I put the original post back, because one of my advisors toned it down and felt it was OK to repost. Two other trusted advisors have seen it and say no. So I pulled it again, this time permanently, and have used the "original replacement," which, with the comments, tells at least parts of the story.
I did a post last night, as a summary of the Special Commission meeting. The person who is functioning as my campaign advisor, or consiglieri, told me in advance not to do one at all. She was at the meeting, she knew what happened, she knew how I had to have reacted, and she told me just to forget about it.
Being the person I am, I did the post anyway. And I published it. Some people saw it. My advisor, who knows me painfully well, stayed up late enough and saw it, too. Her response to it was "It's a great post - and a wonderful recap. It CANNOT go up while you are a candidate, unless you aren't a serious candidate."
The dilemma is that I definitely am a serious candidate. I'm also serious about wanting to let people know what goes on around here, and I use this blog to report it. It's a real "conflict." If I tell you what happened in the meeting last night, I jeopardize my chance of having a successful Commission candidacy, at least according to my advisor. It's as if you, as a voter, really might shoot the messenger. If I protect my image, I'm not doing my self-appointed job of telling you what you have no other way to know, since you didn't come to the meeting. As always, I certainly do have my own way of telling things, but I do not believe I am an inaccurate reporter. As you can see from my advisor's reply to me, she doesn't think I was inaccurate, either. She just thinks I cannot be the one to tell you what happened.
So I have pulled the post for now. I'm still thinking about whether to put it back, and I'll show it to a few selected people, to see if they all agree with my advisor. If they do, I apologize for failing to tell you what I think you should know. However, there is a way out of part of this dilemma. If you want to know what my advisor says I shouldn't tell you, ask Chuck Ross, Janey Anderson, Rosemary Wais, Brad Piper, Brian McNoldy, Linda Dillon, David Coviello, Manny Espinoza or his wife, Dale Blanton, Jorge Marinoni, Barbara Kuhl, Gary Kuhl, or Lynn Fischer. It seems to me there were a couple of other people there, but I'm not remembering them right now.
What is essential for you to know, no matter what, is that we have a new manager (white smoke), and her name is Heidi Shafran. We have all been given a good chance to get to know her, and we're all more than satisfied to welcome her to the Village. The fact is, we liked all three manager candidates, and we could not but have wound up with a manager we were happy to have. As pleasing as it was to welcome Heidi, it was frustrating to have to give away the chance to welcome Sarah Hannah-Spurlock and Sharon Ragoonan. All wonderful women any one of whom would/will make a great manager. Ah, the dilemmas we all have.
The rest of the meeting was foolish and clearly illustrated why I, and some of the rest of us, are running. But you won't, for the moment, hear any more about it from me. I am truly sorry, and I will continue to explore whether I should put the original post back.
There was a pretty good turnout at last night's Special Commission Meeting which was called to select a new Village Manager. Three excellent candidates. We now have Heidi Shafran to lead us and it seems like everyone is excited about our new Manager. I really expected the room to empty after the selection was made but I then realized the residents who were there were also there for Fred.
ReplyDeleteCommissioner Watts withdrew her complaint. Our attorney explained that the term Conflict of Interest in legal terms doesn't apply to this situation. The other four commissioners seemed to be strong on Freedom of Speech. This resolution had no merit but it did have the ability to negatively impact Fred's campaign for Commissioner. She didn't get him removed from the Foundation or silence his opinions on his blog but it seems like her mission was accomplished.
Barbara
PS - I was extremely impressed with Commissioners Anderson and Ross last night. There were four bad resolutions on the agenda and they came prepared with statistics and even our famous Tree Survey. Unfortunately, the resolution from Commissioner Watts / Marie Smith trying to turn all Australian Pines into National Monuments had support from Mayor Jacobs and Bryan Cooper.
We are extremely fortunate to have Heidi Shafran as our new Manager. Her focus to replenish Biscayne Park's coffers needs to be our city government's main focus as well. On that note, let's talk about wasting money. Biscayne Park Commissioner, Barbara Watts is a legal liability. Creating unsubstantiated claims against a Biscayne Park citizen and board member, potentially could result in a lawsuit. It's an embarrassment to have someone with such poor judgement, on the commission.
ReplyDeleteInstead of focusing on creating an economically sustainable community, Commissioner Barbara Watts' focus is to protect an invasive tree, and set up a preservation fund. No one has proposed to cut down all the Australian Pines, however if they are dead, they are a liability to the city, and could damage resident's property in the event of a hurricane. Here is a quote from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission "Because of its aggressive growth rate, never plant Australian pine trees. There are native trees that provide shade and do not harm the environment. Possession of an Australian pine with the intent to sell or plant is illegal in Florida without a special permit." http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/invasive-plants/weed-alerts/australian-pine/
My advise to Commissioner Watts would be to acknowledge her mistakes publicly, and step down from her position.
She asked me to post this for her:
ReplyDeleteWe have a 9.7 millage rate - highest in the county. We are struggling to sustain ourselves financially. Most residents voice concerns that the commission is not doing enough to curb expenses. Barbara, Noah and Bryan all profess to be so concerned about "tough economic times" yet the 3 of them passed the resolution to have the attorney start the process of having Australian Pines declared champion/historic trees and to set up a special fund for their maintenance........without a clue as to what this all will cost! A new expense and a blank check!
Barbara kept referring to the Town of Gulfstream and how they handle their Australian Pines.....minor detail she missed. The median income there is over $176,000 and the median house price over $700,000. Ya get the feeling money is not an object there?
We need to treat all trees, all medians fairly and equally - making our tax dollars do the most. We are a "Tree City USA' not an Australian Pine City USA.
Janey Anderson
That's catchy, Janey - Australian Pine City USA. We could do tee shirts with a big circle and a line through it.
DeleteHow about a tee shirt with Barbara Watts face on it with a big line through it?
ReplyDelete