It wasn't a Commission meeting as much as it was a tortured and not-well-organized workshop. It came out at best like a gripe, and whine, session. There was really only one topic of conversation, just one substantive Agenda item. And it didn't look like much on paper. Item 11a was the Manager's recommendation about outsourcing the sanitation function of our Public Works Department. She had studied the matter, and she was going to tell us what she thought we should do. She was going to give us a piece of advice, which the Commission could accept or reject. Her advice, known in advance by the time of the meeting, was that we ask her to negotiate a potential contract with WastePro to remove garbage and trash, and do recycling. The idea was that she and the Village Attorney would negotiate the best contract they could, and that the Commission would either endorse or reject that contract a month or so later. The reason for the deadline was that we have to communicate a sanitation fee to the County Tax Assessor by June 1, and we have to begin the process of transmitting that communication about two weeks before. In theory, then, we have to arrive at the fee by about the May 6 Commission meeting, give or take.
Because the Manager's suggestion was "known" in advance (some of the knowledge was based only on rumor, or even assumption), there was abundant feedback from BP neighbors, almost uniformly to complain about whatever fantasy neighbors had as to what the Manager was suggesting, and what her suggestion meant. Some of the usual sources of misinformation were at the core of these screeds (most were via e-mail). Almost all of the people who wrote in advance had not been to the public information sessions and further wrote to say they would not, for one specified or unspecified reason or another, be able to attend the Commission meeting, either. So most correspondents were as deprived as possible of real facts and real opportunities to acquire information. One of the common complaints, even from some people who actually did attend the public information sessions, the Commission meeting, and wrote e-mails, was that announcement of the sessions was inadequate. How people knew of these meetings they complained were inadequately announced was never made clear. I did ask, but I did not get an understandable answer. Even people who said they knew from the Village website said posting on the website was not good enough. It was good and effective enough for them, apparently, but it was somehow just not good and effective enough.
The Manager was ready to present her recommendation, but some on the Commission did not want to hear it. There was talk of delaying this announcement and the full presentation of it for a year. Some neighbors did not want to hear it, either, leaving in clusters as soon as it was decided by a 3-2 Commission margin that we would, in fact, listen to what the Manager had to say. Our Public Works employees had been pleaded with to go in advance to meet with WastePro, simply to see the operation, ask questions, and talk to other WastePro employees, in case there was a decision to outsource. They refused, to a man. When WastePro personnel were brought to them instead, most of these PW employees simply stubbornly refused to consider exchanging one employer for the other. At the Commission meeting, two of the PW employees announced that if we outsourced, they would refuse to accept employment with WastePro, no further questions asked or information needed. WastePro higher-ups attended the Commission meeting but were never allowed to make a coherent presentation. Instead, their Florida VP occupied himself responding to various incendiary bits of inaccurate accusations, some of them coming from a union guy, brought in from the west coast of Florida. Finally, Roxy Ross made the relevant motion: task the Manager and the Attorney simultaneously to negotiate a contract with WastePro and work up the real numbers representing the real cost of running the sanitation function in-house. The purpose, in case it wasn't obvious, was that we could then make a direct comparison, which would lead us to a clear-headed decision. There was opposition to that, too, but the motion passed.
Resistance, and antipathy to facts, ran this far: one neighbor responded to my suggestion that he talk to the Manager, and to WastePro representatives, to get questions answered, by telling me the sanitation industry is rife with criminals, and he wouldn't believe them no matter what they said. There isn't much you can do with a posture like that.
Neighbors approached the speaker's podium in what sometimes looked like endless procession, to plead for us not to outsource. Few of these neighbors had been to the information sessions, and their pleas came during initial Public Comment, before the imposition of any factual or substantive content. Four of our neighbors who spoke wanted to outsource sanitation. About 25 wanted to keep it as it is. Written communications received in advance of the meeting tallied about like that, too. Now here's an interesting fact: At the two informational meetings, there was a similar parade of neighbors who tore their clothes in devotion and protest over the idea of losing our PW guys (although that was never the proposal), so that it appeared no one wanted to outsource. But a secret ballot poll taken at the end of those meetings showed that fully 50% of BP residents* actually did want to outsource. It appears they felt freer to say so, if no one was watching or listening.
