There Are Some of the People You Can't Please Any of the Time

Last night's special Commission meeting seemed like a minor matter.  I would have given it 30 minutes, although, yeah, I know, nothing to do with the VBP Commission happens that fast.

The issue was our old friend, the dais, and our need to, um, get off the pot.  Not only were McKenzie representatives coming, again, to listen to us fuss about the dais, but even the architect, Richard Heisenbottle, who specializes in historic renovation, came to provide his two cents.  By the time we were done with him, I suspect we took at least a dollar's worth of his thoughts.

Charlie Easton, our resident consultant/carpenter, was there, too, to provide the benefits of his own expertise and wisdom.  And it might have been a good thing he was there.  He's Barbara Watts' favorite, and she even hugged him at the beginning of the meeting.  Barbara don't do nothin' without Charlie's approval.  Or someone's.

The stage was set.  Barbara Kuhl restated the issues: the dais costs too much, and it's not movable.  Never mind that making it movable would also make it even more expensive.  This was one of those no-win dilemmas.  And no one could figure out what it meant that it was not movable.  Not being movable apparently did not mean it could not be moved.  It could be lifted and carried a short distance, which is all anyone anticipated would need to happen anyway.  It just couldn't be moved easily and often.  How often would we need to move it?  Somewhere in the range of never to very seldom.   But it wasn't easily movable. by a couple of guys, or one guy.

Heisenbottle spoke, McKenzie reps spoke, and Charlie Easton spoke.  It's hard to say there was any real conclusion.  The whole discussion was a bit of a moving target.  The bottom line is that the dais could be made more easily movable.  Yes, it could.  After a bit of what sounded to me like smoke and mirrors, it was concluded that whatever had to happen to make it more easily movable would somehow not increase the cost, or at most only negligibly.  I still don't understand whether the manipulation to make it more easily movable will make it less stable.  Heisenbottle equivocated about that.

Barbara Watts had lots of concerns, and lots of questions.  She really needed a very clear picture of what would make this dais more easily movable, how much it would change the price, and whether it would affect the overall quality and stability of this piece of furniture.  She grilled the McKenzie guys, Richard Heisenbottle, and Charlie Easton.  Finally, she got what sounded like reasonable agreement among them: the dais can be more easily movable, it won't cost more, or not appreciably more, to make it so, and it will be fully stable.  It may need an additional or stronger prop or brace here or there, but it very definitely can be done.  OK, done it was.  Barbara seemed reassured.

Roxy Ross moved to make the dais as it was originally proposed: "not movable."   I seconded.  No one else was interested, so Rox and I lost.  Bob Anderson then moved to make the adjustments described to make the dais more easily movable.  That's what Rox wanted to avoid, and so did I.  So we didn't second.  Oddly, neither did Watts.  So Dave Coviello, who is not allowed to make motions while he holds the gavel, but is allowed to second, seconded.  We voted.  Bob and Dave voted for Bob's motion, and Rox agreed to the adjustment.  It felt to her like a gentlepersonly compromise.  I held my now meaningless ground, still feeling like a movable dais was a mistake.  Barbara Watts voted against, too.  This seemed peculiar, although it no longer mattered.  Rox, wanting to pretty things up, asked for a revote, this time requesting a show of unmitigated commitment.  She wanted a unanimous vote.

Rox, you know how much I hate, hate, hate to disappoint you, but I accept that I got outvoted, and I lost, and I don't need this to be other than yours and Bob's and Dave's victory.  To me, unanimity does nothing.  So I'm sorry, my love, but I'm not changing my vote.

Dave, for no reason at all any more, turned to Barbara Watts, asking her to make it at least 4-1, in accordance with Rox's friendly and conciliatory sentiment.  No, said Barbara, she doesn't want any dais at all, unless, perhaps, Charlie Easton makes it, so she's not voting for it.

What?!  All that interrogation and squeezing of square pegs into round holes, and Barbara didn't agree to the modification?  It was she, more than anyone, who insisted on making this dais movable.  The whole effort was for her benefit.  And it was she, all this time in this meeting, who demanded to be accommodated and reassured.  She was never going to agree, no matter what McKenzie, Heisenbottle, or Charlie Easton promised and reassured her?  Why did a 30 minute meeting have to last an hour and a quarter?  I could have been home working, or watching cartoon re-runs on TV?  Wow, Barbara.

