Greetings Neighbors,
I am writing you today to
provide several videos and other thoughts to illustrate a disturbing trend that
is happening within our Community. That being the failure to accept certain
realities and the process of coming to terms with them.
In reviewing the agenda for
tomorrow's Commission meeting, I noticed that Commissioner Watts has, once
again, brought up the subject of annexation. I mention "again" in
that she is simply re-hashing her same argument that failed to gain majority
support from February 4th, 2014. The main difference now being that in
February, it was the proper time to discuss it before any decisions were
made. Her attempt to bring this topic up
again now, some 8 months later & after the fact is not, and serves
no constructive purpose.
Barbara Watts apparently suffers
from one of the most basic human failings shared by us all - she allows
personal emotions to impact her business decisions. And this is problematic
when serving as one of our elected public officials. Below is a link to the video
from the annexation discussion on 2/04/14 to include the section from good and
welfare. You will hear from those neighbors in attendance and the reasons
behind their thinking.
During the annexation
discussion on the video, Barbara Watts emotionally voices her distress and
called for more delays and to defer the topic further. This, after personally
admitting to the many delays and deferments already made by the previous
Commission… one of which she was a part of. Her language and I quote; “because
we want our sweet nice little Village, we want to live the way we want to live
and we will be taxing the hell (half out of your mouth) out of these faceless
people so that we can maintain our lifestyles” is disturbing to me on many
fronts.
Who is it that she serves? Our community, or the “faceless people” on the other
side of the tracks?
I am at a loss to see how
she, after studying our fiscal shortfalls finds that the proposition of
annexation is to simply “maintain our lifestyle.” What is missing is the
audited fact that our community has run a deficit in 8 out of the last 10 years
losing $840,526 from our General Fund. Why was this, the entire
reason for this discussion in the first place not mentioned? Curious isn't it?
Does she perceive only
“greed” in seeking alternatives to simply survive as an independent entity? In
this Barbara Watts has shown, in my opinion, very poor judgment towards the
financial management of our community. All other Commissioners were in
agreement, albeit Commissioner Anderson favored starting out with a smaller
area first if possible.
You will find another video
that includes the final vote and, what should
have been the conclusion of this discussion. Link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUUOuB4tzDM
After careful consideration
the vote carried and was met with a hearty round of applause from the audience.
Harvey Bilt
said something during the Meet the Candidate’s night (December 2013) that
struck a chord with me and was a pearl of wisdom. He stated and I quote “you’ve
got to give in. If you don’t agree, then come up with a solution.”
I feel there is a point that
we all need to consider moving forward. And that point is… who do we want
to be as a Community?
Do we want to continue to
view ourselves as a fractured, disenfranchised lot or do we want to rise above
the pettiness? If any of us choose to not be involved in the discussion and the
process … and during the correct time, NOT these patented 11th
hour, [after the fact] panic knee jerk reactions, then we have no right… no right at
all to complain or make idle threats due to our own negligence. There is
no one to blame but ourselves.
Below are
comments from resident Andrew Olis:
At the last
round of elections- (December 2013) annexation was one of the "hot
topics" that was a part of every candidates platform, as was metal roofs
opinion, code enforcement opinion etc...All were vocalized at the Meet the
Candidates meeting. Elections occurred and the candidates were elected to be
commissioners by the most votes (majority) of the residents based on their
platforms and integrity. We need to allow our ELECTED OFFICIALS do what they
promised. The clock has been ticking on this opportunity for a while now and of
course becoming more and more difficult. We need to move things along faster in
Biscayne Park and not to squander opportunities when we have a chance to do the
right thing for the future of the Village. I am afraid to have the tightening
window for the Annexation close, for the Log Cabin restoration and Village Hall
annex getting bogged down in yet another war of opinions, and anything we have
with a deadline. The Learning Center we lost (a $350,000 grant) was an
embarrassing lesson learned already in bogging things down- why are we gearing
up for a repeat? The future of our village is at stake. -Andrew Olis
If we chose to be part of
the solution… and not part of the problem… then we HAVE to be educated on
the facts and get those facts from the proper source. And that source is
NOT some email circulation to only a select few under the cloak of secrecy. That
action is part of the problem and not part of the solution! Neighbors, nothing is being
hidden from you, there is no great conspiracy at work here, as suggested by
some… but you need to be accountable for your own education. Until we are ALL willing to
do this, I fear we will remain entrenched
where we are… as we continue to bounce from topic to topic in unnecessary
conflict.