Here's the real irony of this issue. Chester Morris, in his comments, concluded by saying we should all act on our consciences, and leave out personal feelings. The let's-keep-our-sanitation-function-no-matter-what sentiment was about nothing but personal feelings. There was what seemed like an aversion to anything else.
Much of the "discussion" last night, then, looked like bad news. There was, however, a very distinct piece of very good news. Our neighbors, who pleaded to keep the system and personnel we have now, with every bit of its local charm, offered more or less unanimously to pay more, and whatever it costs, to preserve exactly what we have. We have recently paid $572 per dwelling per year, and projected fees like $717 and $930 were floated last night. No matter, devotees announced. We want what we have, and we will pay for it! Now to be perfectly fair to our devoted neighbors, some of them did flinch a bit, and begin to wonder if perhaps there might be some ways to economize, too. They weren't so fiscally blind that they were really willing to write the blank checks they almost waved around last night. But they were close. One neighbor offered $500 on the spot, toward the purchase of a new lawnmower. We weren't discussing lawnmowers, but the sentiment was not lost. Another neighbor immediately matched him. No checks were written, but I have confidence these neighbors would be good for it.
The rest of the meeting was anticlimactic. Only two other issues came close to inspiring any meaningful reaction. One was the offense we took toward the Boy Scouts of America, who will not permit gays in positions of "leadership." (Interesting thesis: prejudice against gay people as a demonstration of "leadership.") The other was our favorite bogeyman of all time, FPL, who want to install more concrete transmission poles in the Park. The BSA wanted us to waive the fee for use of Village space. We told them no, until they finish cleaning up their act, and knock off the homophobia. If they expect to help boys grow up, they themselves should grow up. It is unlikely we will stop resisting FPL. We have developed what appears to be a real appetite for demonizing them (I was going to say "a healthy appetite," but there's nothing healthy about it), and several of us seem more than satisfied to keep them as our favorite enemies. So the BSA helps boys grow up, we want the BSA to grow up, but no one is going to help us grow up. OK, so we'll declare concrete power poles the worst scourge of the urban environment, and we'll enter into endless battle with that evil empire, FPL, to resist them. Sounds like a good use of time, trouble, and emotion. We'll need something to occupy ourselves once we either outsource sanitation, or we don't.
11:30, if you were wondering.
*Correction: the vote did not represent "50% of BP residents." It represented 50% of people who voted. Not only did not all BP residents vote (proportionately very few BP residents were there), but not even all who attended voted. There is no basis to guess whether those who chose to vote were probably more in favor of outsourcing, or more opposed to it. There is no way to identify who voted.
Careful, Fred. Your contempt for your constituents is showing. You're disgusted if residents don't show up and apparently disgusted if they do and voice their opinion. You seem to think anyone opposed to outsourcing should have just sat quietly and let the Manager make her pitch. Then if the Commission agreed with her and heard no opposition it would be an easy move to outsource. Your next post probably would have been titled, "Hey, why didn't you say something."
ReplyDeleteI wasn't impressed with your suggestion to let the Boy Scouts have the recreation center for free and give them another year to continue their discrimination. Sometimes you do have to take a stand or nothing will change.
One of Biscayne Park's biggest "whiners"
Not contempt or disgust, Barbara. Frustration and disappointment. I welcome anyone's view of anything, and a feeling not to want to outsource sanitation can have great legitimacy to it. All I asked was that this conclusion take into account all available information. That means we have to listen and learn before we conclude. So yes, I think we should all have been eager to hear what Heidi concluded, and how she got there. Is there some advantage in making uninformed decisions?
DeleteThe fact is, it seems most of us, at least most of us who spoke openly, at least when they were speaking openly, say they don't want to outsource. And our best reason, having heard all the facts, might be "because we just like it the way it is, and we don't care what it costs to keep it that way." That's fine. It's a position. It's a conclusion. It would feel right to some, maybe many, and not to others. But it's an answer to the question. And as a representative of my neighbors, not someone who rules over them, I go with what they want. I might not agree, but if it's what they want, and they're willing to pay for it, I consider that the end of the story. I will confess that according to what I have learned about Village finances and this issue, I think outsourcing is a good idea, and I would try to explain to someone else why, to try to convince them. But if I don't succeed, I go where they go. They, you, have my vote and my advocacy. Even if I disagree. Even if I think you're wrong. This is not the first time I've said this to you.