The Ant and the Grasshopper, or "First They Came for the Socialists..."

You must know the Aesop's fable of the industrious ant that saved for the winter, and the lazy grasshopper that didn't.  When winter came, the ant had food, the grasshopper didn't, the grasshopper begged for food from the ant, but the ant refused.  The grasshopper died.

And the famous poem by Martin Niemoller, about all the people who stood passively by, while the NAZIs rounded up group after group.  But the individuals didn't protest, because they were not part of the group being persecuted at that moment.  When the NAZIs finally came for those who had not spoken out on anyone else's behalf, there was no one left to speak out on theirs.

There's some discussion, and debate, here in BP about whether we have a problem with standing water.  The issue is what water remains after a heavy rain, and indirectly, about the water table.  Some of us are concerned, and others of us want to reassure ourselves that there is no meaningful, or out-of-the-way, problem.  Yet.

There's agreement they have a problem on the Beach.  There seems even to be some agreement that they have a problem in CNM, which borders us.  Not precisely here, though.  Not according to the rules.

I remember back in '05 and '06, when I started attending Commission meetings.  I had just moved here in July, '05.  I don't know if it was the '05 hurricanes, or just some unrelated pressure, but there were some of our neighbors along Griffing, on the canal side, who complained that the level of the canal would rise, and they would get backyard flooding, and even some water in their houses, seeping up from saturated ground.  No one complained about standing water in the street, though, and some say there still isn't, at least according to the rule-based definition of problematic standing water.

So some of us wait.  Presumably, they're waiting for some more incontrovertible evidence of a problem.  This approach calls to mind the failure to see a forest, for the trees.  Or the saying about penny wisdom, and pound foolishness.  Keeping one's head in the sand, or trying to navigate with blinders on.  If you're rolling your eyes at the profusion of cliches--two in the title of this post, and four more in the beginning of this paragraph-- some others of us roll our eyes at the effort not to see what seems so plain.

There's a contingent of Americans who don't believe in global warming, either.  Bleached and dead coral reefs, melting and shrinking ice masses, rising sea levels?  Nope, not global warming.  It must be something else.  Or maybe just a weird coincidence.  And when you talk to these people, it becomes clear that it's not really that they don't believe the earth is warming, per se.  It's what to do about it that bothers them.  They don't like the idea that money would have to be spent, and some of it would be government money.  That's their money, the money they resent paying in taxes.  The rest would be money paid by manufacturers, to retool to make products that use less energy, leading to higher prices for those products.  That's why they don't want there to be global warming.  Because they don't want to pay any more than they already do.

And so it is here in BP.  The reason some of us don't want us to have to acknowledge a problem with standing water, now or in the foreseeable future, is really that we don't want to have to pay to treat it or prevent it.

Are we waiting, as Americans seem always to want to do, for this to become a crisis?  And when it does, at whom will we be angry?  Whose fault will we want this to be?  And whose responsibility will we say it is to give us the money to address it?

Miami Jazz Cooperative

Normally, I wouldn't bother you about something like this.  The MJC is an organization of local jazz musicians and enthusiasts, and they have events.  One of their standing events is their Monday night "Rent Party."  It takes place in a bar/lounge (+/- upscale) called the Open Stage Club, at 2325 Galiano St, in Coral Gables.  It's a pretty nice event, goes on for a couple of hours, and only costs $10 to attend.  The music starts at 8:00.  You can buy drinks and limited food, if you want to, but no one bothers you if you don't.  Sometimes, they also have these events on selected Thursdays, too.

The musicians are almost entirely locals, and these are big local names in jazz.  I've been to this event, the "Rent Party," a few times, and apart from the trouble of going there, it's a good evening.

The MJC website, by the way, is miamijazz.org.

The reason I mention the "Rent Party" today is that on Monday, November 9, the pianist is Mike Gerber.  He and his wife Atlanta live in BP.  Mike is the iconic "blind jazz pianist," and having heard him a couple of times, I can tell you he's terrific.  You might have heard him once, too, since he did intermission duty once at a Food and Tunes a couple of years ago.

If you want something to do on Monday evenings, and especially if you want to hear and support your neighbor, Mike Gerber, I very definitely recommend the MJC Rent Parties.  They're good, cheap entertainment.

Have Amy and Mariana Got a Deal For YOU!

Here's what happened.  Amy Alonso and Mariana Ferro put in a pool.  They made some other improvements, too, and they really spiffed up their property.  Part of the pool project was a pool shed/cabana.

