A HISTORY OF FINANCIAL MISMANAGEMENT
By the way, when I brought up these expense vs revenue questions to the previous manager, she said that it's ok, there's lots of revenue not taken into account that will more than cover any expenses not listed. But you know what? NOPE. Check out page 278 where it says that all utility fees and taxes, and all FPL Franchise fees, and even cigarette taxes paid by our potential new neighbors (but not really, separated by railroad tracks and not reachable unless you leave BP) will go directly to the County, not BP. Extra revenue? Maybe if property values go up and they pay more taxes.... for us. (So are these our "new neighbors," or are they not? Steve is absolutely right: we're not moving the land and the buildings; they're staying where they are, across the tracks. It makes you wonder a bit what, exactly, is the concern. That annexation is a fiscal drain? Municipalities annex, and it's not uncommonly because the annexed area provides diversification, like of revenue. Municipalities don't annex, because they want to go bankrupt. It's for the opposite reason. One of Steve's proteges, Bryan Cooper, actively said he wanted us to go bankrupt, so Miami Shores, as he envisioned it, would pick us up. Steve wasn't heard complaining about that. So now, Steve sees the area in question providing revenue, but not for us. I suppose it's good to know he recognizes the revenue potential of the area. He directs his readers to a link that doesn't say what he says it says. But let's imagine that it did. What we have every reason to assume is that 1) the County would be flexible and consider such an arrangement to be negotiable, and 2) that retentions like these are in the context of things like franchise agreements, that have end dates to them. In the present case, the end dates of some of these agreements is very soon {and annexation not imminent}, so that the entity renegotiating a possible new agreement would be BP, not the County. So clearly, there is abundant flexibility here, but Steve either doesn't know that or chooses not to mention it.)
Sounds pretty naive, right? Maybe even as poorly thought out as the recent funding debacle at Village Hall. If you missed it (and it was easy to miss it - no newspaper articles about it, nothing sent out by your Commission, because it's just so shameful) the Village asked the State for a million dollars to renovate the Log Cabin and build a new Administration Building. And they got it! Whoo hoo! A million bucks! Everyone crowed about it, everyone slapped themselves on the back, emails from the mayor, a press release... but. No one included a cost estimate to see how much the project would be before they asked for the money.
No one asked how much the job would cost when they approved a yearly budget, or hired an architect, or when they signed a contract with the GC (they committed to the new building before they knew how much the log cabin would be). Turns out the entire job was about $1,800,000! Where'd they get the money to make it up? I'm not exactly sure. I know they took out a $350,000 loan with little fanfare (our first building loan ever! But don't tell anyone... shhh....), but I don't know where the rest came from - sold a garbage truck here, maybe went into the reserves there... Maybe you can ask them when you come to the Commission meeting Tuesday 7/12/16 and ask why they think annexation is a good idea. Yes, the buildings are beautiful, and yes, the funding was disgraceful... and if the amateurs who failed to oversee that fiasco are in charge of annexation, we are in trouble. Instead of stepping down in shame, they are now pushing for one more financial boondoggle. (He's really working himself into a state here. I wonder why. I'm glad Steve thinks the new work is beautiful. It wasn't done under the preceding Commission, or any others of the past Commissions, including the ones on which he sat. Is that what upsets him? Decades of BP Commissions let that building deteriorate more and more. Presumably, they didn't want to be in the position we're now in: spend some money to improve the neighborhood. And if you don't repair, you just enable more deterioration. Maybe they didn't want Steve Bernard, so some other version of him, at their throats. The old log cabin was in disgraceful condition. Sure, it was the water leaking when it rained, and the rats running wild. And the bathrooms you couldn't actually use. And beyond that, it was just very, very cramped. One Village Clerk some years ago threw away many documents, because there was no place to store them. And Steve is satisfied with the new results. Good. Me, too. Steve's main castigation is that we didn't take into account the possible cost of the job and the possibility of cost over-runs. Of course we did. Gary Kuhl, one of our neighbors who has had a long and active career in the construction management trade, criticized the architect for not padding the overage assumption more than he did. Gary was right: these jobs often go over expected budget, and this one went over more than the architect bargained for. But Steve somehow thinks no one even thought about overages. Does he really believe this, or does he just say it for polemic effect?)
Because no matter how bad our financial situation is (or maybe isn't - who can believe a word this commission says? We're so broke we have to outsource sanitation, but we're so rich we can spend an unbudgeted $800,000 on a building project) (We have no money; we can't afford to keep this place afloat. We have plenty of money, and we're happy to spend it; we want to run our own sanitation service, no matter how much it costs the Village and the homeowners. "She's my sister. She's my daughter. She's my sister and my daughter."), going into a lifetime annexation with no clue how we can pay to police it or service it, but knowing we'll need more than just 2 cops going into it is a mistake of the highest magnitude (Great phrase.). Enough to truly bankrupt our Village, as opposed to scare tactics this commission used to push through annexation.
And if, as we have been told, the new area does not have to pay the 9.7 mils immediately, but it can be raised in steps, we'll be broke before we ever get the full amount promised by our math-disabled commissioners, if we ever get that much, which is highly doubtful.
As far as I'm concerned, I am 100% sure that if 50 people... 100 people... 500 people showed up tomorrow night and told our BP Commission we do not want this, that the math doesn't work... they will disregard us as they have so many times in the past. But this time, the one making the final decision is the County Commission, and they rarely have that many people show up to tell them how wrong their own Village Commission is. (As if no one knew or understood anything, until Steve Bernard sets them right.)
And I also bet that if you look at the numbers (and you're not one of the dozen people - if that much - who first supported this and will now be defensive) you'll agree that this is a financial mistake, and you'll come out in force... or at least sign a letter telling the County you're against it. Our own commissioners have proven they don't give a damn what we think, but it's a different story with the County.
Send me an email if you think this is a mistake, and let's figure out how to stop it by the 7/19 county meeting. And please tell your friends and neighbors about this, as I know there are many new residents who aren't on my list.
Here's the link to that Agenda item 11 B if you want to see for yourself - http://www.biscayneparkfl.
No comments:
Post a Comment