You are not the only person who "wasn't impressed" with my suggestion about the Scouts. I apologized in the next post. I proposed my version of a stand last night. Clearly, it did not resonate.
Me, too.
Fred
Fred, you're so quick to chastise anyone who didn't listen to Heidi's presentation. The simple fact is her reasons for recommending outsourcing were presented in the back up material for the commission meeting. It was the same presentation, word for word. Did you ever think that some of us actually read the material. Maybe residents took into consideration the available information and still didn't want to outsource.
DeleteSince this was one of the biggest turnouts that I can remember for a commission meeting, maybe you should listen and try to learn what the majority of the residents were saying. They did tell stories of how happy they were with Public Works but more importantly they kept telling the commission and the manager to come up with different options. Our men think we only need one truck. They want to start cutting the medians again and do the recycling. Over and over again residents questioned the administrative costs of almost $190,000.
Some residents were right when they said that this isn't about Sanitation. It's about bad budgeting for our village and now Public Works is the scapegoat. Suddenly we're being told that to keep Sanitation in house we have to lease two new garbage trucks, give everyone substantial raises, set aside money for a road fund and budget an administrative that's three times the old fee. When have we ever taken on so much in so little time? We've always needed new equipment, better salaries and money for the road fund but we've always ignored it. For years. Now, suddenly, it all has to be done by May. Big surprise that they're estimating our garbage fee will almost double. This isn't how you do things. We need a three year or a five year plan to budget for these things. The administrative fee needs work. These are scare tactics and the one thing that came across at the meeting was the willingness of our community to go to bat for Public Works. The commission and administration are taking the easy way out if they just look at these very stacked figures. Public Works is not saying they want all of these changes tomorrow. They're saying they want their jobs tomorrow.
You said that you were a representative of your neighbors, not someone who rules over them and you would go with what they want. Well, you heard them loud and clear at the commission meeting. Maybe you're the one who is refusing to listen. We've had our own trash and garbage since this village began. Nothing has changed that drastically in the past year for us not to be able to afford it. Let's figure out how to make that happen.
Yes, Barbara, Heidi's recommendation was in the backup. And many people had already expressed opinions, too. So what do we need meetings for? What could possibly be left to "discuss?" Not only do most of us not read the backup material, but I was informed yesterday that many Village residents, including very long-time residents, should receive a written flyer in the days before each gathering, including Commission meetings, because they somehow don't know when these meetings are, what the agenda is, and they don't have computers. Yes, I was told that. By more than one person. In any event, it is patently rude to walk out on someone, especially if the exodus represents an immature gesture much like sticking your fingers in your ears and humming, because you don't want to have to hear what the other person is saying. You don't expect any more than that? I do.
DeleteBarbara, how many times to I have to tell you this: at this point, under the right circumstances, I plan to vote not to outsource. I get it. It's loud and clear. My neighbors, who live here just as much as I do, who outnumber me considerably, do not want to outsource sanitation, AND THEY ARE WILLING TO COMPENSATE BY PAYING THE FULL COST OF WHAT THE EFFECT OF OUTSOURCING WOULD HAVE BEEN. Did you see the all capitals? That's a signal to note particularly and carefully. We will agree to pay what the service really costs (what it costs us, not what it would cost someone who could do it cheaper), AND WE WILL COMPENSATE FOR THE EXTRA BENEFITS OF OUTSOURCING. You saw those all caps, right? So outsourcing provides two benefits to the Village. One is a cheaper price to do the identical job in the identical way. The other is new income. That new income would have come from the Franchise Fee and from our paying more into the sanitation line item than the contractor would have charged us, so we could use the overage for a related expense, like fixing the streets. Pending, of course, that we learn if we can even do this. If we can't, then we are proposing to walk away from an amazing fiscal opportunity by not outsourcing. My current loose estimate is that the total of all these costs leaves us paying an initial sanitation fee in the $900s, to go up by some unpredictable amount every year. That's what it costs us not to outsource. If that's what you want, and you will agree to work to see to it that the rest of our neighbors agree to the same thing, I'm yours.