It wasn't really anyone's fault, per se.  Just some signals that got crossed.  It turns out that the wrong person gave Amy and Mariana the wrong advice, and they wound up buying a shed that was bigger than our Code permits for the place they wanted to put it.  It couldn't even be slid in with a variance.  By the time all of this came to light, the shed was already bought.  Amy and Mariana then had to get another shed, smaller than the first, and in keeping with our Codes.

Now, they own an extra shed they can't use.  And I have to say, it's a really nice shed.  It's 8 feet by 10 feet, with 8 foot walls, a hurricane grade hip metal roof, and a glass door.  It also has three windows.

This is what it looks like:

Amy and Mariana paid $4800 for this shed, and they would not like to lose money over the mistake.  If anyone is interested, for him- or herself, or for someone else you know, let Amy and Mariana know about it.  You can reach Amy at 305-975-6933, or you can e-mail her at jupiter247@me.com.  The shed is here in BP.  

This Town's Plenty Big Enough For Both of Us. Welcome, biscayneparker.

There's a new blog in the Village.  You'll find it at www.thebiscayneparker.blogspot.com.  Our neighbor, Milt Hunter, decided to start his own blog, and that's the address.  So far, Milt is only talking about the water situation in the Park (as in, whether we really have a water situation), but I'm sure he'll soon enough be onto other topics.  He already has a few followers, and no doubt he'll quickly have more.

Milt's blog is very classy.  It has a great layout, with nice background art and a smart look.  I don't know if the background photograph is one Milt took himself, but it would be cool if it is.

blogspot blogs are set up to accept comments from readers, and Milt's got them, too.  There's a lively and pleasing conversation going on about the water situation.

So take a look at Milt's blog.  Become a member, if you like it, and join in on the conversations.

Welcome, Milt, and welcome, biscayneparker.

What?!!! He Can't Be Serious! I Hope What We Need Is a New Police Chief.

I got from Chuck Ross, our CrimeWatch Chairman, an e-mail about crime events over this past weekend.  Our police chief, Cornelius (Rusty) McKenna, had the nerve to make the following statements about us:


THEFTS: Four cars were illegally entered by an unknown person(s) overnight. Two were on NE 116^th St near 7^th Ave, one was on NE 119^th St. near 9^th Ave, and one was on NE 115^th St. near 7^th Ave. All of the four cars were unlocked. A Dell Laptop computer was taken from one car, and a child’s lunch pail was taken from another car. All four of the cars were ransacked. If you have any information about any of the thefts, please contact Detective Lieutenant Pineda at 786-447-7122.


I have highlighted in red, and italics, and bold, the outrageous assertion Rusty made.  The outright nerve of this man.  What kinds of rubes does he think we are, anyway?  Well, what kind?  To accuse us--at least four of us-- of walking away from our cars, and going into our homes for the night, and not locking our car doors!  Does he think we were born yesterday?  Anyway, if the Chief, or even Chuck Ross, thinks it's important that we lock our car doors, why didn't they ever tell us that?

And as if this wasn't insulting enough, he also took the trouble to point out that one of our very own neighbors saw something very suspicious, and didn't even intervene personally!  Instead, the neighbor called 911.  The result of this tactic was to invoke police action, further resulting in the detention of someone who had two loaded handguns with him.  If Rusty is suggesting that BP residents themselves aren't courageous enough to confront an unknown trespasser who has two loaded handguns, I can't see how he could have been more patronizing.

Clearly, I intend to take all of this up with Heidi Siegel, our Manager.  Just wait until she finds out what Rusty is saying, for worse and for "better," about BP residents.

Agree to Disagree

Or, as the late Rodney King famously asked, "why can't we all just get along?"

What seems to happen to us all too often is that we take positions, we become entrenched, and we become embattled.  And the problem is not just that we don't see things the same way.  It's more than expected that that would happen.  The problem is that we have no mutual understanding.  One of us doesn't just disagree with another of us.  One of us rejects the other of us.  One of us has no idea what the other of us is talking about.  And doesn't care.

Battle lines seem to get drawn before there's anything about which to disagree.  An idea is unacceptable, or stupid, or toxic, or sabotaging, because of whose idea it is.  In that sense, every issue is an ad hominem issue.

