From time to time, a reader of this blog will write to me to complain or criticize. A very recent example was regarding my "What Goes Around Comes Around" post, and the complaint, or criticism, was to tell me I was wrong about what I said. I said an FPL representative said FPL would not give us a cherry picker, because FPL were mad at us about something. The reader said that was not believable, and that he imagined FPL would not give us a cherry picker under any circumstances, because a cherry picker is not something even FPL could simply give away. The fact is, I agree with the reader. I don't think FPL would give away a cherry picker either, for exactly the reasons the reader suspected. I think the FPL representative who said no was communicating both a position from FPL about cherry pickers, and a component of anger at us, and disguised the former under the latter, saying it was our fault, not their fault, that they wouldn't give us a cherry picker. They're not stingy. We're rude. Yup, that's my guess, too.
Toward the end of 2011, I wrote a post called "Heads Up." I communicated a rumor I heard. I clearly identified it, repeatedly, as a rumor. I got a good deal of flak for that post (I took it down under the weight of several readers telling me it was offensive), and one reader wrote to tell me the rumor was wrong. That is, the reader said what I heard was not true and did not happen. That was certainly one of the possibilities, and I asked, also repeatedly, that anyone with any information better than mine let me know whether the rumor was true or it wasn't. Unfortunately for the process, the one reader who did tell me the rumor was not true was in no way directly involved in the matter and could not have known whether the rumor was true, except on the basis of someone who really did know telling him. Frankly, I would much have preferred that someone directly involved tell me I was wrong. And interestingly, several people said my report was offensive, but only one, who was not directly involved, said it was not true. Hmmm.
In any event, the disclaimer is this: this blog is not fanciful. It is not my outlet for any designs I may have to be a fiction writer. It's certainly true that it includes my opinion, or the opinion of anyone who contributes to it. It's also true that I don't at all mind trying to be funny. Or a wiseguy. But anything I write is based on fact, at least as I know it, and the facts are clearly articulated in the post. I don't intend to write anything that is not factually true. If I ever guess about something, I endeavor always to make clear that I am guessing about whatever it is. If I'm wrong about anything, I want very much to be so informed, and I will always stand corrected when I'm persuaded that I made a mistake.
My report about FPL was a report of something that was said. I did not make it up. I don't guarantee that the reason given was the true reason. I do guarantee it was the reason given. The rumor was one I heard. I don't guarantee it was true. I do guarantee it was said. I invite all readers to have the greatest confidence in my honesty. I would make quite a fool of myself if I asserted as true things that were not only false, but that it could be shown I invented. I have no reason to do that. There's more than enough material for this blog without my making things up. And I will say again, as I have said so many times before, if you don't believe me, go check it out. If you think my descriptions of things like meetings are unimaginable (I agree, it would be hard to make this stuff up), come to meetings, and see for yourself. And if you ever find me to be wrong about something, or even if you have a different, but equally valid, opinion, PLEASE correct me. Correct the record. You can send me an e-mail, or better yet, just enter a Comment. You will publish your own material, right there in the blog. I don't touch comments. I think there's a way I can delete them, but I can't edit them. And I don't delete them. I wouldn't.
Send anything you want to vbpblogger@gmail.com (those e-mails will go directly to me), or use the Comment opportunity at the end of every post. If you can't get it to post, which some people tell me happens to them, send your comment to me as e-mail, and I'll post it for you. If you want me to fix the grammar or spelling for you, tell me so. Otherwise, I will simply cut and paste whatever you send. I will sign it with your name. If you want to say I was wrong about something, please feel free. If you want to say I'm a criminal and a horrible individual, go for it. It was my idea, but it's all of our blog.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Saturday, January 26, 2013
MLK Day of Service, January, 2013
Today's project was a clean-up on 121st Street, much as we did last year. This year, we continued where we left off, and covered 5th Avenue to 8th.
It was a pretty nice group of residents, few, but dedicated and ready to do a bit of physical work. Chuck and Roxy Ross were there, as were the Kuhls, Dale Blanton came, Barbara Kiers was relentless and expert in her work, Josh Young was there, a woman named Kirsten was there, and I was there. Barbara Watts came by later to say hello. I think I saw everyone, and I hope I didn't forget to mention anyone. Ana Garcia gave up her Saturday morning, as did several of our Public Works guys. Some of our police came to provide guard duty, and a contingent of the CNM PW guys came. Even their PW Chief was there at the start. And they brought a cherry picker (yes, a cherry picker), and a grinding/mulching truck. Extremely helpful.
Some people could not join us today, but they made or will make donations. Donations are welcome, and checks can be made out to the Village, with a notation of MLK Day of Service contribution. Donations like this are tax-deductible.
We raked and cleaned, we pulled overgrowth, we eliminated some plants that are invasive and will crowd out other plants, and we identified some larger trees that need to come out. The CNM guys will put it on their schedule and get it done. If they need any help, I hope they call us, because they sure were helpful to us.
The difference in the look is not dramatic, but it's noticeably cleaner and tidier. The more important effect is to raise consciousness and spur people to take more of an interest in the medians. If we can get a median plan developed, the improved medians are now ripe for further development.
It was a pretty nice group of residents, few, but dedicated and ready to do a bit of physical work. Chuck and Roxy Ross were there, as were the Kuhls, Dale Blanton came, Barbara Kiers was relentless and expert in her work, Josh Young was there, a woman named Kirsten was there, and I was there. Barbara Watts came by later to say hello. I think I saw everyone, and I hope I didn't forget to mention anyone. Ana Garcia gave up her Saturday morning, as did several of our Public Works guys. Some of our police came to provide guard duty, and a contingent of the CNM PW guys came. Even their PW Chief was there at the start. And they brought a cherry picker (yes, a cherry picker), and a grinding/mulching truck. Extremely helpful.
Some people could not join us today, but they made or will make donations. Donations are welcome, and checks can be made out to the Village, with a notation of MLK Day of Service contribution. Donations like this are tax-deductible.
We raked and cleaned, we pulled overgrowth, we eliminated some plants that are invasive and will crowd out other plants, and we identified some larger trees that need to come out. The CNM guys will put it on their schedule and get it done. If they need any help, I hope they call us, because they sure were helpful to us.
The difference in the look is not dramatic, but it's noticeably cleaner and tidier. The more important effect is to raise consciousness and spur people to take more of an interest in the medians. If we can get a median plan developed, the improved medians are now ripe for further development.