Sure we budgeted badly in the past. That's the fault of the past Commissions, the past Finance people, the past Managers, and all the rest of us who sat by and never thought to ask the most obvious of questions. And your point is? All we can do is to pledge to do better from now on. Our current Manager, the person we worked so hard to choose, the person with the credentials on which we insisted, the person with the experience we thought was so important, the person who we insisted should impress us adequately enough in a public setting, the person to whom we offered a perfectly nice contract, then agreed to pay more, because she wanted more, and we didn't want to lose her, says we should outsource. We know better than she does? How great for us. And what a waste of time and money to have hired her. We should have hired a Manager by using an RFP, and just taken whoever was cheapest. And our PW supervisor knows, after all these years of our having two garbage trucks, and no one ever saying there was no problem when one broke down, that we really only need one truck? I wonder if he can name that tune in zero notes. I also wonder if he might have any motivation to offer practically anything for us not to outsource this function, since he stated VERY clearly that he doesn't want us to outsource, and he won't cooperate if we do. This is not exactly what anyone could call a mature response.
TO BE CONTINUED:
CONTINUATION:
DeleteSo going to bat for Public Works is going to be easier than you think. You don't need a bat. All you need is a well-stocked check book and some very comfortable walking shoes. We have to start writing big checks, and we have to go convince all of our neighbors to do the same thing. From now on. Are you good with this? Me, too. I'm going to vote as my representation of you demands I do. And you're going to take responsibility for the decision you insist I make. Because I'll tell you what the alternative is. The alternative is that I say to myself, there were an awful lot of BP residents at that Commission meeting this past Tuesday, but there were vastly more who were not there. I'm going to guess that these other neighbors weren't there, because they really don't care. In fact, I'm guessing they couldn't care less. I'm guessing that these people are so uninvolved that they have little for the Village, and they want little from the Village. I'm guessing that they don't know anything about our sanitation function, or the people involved in it. I'm guessing that it would please them greatly if they got their next property tax bill, and the sanitation charge was lower than it was last year. I'm guessing that they would have no questions at all about that. That's my guess. But they didn't tell me that. They've left me to guess it. I hear you, though. And if you want me to accommodate you, and the other 25 people who pleaded not to outsource sanitation, even though I think it's best for the Village if we do, then you will work very hard to leave your neighbors with a very clear and convincing understanding as to why their sanitation bill is going way up. I'm going to do something for you, and you're going to do something for me. Deal?
Fred
Barbara,
DeleteI realize that we do not agree on this point but I believe that you're pushing your point beyond the reality of the situation.
As Fred states below, the group of 25 residents (plus or minus) do not come close to the majority of the taxpayers in the Village. Mobbing together and then refusing to listen to sound options discounts your argument.
It makes NO SENSE to pay twice as much for ANY SERVICE over the actual cost of said service. Period. 25, or so votes for this doesn't change the facts. I don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.
Keeping the village "the way it has always been" simply is not the answer. More need to be done, for sure such as looking at the overall budget, on this we do agree. But this steadfast refusal to consider options recommended by our Manager shown by some is disturbing.
Sadly for some, they need to be run over by a truck before they realize that they were standing in the middle of the road.
ReplyDeleteWe can only hope that some of the neighbors in attendance (those who didn't attend either workshop and haven't studied our fiscal shortfalls) will become active and work to find solutions in how to make up for the potential lost ability to add much needed money to our General Fund or Reserves.
The clock is ticking...
Thanks for the recap, Fred... I'm in San Diego for a conference and had to miss this one. I hope the manager and Commission see clearly through this and push for the long-term good and viability of the Village by opting to outsource the sanitation. It's the only rational route. I may ruffle some feathers over personal feelings at first, but you guys are tasked with looking out for the good of the Village.
ReplyDeleteFeathers were ruffled at the meeting to be sure. Based on the emotions from those in attendance, logic and "long-term viability" of the Village wasn't the focus of their battle cry.