Really, who cares about the dais?  Suppose a dais cost $24K, and suppose it lasted 48 years.  That's $500 a year for the dais.  That's less than 1/2 cent per house per year.  So what's the issue?  That we could have gotten a dais for $12K, and it would have cost $250 a year?  So instead of my paying, or your paying, less than 1/2 cent per year, we could have paid less than 1/4 cent per year?  Really?  BP resident Gavin McKenzie could make that dais, or BP resident Charlie Easton could.  Yeah, and?

In whose interest is it for Charlie Easton to build a dais, instead of for Gavin McKenzie to build one?  Certainly not Charlie Easton's.  The offer was that he would build it for free: he would volunteer his time and labor, and that of some others of our neighbors.  When George W Bush ran for president, there were people who advocated for "ABB:" Anybody But Bush.  The current effort to avoid the plan that includes Gavin McKenzie is a lot like that.  The proposed dais is too expensive.  It should be made movable (read more expensive), despite the fact that there is no reason to think anyone would ever want to move it.   (And amazingly, it's generally the same people who complain about the expense, and insist on making the dais movable.)  It should be made of some other wood than the one planned.  Any other wood.  We can adorn our "magical" newly renovated log cabin with a dais still composed of plastic folding card tables finished with Velcro-attached nylon skirting.  Anything on earth but what was proposed.

It's not about anything.  It's just fussing.  And it's really two problems.  One is the blind, ad hominem squabbling.  The other is the refusal on either side to comprehend the interests of the other side.  That's not to say that if either partisan understood the interests of the other partisan, they wouldn't disagree.  They probably would.  But it would be an honest disagreement, about real matters of philosophy.  Or particular interests.  But it's very different if anyone can say of someone else, I understand where you're coming from, but the other consideration seems more important to me.  Fair enough.  I wouldn't quarrel with anyone who just disagreed with me, as long as I knew they understood my position.

Last Tuesday night, at the Commission meeting, someone from 5th Avenue got mad at me.  Actually, it was more than one person, and they got mad at me before the meeting began.  It's very possible that one of the reasons they came to the meeting, which neither of them ever does, was to let me know how angry they were at me.

You know about the incident at 5th Avenue and 121st Street, about a week ago.  Someone from the CNM side of the street was arguing with someone else from there, and shots were fired.  One of the combatants fled down 5th Avenue in his car, and the other combatant shot at him while he was fleeing.  Fired shots clearly terrified BP neighbors, and one even struck the truck of a workman parked on 5th Avenue.

Two of those neighbors wrote to the Commissioners, not only to inform us of the matter (as if we hadn't heard all about it), but to let us know how insistent they were that something be done.  The preferred something was closure of the 121st Street median, the opening in which created the get-away path used by the fleeing and shot-at driver from CNM.  And two correspondents added an incentive for the Village and its Commissioners: we were now alerted, and if we don't somehow make something happen, quickly, any subsequent event, endangering and terrifying BP residents, will be our fault.  We will bear legal responsibility.  One of the writers made sure to point out he is an attorney.

I wrote back to these neighbors, some of whom I know, and some of whom I don't, to tell them that we all knew about this episode, that it would of course be taken very seriously and attended to in any way we could address it, but that it didn't do good for BP residents to threaten the Village.  What I got back immediately was a confrontation that neighbors had not threatened the Village.  What I got back at the Commission meeting was being glared at and addressed (dressed down), for how wrong I was to have said these neighbors threatened the Village, and for clearly having no understanding, let alone empathy, about the matter.

In the lobby, during the interval, I approached one of the people who was so mad at me.  I hadn't actually ever met nor seen him before, so I introduced myself and tried to smooth things over.  He was having none of it.  I said "I get it."  He said he had no reason to think so.  I pointed out I live on 119th Street, which has plenty of its own traffic issues, but he was not one bit assuaged.  He was sure I didn't understand his problem, since I wasn't enraged and swearing guaranteed and relatively expeditious correction.  It seemed clear he had neither understanding nor patience for the Village's dilemma-- we can't close the median, even if we agree it's the right thing to do, without cooperation from CNM, and there are reasons to think they are not in the mood to be cooperative with us.