What Goes Around Comes Around
From the outset, I was certainly well aware of the dynamics. The Village had jerked FPL around for a couple of years, squandering both $22K in appreciation if we signed the Franchise Agreement early, and the good will of FPL that would have gone with it. We didn't accomplish anything, but some in the Village wanted their version of showing FPL who was boss. Well, we sure showed them. We then gave them trouble about the hardening project. Another losing battle, which resulted in an improved neighborhood, thanks to FPL, and increasing ill will from them, for the continuing and pointless aggravation we lavished on them.
A couple of months or so ago, I reached out to FPL, to ask them if by any chance they had one of those "cherry pickers," the truck with the small stand that can be elevated to do work at heights, that they were perhaps going to retire, to be replaced with a new one. We have tree-trimming we can't do, in part because PW has not developed the expertise, but also because we can't reach areas to be trimmed. One of those cherry pickers would do us nicely. So I asked if maybe we could have one of those aging ones, or if they could sell it to us cheap. Knowing how we treated them, though, and that it could possibly be that they're not feeling the love from BP, I alternatively asked if they could give or sell cheap a cherry picker to me, so I could give it to the Village.
I went as high in FPL as I could, and the answer was no. It wasn't no, we don't have any cherry pickers we're planning to cycle out. It wasn't no, we couldn't just give away, or even sell cheap, an item of such value. It was no, considering the way BP has treated us, we would not possibly gratuitously do anything of such a special and generous nature for the Village.
Euphemisms for the title of this post are "As you sow, so shall you reap," shooting yourself (ourselves) in the foot, or spitting into the wind. We really did ourselves a wonderful job in our treatment of FPL, and we have egg, or spit, on our faces to show for it. And we're out $22K and possibly a cherry picker. What some of us unsuccessfully fought was a Franchise Agreement, which is very good for us, and a hardened network of power lines, which is also very good for us. Some well-placed thinking caps, huh?
A couple of months or so ago, I reached out to FPL, to ask them if by any chance they had one of those "cherry pickers," the truck with the small stand that can be elevated to do work at heights, that they were perhaps going to retire, to be replaced with a new one. We have tree-trimming we can't do, in part because PW has not developed the expertise, but also because we can't reach areas to be trimmed. One of those cherry pickers would do us nicely. So I asked if maybe we could have one of those aging ones, or if they could sell it to us cheap. Knowing how we treated them, though, and that it could possibly be that they're not feeling the love from BP, I alternatively asked if they could give or sell cheap a cherry picker to me, so I could give it to the Village.
I went as high in FPL as I could, and the answer was no. It wasn't no, we don't have any cherry pickers we're planning to cycle out. It wasn't no, we couldn't just give away, or even sell cheap, an item of such value. It was no, considering the way BP has treated us, we would not possibly gratuitously do anything of such a special and generous nature for the Village.
Euphemisms for the title of this post are "As you sow, so shall you reap," shooting yourself (ourselves) in the foot, or spitting into the wind. We really did ourselves a wonderful job in our treatment of FPL, and we have egg, or spit, on our faces to show for it. And we're out $22K and possibly a cherry picker. What some of us unsuccessfully fought was a Franchise Agreement, which is very good for us, and a hardened network of power lines, which is also very good for us. Some well-placed thinking caps, huh?
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Oh, Shoot.
Linda Dillon and I have been having a debate about guns. We decided to continue the conversation on neutral territory, so we met at the Hollywood Rifle and Pistol Club. It seems Linda was going to win this debate, one way or another.
In reality, Linda and I are friends, and we arranged that I would come to the club to shoot with her. And experience what we're talking about. She told me to come at about 1:00 or so, since she was shooting in a competition just before then.
Not being entirely obedient, I showed up early, at about 12:15. As it turns out, the competition was over, and Linda was done. As it also turns out, which Linda learned a bit later, she won! I saw her target, which she punctured repeatedly from 50 yards away. There are lots of small targets on one larger piece of paper. How she could have seen them from 50 yards away is beyond me. How she got so many bullseyes is astonishing. The bullets were 22s, which are very small, and the bullseyes are exactly the diameter of the bullet.
Linda brought a 22 pistol for me, and she set me up with a more respectable target. I could see it, and it was about 15 yards away. I was satisfied with how I did, and so was Linda. Every shot hit the target, and some were 9s. Not bad, since I haven't held a gun since summer camp, literally 50 years ago.
Linda and her friends at the club are very serious gun owners. And they're very responsible. When I arrived, early, Linda was orienting a new member. She told him the rules, and she told him about the two people who were kicked out of the club for not following them to a T. Safety is rule 1. It's also most of the rest of the rules. Everybody's careful, all the time. There are no cowboys and no wiseguys at the club. These gun enthusiasts enjoy their hobby, they know how to have fun with it, and they are very respectful of the enterprise. If all gun owners and users were like that...
If all owners and enthusiasts were as careful and respectful as the Hollywood Rifle and Pistol crowd. If only level-headed and not rageful people had guns. If the people who bought guns kept them locked securely away all the time, and didn't sell them to someone else, whose intentions and level of respect were not as reliable. If guns didn't get stolen from people who know how to appreciate and respect them, by people who only want trouble.
Linda will never change her mind about guns. If all gun owners were like Linda, I might change mine.
In reality, Linda and I are friends, and we arranged that I would come to the club to shoot with her. And experience what we're talking about. She told me to come at about 1:00 or so, since she was shooting in a competition just before then.
Not being entirely obedient, I showed up early, at about 12:15. As it turns out, the competition was over, and Linda was done. As it also turns out, which Linda learned a bit later, she won! I saw her target, which she punctured repeatedly from 50 yards away. There are lots of small targets on one larger piece of paper. How she could have seen them from 50 yards away is beyond me. How she got so many bullseyes is astonishing. The bullets were 22s, which are very small, and the bullseyes are exactly the diameter of the bullet.
Linda brought a 22 pistol for me, and she set me up with a more respectable target. I could see it, and it was about 15 yards away. I was satisfied with how I did, and so was Linda. Every shot hit the target, and some were 9s. Not bad, since I haven't held a gun since summer camp, literally 50 years ago.
Linda and her friends at the club are very serious gun owners. And they're very responsible. When I arrived, early, Linda was orienting a new member. She told him the rules, and she told him about the two people who were kicked out of the club for not following them to a T. Safety is rule 1. It's also most of the rest of the rules. Everybody's careful, all the time. There are no cowboys and no wiseguys at the club. These gun enthusiasts enjoy their hobby, they know how to have fun with it, and they are very respectful of the enterprise. If all gun owners and users were like that...
