The time is quickly approaching for the Village and its Commission to begin to make a decision about sanitation.
I might as well make a confession here. It's probably clear enough anyway, but I should be on record about it. At the beginning of this conversation, I was very much opposed to outsourcing sanitation. I felt the same way you do, and for the same reasons. But the more I studied the matter, the more I talked to people, and the more I learned and thought carefully about it, the more I have changed my thinking about outsourcing. I think it's the right thing for the Village to do, it's better organized and more efficient than our current system, it will produce extra income that is otherwise not easy to get, and it will leave us with the same service we will have if we don't outsource. We have more control over sanitation if we contract it out. And it's much cheaper for each of us as homeowners than trying to accomplish exactly the same things if we don't outsource.
I have been having a philosophical debate with myself about this issue. Is it my job to advocate for the satisfaction of my neighbors' wishes, or is it my job to do what I think is best for the Village, whether my neighbors like it or not? And if the former, for which neighbors' wishes should I advocate?
Well, I've found a partial way out of the dilemma in the case of sanitation. It's true the Village gets more money for less work if we outsource, but if we compensate ourselves for the money we would have gotten with outsourcing, it comes out to a kind of wash for the Village. Except for the extra management requirement. It makes a very big difference to each of us homeowners, who have to pay the extra money, but it can be more or less equal for the Village fiscally. There's a way I can advocate for the wishes of people who, for whatever reasons, don't want to outsource sanitation, while protecting the Village at the same time. Partially and more or less.
The very clear fact is that many of us don't want to outsource sanitation. We've seen and heard it all, but some of us just like it the way it is. It doesn't have to be rational, it's just the way some of us feel. One of our neighbors, a friend of mine, says the numbers make clear we should outsource, but she just doesn't want to. Got it.
So here's what I have decided to do. I've decided that if my neighbors want to keep sanitation under Village Hall's roof, and they're willing to pay what it will cost the Village, who am I to vote to take it away from them? If you don't want to outsource sanitation, and you're willing to pay the cost, my vote and I are yours. All I ask is that this is really what you want, that you're really committed to paying for it, and that what you want is what most of us want.
There won't be any problem for you and me if we agree with each other to pay a higher sanitation bill. You've already offered to do that. The problem will come when we tell our other neighbors that we've decided to have them pay a much higher bill, too. What will happen if I advocate for you, and we don't outsource, and sanitation fees get really high, is that someone, not you, will want a word with me. They'll want to complain, vigorously, that I have stuck them with a bill they don't want to pay, and it was their understanding there was a way they didn't have to. They won't come to you. They'll come to me.
So I need you to bail me out. I need you to explain to your neighbors, and convince them, that outsourcing is not what they/we want, and that they should be agreeable to pay much more than they've been paying and more than they might otherwise have to pay to get their refuse removed. Now I know you won't convince everyone, but I need you to convince a lot of people. I need to vote on behalf of a very healthy majority.
Let me present you a model of what you might do. A year and a half ago, there was a question of moving the BP election to combine it with the general election. It seemed to me to be a good idea, because it would be cheaper for the Village, and we would get many more people to vote. So some of my BP neighbors and I had nice flyers printed, we paid for those flyers, we put our names and telephone numbers on those flyers, and we went door-to-door distributing them. Every home in BP got one. It was unquestionably money equity and sweat equity. If someone was home, we took the time to talk to them, to explain why this seemed like such a good idea, and why they should vote to do it. To me, moving the election was as obviously a good thing to do as not outsourcing sanitation is to you. I and my neighbors put our money and more where our mouths were. I guess I would have to say we succeeded in convincing people, because they voted to move the election. It's moved.
That's what I'm asking you to do. Go convince people. Convince most people. Do it for me, so I can do something for you. Plenty of people will get mad at me for wasting their money, so produce an irresistible majority that I can feel I am legitimately representing. Not a majority of people in a certain room at a certain time on a certain day, but a majority of all the people who write checks to pay their sanitation bills, and a majority of people who can vote. And put yourselves out there. Let your neighbors know who you are, and that it's you who want not to outsource. Maybe when some of them get incensed, they will remember you, and they'll come talk to you about it. If they come to me, I'll remind them that it was you who saw the community value in keeping sanitation the way it is. I will advocate for you. But remember, as there were more of you at a given meeting, urging that we don't outsource, than there were neighbors who thought we should, there are vastly more BP residents who don't bother to come to these meetings at all. They don't even bother to vote. They seem very uninvolved. Do you want to guess what they think about things like our PW department and the sanitation bill? Couldn't care less; just want lower bills and the garbage picked up? That's my guess, too. I will hear from them when their bill suddenly increases substantially. Those neighbors are your challenge.