These kinds of hostile stand-offs have become increasingly frequent in the Village.  I moved here in 2005, and there was already an established group of residents who occasionally threatened to sue the Village for one thing or another.  They have receded, but they have been replaced by another group, who either identify problems, or they invent them, and they threaten the Village with one thing or another.  Sometimes, it's as simple and routine as threatening Commissioners with being overturned at the next election.  Sometimes, it's a more energetic and concerted recall of them.  And it's always the accusation that they fail to understand and accede to the "will of the people."  (On one occasion, it was even suggested that if Commissioners or the Manager advocated for a new direction about something, the clear explanation was that they were taking graft.  Yup.)

Even if we subtract the invented controversies, there will always be disagreement among people.  It's anticipated, it's understood, and it's often even advantageous.  But there doesn't have to be a portrayal of injury, when there is disagreement, and when one person's position has to give way to another's.  Can't we just agree to disagree?

You Busy? You Know About Miami Light Project, in Wynwood? I Think I Might Have Mentioned.

The first time I went to MLP was about three years ago.  I had for some reason gotten turned onto a guy named Reggie Watts, and amazingly, he was coming to Miami.  To MLP, at 404 NW 26th Street (the Goldman Warehouse) in the Wynwood section.  So I packed up myself, and Chuck and Roxy Ross, and went to experience Reggie Watts.  Wow, what an experience it was.  I've become a regular at MLP ever since.  You know how it is when they know you?

MLP is a very funky organization.  Everything is off-beat and experimental.  I've seen plays and concerts there.  I meet people I would not otherwise encounter.  It's where I encounter 20-somethings with weird hair, hardware, and tattoos, but who want theater.  Yup, they exist.  Their parents and grandparents go to MLP, too.

The Goldman Warehouse, no doubt named for Tony Goldman, is in a district that was perhaps home to warehouses.  It's a lot of discount, "to the trade" showrooms of clothing now.  Some will sell to you retail, and some won't.  Austin Burke's Men's Wear is there someplace, too.  (If you're not young, and you've been in Miami for decades, you might remember the TV ads, in which you were promised that "little old Burky will fit you personally."  He'd peel off layer after layer of jackets, to show you the different looks.  I'm quite sure little old Burky is long gone by now.)  There's also a very cool shop that sells clothing and objets d'art from India.  It's called Rupees.  Operated by two very nice guys.  And there are murals on the buildings.  Loads of murals, super interesting.  It's continuous from the murals on Miami Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue.

Reggie Watts was my favorite show there.  My next favorite show was the "Tiger Lilies."  They're a British trio who paint up their faces and dress oddly and perform stuff that sounds like it was done during the time of German expressionism.  You watch and listen to them, and you think you're in the movie "Cabaret."  Google them and Reggie Watts, and you'll see what fun they like to have at MLP.  They love local talent, too, at MLP, and there's a resident playwright/director named Teo Castellanos, whom they frequently feature.  He did a terrific one man show, which he wrote, last year.

The room is small.  All seating is essentially excellent.  Tickets are usually $25, but you can pay $50, if you want "VIP seating."  VIP seating is at a little table (think cabaret) at the foot of the stage, and you get a free glass of wine, too.  I don't do this any more, because the wine isn't good enough to pay for, and all the seats are equally great.

Parking can be a bit of a problem, although it's not impossible.  The machines used to have two-hour limits, which was a regular problem when the shows were longer than that.  But now, I think they've extended the limits on the machines.  It's all on-street parking, though.

The other somewhat bad news is the cost of tickets for events at MLP.  I almost always wind up feeling like I've cheated someone, because they don't charge enough.  So I make up for it by giving them a donation in support.  I don't know how much it helps them, but it makes me feel like less of a thief.

The first concert this year is on Friday, October 9.  The lead performer is a jazz saxophonist named Carlos Averhoff, Jr, who appears to be the real deal.  You can google him, too.  I have about five or six other events to attend at MLP this season.  All cool stuff.

So think about it.  You can look up Miami Light Project, and see if anything appeals to you.  If you call them, you'll probably speak to Ivonne Batanero.  You don't need to know if she's a knock-out, right?  I mean, it has nothing to do with it.

My Hero. As Long As He Feels Safe.