If all owners and enthusiasts were as careful and respectful as the Hollywood Rifle and Pistol crowd. If only level-headed and not rageful people had guns. If the people who bought guns kept them locked securely away all the time, and didn't sell them to someone else, whose intentions and level of respect were not as reliable. If guns didn't get stolen from people who know how to appreciate and respect them, by people who only want trouble.
Linda will never change her mind about guns. If all gun owners were like Linda, I might change mine.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Less Power To You
I'm a comparatively modest user of electric power. I don't watch TV, I don't run the radio much, I don't tend to leave lights on when I'm not in the room, and I don't like conditioned air. My central system is off from some time in October until some time in May. My stove/oven, hot water, and clothes dryer are propane. I do have one unusual need for electric power, and that's my car. It's battery/electric only, and it's plugged in most days. But it doesn't use much power.
And I'm cheap. I watch my bills, and my electric bill is one I monitor closely, just to keep track of it and as a kind of perpetual challenge, to compare it to the amount and usage from the same month in previous years.
I just last week got my most current electric bill. It was very satisfying. It's in the mid 50s, as were the bills from the month before and the month before that. These are within my low usage months, because the central air is off, but I've never had bills this low before, and certainly not three in a row. I must say I was impressed to have gotten it that low.
I've had one of those power usage surveys offered free from FPL, where some guy came out to the house, looked around, asked a lot of questions, told me about his marital problems, and left me a report about how I used power and how I could use less. Some time last year, it seems to me in the late spring or during the summer (it was hot), Chuck Ross, Barbara Kuhl, Maria Camara, and I (I hope I didn't forget anyone) attended a talk given by FPL at the library on NW 7th and 90-something, about energy usage, and how to be more efficient about it. They also gave out free stuff, like about a dozen compact fluorescent bulbs, a water saver shower head, weather stripping, and several other treats. Most of the information was what we all hear all the time, but it wasn't bad to get the reminder. One piece of information was new to me. The advice was to unplug anything that isn't in use, even though it's off. This would include lamps, coffee makers/grinders, radios, my washing machine and dryer, and any other electric appliance that can easily be unplugged when it's not in use. We were told the issue is called something like phantom electricity or a vampire draw on power or some such term, and we were told it actually amounts to a vanishingly small amount of waste. But if you really want to save your money, and you're a purist about such things... So what the hell, I was willing to save even a few cents a month. Better I keep them than give them to FPL, especially if I'm really not using the power, right?
Well, it's the only change I've made in the last year, and it's not a few cents. It appears to be $7-$21 a month in savings. I have to say, I'm impressed, and I'm pleased.
By the way, I now have more compact fluorescent bulbs than I need. So if you could use one, lemme know.
And I'm cheap. I watch my bills, and my electric bill is one I monitor closely, just to keep track of it and as a kind of perpetual challenge, to compare it to the amount and usage from the same month in previous years.
I just last week got my most current electric bill. It was very satisfying. It's in the mid 50s, as were the bills from the month before and the month before that. These are within my low usage months, because the central air is off, but I've never had bills this low before, and certainly not three in a row. I must say I was impressed to have gotten it that low.
I've had one of those power usage surveys offered free from FPL, where some guy came out to the house, looked around, asked a lot of questions, told me about his marital problems, and left me a report about how I used power and how I could use less. Some time last year, it seems to me in the late spring or during the summer (it was hot), Chuck Ross, Barbara Kuhl, Maria Camara, and I (I hope I didn't forget anyone) attended a talk given by FPL at the library on NW 7th and 90-something, about energy usage, and how to be more efficient about it. They also gave out free stuff, like about a dozen compact fluorescent bulbs, a water saver shower head, weather stripping, and several other treats. Most of the information was what we all hear all the time, but it wasn't bad to get the reminder. One piece of information was new to me. The advice was to unplug anything that isn't in use, even though it's off. This would include lamps, coffee makers/grinders, radios, my washing machine and dryer, and any other electric appliance that can easily be unplugged when it's not in use. We were told the issue is called something like phantom electricity or a vampire draw on power or some such term, and we were told it actually amounts to a vanishingly small amount of waste. But if you really want to save your money, and you're a purist about such things... So what the hell, I was willing to save even a few cents a month. Better I keep them than give them to FPL, especially if I'm really not using the power, right?
Well, it's the only change I've made in the last year, and it's not a few cents. It appears to be $7-$21 a month in savings. I have to say, I'm impressed, and I'm pleased.
By the way, I now have more compact fluorescent bulbs than I need. So if you could use one, lemme know.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Anybody Know What's Up with Cooper?
Bryan has been marginal from the outset. He came in with no agenda, except to express his frustration at having had a pet idea turned down. He combined that with some other chronic gripes, but there was never a real foundation there. So he was never really engaged. He demonstrated that by being absent from more Commission meetings than any other Commissioner, often or usually not attending special Commission functions, and never attending any Village function that was not a Commission meeting.
But the gripes continued, and they were accompanied by chronic bad attitude. A favorite tactic was accusing people of things. This tactic was somewhat broadly applied.
One issue that was a combination gripe and accusation was about the minutes of Commission meetings. Bryan, and his sponsor, regularly insisted on amendments to the minutes, then complained bitterly when the amendments were not adopted. But once Bryan was in a position to have any amendment he wanted adopted, he stopped offering them.
Another combination gripe and accusation was about the newsletter, and the fact that Commissioner posts were suspended, mainly because of him and his raging, accusatory post. Commissioner posts were reinstated for the last newsletter, Cooper once again submitted a collection of whining and baseless accusation, and now he hasn't submitted a post for the current newsletter.
So the newsletter complaint is like the minutes complaint. Bryan doesn't seem to want anything. He just wants to complain and accuse.
Bryan continues to miss Commission meetings, too. It's nothing at all new for him, but he recently missed two meetings in a row. And of course he's absent from all other Village functions.
So I don't know what's going on with him. Dan Samaria says he knows, but he's not telling. But perhaps it doesn't matter. Either Bryan is simply disinterested, and has been from the start, or something is going on in his life outside the Village, or both. If it's the former, he should have had the courtesy and the decency to have resigned long ago. If it's the latter, things do happen. They happen to all of us. And as is true of elected officials, Sandra Day O'Connor, new mothers, or any of a range of people, when outside pressures and priorities overwhelm, you just resign.
If you say you have family or health issues, or some other such matter, and you resign a post, you get a certain amount of understanding and sympathy. If you victimize the people you're failing to serve, you lose the understanding and sympathy. I would say Bryan miscalculated here, but it's not my call. And of course, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt at the moment, and not concluding he's out for nothing other than to destroy, which is what I usually think. Right now, I'm thinking about Dan Samaria's comment and the two missed meetings in a row. But even at best, Bryan has to rise to the occasion of propriety. It seems he's not doing it.
