Saturday, September 15, 2018
I Didn't Forget. I Think I Just Couldn't Stomach It.
This past Tuesday, we had two Commission meetings. The first was to vote on the budget, and the second was the regular monthly meeting. Because I couldn't stomach it, I'm going to make this short.
The first meeting started out with Tracy Truppman's scolding her colleagues (I guess that's whom she was scolding) for having gotten this far with a budget Tracy called "fiscally irresponsible." Now this is not only after two workshops, which Tracy controls, but the fact is, this was Tracy's budget anyway. She tells the manager what to write, and he writes it. Tracy voted for the familiar and irrational millage of 9.7. Tracy voted for each part of this budget along the way. So what does she mean-- what is this non-reality-based grandstanding-- by declaring this budget-- her budget-- "fiscally irresponsible?" Now, she claims she wants things cut? She had plenty of opportunity for that. The woman is not well. The Commission voted to approve it, as they should have, and must, at this point. This was a five-minute meeting that probably took a half hour.
The regular meeting was mostly Resolutions and Ordinances, with one variance and a couple of items of new business. None of it was about much of anything, and the meeting was not worth the 2 1/2 hours it took. The one curiosity was the new business, some of which had been introduced by Will Tudor. Tracy made the comment that it was important to pass these matters (which needed, and I hope will get, more time) quickly, because we have elections coming. This crack means one of two things. The less likely thing it means is that Tracy is in a hurry to register something she can think of as an accomplishment before it's possible she will no longer head a majority of stooges. But this is unlikely, because the new business items wouldn't really accomplish anything, and Tracy doesn't care about anything anyway. The more likely meaning was that she wanted something on the books that she could present as representative of Will's imagined value to the Village, so that he could use this imagined value, and these imagined accomplishments, as part of his platform in his campaign for re-election. This is Tracy's way of trying to campaign for Will, using the Village as fodder. Similarly, Tracy just sent out an e-mail blast in which she gratuitously and wrongly refers to the currently cementing resolution of the Village's police-related troubles of several years ago as an accomplishment of the current Commission. Which had absolutely not one thing to do with it. But again, she makes this statement not only so she and the woman in the mirror can compliment each other about it, but further to bolster the fantasy that Will was part of something adaptive.
Anyway, this is still very sickening, and I have nothing more to say about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the 5-minute budget hearing took almost an hour and I agree she's trying to distance herself from herself! Kind of silly isn't it.
ReplyDeleteIf Tracy was trying to campaign for Will at the meeting she topped that this morning by making a veiled attempt to claim that the newly elected commissioners get credit for former Chief Atesiano pleading guilty yesterday along with three other officers over the past month or so. It’s perverse to use this dismal moment to promote herself and the newly elected commissioners that had no more to do with this than you or me.
The appropriate official for a message to be communicated would be the Manager and in fact yesterday the Manager cautioned the rest of the Commission that he would be the point person for any communications regarding this matter. So, it’s clear to me who’s in control when his directions are ignored.
So now she has changed the message so she's taking credit by herself for cleaning up the police force. She just continues to spiral downwards.
DeleteI haven't seen her message. Is she taking credit alone, not even with Krishan? If so, then she's directing the police herself, which is a violation of the Charter. Is that the downward spiral you meant?
DeleteThe fact is, this has nothing at all to do with Tracy or the current Commission. It's a matter that began several years ago, resulted in firings about two years before Tracy ran for Commission, and has been investigated by the FBI, separate from Village administration. I would be surprised if the FBI or anyone even discussed any of this with Tracy. It has nothing to do with her. The FBI interviewed me, but that's because I was a Commissioner at the time. They might well have interviewed Krishan, because he was highly positioned administrative staff then, not because he's our manager now. They certainly interviewed many of our police from that time, and Heidi, and David Coviello, and Bob Anderson, and Barbara Watts, the latter three of whom were Commissioners then. But Tracy? Unimaginable.
Tracy is the mayor, and she can't articulate any vision, improve anything in the Village, or even help create a budget about which she then doesn't complain, as if she didn't approve. But they're her budgets. How can she not approve?
Downward spiral, you say.
It's been three and a half days since the meetings, and I just remembered why the first one took so long. Roxy Ross came prepared, and she asked for clarification and corrections about several items in the budget. While she was doing this, Tracy kept interrupting, because she couldn't stand that she wasn't getting any attention-- that smart girl was getting all the answers right-- and she resented that Roxy knew what was going on, and she, Tracy, didn't. And the other three, when called upon to ask any questions they might have, looked blankly, and sucked their thumbs.
ReplyDeleteI realize it sounds like I'm making this up (I did: they didn't really literally suck their thumbs), or exaggerating wildly. If anyone thinks that, please review the recordings of both of these meetings. Correct me, if you discover I was wrong about anything.