From Noah Jacobs' facebook page:

Barcaloungers for all

Someone gave me the heads up that Dr. Jonas thinks I'm childish, and further suggests that the Dais is not that big an expense.... apparently if all the residents just pony up $20.00, this would be paid for no problem. If this was such an easy sell, why didn't he and the other elected officials put this up for a Village wide vote? I wonder...
As far as childish, that seems a curious sentiment coming from him, and I will respond in kind... I believe the proper response is, "it takes one to know one", or maybe "I know you are Dr. Jonas, but what am I".
Honestly, and a bit more seriously, Fred has pushed this $20 a person idea before. He suggested this when he was on the Biscayne Park Foundation. For some reason residents balked at the idea then. Amazingly, now that he is no longer the face of it, the Foundation has done a remarkably better job in regard to fundraising.
As a government official he has a responsibility as do the others to properly and judiciously manage the finances of the Village. Spending money on a throne so that he has a nice cushy place to put his fanny is not a well thought out expenditure of Village revenue.
But let me delve into the $20 a person idea, there are roughly 321,873,982 people in America; imagine that the federal government raises your tax rate to the highest in the Western World, (bear with me, I am going somewhere with this), then the IRS sends you a nice little letter that says they are asking that you give them an extra $20 for every one of you and your family. They intend to spend it in a way that makes certain Congressmen and Senators would get top of the line seating.

Does that seem like a good use of...hold on (20 * 321,873,982)=
$6,437,479,640? I didn't think so either....

The meeting is Tuesday the 6th, please go and have your voice heard... Oh by the way its still in the Rec Center, because the really fancy Annex with the place that might have thrones isn't finished inside, I wonder if this project is over budget? For a look at the Agenda, here is the link...
http://www.biscayneparkfl.gov/…/Agenda_ONLY_Regular_Commiss…

I'm so ashamed.  What could I say?:

Noah, if you want to fuss about something, bother to know what you're talking about.  It was $20 per household, not $20 a person.  And yes, you're right.  If each home contributed $20, we would very easily pay for the new dais, with money to spare, "no problem."

I'm curious about your "cushy...throne" reference.  This is not the first time I've heard it.  The proposed dais is a long table that will sit on the same floor as all the other seats and tables in the room.  My guess is that we will use the same chairs the Commission uses now.  Tell us more about your "cushy...throne" fantasy.  What did you think this was about?

As far as taxes are concerned, you are at a disadvantage.  You are not a property-owner here, and you don't pay taxes.  You have no reason to know that property values in BP are comparatively low, so that a given millage, which might sound high, is not a lot of dollars in taxes.

Also, our Village is unique.  It is unique in its charm, and it is consequently unique in some limitations it has.  It has an unusually limited way of raising revenue.  We have no commercial component here, so it is essentially the contribution each of us property owners makes that pays the bills.  Other income is based on residence, but not necessarily on ownership.  Thus, we have non ad valorem revenue, too, but most of the income is ad valorem.  So our limited ability to hold a high millage is what keeps us as afloat as we are, which is not exactly healthy, let alone luxurious.  The current Commission is trying to make improvements as we can.  We have a vision for the Park, and we understand that improvement requires commitment.  In the early days of the Village, if residents wanted a log cabin, they dug into their pockets to get the money for the materials to build one.  None of them would have tolerated the mean and mealy attitude you adopt.  Had you been here to spout off then as you're spouting off now, you would have been run out of town.

I am personally proud of the commitment I have made to this Village.  As is true of every other area of my life, I aim to give more than I take.  If I ask my neighbors to pony up $20 per house for a very worthy cause, you can be sure I commit much more than that myself.  I don't know how to answer you about the Foundation in its earlier years, when I was a Trustee of it.  We all did the best we could.  We worked hard, and we were as creative as we could be.  Did we disappoint you?  I'm sorry to learn of it.  Have you joined the Foundation yourself, or have you joined any of the Boards, to show your own commitment, and your skill in making things happen?  I don't know whether the Foundation right now is doing better, worse, or the same as we did then.  It never felt to me like a competition.  I do know that the Foundation has recently committed about $2000 to the Village, for a lighting project.  The job costs twice that, but the Foundation could not raise more than the $2000.

Raising money is not easy.  You often have to ask people who are not eager to contribute.  They'll fuss and resist over no more than $20.  If I remember correctly, when there was an effort to find money to pay for the mural outside the recreation center, and the private fund-raising came up woefully short, the Commission of which you were a part simply raided Village coffers for the rest, which was almost all of it.  Your neighbors all pleaded with you not to do it, and two of your Commission colleagues objected.  But you and your other two colleagues ignored everyone, and just snatched the money.  Is that what felt to you like a successful fund-raising effort?

