Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Congratulations, and Some Voting Perspective

I want to again congratulate the candidates, but especially the three elected commissioners: David Coviello, Roxanna Ross, and Fred Jonas.  They will join Bob Anderson and Barbara Watts, and among them, vote on our new mayor on December 10th.  This new commission promises to bring with it an era of civility, functionality, and progress that has been absent lately.  And together with our new village manager, Heidi Shafran, we're really ready to get rolling!

What's disappointing, however, is that only 460 residents voted in this election.  As of the 2010 census, there were 3056 residents, 2414 of which are over 18 years old (eligible voting age).  Of those, 1938 are registered to vote.  So, that works out to be about 24% voter turnout among registered voters, or about 19% of all eligible residents.  To put that in perspective, the national average over the past five midterm (non-presidential) elections has been about 57% of registered voters and 37% of eligible residents.

For the last time, our Biscayne Park election was held independently of the national election... that certainly has a negative and disengaging impact on turnout.  Our future village commissioner elections will coincide with the rest of the county, state, and federal elections.  Some people are simply not interested in how their local government functions, and are content to go along with whatever happens -- good or bad.  And there are people who perhaps were interested years ago, but have become disenchanted with the meetings and the commission and gave up caring.  Finally, there are those who don't think their single vote matters, so why bother voting.  In a small town more than anywhere, every single vote really does matter!

I encourage new-comers and long-time residents of Biscayne Park to attend the monthly commission meetings (if you want to be informed of when they are and what the agenda is, ask to join Commissioner Anderson's email distribution list: banderson@biscayneparkfl.gov; he's really good about sending timely information).  The next meeting, and first with the new commission, is Tuesday, December 10th at 7pm at the Rec Center.  There's more to your home than a single building, it's also your neighbors and community, so be a part of making it better!

7 comments:

  1. Thanks, Brian.

    I'm happy to report there were relatively very few "undervotes." Unfortunately, as you point out, there were very few votes at all.

    There was a weird combination of people being turned off, and people being energized. Keep in mind, by the way, that BP residents received two e-mails from me, one from Roxy Ross, one from David Coviello, one from Harvey Bilt, one from Bob Anderson, and one from Steve Bernard, all asking them to vote yesterday. We didn't have much to show for the efforts.

    Oddly, there were some other e-communications yesterday and the day before which were not constructive. Some voters yesterday said they had not intended to vote, but they were so disgusted by the negative e-mails that they resolved to come to the polls and vote contrary to the intentions of the e-mailers. I regret if Roxy and I benefited from that, and I'm sure Harvey and Dave did, but that was apparently part of what happened.

    So thanks again for the post. I hope it will be the first of many from you.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fred,
      I have a different opinion on your assertion that it was “odd” when describing the barrage of smear emails we were subjected to over the past week or so.

      I found it rather typical considering the source. I mean, haven’t we seen this story play out before?
      Those who build their foundation based on lies and deceit, rarely stand for long. This was clearly proven yesterday. Their strategy of attempting to smear others as opposed to discussing their own views and ideas simply backfired.

      They exceeded their reach in their arrogance belief of influence.

      Delete
    2. Milton,

      Of course you're absolutely correct. I got a little lost in my thinking, and I didn't accurately express what I meant. What was odd was not the smear, but the opposite and unintended effect it had on some voters. It caused them to do exactly what the authors of the smears didn't want them to do, and to go out of their ways to do it.

      Fred

      Delete
  2. I forgot to mention that third place, which is the least winner, was separated from sixth place, which is all three candidates who didn't win, by a total of 29 votes. Every person who didn't vote yesterday was highly consequential.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brian,

    Not there's anything good about our terrible voter turnout, but it's not precisely as bad as you say. Where you seem to define "eligible [to vote] residents" as people over 18, keep in mind that some people over 18 are not citizens. I encountered lots of them. So the low percent of registered voters who actually voted is as bad as you say it is. But the low percent of "eligible voters" is not as bad as you calculate. Your denominator is too high.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello,
    I am going to be one of your new neighbors and have been following all of this from afar. Obviously I can have no opinion on the past as I wasn't there for it but I do hope that the future will find less acrimony.
    As an outsider, I can tell you that we fell in love with BP just because of it's character, knowing full well it had the highest millage rate in Miami-Dade. Anyway, I love to be informed, I am very political and I vote so hopefully I too will in some way better this community by being a part of it.
    As for annexing the "other side" I've not seen mention a clear economic reality of annexation. I'm well aware of the reasons (stated and not) as to why people don't want to annex the residential part; in no small part to the fact that it is a poor and perhaps less civicly minded region but annexation would likely hasten the gentrification of that side as higher living costs would naturally translate into people living there who can/will pay the differential and those who cant moving out. Those who want the services this money can provide might be ideal citizens but whether that's good or not is up to your conscience...but it will happen none the less, whether it's to BP's benefit or not.
    Anyway best of luck to the new board and hope to hear from some of you soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome, Peter, and it's great to "meet" you. Please come around, to meetings or just knocking on doors. You have pretty good vision "from afar." You seem to have noticed it all.

      We have had a fairly comprehensive study of annexation of the tract under consideration, and it has included many of the financials. As with anything, there are some unknowns, but the general concept is there, complete with revenue calculations, or estimates. The long term consequences are precisely as you describe, and I agree with you that in the long term, it would be nice to extend a bit, for our benefit and for the benefit of the area you describe.

      Thanks for your comment, your interest, and your devotion already to BP. Please do let us meet you in person.

      Fred

      Delete