I don't want to pay an inflated price for something that can be inexpensive. But I'm just one person, and I'll do it, if that's what you want. I'll be OK with it. I won't be OK with fighting your battles for you, though. Especially if I think you were wrong to pick them.
I am not sure I understand why this is such a difficult decision? Your concern is appreciated, but why are you beating dead horse? Appeasing those residents that are afraid of any change is not helping this community. It's unfortunate that most of BP does not vote or attend meetings, however you have a responsibility to represent ALL of Biscayne Park.
ReplyDeletePros:
Save $400/yr per household by not increasing costs.
Create a source of revenue for the village.
Save $$$ moving the police headquarters (eliminate the trailer, and costs associated) and eliminating the need to build ($$$$$)
POTENTIAL NEW HOMEOWNERS.... how does the most expensive trash bill in Miami Dade,a virtually maxed out millage rate, and no revenue look to new home buyers? What does this mean to our property values? Not hard to figure out.
No trash sitting in the street 4 days a week.
Less liability due to decreased workforce.
Brad,
DeleteClearly, I agree with everything you say about the benefits of outsourcing. But here's my philosophical problem. You properly remind me that my responsibility is to "ALL of Biscayne Park." But how do I actualize that? First of all, who are "ALL" of these people? If they don't present themselves and state their opinions, I'm only guessing at what I think they want. Or at what the kind of person who doesn't state an opinion probably wants. On the other hand, isn't the majority supposed to rule? And don't we establish what a majority wants by asking them? So if in a given room at a given time on a given day, there is a very clear majority who have "voted," by stating an opinion, is that my proper constituency? I'm only guessing about the silent "majority." My alternative is to set aside what the vocal majority want in favor of what I think is best. But in a tiny community, where information is available to everyone who wants it, what makes my judgement more valid than someone else's, or almost everyone else's? Now I could say that the kind of person who resists getting information disqualifies him- or herself, and it is most proper for me to substitute my own judgement. Since that has actually happened, repeatedly, is that what you would advise me to do?
Or do I ultimately say that if people have expressed an opinion, and they're willing to take responsibility for that opinion by paying for a given service, even if they're very clearly overpaying and looking at the whole thing "wrong," then the majority should be allowed to rule? The downside is that a majority ruling disfavors the minority, or even whoever failed to express an opinion, which may be an even bigger "majority" than the vocal majority, but that's always the case.
The other complicating factor, cited in particular by Milton in the comment below, is that we don't really know what the people who don't want to outsource really do want. Are they merely afraid of change, as Milt imagines? It seems unimaginable that they want what they say they want: to vastly overpay for a service, because the employees who do that service are seemingly nice people who say hello to them and wave. And besides, it's entirely possible that if we do outsource, we'll wind up having the same debris picked up by the same nice and cordial people. To be honest, unless Milt has hit the nail on the head, I feel like I'm missing something.
Fred
Fred,
DeleteI clearly see where you are coming from, and why you are torn on this issue. You are representing Biscayne Park as a whole, and there are a small percentage of residents attending meetings, and being vocal. You still have to act on the better of the whole community, not the few vocal residents. You are empowered to assess the situation and vote accordingly, representing the whole community, even the silent majority. This is not about your neighbor, my neighbor, or the elderly couple down the street, it's about the future of the village as a whole. It's time we run this village properly, and create a community that future generations can be proud of. Being a leader is really about dodging arrows when you have to make tough decisions. Tony Blair said it best "The art of leadership is saying no, not saying yes. It is very easy to say yes." Again, this community needs strong leadership, and the 5 of you accepted that position to better this community.
Well said Brad. It is perplexing that some of our homeowners. Commissioners can not/ will not see the facts for what they are. I looked at a real estate pricing model and saw that "an example" Biscayne Park property (average) was valued at $345,000. For zip code 33161- $144,000.
ReplyDeleteFor those who simply prefer to avoid any change, this could be what our future property values look like if we default. Perhaps, not the lowest end of the scale but certainty lower than what we now have.
What other solutions have these homeowners brought forth to counter for the lost revenue/opportunity we have before us??