Please comment, if you know anything.
But the gripes continued, and they were accompanied by chronic bad attitude. A favorite tactic was accusing people of things. This tactic was somewhat broadly applied.
One issue that was a combination gripe and accusation was about the minutes of Commission meetings. Bryan, and his sponsor, regularly insisted on amendments to the minutes, then complained bitterly when the amendments were not adopted. But once Bryan was in a position to have any amendment he wanted adopted, he stopped offering them.
Another combination gripe and accusation was about the newsletter, and the fact that Commissioner posts were suspended, mainly because of him and his raging, accusatory post. Commissioner posts were reinstated for the last newsletter, Cooper once again submitted a collection of whining and baseless accusation, and now he hasn't submitted a post for the current newsletter.
So the newsletter complaint is like the minutes complaint. Bryan doesn't seem to want anything. He just wants to complain and accuse.
Bryan continues to miss Commission meetings, too. It's nothing at all new for him, but he recently missed two meetings in a row. And of course he's absent from all other Village functions.
So I don't know what's going on with him. Dan Samaria says he knows, but he's not telling. But perhaps it doesn't matter. Either Bryan is simply disinterested, and has been from the start, or something is going on in his life outside the Village, or both. If it's the former, he should have had the courtesy and the decency to have resigned long ago. If it's the latter, things do happen. They happen to all of us. And as is true of elected officials, Sandra Day O'Connor, new mothers, or any of a range of people, when outside pressures and priorities overwhelm, you just resign.
If you say you have family or health issues, or some other such matter, and you resign a post, you get a certain amount of understanding and sympathy. If you victimize the people you're failing to serve, you lose the understanding and sympathy. I would say Bryan miscalculated here, but it's not my call. And of course, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt at the moment, and not concluding he's out for nothing other than to destroy, which is what I usually think. Right now, I'm thinking about Dan Samaria's comment and the two missed meetings in a row. But even at best, Bryan has to rise to the occasion of propriety. It seems he's not doing it.
Please comment, if you know anything.
A Good Constitutional (The Wrongful Right.)
I suppose it's disrespectful to lose track of the spate of attacks and massacres with guns lately, but that's sort of where I am. It's a real "dialogue," too, complete with impassioned arguments on both sides of the gun issue. The latest argument is that the Sandy Hook school shooting is a hoax. Like the Holocaust is a hoax, and men walking on the moon is a hoax, and Barack Obama being born in the US is a hoax.
At this month's Commission meeting, there was a proposed Resolution urging a ban on sales of guns. It's not clear what this was about, since there are no gun sales, or sales of anything else, in BP, and the proposal had no actual meaning, but the sentiment was something about declaring a disapproval of gun violence. I guess there's no real argument there. Even the pro-gun people don't say they like gun violence. They argue that people should be allowed to have guns, and that there may be value in lots of people having lots of guns, because "good guys with guns" inhibit bad guys with guns. That's what the NRA spokesman says. It's a theory, like trickle-down economics is a theory, or Communism is a theory, and people can theorize whatever they want. They all look good on paper.
In the service of pro-gun theories, advocates invariably cite the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Either they're being disgracefully disingenuous, or they misunderstand the Amendment. They think it's about guns and gun ownership. It's not remotely about that. It's purpose and it's intention are very clearly stated, right there in the Amendment. "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." That's the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Short, and sweet. It's not at all about guns. It's about late 18th Century concepts of civil defense, especially in a frontier territory. It's about what, at such a time, was necessary to provide security of such a territory. At that time, and in that place, it was a network of local militias, manned by average citizens, who used and needed to possess their own guns. Absent that presumably critically important need in a late 18th Century frontier territory, where people ate what they hunted, and worried about what they believed were hostile and attacking natives, there is no Second Amendment.
The idea was that the King of England might want to make the colonists impotent, and in the service of so doing, might want to take away the colonists' guns, or method of protection from a predator like, let's say, the King of England. The colonists spotted that scam a mile away and said no. Not in our house. Local generals had to be able to call upon able-bodied men, and those men needed to grab up their rifles and hie it on over to the town square, or wherever the gathering was to occur. There was a battle to wage. This was frankly essential in the late 18th Century, in the colonies. We were dead without that possibility.
Today, we can proudly say we rely on a professional army. The armed forces are at least somewhat selective, and if you qualify, they will take your completely undivided attention for weeks or months, and demand an undiluted commitment for two years minimum. They provide room and board, all training, special clothing, and guns. You have your own? Leave it at home, with your favorite blue jeans and you letter sweater. It's not regulation, it's not good enough, and it's not needed.
If you google, or Bing, "archaic laws s" the engine will automatically fill in "till on the books." Yes, it's a real topic, and they already know what you want to know. You can find Federal archaic laws still on the books, and even such laws for every state. The Second Amendment to the US Constitution is not listed as an archaic law still on the books, but that's what it is.
The United States does not depend on militias any more. It does not need or want any able-bodied man who is motivated to come out on a moment's notice to fight someone about something. If the average person volunteers for such an impulsive adventure, the armed forces will decline. In fact, the citizen will probably be arrested for interfering. And if someone is interested and qualifies, the country does not depend on such a person's happening to have his own gun. In fact, such a person would not be welcome, or even allowed, to provide his own weapon. Second Amendment? That was your great-great-great-great grandfather.
So misunderstanding? Maybe. Self-serving, disingenuous mischief? It's been known to happen. But in either case, people need to stop referring to the Second Amendment as if it was about guns. It's about late 18th Century colonial security, it's completely anachronistic, and it should be repealed. Subsequent Supreme Court endorsement of the Amendment is no more proof of anything than that past Courts' endorsements of the ideas that women weren't fit to vote or black people weren't whole humans was proof of anything.
At this month's Commission meeting, there was a proposed Resolution urging a ban on sales of guns. It's not clear what this was about, since there are no gun sales, or sales of anything else, in BP, and the proposal had no actual meaning, but the sentiment was something about declaring a disapproval of gun violence. I guess there's no real argument there. Even the pro-gun people don't say they like gun violence. They argue that people should be allowed to have guns, and that there may be value in lots of people having lots of guns, because "good guys with guns" inhibit bad guys with guns. That's what the NRA spokesman says. It's a theory, like trickle-down economics is a theory, or Communism is a theory, and people can theorize whatever they want. They all look good on paper.