DeleteCorrection: "IT may ruffle", not "I" may ruffle. Stupid smartphone keypads.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe commission needs to act on the best for the community, and it's apparent to me that outsourcing is the most viable answer to this community's fiscal needs. Fred, I think you were completely right to insist that our City Manager complete her scheduled proposal, and that the residents needed to hear her professional opinion based on extensive man hours of research.
ReplyDeleteNow I will ruffle feathers, and have no issues doing so. Our sanitation staff are wonderful people.... enough said. However, they are not efficient, which is due to a lack of proper equipment, and an old fashioned management style. The work model of Waste Pro is efficient, and is utilized in many other service industries. Whether we like it or not, it is far more productive than paying guys an hourly wage. If we were to retain our sanitation department, we need to incorporate the same work model..... I will bet money that a majority of the workers would quit. They have a relaxed slow easy going work place, and we're paying for it, and will pay 50% more if we continue ($900 plus per year). According to Heidi, we have a very high amount of absences, especially on Mondays. We have had trash pick up delayed due to sick employees, and "no shows". There is no motivation for the trash guys..... they make $7-$8/hr. WE CANNOT WALK AWAY FROM THE FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE, IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE WHEN OUR COMMUNITY COFFERS ARE DWINDLING.
I know that last night was very intense, especially for the commissioners. I am really counting on the commission to be strong enough and show the leadership to get our community back on track. Delaying and avoiding the inevitable is why we are facing this situation right now. Do what's best for our community, make tough decisions, and do it with compassion.
I feel betrayed. I understood that we would get a true comparison between outsourcing vs in-house services by Public Works so that the best decision could be made. We did not. A number of us who wrote to various Commissioners, the Mayor, the Village Manager, etc., asked and asked that we get an apples to apples comparison. We did not get one. With a totally different method of paying employees (or so it seems) by Waste Pro, you can’t even compare salaries. Our own guys kept telling us we don’t need two trucks yet all the financial data included our getting two trucks. Our guys work 5 days a week and Waste Pro proposed service, at a much reduced rate, and it sounded like they were saying the entire job could be done in two days. Have we examined ways to be more efficient? I don’t think so. Has much been done to encourage residents to recycle more? I don’t think so. At the meeting last night we were told that all we needed to return to doing the medians ourselves was a new lawnmower, and that by doing it ourselves again we would save money. At least that’s what I understood. Probably a lot more to this but having the right equipment to do it ourselves seems to be a place to start. This was the first any of us heard we needed a mower, hence why my neighbor offered the $500, to be matched by many. I have no doubt we could rally the troops and come up with the rest of the money. Plenty of my neighbors would donate to the this cause, but not to public art. I spoke to the main rep from Waste Pro and he admitted that a number of the guys who transferred in from North Miami were gone shortly afterwards. Some physically could not make the transition and he only had so many “lighter duty” positions. It costs money to draw up a contract and many of us asked how can you draw up a contract when there has been no real examination of what we could do to become more efficient and reduce costs. There is still this giant increase in administrative costs that is being added to the equation. I understand why this line item is included by most municipalities; but, I strongly question the amount allocated and the increase which is (I think) now more than 3x what it was in previous years. To me this is a flaw in the budget to begin with. I don’t understand how you can spend money and time to draw up a contract with a company and then decide whether or not you want to accept the contract. I am sorry but I maintain that there was not enough time or energy spent in giving us the true picture. Even from the workshop we first were told that to maintain what we have in house would cost $700 something or other. A number of us stated we would gladly pay the increase to keep our PW Dept. Suddenly last night we heard $900+. We asked for an apples to apples comparison but we did not get it. Instead we got a one sided picture. To me it was like comparing Red Delicious to Granny Smith’s with the one doing the comparing having a preference to begin with. As for the polls from those workshops, for sure the one I attended had more participants than the number of green thingies turned in. I know I am rambling but I am terribly annoyed by this whole issue. We need money to fix the roads? Gee, what a concept. But where’s that in the budget? And you can’t convince me (at this point) that if Waste Pro has to pay a 12-20% franchise fee, that they won’t eventually find a way to pass this cost back to us. I think David’s idea of putting a band-aid on things and giving us more time to really examine everything was a far better solution than spending money on legal fees to draw up a contract that might get rejected. So how about an unbiased examination of this entire issue with a true comparison as to how much more it might cost for us to keep our PW Department? Include re-cycling comparisons and even median upkeep. Also, it sounds like if we don’t get the annexation, we won’t even have a Village anymore.