In Tracy's letter, I don't read her trying to claim credit for anything related to the FBI matter. I do, however, read her claiming that, during her tenure as mayor: "The Village’s police department has made great improvements to ensure your safety and the safety of all who live in and visit our Village." That's a real stretch, and I'd challenge her to provide evidence of that. Name an improvement and connect it to results, Madame Mayor. And, you don't get to count that board you guys created to deflect your responsibility in matters of public safety ... the board that has yet to make one suggestion for you to even consider let alone implement. Speeding, one of the main safety complaints voiced on a regular basis from residents, has not even been addressed. The mayor and commissioners can't even find their 'nads or voices to state out loud on public record: "We direct the manager to ensure that the police fully enforce traffic laws and that Code fully enforce existing code." That would be a good start.
ReplyDeleteMac, it's in the context, or the juxtaposition. While there is publicity about past BP police problems, Tracy comes out with a communique saying she's improved the police department.
DeleteAs for what Tracy could do, it would require a statement of vision, and Tracy has steadfastly avoided one. And there is no "we." It's only Tracy.
Fred, I read the mayors letter and I didn’t find anything wrong with it. I didn’t see her taking credit for anything accept continued cooperation with the investigative bodies started previous to her administration.
ReplyDeleteI will agree with you that Rox’s thorough understanding of the budget payed off in correcting issues in the budget that should have been caught by the Managers office. The other Commissioners and the Manager should take note and become similarly acquainted with the operations of the Village and how that should be presented in the budget document.
As to your presumption that the Mayor runs the Village as an administrator, giving orders where orders are not permitted by the Charter, that can only happen when a Manager takes orders. I am sure that the Mayor confers with the Manager as all members of the Commission should. It follows that when 3, 4 or 5 of those Commissions express a certain view on an issue either at a Commission meeting or during private conferences, only a fool or an extreamly principled, courageous Manager would publicly stand on a position that was in opposition to the wishes of those commissioners. I’ve seen that done in other cities, but not often. If the other Commissioners feel that the Manager is cowtowing to just one member of the Commission, then they can make an issue of it as Rox has done. There has indeed been an absence of opposition expressed on the dias by some Commissimers. One needs to consider if this verbally unexpressed agreement is due to their communications with the Manager as to his plan of action, which may or may not have been derived by him or as a result of discussions with others on the Commission. All Commissioners should know that their constituents want to know what they think - it kind of tells them that they actually think.
Back to the budget. I found nothing wrong with the Mayors concerns for fortifying the budget contributions to the reserves. They are valid considerations and I don’t think that fact was lost on the rest of the Commissioners. They in the end have recognized that the other important priorities in the budget will move us forward in ways that are worth the risks presented by our pre FEMA reimbursement reserve position. At least three of them actually verbalized that the funding for a Public Works Director was such a high priority that they believed it should move forward outside of the general consensus that discretionary spending in the budget should be carefully considered during the first several months of the budget year or at least until FEMA and State refunds had been disbursed. This verbalizarían was a positive action, signaling that some members of the Commission may be developing the necessary knowledge and experience as Commissioners so as to be willing and able to express their opinions with confidence.
Dan, see my comment to Mac. And it is not for Tracy to promise cooperation. It is not she who is being asked to cooperate about anything. If anyone needs anything from us, of course we would cooperate, and it would be the manager, in theory, who would be cooperating.
DeleteThe manager's office is Tracy Truppman. Tracy spends inordinate time with the manager, almost especially around budget time. There is no reason to imagine the budget came anywhere but from Tracy. The manager would have little independent time to do his work without Tracy's hovering, and directing.
There are two things that enable Tracy to run the Village herself. One is what you state: that the manager takes the orders Tracy gives. Tracy has already made clear that she owns the Commission, and that she will abruptly fire anyone who doesn't obey her. I wish the manager did not take Tracy's orders. I wish, as you suggest, that he would stand up to her. But he wants his job. I wish, as you say, that other things were more important to him than his job. Apparently, they're not. The other thing that enables Tracy is the three silent stooges. If you want me to tell you why they are spineless as they are, I don't know. They have no agenda, and never did, so maybe there's no point in bucking Tracy, since they don't want anything in her place. Rox can say what she wants, because it doesn't matter. Rox's big victory is being on the short end of a 4-1 vote about something. Or 3-2, when Will Tudor is pretending to have some independence. No one can know what conversations the other Commissioners have with the manager. But we can all know what they say in public meetings. It's essentially nothing. They clearly don't know the issues or what's going on, and they have nothing to say. Many times, it is very literally nothing.