In the service of pro-gun theories, advocates invariably cite the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Either they're being disgracefully disingenuous, or they misunderstand the Amendment. They think it's about guns and gun ownership. It's not remotely about that. It's purpose and it's intention are very clearly stated, right there in the Amendment. "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." That's the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Short, and sweet. It's not at all about guns. It's about late 18th Century concepts of civil defense, especially in a frontier territory. It's about what, at such a time, was necessary to provide security of such a territory. At that time, and in that place, it was a network of local militias, manned by average citizens, who used and needed to possess their own guns. Absent that presumably critically important need in a late 18th Century frontier territory, where people ate what they hunted, and worried about what they believed were hostile and attacking natives, there is no Second Amendment.
The idea was that the King of England might want to make the colonists impotent, and in the service of so doing, might want to take away the colonists' guns, or method of protection from a predator like, let's say, the King of England. The colonists spotted that scam a mile away and said no. Not in our house. Local generals had to be able to call upon able-bodied men, and those men needed to grab up their rifles and hie it on over to the town square, or wherever the gathering was to occur. There was a battle to wage. This was frankly essential in the late 18th Century, in the colonies. We were dead without that possibility.
Today, we can proudly say we rely on a professional army. The armed forces are at least somewhat selective, and if you qualify, they will take your completely undivided attention for weeks or months, and demand an undiluted commitment for two years minimum. They provide room and board, all training, special clothing, and guns. You have your own? Leave it at home, with your favorite blue jeans and you letter sweater. It's not regulation, it's not good enough, and it's not needed.
If you google, or Bing, "archaic laws s" the engine will automatically fill in "till on the books." Yes, it's a real topic, and they already know what you want to know. You can find Federal archaic laws still on the books, and even such laws for every state. The Second Amendment to the US Constitution is not listed as an archaic law still on the books, but that's what it is.
The United States does not depend on militias any more. It does not need or want any able-bodied man who is motivated to come out on a moment's notice to fight someone about something. If the average person volunteers for such an impulsive adventure, the armed forces will decline. In fact, the citizen will probably be arrested for interfering. And if someone is interested and qualifies, the country does not depend on such a person's happening to have his own gun. In fact, such a person would not be welcome, or even allowed, to provide his own weapon. Second Amendment? That was your great-great-great-great grandfather.
So misunderstanding? Maybe. Self-serving, disingenuous mischief? It's been known to happen. But in either case, people need to stop referring to the Second Amendment as if it was about guns. It's about late 18th Century colonial security, it's completely anachronistic, and it should be repealed. Subsequent Supreme Court endorsement of the Amendment is no more proof of anything than that past Courts' endorsements of the ideas that women weren't fit to vote or black people weren't whole humans was proof of anything.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
From Sira Ramos, Who Asked to Be Heard
In plain and simple English it is the commissioners that make the laws that the employees follow so the Village can operate properly. I am writing because I am sick and tired of the attacks as to the job I did while Code Enforcement Officer for the Village of Biscayne Park.
I took a department that was virtually non-existent and worked diligently to make it a legal and viable department for the Village of Biscayne Park. The Village with all its bumps and bruises never flourished more than in the years that I headed the Code Enforcement Department.
I laugh when whiners attack my job. As per some I was a gun toting bully that trampled everyone's civil rights, as per others I was a wimp that didn't do my job because I refused to illegally make people do what was not aesthetically pleasing to them.
I walked a fine line. I had to follow the law but make residents, commissioners and Village employees happy. I was told to "do my job" by Village commissioners even though the attorney had to tell them over and over that legally we could not go any further than my department had gone. I was told by residents to "get" their neighbors but then got upset when they did something wrong and got called out on the infraction.
Then there were the crazies, the yellers and screamers, the residents who threatened me, my family and my pets, the invasion of my personal privacy, the verbal attacks, etc. That was OK because I was an employee of the Village, and they felt entitled and empowered to treat me in that fashion.
I, through my lowly department that many thought did nothing, single handedly brought in thousands if not 10's of thousands of dollars through citations to contractors doing work without permits. I had to diplomatically handle neighbor disputes. The meanness that I witnessed was shameful how neighbors would turn their "good friends" in because they didn't like what their "friends" were doing. When residents had very personal or sensitive issues, I kept their confidences and worked with them whenever possible. I witnessed commissioners who bullied Village employees and tried to get them to do things that they knew were wrong and when the employee declined they would make their work time hell and at budget time would do everything possible to make sure that employee did not get a raise. Oh I guess no one noticed those things.
When I left the Village to retire from Code Enforcement I did it with my head held high that I always had the best interest of the Park at the forefront of all that I did in the 11 years that I worked there.
Sira Ramos
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Another Day, Another Meeting, and Lots of Dollars
There was nothing in this meeting that was worth three hours, and whatever those three hours cost in attorney time, new Finance Director time, and videographer time. The Agenda was remarkably short, and almost nothing was worthy of much discussion. Where, oh where, does the time go?
The good event was the formal promotion of Ray Atesiano to Chief of Police. That was worth the time it took, it was great to hear from him, and many of the officers came out to attend. The discussion of charging a $500 fee to felons to get their impounded cars back was not worth the time it took. Commissioners had too many questions, betraying too much doubt, about "checkpoint" police activity. They should happily have let the Chief and the Manager do their jobs.
Ah, the ongoing struggle about compensation of Commissioners, and for what. It's clearly an endless battle, and it was postponed for about six months, so the new Finance Director could form an opinion about how cumbersome it would be to change the method and formula for compensation. But it doesn't matter. Three Commissioners stated very clearly that nothing anyone says is going to change their minds, and they were right to say we should just kill the idea right now. Not that it's not a good idea. It is. But these three want their money, and they don't want to have to earn it. Case closed. So instead of voting the idea down tonight, they'll vote it down in June. One of them was being diplomatic, and she agreed to the postponement. But she was clear in saying she'll vote in June as she would vote tonight. Roxy Ross should by now be able to recognize this as a non-starter, and she should permit it a dignified death.
It should also not have taken time to welcome the new Finance Director. He was hired by the Manager, as is protocol, and that's the end of it. If we don't trust her to hire appropriately, we should replace her. A 10-second introduction-- "this is our new Finance Director, Mr Williams"-- would have been more than sufficient. It was not important to hear his entire life story, including a recap of every good idea he ever had, like when he was treasurer of his elementary school class. You think I'm making this up, right?