When I have had a more personally inspired project, and I didn't need to depend on the formal participation of a group of other people, I have joined a few other ambitious Village residents and made things happen.  You will see three pieces of public outdoor sculpture around the Village.  The Village now owns two of them, and it is about to be presented with the third.  All of these represent the hard work and personal sacrifice of some of your neighbors, not, unfortunately, including yourself.  We spent a lot of time knocking on doors, we took "no" for an answer a lot (if we couldn't persuade the neighbor that "yes" was the right answer), and we paid more to compensate for those who paid less.  We would love to have been able to include your $20, or $200, or $5, but you never made anything available to us.  By "us," of course, I mean the Village.  The municipality where you choose to live for a little while.   The one to which you commit nothing, and from which you seem to demand a lot.

I Rest My Case, or You Can't Make This Stuff Up; Or Can You?

Letter written in response to Biscayne Times article.  Not sent to them, as they are not likely to publish it.


I'm still not sure what was Erik Bojnansky's point with his article about Biscayne Park and a collection of unconnected issues ("$24K Question," BT 10/2015).  I guess the title and the column inches suggest he wanted mostly to address the log cabin renovation, and the dais that is to be created there.  

Bojnansky cited BP resident Steve Bernard more than he cited anyone else.  He quoted three Commissioners, which I imagine is supposed to mean he spoke to them.  He did not speak to me, and I don't know if he spoke to the other Commissioner, either. But he did speak to Bernard.  Bernard was a Commissioner here some years back.  He no longer attends meetings, and he is not seen at information-gathering and opinion-expounding sessions, but that doesn't seem to prevent him from forming opinions.  And it seems not to prevent Bojnansky from relying heavily on him.

Bernard told Bojnansky, seemingly as a complaint, that the Village is not run by its residents any more.  Now, it is run by a professional manager.  What Bernard seems to have forgotten to mention to Bojnansky is that the change occurred on advice from a Charter Review Committee of Village residents, and that it was Bernard himself who chaired that Committee.  Bernard has never told anyone why he thought professional management was such a good idea, but then he spent the remainder of his time, both on and off the Commission, bucking the managers and lamenting, as he does here, that residents don't run the Village any more..

I was also unclear what to make of the juxtaposition of BP's having gotten a very large grant from the State, for construction of a new administrative building and renovation of the historic log cabin, and Bojnansky's quote of Commissioner Barbara Watts. who thought continued use of plastic folding card tables, covered in blue nylon drape attached with velcro, was good enough for us.  I wonder if we would have gotten that grant from the State if they had known our level of devotion and sophistication, or at least Commissioner Watts'.

Then, there's the matter of that "movable" dais.  Bojnansky quotes BP resident Barbara Kuhl as having thought it would be an advantage to have a dais that could be moved "out of the room."  I hope that's not really what she told Bojnansky.  No one has imagined such a thing.  The dais, unless it's those plastic folding card tables Commissioner Watts likes, will be a very heavy and well-made piece of furniture that isn't going anywhere.  At most, it could be moved toward a wall, but there's no way anyone could move it out of the room.  And there's no place to store it anyway.  This, of course, is assuming anyone would ever have a need to move it, which, according to imaginings of uses other than for Village meetings, would be almost unheard of.

Christina McKenzie, who originally said she didn't want a fixed dais, will be relieved to know that there will be no yoga classes in the log cabin.  They'll take place in the recreation building, as they always have.  And she doesn't want us to "get stuck on tradition?"  That was the whole point of the renovation.  In any case, we're then told she changed her mind.  The message here is what?  Where is Bojnansky going with this?

As for Bojnansky's glancing swipes about outsourcing sanitation, and annexation, we can talk about those alleged "some 300" people who didn't favor outsourcing.  I'll explain to Bojnansky about the petition that was the basis for this conclusion, but maybe his stomach can't take it.

If, as Bojnansky says, "some residents...fear that annexation will actually cost the Village money," does that mean that other residents don't think so?  How many on each side?   Did Bojnansky research the financials at all, or is he just passing along the views of "some" people?

I knew in advance about Bojnansky's article.  I followed from a distance, since he never contacted me.  I was expecting something that was at least questionable, as are so many BT articles.  Bojnansky did not, in that sense, disappoint.  Unless I was looking for something honest, remotely adequate, and balanced.  But the BT doesn't seem to work that way, especially when it comes to BP matters.

Fred Jonas

Commissioner,

Biscayne Park