Respectfully yours,
Milton Hunter
Biscayne Park Resident
Milt,
ReplyDeleteI, for one, do not want us to "maintain our lifestyle." It is a losing proposition. "Our lifestyle" includes very poorly developed (really undeveloped) medians, a Village Hall we could not afford to maintain, streets we cannot afford to repair, a railroad track from which we cannot afford to shield ourselves, minor expenses we cannot afford, police who operated on donated and badly used equipment, and a number of other quaint charms. This may be how Barbara Watts wants to live, but it's not how I want to live. It's not how I want us to live.
As for Harvey's caution, I see no reason that Barbara, and others opposed to annexation, shouldn't apply themselves to finding a viable alternative. I'm reminded of the FPL Franchise Agreement torment, and the similar plea that we shouldn't give ourselves away. But there was no viable alternative, and the plea was made at the hour of decision. I have separately urged the current Commission to seat a committee that would occupy itself with developing methods of raising revenue, so that we don't have rely on the Franchise Fee, and methods of creating electric power, since that's what some complained the Agreement would prevent us from doing. Neither the Commission in general was interested, nor was Barbara Watts, nor was anyone else. So now, when the Agreement has to be re-signed, I trust there will be no last minute portrayal of opposition. Likewise with annexation. Instead of trying to halt the process now, let's have Barbara, and whoever else, present to us some great alternatives, so we can abort the annexation application, and use these better options instead. If they can't do that, and if we want a better life than we have, let's have them either help or get out of the way. As you say, let them be part of the solution, not just a problem compounding our other problems.
Fred
Long on questions and complaints.... short on answers and solutions. It's part of the problem.
DeleteFred,
ReplyDeleteI preparing this I also found some good points made by Chuck Ross. It's a little dated but the main points are well made:
If BP annexes the proposed area what are some of the benefits to the area?
1) One of the best Police Departments in Miami-Dade County.
2) The personal attention of belonging to a small Village.
3) The convenience of dealing with Village hall not that far away to transact Village business.
4) Becoming part of the Biscayne Park community.
Pro’s to BP:
Other than the taxes what other advantages are there for BP? There are additional revenues above and beyond the Ad Valorem tax base; there will be a Police presence in a place that has presented many challenges to keeping BP safe. The proposed area has a limited number of residents approx. 560 or so based on the *420 living units contained in two gated communities. So according to the study the majority of the additional cost to maintain the area will initially be 3 Police Officers and a FT or possibly PT Code Officer.
Con’s to BP:
I don’t really see any because as a practical matter BP is running out of resources, the reserves have diminished, critical improvements to our infrastructure need to be made, our police need to be better compensated for the excellent work that they do, and our local streets and medians need to be improved.
It’s not going to come from BP’s existing tax base which is at best flat lined, ad valorem revenues are capped annually, Intergovernmental revenues are on the decrease and expenses are on the increase. Don’t believe me- I’ll show you the charts I have prepared based on BP’s Audited Financials.
What if we do not find additional Revenue sources?
My opinion is that in order to survive we will need to cut services. Where will we start? I don’t know you tell me. Our annual General Fund expenses have already been reduced over $400,000 since the year ended Sept 2008. The unrestricted fund balance in the general fund is down substantially despite the reduction in annual expenditures since Sept 2008!
If action is not taken make no mistake, there will be no money for Village improvements, services will be cut and ultimately there will be no Biscayne Park as we know it today, if at all.
Chuck Ross- 7/13/13