppress and control everything around him. Whose favorite refrain, when he has had enough of the meaningless chatter of other people is "I'm calling the question."
I know how this sounds. I know what you're thinking. It's mean-spirited, there is a wretched quality about it, and it's intensely slanted. These people are not like this. Jonas is off on some tired rant. I know. It looks like that when I read it myself.
So please (PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!) come to meetings. See what this really looks like. And when you see how mistaken I am, just let me know, and I will turn this blog over to you, so you can post your own summary. You tell it like it really is.
Look, we were all given an explanation for what has happened to Commission meetings in Biscayne Park. Steve Bernard described it painfully clearly, on many occasions. We were under the influence of suppressing brutes, the majority of the last Commission, and no one could function, or breathe, because the vile beasts were controlling the air. People gave up completely, and even stopped coming to Commission meetings. And it was true. People had, over a few years time, perhaps even before the tenure of the culpable Commissioners, stopped coming. But Bernard explained it as he saw it, and he only wished, on behalf of all of us, that we could have a new, kinder, more open regime. Well now, we have one. And the attendance is more pitiful than ever. The usual suspects were there last night-- Janey Anderson and Chuck Ross, the long-suffering spouses, of course-- and I was there, and so was Barbara Kuhl. Dan Samaria, Linda Dillon. Karen Cohen and Linda Brewer. As I say, the usuals. But we did have one most unusual guest. The First Lady herself, Mme Elizabeth Jacobs. It was never clear what that was all about. But we have never gotten the promised, or at least implied, neighbors back. And no explanation, either.
So please, straighten me out. Straighten out this column. I need some help here.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Pissing in the Ocean? Or Spitting into the Wind.
OK, I'm harping. There's a recurring problem, and I want to understand it. My question was this: given that Commissioners say they are responsive to their constituents, but noting that some in particular ignore those voices, or don't even want to hear them, is there some pattern, some way to anticipate, when Commissioners will listen to their constituents, and when they won't? Could we predict when Commissioners, or those Commissioners most prone to the lapse, couldn't care less what Park residents think and want?
The context includes this: last month, our Mayor said he wanted the Commission's blessing to enter into special exploration with CNM about the water, because one family allegedly complained to him. But when a petition signed by over 100 Park residents was presented to the Commission, neither the Mayor nor any other Commissioner bothered even to comment on it. And in the past two months, there was the presentation of an Ordinance to solicit the voice of the residents via a referendum, but the Mayor, and Commissioner Dr Cooper, voted against it. They voted against learning what the residents of Biscayne Park want.
Tonight, the Mayor, that's the one who ignored the petition and voted against the referendum, commented that the "squeaky wheel gets the grease." But he doesn't want to hear the wheel squeak. And when Commissioner Anderson raised the subject of soliciting the opinions of Village residents about which public school they would like their children to attend, he spoke against that, too. He said he didn't want to know opinions, if the Commission might be unable to effect the hypothetically desired action. Not that the Commission would be unable. Just that they might, in theory.
Furthermore, our Mayor ran in part on a platform of openness and precision, explicitly about the minutes. In the interest of accuracy and greater completeness of those minutes, he took a leading role in charging the Village Clerk to change the way she composes the minutes, to reflect "salient points," whatever anyone thinks those are. It has taken her many hours to try to distinguish whatever "salient points" she guesses Commissioners meant with their comments. But when Commissioner Ross introduced a list of amendments to prior minutes, His Honor was the only one to vote against admitting those corrections. If those of us down wind of His Honor's caprices and neglect are supposed to feel better, in that he pulls the same nonsense on his colleagues, I don't think it's working.
Similarly, Commissioner Dr Cooper at one point asked, in a challenging way, if Commissioner Ross would be receptive to public input about something. He's not. He's one of the two who voted not even to have to hear it. And regarding the survey about the schools, he argued against such a survey, by asking the possibly rhetorical question as to whether Commissioner Anderson intended frequently to solicit such opinions. I mean really, Commissioner Anderson, are you intending to make a habit of trying to find out what your constituents want? Commissioner Dr Cooper is mostly uninterested in anyone's opinion, though he seems to have inordinate fondness for his own. He regularly carries on foolish debates and arguments with his colleagues, the Village Manager, the Village Attorney, the Finance Director, and others, based on his firm commitment to his quirky and frequently not reality-based opinions.
So not having received an answer to my opening question, I asked again at the end of the meeting. Ross, Anderson, and Watts were dutiful in spouting the usual reassurances that residents' voices were important to these Commissioners. Commissioner Dr Cooper decided to decline an opportunity to respond. His Honor launched into some kind of discourse, but most of us couldn't figure out what he was saying. The closest we could come was to realize he didn't answer the question.
The context includes this: last month, our Mayor said he wanted the Commission's blessing to enter into special exploration with CNM about the water, because one family allegedly complained to him. But when a petition signed by over 100 Park residents was presented to the Commission, neither the Mayor nor any other Commissioner bothered even to comment on it. And in the past two months, there was the presentation of an Ordinance to solicit the voice of the residents via a referendum, but the Mayor, and Commissioner Dr Cooper, voted against it. They voted against learning what the residents of Biscayne Park want.
