Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Now…About That Petition


Last week we had the second reading/hearing on the proposed outsourcing of our sanitation services. And this issue [as others have in the past and potentially will in our future] has served to divide our community and in my opinion, unnecessarily so.
Grassroots petitions in Biscayne Park generally have a history of failing to receive much traction. This one was no different.

Now… about that petition. It was neither accurate, complete, nor based on real discovery and honest representation. Based on a preliminary review of the petition this has already been found to be evident. For starters, the count was exaggerated. The sanitation billing structure is based on each residential unit, not each member of said household. The petition's language was also deceiving in that it was typed “to outsource our Public Works Dept.” [mentioned twice] which was clearly never the case. There was a handwritten addition of “sanitation” which looks to have been added after the fact, and only on some of the pages. Very misleading. Moving along… there were cases of signatures from those who do not even live in our Village, and then additional added relatives that also, you guessed it, do not live in our Village. Should renters count? They are not responsible for the sanitation bill, and who knows how many renters were listed. There were some very large signatures taking up several spaces yet counted as each space and so on and so forth. It was suggested that “residents stood up and their voices were ignored.” Simply not true. Not getting the results you wished for doesn’t indicate that anyone’s “voices were ignored.”
But the most obvious omission was the fact that there was no explanation as to why the majority of our Commission voted in favor of outsourcing or the cost saving realized by outsourcing and other tangible benefits for both our residents and the Village. This petition was simply too one-sided and incomplete.

So, with this in mind, let’s look at this topic [petition] from another view:

Dear Biscayne Park Taxpayers,
A group of our residents want to force our Commission to raise your garbage rates by 59%-75% with no cost control for future years! We have rights and our voices should be heard! They also are willing to walk away from new revenues and benefits which our Village desperately needs.
Did you know that we have been told from our finance director that our Village reserves might be consumed in 5 years? That's right, no more financial reserves or community identity. It's up to you to make a stand and protect us from this action before it's too late!

Neighbors, do you see my point?  Every comment made was the truth and factual.
How long do you think it would take me to get 327+ signatures on this petition? As well, with this "other side" explained, many of those who signed would potentially re-think their position.

There were reports of Commissioners (past AND present) who either deliberately misinformed or outright lied to the resident they sought a signature from. Just to list two such examples; when asked about “what was the cost difference” between outsourcing and keeping the program in-house, one current Commissioner said that she “didn’t know.” Really? Was it even ethical for a sitting Commissioner (who had to vote on this issue) to be so involved? There was also the case of her signing the petition for another resident. The other example is of a past Commissioner who stated that the outsourced rate would increase soon after the contract was signed and endlessly harped that the contract would not be honored. This was a clear omission of truth in deceiving the resident of the fact that we have a contract that is price-guaranteed for the first year and has a guaranteed cap for potential future increases of no more than 5% for the remaining four years. Many other safeguards have been worked into the contract to protect our Village. It is shameful that those who have some degree of trust from our residents would resort to lies and deception in an attempt to support their views. But, this has now become a rather common offense. And as mentioned, these are just a couple of examples of what was discovered.

 If we want to be fair, honest and, heavens forbid, "transparent," don't you see the hypocrisy in how this petition was designed?
So, if you must hold onto your ire over this, be sure to aim it at the proper target. And that would be every past Commission that avoided dealing with this issue before the 11th hour was upon us. This problem did not happen overnight. Ask them why no money was set aside for the purchase of new equipment, or to pay our workers a decent wage nothing was done.

Knowing that our sanitation department lost $91,397.00 [last audited year] tells me that we really don't do a good job in managing this service ourselves. Never have. This fact proves the problems and inefficiencies of our in-house service. There was a plea of delaying (per usual) and trying to revamp the department ourselves. Tell me, who do we have in-house that can manage it in such a way to compete with WastePro's bid? Because that would have been the only other viable alternative to consider. And if we do have such a person, then why have they withheld this much needed assistance up until now?  Again, no concrete alternative plans were ever disclosed as you all well know. We cannot at this stage bank on “hope” and “good intentions.”
I will state that over most of the 22 years I’ve lived here I was the “model of apathy” as I abhor politics. Why? Well, for all the reasons that we’ve now seeing in our small little Village. Yes, we have now become as corrupt and disingenuous as any other larger branch of Government. And it sickens me. I reached my limit of apathy in what I was seeing transpire within my own community by a small toxic element whose main mission seemingly was to spread contrarian disinformation and create disruption at every opportunity. I could no longer sit back and watch this malignant corruption grow unheeded.

You will not find me writing to only a selected group of Commissioners, instructing/demanding them on agenda policy. You will certainly not see any Commissioner step down from the dais to hand me a folded note as was witnessed during the 5/21/14 meeting.
It is really a shame that it has become necessary to follow up behind this “noxious element” but as long as the lies, misinformation and deliberate community divide is evident, we all need to remain diligent. There must to be a balance of truth and also consequences for those offenders.