The matter of replacing Noah Jacobs as voting designee to the County League of Cities should also have been simple and almost instantaneous. Noah doesn't attend meetings. We have been unrepresented for the past year. The biggest issue is Noah's confession that he "[doesn't] have time" to attend these meetings he committed to attend. He agreed to be the designee, doesn't bother to do the one thing the designee has to do (attend meetings), didn't resign from the post a long time ago, but wants his Mayor's salary, which is twice what other Commissioners get, even though he "doesn't have time" to do the extra work. That's a problem. Replacing him with Bob Anderson, and Roxy Ross as an alternate, was a no-brainer and should not have taken time. And Bryan Cooper, of all people, should not have bogged down the process and the discussion saying he wants notice and say about League issues and votes. He's grossly disengaged from the job he's supposed to do, so why does he want to have input about a job that's not his?
Right, we're all upset about the shooting in Connecticut. But we had to have a long discussion about Noah's idea to paste a South Miami Resolution into the Biscayne Park archive, declaring Biscayne Park to be against the sale and possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons. This was a non-issue, that should never have been introduced, because there are no sales of anything in Biscayne Park, and the State has controlling statutes about sales and possession of weapons. But for who knows what reasons, Noah decided this would be a great crusade for him. He wanted amendments now, so he could adjust his Resolution for passage tonight, and when delay was imposed upon him, he insisted he'd come back with something, and go to the mat over it. So on it went, too.
I watched this 30 minute agenda take three hours, and I still don't get it.
The good event was the formal promotion of Ray Atesiano to Chief of Police. That was worth the time it took, it was great to hear from him, and many of the officers came out to attend. The discussion of charging a $500 fee to felons to get their impounded cars back was not worth the time it took. Commissioners had too many questions, betraying too much doubt, about "checkpoint" police activity. They should happily have let the Chief and the Manager do their jobs.
Ah, the ongoing struggle about compensation of Commissioners, and for what. It's clearly an endless battle, and it was postponed for about six months, so the new Finance Director could form an opinion about how cumbersome it would be to change the method and formula for compensation. But it doesn't matter. Three Commissioners stated very clearly that nothing anyone says is going to change their minds, and they were right to say we should just kill the idea right now. Not that it's not a good idea. It is. But these three want their money, and they don't want to have to earn it. Case closed. So instead of voting the idea down tonight, they'll vote it down in June. One of them was being diplomatic, and she agreed to the postponement. But she was clear in saying she'll vote in June as she would vote tonight. Roxy Ross should by now be able to recognize this as a non-starter, and she should permit it a dignified death.
It should also not have taken time to welcome the new Finance Director. He was hired by the Manager, as is protocol, and that's the end of it. If we don't trust her to hire appropriately, we should replace her. A 10-second introduction-- "this is our new Finance Director, Mr Williams"-- would have been more than sufficient. It was not important to hear his entire life story, including a recap of every good idea he ever had, like when he was treasurer of his elementary school class. You think I'm making this up, right?
The matter of replacing Noah Jacobs as voting designee to the County League of Cities should also have been simple and almost instantaneous. Noah doesn't attend meetings. We have been unrepresented for the past year. The biggest issue is Noah's confession that he "[doesn't] have time" to attend these meetings he committed to attend. He agreed to be the designee, doesn't bother to do the one thing the designee has to do (attend meetings), didn't resign from the post a long time ago, but wants his Mayor's salary, which is twice what other Commissioners get, even though he "doesn't have time" to do the extra work. That's a problem. Replacing him with Bob Anderson, and Roxy Ross as an alternate, was a no-brainer and should not have taken time. And Bryan Cooper, of all people, should not have bogged down the process and the discussion saying he wants notice and say about League issues and votes. He's grossly disengaged from the job he's supposed to do, so why does he want to have input about a job that's not his?
Right, we're all upset about the shooting in Connecticut. But we had to have a long discussion about Noah's idea to paste a South Miami Resolution into the Biscayne Park archive, declaring Biscayne Park to be against the sale and possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons. This was a non-issue, that should never have been introduced, because there are no sales of anything in Biscayne Park, and the State has controlling statutes about sales and possession of weapons. But for who knows what reasons, Noah decided this would be a great crusade for him. He wanted amendments now, so he could adjust his Resolution for passage tonight, and when delay was imposed upon him, he insisted he'd come back with something, and go to the mat over it. So on it went, too.
I watched this 30 minute agenda take three hours, and I still don't get it.
Let's Get Our Act Together, By Gary Kuhl
We are hearing more and more residents comment on the condition of the houses and rental units in the village. Recently we had a former resident remark on how the village looked worse than when they left just a couple of years ago. Of course it would be more productive for people to express their concerns to the Village Manager or at a commission meeting than to simply grumble.
The ups and downs in recent years with code compliance may account for some backsliding, but what about the conditions that have existed for years? The derelict cars that have been around for the better part of a decade. What about the conditions that are blatantly obvious? The trash residents pile in the swale days before their pickup day. Why are we letting residents run businesses out of their front yards? These are just a couple of salient examples. Of greater concern is the general malaise of the village.
We need a grassroots, take-a-look-at-your-property campaign to start. Significant improvements can be made with just a simple cleanup. Cut the 5 year old dead tree down, weed the hedge out, stop parking on the front lawn, paint the front door, put the garbage cans away and so on. Some of the worst offenders are the rental properties. Some of them border on slums. Piles of outdoor stored junk on the front porches makes it look like tenants are in a perpetual state of eviction. The ordinance covering the permit for rental properties has stringent requirements and an effective means of enforcement, yet it appears little is being done to enforce compliance. We need the involvement of the Commission, the Village Manager, the code compliance team, the boards, we need to use the news letter and people need to express their concern at the commission meetings or to the Village Manager. The point is we need overall, general interest, improvement and code compliance. People are less likely to do something when nobody is doing anything.
I was recently doing a project in West Miami. The homes and lots are smaller. Most of the homes are simple boxes and the average value is less than the average in Biscayne Park. The income level is less than Biscayne Park. 25% of the residents are over 65 vs. 14% in Biscayne Park. But as I walked down several streets I found the quality of the maintenance to be remarkable. The house paint was in good condition. The doors were in good repair. There was no trash in the yard or Right Of Way. The landscaping generally was basic, but neat and weed free. There wasn’t an accumulation of unregistered cars, boats, RV’s or trailers in the front yard –and not one car parked on the front lawn. The empty garbage cans weren’t sitting in the driveway. And so on. While code compliance may have some hand in the consistently well kept residences, there was another overriding factor– pride. The residents obviously took great pride in their homes. They had respect for neighbors and their community. We in BP seem to have lost the pride that existed in years past. As one resident aptly put it, “we’ve become a safe haven for slobs”.