ReplyDeleteLinda Dillon
Linda,
DeleteIn my opinion, dragging our feet on issues like these is part of the reason we're in the position we're in now. Poor leadership and denial from past Commissions have created potential and unnecessary additional risks on the annexation proposal for one.
We MUST consider what is in the best interest for the Village above all else.
What am I, everyone's secretary? First Linda, now Dan.
ReplyDeletePlease post for me under Linda's comments:
This is really a very simple issue. If you want to buy a red delicious apple and one store will sell it to you for $.10 and another wants $.15, then you have a decision to make - you pay five cents more for the exact same apple or you pay $.10 and buy an orange with the five cents that you saved. Every one of us makes the equivalent decision of buying $.10 red delicious apples on a regular basis.
What makes us think that contractors will not faithfully perform their duties in accordance with their contract. We have no information that they won't, but there is evidence that they do perform well for many of their other customers throughout the state and the Southeast. Presumably, none of us have problems hiring electricians and plumbers and roofers and many other contractors to help us manage our lives as Village residents and homeowners. Why is this any different?
This contractor will be bound to the contract that they agree to along with the Village. If that contract provides for some sort of escalation in costs, and it's agreed to by both parties, then we will know three or five years in advance what our cost are going to be for those services. The same cannot be said for escalations and the cost of services as they may be performed in-house. At the end if the initial contract period, the Village would have the right to renegotiate favorable terms with Waste Pro for a continuation of their services, or they could re-bid for those services in search of better services, better prices, or both. It could also decide to return to Village-performed services by simply buying a few trucks and hiring some new employees. I tend to agree with those that say this would never happen, though I believe that the reason we wouldn't do that is because we will be more than happy with the contractor's services and the benefits of the reduced cost that we will have all benefited from.
Contracting out the services will have the added benefit of freeing up the Village's management staff to moving our community forward in other ways. Free from the requirements of managing staff and the associated day-to-day issues that arise from an in-house waste collection operation, staff will be able to focus on needed capital improvement projects such as, but not limited to, road paving, drainage projects, median improvements, Village Hall renovations etc. These types of projects truly do have the potential for raising property values in the community which in turn will help us to solve our ad valorem tax limitation problems. Each of these issues deserve the full attention of management staff.
Dan Keys
All good points Dan.
DeleteWell, it was a very heated night, that's for sure.
ReplyDeleteI thought there was one mistake on the agenda: the manager presentation should have been heard before everybody's comments, not after. We had people that had not attended any of the 2 workshops and never heard the manager's presentation coming to the mike to talk and comment on an imaginary situation. If we are not willing to listen and consider to all the points made, then we are wasting our thoughts and energy pursuing imaginary scenarios that have little to do with reality.
On top of all that, a lot of our neighbors that were vehemently against this outsourcing option just walked away before they could hear the manager explain all the hard work and research that was done. I respect the opinion of the neighbors that went to the workshop and opposed the outsourcing because they made the effort to get informed and some points raised made a lot of sense. But I didn't like the crowd ganging up trying to bully the commissioners into complying to their feelings. We need cooler minds and smart decisions for the good of our village.
Really good comments and ideas from all. I hope that you have forwarded these comments to our Commissioners as I am not sure all follow this blog.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of if we outsource or not, change is needed for our PW department. Brad Piper makes great points on this "WE CANNOT WALK AWAY FROM THE FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE, IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE WHEN OUR COMMUNITY COFFERS ARE DWINDLING."
Further, "I am really counting on the commission to be strong enough and show the leadership to get our community back on track. Delaying and avoiding the inevitable is why we are facing this situation right now. Do what's best for our community, make tough decisions, and do it with compassion."