Tonight, the Mayor, that's the one who ignored the petition and voted against the referendum, commented that the "squeaky wheel gets the grease." But he doesn't want to hear the wheel squeak. And when Commissioner Anderson raised the subject of soliciting the opinions of Village residents about which public school they would like their children to attend, he spoke against that, too. He said he didn't want to know opinions, if the Commission might be unable to effect the hypothetically desired action. Not that the Commission would be unable. Just that they might, in theory.
Furthermore, our Mayor ran in part on a platform of openness and precision, explicitly about the minutes. In the interest of accuracy and greater completeness of those minutes, he took a leading role in charging the Village Clerk to change the way she composes the minutes, to reflect "salient points," whatever anyone thinks those are. It has taken her many hours to try to distinguish whatever "salient points" she guesses Commissioners meant with their comments. But when Commissioner Ross introduced a list of amendments to prior minutes, His Honor was the only one to vote against admitting those corrections. If those of us down wind of His Honor's caprices and neglect are supposed to feel better, in that he pulls the same nonsense on his colleagues, I don't think it's working.
Similarly, Commissioner Dr Cooper at one point asked, in a challenging way, if Commissioner Ross would be receptive to public input about something. He's not. He's one of the two who voted not even to have to hear it. And regarding the survey about the schools, he argued against such a survey, by asking the possibly rhetorical question as to whether Commissioner Anderson intended frequently to solicit such opinions. I mean really, Commissioner Anderson, are you intending to make a habit of trying to find out what your constituents want? Commissioner Dr Cooper is mostly uninterested in anyone's opinion, though he seems to have inordinate fondness for his own. He regularly carries on foolish debates and arguments with his colleagues, the Village Manager, the Village Attorney, the Finance Director, and others, based on his firm commitment to his quirky and frequently not reality-based opinions.
So not having received an answer to my opening question, I asked again at the end of the meeting. Ross, Anderson, and Watts were dutiful in spouting the usual reassurances that residents' voices were important to these Commissioners. Commissioner Dr Cooper decided to decline an opportunity to respond. His Honor launched into some kind of discourse, but most of us couldn't figure out what he was saying. The closest we could come was to realize he didn't answer the question.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Eats.
I admit I don't go to Revales much, but I decided to take myself to breakfast there today. Gone. The head waiter had made noises in this direction earlier this year, but they hung on until they didn't any more. It was a nice place. Friendlier and a bit more upscale in its presentation than some other cheap, local eateries. Oh, well. I guess Chester and his lads will have to go bestow themselves on someone else.
So I went to Bagel and Co. ("Guns and Bagels"). A good standard, where you run into your neighbors. Today, it was the Chao's. (Spells like chaos, if you don't use the apostrophe, but they seemed sedate to me, so I used one.) The food is good, and it is, in fact, cheap.
I'm not a Jimmy's denizen, for no particular reason. I've eaten there, but I just don't make a habit of it. I also ate at the Gourmet Diner once, and I don't even know why I don't go there. I don't remember disliking it, and I don't remember if it was expensive.
Some people go to Panera, and I've been there. It's not bad, and the coffee is excellent. Who knows how we establish the habits we do?
I pretty much only go one place for lunch. Kebab, on 167th at NE 6th. The buffet lunch is Tuesday to Friday, 11:30-3, the food is great (I love Indian food, and I've eaten it at lots of places), and it's dirt cheap for all you can eat.
For dinner, I make the rounds of just a few places when I go out. Top of the list for me is Ricky Thai on 123rd just west of Biscayne. The best, and cheapest, Thai food I know, and you see your friends there, unless you brought them with you. They only have two problems. The place is so small, that sometimes you can't eat there. And the service is very slow, so it can take a long time to get dinner ordered, served, and eaten. But if you have time, that's the place. Also, you have to be prepared to feel like a thief for paying as little as you do for what you get. Some of us tried to get Giuliano to raise the prices, and he did a little, but it's still too cheap. So we tip bigger.
Victor Romano and Steve Taylor put me onto Slices, on Biscayne and the upper 130s. It's the place that used to be Scorch. Scorch was so-so. Slices is great. The big deal is their "Rodizio" service, which is all you can eat pizza, pasta, and risotto, which they make extremely well. The price before 7 is $12.95, and after 7 it's $15.95. Fabulous. But it's only pizza, pasta, and risotto. If you want salad or something, it's extra. And they use a bit more cheese than I like. But no question, it tastes great. And it's all you can eat. (You get my little problem, right?) They claim to have an even cheaper lunch price, but since they don't open until 5:30, it's sort of a weird loose end.