People may point to the weak economy or foreclosures as reasons for the decline in the village. This is only an excuse and a weak one at that since it is not a universal condition. Nevertheless it is why I point to the simple, least costly steps to start instilling pride in the community. The community needs to realize our apparent laissez-faire attitude is leading to a downward spiral in our property values.
Let Me Put This Another Way
The Foundation at one time considered paying for outfitting a local piece of property, either one of the medians, or a small Village park, or even purchasing a vacant lot in the Village, as a dog park. And there was significant support for such an idea from a few people. At least one would have contributed a good deal of money toward the project. And this wasn't the first time there had been notable energy in the direction of a dog park.
The problem turned out to be that as much as there were people who wanted a dog park, and who would have taken their dogs to make use of one, there was no place in the Village that the direct neighbors of a proposed dog park wanted one. Even dog lovers, and proposed dog park devotees, didn't want a dog park next to them. So the idea was abandoned.
That's what we're dealing with regarding the school in the church. Most of the people who have come to special meetings where the issue was taken up, who were devotees of the church, or proposed customers of a potential school, were not residents of Biscayne Park. They wanted a school, and a church, but not in their back yards, so to speak. And I understand their position, of being generous, but only with someone else's money. Hey, it's OK with me, too, if there's a church and school, as long as it's in their neighborhood, and not mine.
Look at Father Cutie. He could have lived in the house right on church property, directly next door to the church. He didn't want to. He wanted to live elsewhere, in Miami Shores. So the "caretaker" lives in the church-owned house instead. Doesn't Father Cutie like the church? You bet he does. He loves it. It's where he works. But he doesn't want to live next to it. Not even in the same town. He leaves that to us. The church is a great idea, and so is the school, but only if we have to put up with living next to them, and he doesn't. Traffic mess? No problem. As long as the mess is in Biscayne Park, and not next to Father Cutie, or Sandy Busta, or Michael Campo.
I get it. I really do. I just don't like it. In fact, I resent it. Not that it's my issue, but it just seems so un-Christian.
The problem turned out to be that as much as there were people who wanted a dog park, and who would have taken their dogs to make use of one, there was no place in the Village that the direct neighbors of a proposed dog park wanted one. Even dog lovers, and proposed dog park devotees, didn't want a dog park next to them. So the idea was abandoned.
That's what we're dealing with regarding the school in the church. Most of the people who have come to special meetings where the issue was taken up, who were devotees of the church, or proposed customers of a potential school, were not residents of Biscayne Park. They wanted a school, and a church, but not in their back yards, so to speak. And I understand their position, of being generous, but only with someone else's money. Hey, it's OK with me, too, if there's a church and school, as long as it's in their neighborhood, and not mine.
Look at Father Cutie. He could have lived in the house right on church property, directly next door to the church. He didn't want to. He wanted to live elsewhere, in Miami Shores. So the "caretaker" lives in the church-owned house instead. Doesn't Father Cutie like the church? You bet he does. He loves it. It's where he works. But he doesn't want to live next to it. Not even in the same town. He leaves that to us. The church is a great idea, and so is the school, but only if we have to put up with living next to them, and he doesn't. Traffic mess? No problem. As long as the mess is in Biscayne Park, and not next to Father Cutie, or Sandy Busta, or Michael Campo.
I get it. I really do. I just don't like it. In fact, I resent it. Not that it's my issue, but it just seems so un-Christian.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Up'Side Our Heads, Or, Like Lambs to Slaughter
It's actually less unsettling when a spade is called a spade. Pussy-footing doesn't really do any good. Yes, it is going to hurt. What's that they say about when rape is inevitable?
It was church/school night at Planning and Zoning, and we were spared fanfare. And kid gloves. Michael Campo, the attorney for Ms Busta, the school Ma'rm, started to hem and haw a bit, before he realized he didn't have to. There was no point. The set-up was the team of planner David and attorney Boutsis, who are working for whom?, telling us we're getting a school, and there's no exemption or any other way out. So Campo got up and delivered the focal point of what this is about: "The church needs money." That's not too subtle, is it? And Ms Busta got up and said she could have taken her show to any of a number of places, but she just likes the church. So that was pretty much it. She told us she would be willing to start with only about 25 kids, that 50 was a break even number for her, and that her ambition is 100 or so. She started with a preschool in Miami Shores, then nursed it up to a full elementary school. That's her plan here. How young?, Doug Tannehill wanted to know. Six weeks, Ms Busta replied. And she doesn't want us calling this a day care, either. It's pre-school. She didn't say what the planned curriculum was for six week old pupils. As I recall, feeding themselves and using the potty was way over their heads.
But some of us had a bit of protest left in us. So what if the church needs money, and Ms Busta needs a place to run her operation. Why is that Biscayne Park's problem? Look here, you snotty weasels, said Mr Campo, let me tell you how it's gonna be. You got two choices. You'll take the "preschool," or you're getting a Charter School. Do we understand each other? The Most Reverend Father Cutie went to the same school for thugs. You don't like your little Episcopal Church, you worms? Fine, we'll sell the property to a "megachurch." I put that in quotes, because that's the word he used.
The church stays, and we're installing a school. Are we clear? But nobody who allegedly wants a school is here, and the only people who are here don't want a school. That must count for something, we pleaded. F**k Y**, replied team Cutie/Campo/Busta.
So I guess we're getting a school. But here's the bright side, according to Cutie, the charmer. The church, our lovely little church, has been here for many, many years. He thinks it's 65, but it's really 72. Our Reverend has charm, and his little church has charm. Campo says it serves our little Biscayne Park. Well, of course it doesn't any more, or we wouldn't be having this conversation about what entity is going to provide the church money its few measly parishioners don't contribute. But the history! From a time long ago, when Biscayne Park was pure quaint. We were a quiet and insular neighborhood, where there weren't even any sidewalks. Or Jews. Or black people. And if anyone was gay, which they probably weren't, they made it their business to keep it very much to themselves.
It was church/school night at Planning and Zoning, and we were spared fanfare. And kid gloves. Michael Campo, the attorney for Ms Busta, the school Ma'rm, started to hem and haw a bit, before he realized he didn't have to. There was no point. The set-up was the team of planner David and attorney Boutsis, who are working for whom?, telling us we're getting a school, and there's no exemption or any other way out. So Campo got up and delivered the focal point of what this is about: "The church needs money." That's not too subtle, is it? And Ms Busta got up and said she could have taken her show to any of a number of places, but she just likes the church. So that was pretty much it. She told us she would be willing to start with only about 25 kids, that 50 was a break even number for her, and that her ambition is 100 or so. She started with a preschool in Miami Shores, then nursed it up to a full elementary school. That's her plan here. How young?, Doug Tannehill wanted to know. Six weeks, Ms Busta replied. And she doesn't want us calling this a day care, either. It's pre-school. She didn't say what the planned curriculum was for six week old pupils. As I recall, feeding themselves and using the potty was way over their heads.