To question the integrity and motivations of our three Commissioners and Administration staff that, after careful thought and deliberation made the best decision for the Village is simply unjust.
Yes, I understand that some of you feel that your voices were not heard. There was simply not enough substance behind the position versus the fiscal responsibilities facing our Village at this time.

Again, if you feel compelled to hold on to your ire, just make sure that it is not misplaced.

 Milton Hunter   
miltonhunter@gmail.com

7 comments:

  1. Milton, I agree with everything you expressed in your post. We have only been in Biscayne Park for 2 1/2 years, and are amazed at the deceitful tactics used by some of the commissioners and residents, to lure support for their cause. There must be some sort of Pledge of Ethical conduct that can be enforced. The note passing by Barbara Watts to Steve Bernard was very questionable, and at the very least distasteful. I am also not convinced that Barbara Watts actually understood the information which was presented to her. A commissioner supporting a petition that is based on blatant misinformation, should be addressed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Misinformation aside, inflating the number of signatures on a petition by including non-residents and multi-line large signatures is just plain sleazy and reprehensible (and who knows how many were made-up names and phone numbers). Then, with the blatant lies and errors on the petition, people who have not been following this proposal closely could easily be tricked into supporting the petition, even if they otherwise wouldn't if they actually had the facts. I suspect that after subtracting the non-residents, fictional residents, and misguided supporters, the total would have been more like 25 people.

      The note-passing from a commissioner to a resident was also incredibly tacky and unprofessional. I wonder if that commissioner ever got in trouble for the same act in 2nd grade? Oh, speaking of unprofessional, let's add on storming out of the room when a vote did not go her way. Again, somewhat reminiscent of 2nd grade. I think a lot of people were embarrassed for her, even if she wasn't.

      In the end, we can be thankful that we have finally elected/hired a commission and management that was able to steer clear of the mess and the lies and make a decision that will benefit the Village for years to come.

      Delete
    2. Brian,
      There was certainty more than 25 people who showed support but the petition didn't offer enough data to be seriously considered. I understand large signatures [if the space was restrictive] but don't count them more than once. Don't hand write in something after the fact, which looks to be the case here and list ALL of the information, not just one side.
      The savings and other benefits were totally left out... why? For those wanting to pin all their hopes on this, it would have had to be complete and balanced. It was not. As to the note passing, I'll address more on that later.

      Delete
    3. Brad,
      I don't know all of those who were involved in sponsoring this last minute petition. I can not say that all were intent on misleading others and I believe that they had a conviction in their efforts. However, to have the same contrarian element continue to twist, lie, deceive and distort due to having a weak argument is unacceptable. As mentioned, there are consequences for these actions.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  2. Milt,

    Just two things. First, thanks for noticing. Yes, it's quite true that not agreeing with someone does not equate to ignoring them or failing or refusing to take into account what they said. Having said, that, the petition, coming when it did, could not have been given much consideration. I don't think the petition sponsors expected that it would. I think they imagined that just the mention of "327" signatories would be enough to turn all Commissioners away from outsourcing. To add to this suspicion, one of the petition sponsors essentially threatened the Commission by noting that none of them received 327 votes. In other words, "do what we tell you, or 327 people will rise up against you. That's more than supported you to get you where you are."

    As you describe, there were some pretty considerable and fundamental problems with the petition. Some could have been identified, or at least suspected, on casual inspection, but others would have depended on more in depth examination.

    Second, your point about our very persisting failure to manage this program properly. It may be fair to say or imagine that someone, some time, some Commissioner, perhaps one who managed Public Works, might have recognized the problems. He or she may even have lobbied for improvement. The bigger problem is that the problems were never resolved, not in a decent and timely way, anyway. One of my friends, a 35-year resident of the Park, told me that every time we need new garbage trucks, we go through the same thing: the money isn't there, wasn't set aside, and we have to scramble to find it. As it is, the PW/sanitation department owes the general fund money for purchases like these, and the loan has not been repaid. We eventually erected a proper building for our PW Department, but look at the condition the old space had to come to before we acted. And we only erected the new building, because we got a grant. It appears that if someone ever did try to urge improvements, of any kind, the urging must persistently have fallen on deaf ears. It seems that proper management of a sanitation department is simply not what we do here in BP. We haven't managed this function properly lately, and, as you say, we never have. It would seem like immensely poor judgement and lack of insight not to recognize and accept this about ourselves, and do what we should do to take proper care of this function. The best of intentions? I wonder.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  3. A couple fitting quotes of wisdom from the late Maya Angelou.

    "You may not control all the events that happen to you, but you can decide not to be reduced by them."

    "If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change your attitude."

    ReplyDelete