The Commission has had lots of time and two workshops to discuss the budget. Anything Tracy springs at the 11th hour is not a real effort to accomplish anything. Her bizarre little speech didn't need to happen. It wasn't about anything. Tracy isn't about anything. She doesn't have valid, or any, considerations. There is no plan. The present Commission marked the end of any real consideration about anything. The medians and the roads have gotten no attention, except for one small project you proposed, and that was funded by donations. We had a drainage survey, and no one refers to it, and how to plan to incorporate it. We have a police force? We always have a police force. I have no indication that it is in any way any more effective than other BP police force. We need a public works director? We've had them before. We have internal candidates now, and we could have looked externally. This is for the manager to request, and for the Commission either to decline or to fund. And when you can't afford to attend to the normal problems of the municipality, you don't demonstrate an effort to fund something extra by establishing a millage lower than it could be.
There is no vision. There is no ambition. As I have said many times before, the ambitions of four of our current Commissioners were fully realized the day they got elected. They wanted nothing more. Their elections were for their benefits, not for the benefit of the Village.
Tracy's 11th hour "angst" about the state of our reserves was disingenuous at best. She waits till the very end of the budget hearing to try and lobby for cuts including the much needed, long overdue hiring of the Public Works Manager. Then what was it??? Maybe 60 or 90 minutes later during the manager's evaluation (what a freaking, pathetic waste of time that was)she's wanting to give him not the approx. $1400 increase that was already in the budget but a $5000 increase! And in Tracy world the only fault he has is that he doesn't praise himself enough. Funny how fast her reserve concerns went away.
ReplyDeleteOh, right. For the sake of my stomach, I blocked that out of my memory. But yeah, that bizarre nonsense happened, too. I guess if you want to be able to order someone around like that, at the expense of their pride, you have to pay them extra for the privilege. Tracy was giving the manager a very large tip, and being generous with our money to do it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome of you need to think back about who you supported and when, and how you cast your personal votes. We got what we deserve, folks, locally and nationally. To the world, the U.S. looks like a bunch of nasty, racist idiots. We're all in that same "basket of deplorables" now when viewed from the outside in. To the rest of South Florida, BP appears to be an ineffectual and criminal mess, and perception is very much reality in that case. Our cops are convicted criminals (that's now a fact), our manager is negligent in his duties, and our commission is feckless. Everyone think long and hard about how you vote or we're in for two more years of this slop. And remember, you don't have to cast all three votes. The two you don't cast can be as powerful as the one you do, when you are electing three commissioners.
ReplyDeleteMac, I'm going to suggest BP voters be very careful about casting votes. No matter what happens, or what anyone does, we are going to get three winners. You can vote for one or two, but you're getting three. So I suggest voters choose three. If you choose two, your neighbors will decide who is the third Commissioner.
DeleteAnyone who is satisfied with the current Commission can vote for Will Tudor. It won't matter who are the other two, since Tracy will remain on her throne, and she will control a majority. It appears likely that Betsy Wise is an arm of Tracy/Jenny, so you can vote for her, too.
But if you're not satisfied with the current Commission, all you can do is vote for all three people who are not Will Tudor and Betsy Wise, and hope for the best.
Two years ago, there was a movement to vote for "anyone but Fred." It was thought that he was so toxic that anyone else would be an improvement. That might not have been strictly true, since Dan Samaria, Tracy Truppman, and one of her stooges might still have a left a majority that included David Coviello and Roxy Ross, which could have had a similar effect to Fred's being there, but voters chose three winners who would guarantee that Fred would be out, and the two people who were most like-minded with him would have no power. If anyone today thinks "anyone but Tracy" is important, then it has to be anyone but Will Tudor and Betsy Wise, too. And there are only three others.
Fred intellectually I would love to agree with you. No matter who we do or don't vote for we have an affect. But voting for the 2 we assume are not in alignment with Tracy is indeed a leap of faith. Not knowing their motivations for running (self-serving, lack of intellect, ????) one cannot be sure they would not ultimately fall in lockstep. OR bring to the commission their own deep and destructive baggage. Believe it or not, it could be worse as in the "devil we don't know". I have never been this concerned.
DeleteJaney, if you can't be sure Dan and Manny would not be in lock step with Tracy, you CAN be sure Will and Betsy will. You can also be sure Tracy will work to get her people votes. A vote you don't make for Dan and Manny will be countered by votes for Tracy's people. I myself wouldn't make the bet that Dan and Manny MIGHT align with Tracy by allowing unneutralized votes for people who very definitely will.
DeleteQuestion for someone in-the-know. When I received the mayor's email about the police convictions, the link didn't work. I received several versions that didn't work until I finally got the version that I read. However, neighbors have told me that the prior (non-working) links were letters from the mayor that were worded differently and were removed. Does anyone have screenshots of those first version(s) that I can read? I'd like to compare the wording of the various (alleged) versions to see what she initially said in her letter to her peeps.
ReplyDeleteBetsy's website betsyforbp.com is up and running. I just skimmed it trying to get a read......not sure I can figure her out. Fred - I think this would be your area of expertise!
ReplyDelete