But some of us had a bit of protest left in us. So what if the church needs money, and Ms Busta needs a place to run her operation. Why is that Biscayne Park's problem? Look here, you snotty weasels, said Mr Campo, let me tell you how it's gonna be. You got two choices. You'll take the "preschool," or you're getting a Charter School. Do we understand each other? The Most Reverend Father Cutie went to the same school for thugs. You don't like your little Episcopal Church, you worms? Fine, we'll sell the property to a "megachurch." I put that in quotes, because that's the word he used.
The church stays, and we're installing a school. Are we clear? But nobody who allegedly wants a school is here, and the only people who are here don't want a school. That must count for something, we pleaded. F**k Y**, replied team Cutie/Campo/Busta.
So I guess we're getting a school. But here's the bright side, according to Cutie, the charmer. The church, our lovely little church, has been here for many, many years. He thinks it's 65, but it's really 72. Our Reverend has charm, and his little church has charm. Campo says it serves our little Biscayne Park. Well, of course it doesn't any more, or we wouldn't be having this conversation about what entity is going to provide the church money its few measly parishioners don't contribute. But the history! From a time long ago, when Biscayne Park was pure quaint. We were a quiet and insular neighborhood, where there weren't even any sidewalks. Or Jews. Or black people. And if anyone was gay, which they probably weren't, they made it their business to keep it very much to themselves.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Linda Dillon and I Have an Idea.
Actually, we independently came upon two complementary versions of the same idea.
Linda and I agreed that a big problem with Biscayne Park is how run down parts of it look. I was thinking of the medians, about which she agrees, and she was thinking about personal properties, about which I agree. Here are our ideas. And they both depend on the Parks and Parkways Board.
Linda wants to encourage people to improve the outward appearances of their houses, perhaps especially landscape. Her idea was to have P&P run a kind of contest, or recognition. Maybe once a year, P&P would survey the neighborhood, and give prizes, or certificates, or maybe the Village would even grant nominal tax credits, for people who do good things with upkeep. Linda's fantasy, to which I agree, is that this would raise consciousness, and maybe excite a little friendly and neighborly competition, which would have the overall effect of getting people, maybe most of us, maybe almost all of us, to pay more attention, and make these kinds of improvements that are a credit to the whole Village. And, by the way, raise the sense of value, or even values.
I want the medians improved. The new trees from a few years ago are nice, though they're young and need lots of time to grow, but the medians overall look very thin and skanky, haphazard, unkempt, and not a real credit to us at all. The best that could be said is that the medians are there, and they represent a possibility. So what I want P&P to do is create a plan for all the medians in the Village. I'm guessing the plan would be uniform, or at least unified, but maybe it wouldn't. What I'm looking for is the plan. P&P and the Village don't have to do a thing or spend a cent. Just make and publicize a plan. Then, people whose houses are on medians could buy plants themselves, according to what the plan contemplates. Either residents can install the plantings, or Public Works can. Like Linda, I see a competition available here. Whoever has the nicest median at the end of every year gets...
I was talking to Kelly Mallette and Juan Fonseca about this, and Kelly suggested the simplest, easiest thing in the world. Just end caps at the ends of each median. Just those little boundaries that are like sidewalk curbs. It's like the simple frame on a picture. It adds nothing to the art, and it does no more than create a discrete boundary. But it has great value for that kind of visual punctuation. And if the boundary was not raised, but was brick or keystone or something else, perhaps so much the better.
I envision P&P designing something with xeriscape, or some other low maintenance material, in mind. If we need irrigation, that's part of the project, too.
The concepts are the same, and the results are the same. We improve the appearance of our neighborhood, and that improvement raises property values. It costs the Village (us, as tax payers) little or nothing, and increases community engagement. If there's a downside I overlooked, please add your insights as a comment.
Linda and I agreed that a big problem with Biscayne Park is how run down parts of it look. I was thinking of the medians, about which she agrees, and she was thinking about personal properties, about which I agree. Here are our ideas. And they both depend on the Parks and Parkways Board.
Linda wants to encourage people to improve the outward appearances of their houses, perhaps especially landscape. Her idea was to have P&P run a kind of contest, or recognition. Maybe once a year, P&P would survey the neighborhood, and give prizes, or certificates, or maybe the Village would even grant nominal tax credits, for people who do good things with upkeep. Linda's fantasy, to which I agree, is that this would raise consciousness, and maybe excite a little friendly and neighborly competition, which would have the overall effect of getting people, maybe most of us, maybe almost all of us, to pay more attention, and make these kinds of improvements that are a credit to the whole Village. And, by the way, raise the sense of value, or even values.
I want the medians improved. The new trees from a few years ago are nice, though they're young and need lots of time to grow, but the medians overall look very thin and skanky, haphazard, unkempt, and not a real credit to us at all. The best that could be said is that the medians are there, and they represent a possibility. So what I want P&P to do is create a plan for all the medians in the Village. I'm guessing the plan would be uniform, or at least unified, but maybe it wouldn't. What I'm looking for is the plan. P&P and the Village don't have to do a thing or spend a cent. Just make and publicize a plan. Then, people whose houses are on medians could buy plants themselves, according to what the plan contemplates. Either residents can install the plantings, or Public Works can. Like Linda, I see a competition available here. Whoever has the nicest median at the end of every year gets...
I was talking to Kelly Mallette and Juan Fonseca about this, and Kelly suggested the simplest, easiest thing in the world. Just end caps at the ends of each median. Just those little boundaries that are like sidewalk curbs. It's like the simple frame on a picture. It adds nothing to the art, and it does no more than create a discrete boundary. But it has great value for that kind of visual punctuation. And if the boundary was not raised, but was brick or keystone or something else, perhaps so much the better.
I envision P&P designing something with xeriscape, or some other low maintenance material, in mind. If we need irrigation, that's part of the project, too.
The concepts are the same, and the results are the same. We improve the appearance of our neighborhood, and that improvement raises property values. It costs the Village (us, as tax payers) little or nothing, and increases community engagement. If there's a downside I overlooked, please add your insights as a comment.