If you haven't heard Noah Jacobs make this statement often enough, then you don't come to Commission meetings. It's one of his favorite themes, and he occasionally adheres to it, if it's convenient for his aims of the moment.
Not last night, though. This was one of those we're-in-a-super-hurry-and-we-don't-have-time-for-proper-protocol situations. Here's the set-up:
We're getting ready to hire a new manager. We had seven candidates, and last night the number was whittled to four. They will be interviewed by the Commission en banc at the November 6 meeting, and a decision will be announced on November 14. So just under a month from now, we will have a new manager. We could have been a bit more expeditious, but Noah, Barbara Watts, and Bryan Cooper wanted to take it slow. They wanted time, lots of time, to ask around for advice, or direction, from some of their friends, or neighbors, or advisors. They weren't confident of their own thinking in this matter, despite the fact that they as Commissioners have more information than anyone else. Whom do you ask, when you have more information than anyone else, and the decision rests with you?
At the same time, it seems we got a call from the City of North Miami, who apparently are eager to agree on a water contract with us. They supply our water, and it seems both we and they have lost whatever contract ever existed in the past. John Hearn, our attorney, heard from their attorney, and someone wants to settle this matter.
Well, it appears the CNM attorney wasn't just sitting around thinking about that old missing water contract and what a good idea it would be to make a new one. It seems someone called CNM to suggest a contract. That someone was Noah Jacobs.
If you're thinking what I was thinking, you're wrong. I was thinking that if we have an opportunity to sign a contract as important and long-lasting as a water contract, and if we're about to hire a new manager, wouldn't this be the perfect project for the new manager? Shouldn't we, and wouldn't it be proper for us to, hold off the contract negotiation until the new manager is hired? Just because this makes sense, and just because it happens to be obvious, just because it might be better to do this right than to do it quickly, doesn't mean it's the best idea. There might be something you overlooked. I'll tell you what it is.
Noah Jacobs' term in office is about to end. He has threatened in the past to run for re-election, and he picked up an election packet yesterday. Noah has accomplished nothing, and he has been a huge drain on the Village, its functioning, and its finances. Noah is not remotely competent to hold office as a Commissioner, and the fact that he and two of his pals elected him Mayor is a sick joke. But Noah has adopted a crusade or two along the way. Nothing meaningful, but something to think about when he looks in the mirror. One of those crusades was about our water. He likes to portray the water as foul and its delivery as flawed. He's made lots of noise about the water, and CNM actually replaced some pipes in the southern end of the Village, to try to increase pressure. The new pipes were faulty, and they were never connected, but Noah thinks he accomplished something. Now, he's in a huge hurry to have something else, anything else, to say for himself. Like let's say a new water contract with CNM. But since the BP election is around the corner, Noah doesn't have time to wait for a manager to research the matter, participate in contract negotiations, or handle it him- or herself. Of course that's what a manager is for, but Noah doesn't have time for that kind of nonsense. He wants a new contract signed, quickly, so he can allege that he accomplished something.
And that's why it's sometimes more important to do something quickly than to do it right.
One reader suggested that Noah's campaign slogan could be "It's More Important to Do it Right Than to Do it Quickly." The reader then realized what the problem for Noah was, and suggested instead "It's More Important to Do it Right, So Hire a Manager Who Can..., But Wait, Oops, What Am I Saying...?" Not a bad slogan, if a bit unwieldy. Says it all, though.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIf I had a slogan for his campaign it would be “A Vote for Jacobs is a Vote for Inconsistency and Hypocrisy"
The hypocritical and inconsistent aspects of Jacobs are as follows: A resolution was added to the agenda last night (no notice prior to the meeting) that apparently Jacobs instigated, so no transparency by Jacobs the accuser of no transparency of prior administrations, that directs the attorney (eight months later after it had been discussed) to work with North Miami to get the ball rolling, as the attorney put it, on a water contract with North Miami.
At the September meeting Jacobs seemed to have a great deal of concern about spending professional fees on our planners to continue the work on annexation, a project that could reap revenue for the village, but he had no problem with spending money on the attorney with this project, something that had been laying around for eight months that has no revenue potential.
So he voted against spending professional fees to do what we need to do to save the Village but voted for spending professional fees on an agreement that has been sitting on the shelf for eight months and possibly our new manager could start to work on.
Something does not compute.
FYI I re posted to correct a typo.
Chuck
Chuck,
DeleteThis issue is a lot more than eight months old. If we're talking about the fact that there is no contract between us and CNM, or that no one has been able to find it, it's decades old. And the more recent discussion of it started more than eight months ago. The fact is, this isn't about anything. It began with Jacobs' claim to have heard a complaint from some BP resident, though he never named one other than himself. He also claimed his own water was foul. Someone from CNM came to his house to test it. As I understand it, the result of the test was that there was nothing wrong with his water. Some people complained about pressure, as neighbors often do, especially at peak usage times. It's certainly true the pipes are old, and neither CNM nor we have had the money to repair or replace them, though CNM did replace some pipes. The new pipes were defective in some way, and I'm told they were actually never connected. If the proof of the pudding, so to speak, is that BP residents, including Jacobs, stopped complaining, then so be it. In medicine, we call that the placebo effect.
What doesn't compute is what I told you. The issue is not about what Jacobs claims it's about. It's not about water or contracts or BP residents. It's about him and his re-election campaign. That's the thing you identify as hypocrisy. Where you point he doesn't want to spend Village money to try to ensure the survival of the Village, but he does want to spend it on a new irrelevant and unnecessary water contract, what we're really seeing is Jacobs' willingness to spend Village money on his effort to get himself re-elected.
Fred
Of course I agree it's about Noah and his re-election campaign, I was trying to be subtle and yes you are correct we have been without an agreement with North Miami for decades. Further as you say he claimed his own water smelled funny and was yellow, I also understand the tests showed there was nothing wrong with his water so Jacobs apparently lied about the entire matter.
DeleteAnother example of Jacobs’s hypocrisy and inconsistency, residents came before the commission at the Oct. meeting to ask for a variance regarding the fence in their front yard they had installed without a permit. The P & Z board voted unanimously against the variance. For some background, Jacobs had voted in favor of the current fence ordinance that does not provide for fences or gates in front yards, but in complete contradiction to himself voted in favor of the variance that violated our code to allow them to have a fence in their front yard.
He then made a political speech on the dais that the residents should come back in three months after the election in front of a new commission to try and seek a new variance and accused other commissioners of not being sympathetic to the residents. Why did he not advocate for fences in front yards during the code review process? Does his behavior make any sense?
Yes if he is inconsistent and a hypocrite. The proper vote was to vote against the variance as that is our code, it was the decision of the board and the variance did not meet the hardship requirements for a variance. So he voted to violate our code by his vote in favor of the variance. By the way the vote was 3-2 with Jacobs and Copper for the variance and against our code.
This is not the type of person we want representing Biscayne Park.