"Free People Read Freely"

That was the title Bryan Cooper gave his newsletter post this month.  And it's certainly true: a people who are free are permitted to read whatever they like.  It's part of their freedom.  But we can turn this quote around to say "Only people who are capable of reading are truly free."  People who are unable to read, who are illiterate, or who can dope out words but not really comprehend what was written, are enslaved by their mental limitations.

Bryan provides an example of this problem.  He has gone on at some length in Commission meetings, and now he devotes some of his newsletter post (Commissioners are limited to a certain number of words), to whine yet again about what he believes, or at least says, was an attempt made by me and Chuck Ross "to ban a newspaper from our Village."  Bryan is referring to a petition, which was written, and which he may or may not have read, which asked the Commission to make a statement to the Biscayne Times.  But the statement never was that the tabloid should be banned from the Village.  The petition requested that the publisher and distributor of the Biscayne Times find some other way to distribute the paper than to dump it on every lawn, usually near the street, or in the bushes, every month, whether it is wanted or not and even whether the house is inhabited or not.  We even suggested some alternative ideas, like mailing it to interested residents or leaving a stack of papers in a distribution box, as all other papers do, in a convenient place.  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXUkjkQXN1w&feature=youtu.be  
Did Bryan not understand this, despite having been told it directly and in English a number of times?  I don't think we'll forget, as Bryan admonishes, that "Free People Read Freely."  What we must also remember is that sometimes, the unlikeliest of people turn out to be incapable of reading.  Or listening.  Or comprehending.

Bryan also lets us know that "a large number of tax-paying residents and seniors are still struggling" financially, and according to Bryan, they will be hurt by a property tax of 9.7 mills.  This kind of statement is certainly common political pandering, but Bryan doesn't tell us how he knows.  If I remember correctly, his friend Noah Jacobs, whom Bryan says he appreciates, advocated for a millage of 9.5.  The difference between 9.5 and 9.7 is an average of about $26 per year.  Is that the injury Bryan hoped to prevent for BP residents?  Bryan himself advocated for a millage of less that 9.0.  That kind of revenue doesn't allow the Village to survive, but Bryan is unconcerned.  In fact, he says he would really prefer we fail, and instead of remaining independent, "reach out to Miami Shores to see if we might join them."  It's an odd position for a BP Commissioner to take, but Bryan is standing firm on it.  Taxes in Miami Shores aggregate to more than they are in BP, and we are then committed to the kind of Code demands Bryan stridently resists in BP, so it's not clear where Bryan is going with this scheme.  Out of the frying pan... so to speak.  Not a good demonstration of clear thinking here.

Bryan says that "over 50 Village families" were "negatively impacted" (a curious and ambiguous term) by a restriction regarding the keeping of boats and RVs.  He has either ignored or failed to understand that boat and RV owners are asked to keep these vehicles concealed behind fences or foliage, if they can, but they are permitted to keep such a vehicle in the driveway, if there is no other choice.  And apart from a general complaint issued by Bryan and a couple of residents who are not impacted, no resident complained of a specific and distinct restriction on his or her actual functioning.  No one has complained that he or she can no longer keep a boat or RV.  No such consequence ever happened.

Bryan alleges, and not for the first time, I'm sorry to say, that "Commissioners Ross and Anderson still support annexing areas to the east of us."  It is certainly true, and Roxy Ross would be the first to say so, that she has researched the matter and feels disposed at this stage to move forward with a process that might conclude with annexation, if the Commission and the neighborhood want it to.  Anderson has never taken any such position.  He has agreed that we have a fiscal problem, that annexation could in theory be one way to solve it, and that he would like to gather more information and keep the door open.  Is Bob Anderson, a typically plain-spoken guy, too sophisticated in his thinking for Bryan?  Too many nuances, too much subtlety?  Most people who know Bob don't find him to be abstruse.  But one way or another, Bryan either doesn't get it, or he can't keep it all straight.

Is it "time for a change?" Bryan asks.  Do you "want reform?"  If you do, take Bryan's advice.  We have a group of three Commissioners who function as a majority, and they are leading us in a direction Bryan seems to be suggesting is not a good one.  The terms of two of them, Bryan and Noah Jacobs, are ending.  He wants to remind us that "December 3rd is the next election."  He seems to want us to make that change, and initiate reform.  I agree with him.