******************* WARNING - DRIVEWAY NONSENSE ********************
The second issue is that there's been some kind of grudging admission by the Commission that an Ordinance they passed LAST YEAR is poorly written and subject to different interpretations, and therefore impossible to enforce. As near as I can tell, instead of relying on the Code Review Committee to draft the Ordinance, they took it upon themselves to 'improve' things, and thereby made it a jumbled mess on 8/4/15 & 9/1/15 when they passed it. So they thought it was best to pay our Attorney some extra money to fix it - again without hearing from any Village Committee. Item 11A is their attempt to try to unjumble their mess, and I seriously doubt they can do that, given their past history. (As Steve said at the outset, he's been busy and away from all this. He has forgotten what the Boards and Commission are for. He us unaware that the Code Review Committee most certainly drafted an Ordinance, and that the "improvements" the Commission made are its job to make. This happens in every case of every Ordinance suggested by any Board, and it certainly would have happened when Steve was a Commissioner. But it's been a long time, and he just doesn't remember. What Steve also doesn't remember, or perhaps simply doesn't know, is that it is most common for the Village to rely on its Attorney for things like drafting Ordinances.)
I don't have a particular dog in the race, although for some inexplicable reason, because we have a previously paved swale for parking, we're going to have to abide by the following, and this is a quote from the Ordinance: "Parking on any swale shall be considered a non-conforming parking surface requiring a release agreement to be executed by the adjacent property owner." (It's not easy being Steve Bernard. You're so persistently angry and spiteful that you can't relax and think straight. Anyone reading what Steve quoted, which, by the way, is every bit as present in the proposed Ordinance as Steve says it is, would recognize that it doesn't make any sense, that it is in no way practical or rational, and that it was language no doubt taken from somewhere else, about something else, and not applicable here. It is unimaginable to me that anyone would not agree that it must be removed. But Steve is not looking for what's rational or sensible. He just wants to rage. And there he goes.)
Hilarious. If my neighbor doesn't want me to continue parking on the swale I have been parking on for the last 22 years, I guess the Village will make me rip it up, and install something else? No, no... that's just one interpretation for a poorly written clause.
Because even though I'm sure they mean that it's me (and not my neighbor) who will have to execute a release of some kind (what kind of release, I wonder? Liability for traffic? No way I'd sign that. Responsibility for drainage? Yeah, sure, it's been there for a long time, and drainage settles pretty good after a bit. Ah, never mind, why be clear in an Ordinance. Who thinks that anyone is gonna sign a Release for something that came with the house they bought, and has been that way for decades?) with the Village, to what end? And why is this thing written SO damn poorly? What's allowed, what's not. I heard that the old styled concrete strips with grass between them is no longer allowed - why the heck not?
Bottom line - WHO IS PUSHING FOR THIS? Has the Village risen up as one, prepared a petition of hundreds of residents to demand a change to something that's not cause any serious problems for as long as I can remember, that can't be done a lot simpler and for a lot less money for both our Village and our Residents? I guess, given this Commission's attitude to resident's desires, that's the best thing to do - send a petition that we really and truly need this.... so they will promptly ignore it and abandon this latest round of nonsense. (Who is pushing for this? Some of your neighbors, and a majority of the Commission you elected. Those are people who want this Village to be better than it is, and the best it can be. And please, Steve, don't make this petition like the last one, which was totally faulty, not related to the matter at hand, which contained forgeries and names of people who not only weren't on hand when the petition was presented, but don't even live here. And don't present it at the 11th hour. Oh, wait a minute, it's already the 11th hour. Oh, Steve...)
Here's the link to Agenda item 11A, if you want to see for yourself - http://www.biscayneparkfl.
Sincerely,
Steve Bernard
Resident
Former Commissioner
Fred,
ReplyDeleteI wish he would take all of his energy that is devoted to complaining and denigrating and apply it to trying to provide solutions.
Fred,
ReplyDeleteI wish he would take all of his energy that is devoted to complaining and denigrating and apply it to trying to provide solutions.