I think the new/old name is going to be Ouzo. That's what it was on Normandy Isle. Then they tried to get really trendy, by going to South Beach. Then they came up to 78th, just east of Biscayne, and opened as Anise. This was a wonderful place. Great, great Greek food. I don't know what happened, apart from the divorce, but they wound up as RiverShack, which was supposed to suggest road house or something (it was sort of like upscale diner food), and now they're reportedly going back to Greek. They shuffle chefs like nobody's business, so who knows who's going to be cooking. But I'm definitely going back. RiverShack was frankly not a hit. Their Greek is.
Little Havana at Biscayne in the mid-120s is perfectly good, but I'm partial to La Carreta. Speaking of which, a couple of blocks further west on SW 8th Street is Cava. Beautiful place, made up to look like a brick-lined cave, very good Spanish (not Cuban/Caribbean) food, and flamenco at about 8 about three nights a week: Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. It's worth the drive. A most enjoyable venue for the food and the floor show.
Metro, on Biscayne at about 70th, is not cheap, but it is terrific. Their shtick is meat from properly raised animals. I was there once. Wonderful food.
There are lots of other places, and you're welcome to "comment" on them, but these were the few I frequent, and about which I felt like communicating. Oh, one more, because it's interesting. Cane A Sucre used to be a long list of other places. There was a Mexican or two, and it was Dogma north. I'm talking about 125th and NE 9th. Nobody makes it there. I don't know why. Cane A Sucre has really terrific sandwiches and soup. And you would expect to pay more. Check 'em out.
So I went to Bagel and Co. ("Guns and Bagels"). A good standard, where you run into your neighbors. Today, it was the Chao's. (Spells like chaos, if you don't use the apostrophe, but they seemed sedate to me, so I used one.) The food is good, and it is, in fact, cheap.
I'm not a Jimmy's denizen, for no particular reason. I've eaten there, but I just don't make a habit of it. I also ate at the Gourmet Diner once, and I don't even know why I don't go there. I don't remember disliking it, and I don't remember if it was expensive.
Some people go to Panera, and I've been there. It's not bad, and the coffee is excellent. Who knows how we establish the habits we do?
I pretty much only go one place for lunch. Kebab, on 167th at NE 6th. The buffet lunch is Tuesday to Friday, 11:30-3, the food is great (I love Indian food, and I've eaten it at lots of places), and it's dirt cheap for all you can eat.
For dinner, I make the rounds of just a few places when I go out. Top of the list for me is Ricky Thai on 123rd just west of Biscayne. The best, and cheapest, Thai food I know, and you see your friends there, unless you brought them with you. They only have two problems. The place is so small, that sometimes you can't eat there. And the service is very slow, so it can take a long time to get dinner ordered, served, and eaten. But if you have time, that's the place. Also, you have to be prepared to feel like a thief for paying as little as you do for what you get. Some of us tried to get Giuliano to raise the prices, and he did a little, but it's still too cheap. So we tip bigger.
Victor Romano and Steve Taylor put me onto Slices, on Biscayne and the upper 130s. It's the place that used to be Scorch. Scorch was so-so. Slices is great. The big deal is their "Rodizio" service, which is all you can eat pizza, pasta, and risotto, which they make extremely well. The price before 7 is $12.95, and after 7 it's $15.95. Fabulous. But it's only pizza, pasta, and risotto. If you want salad or something, it's extra. And they use a bit more cheese than I like. But no question, it tastes great. And it's all you can eat. (You get my little problem, right?) They claim to have an even cheaper lunch price, but since they don't open until 5:30, it's sort of a weird loose end.
I think the new/old name is going to be Ouzo. That's what it was on Normandy Isle. Then they tried to get really trendy, by going to South Beach. Then they came up to 78th, just east of Biscayne, and opened as Anise. This was a wonderful place. Great, great Greek food. I don't know what happened, apart from the divorce, but they wound up as RiverShack, which was supposed to suggest road house or something (it was sort of like upscale diner food), and now they're reportedly going back to Greek. They shuffle chefs like nobody's business, so who knows who's going to be cooking. But I'm definitely going back. RiverShack was frankly not a hit. Their Greek is.
Little Havana at Biscayne in the mid-120s is perfectly good, but I'm partial to La Carreta. Speaking of which, a couple of blocks further west on SW 8th Street is Cava. Beautiful place, made up to look like a brick-lined cave, very good Spanish (not Cuban/Caribbean) food, and flamenco at about 8 about three nights a week: Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. It's worth the drive. A most enjoyable venue for the food and the floor show.
Metro, on Biscayne at about 70th, is not cheap, but it is terrific. Their shtick is meat from properly raised animals. I was there once. Wonderful food.
There are lots of other places, and you're welcome to "comment" on them, but these were the few I frequent, and about which I felt like communicating. Oh, one more, because it's interesting. Cane A Sucre used to be a long list of other places. There was a Mexican or two, and it was Dogma north. I'm talking about 125th and NE 9th. Nobody makes it there. I don't know why. Cane A Sucre has really terrific sandwiches and soup. And you would expect to pay more. Check 'em out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)