Friday, December 6, 2019

Ginny O'Halpin and Rafael Ciordia, the Other Two Candidates.


I met with Ginny O'Halpin last week.  Ginny posted a small amount of information about herself on this blog.  I've met Ginny a few times, I like her, and I trust her.  She does not have extensive knowledge about the Village's functioning and its particular problems.  She just feels, as she said in her short post, that somehow, the government here is not working, and since she's gotten over the loss of her husband, and she has time, she thinks she should try to help, or confront whatever is faulty.  As I said, her specific grasp on what is faulty is tenuous.

Ginny told me one story that she found interesting, and illustrative, and I agree with her.  After she submitted her paperwork to declare herself as a candidate, she got a call.  From Rebecca Rodriguez.  The Village attorney.  Rebecca personally called Ginny to give her a helpful heads up.  She pointed out that in her application, Ginny said she owned properties other than the one in which she lives in BP, and Rebecca was advising Ginny to report income from these properties.

So, here are the problems with this helpful little phone call.  First, Ginny didn't say she derives income from these properties, and she doesn't.  One of these properties is in the upper Keys, and the other is somewhere else, and Ginny and her late husband used to use them for vacations.  Why Village attorney Rebecca Rodriguez took it upon herself to assume these were income-generating properties was not stated and was unknown.  Second, even if these had been income-generating properties, and even if Ginny hadn't reported this as a source of income (you have to report sources of income in your application to run for elected office, presumably so it can be determined if there are any possible causes of conflict of interest), Rebecca Rodriguez, the Village attorney, should have been the last person to have called Ginny with a helpful heads up.  Village attorney Rebecca Rodriguez should never even have known about these properties, or the content of Ginny's application.  The Village clerk would have known about and handled that, or she would have brought it to the Village manager.  Ginny told me this story to illustrate one of the problems she wants to confront (or maybe several of them), and it was a pretty good illustration.

I met Rafael Ciordia this week.  Chuck Ross and I intended to talk with him together, and we tried to make arrangements.  But Rafael portrays himself as an almost hopelessly busy guy, and it was not easy to get him to agree on a time and place.  Chuck and I were intent, and we accepted Rafael's offer to meet at Alaska Coffee Roasters at 7:00 AM.  Frankly, Chuck and I had the same thought: that Rafael was offering something he thought we would reject, because it was so inconvenient.

Anyway, Rafael is a ball of enthusiasm.  He's all smiles and some version of happy talk.  He likes slogans, like that you should always ask a busy man to handle a responsibility, because busy men are so intent on getting things done.  Rafael has a lot of slogans like that.  And everything excites and inspires him.  Rafael knows next to nothing about the Village and how it works, and every topic that is raised, and every question that is asked, inspires Rafael to reassure that this is exactly the kind of thing he wants to learn.  (He's much more willing to learn on the job than many other people would be, and than some people would be to "hire" someone whose first mission is to try to figure out what the job is.  But that's Rafael.)

I like Rafael.  He's a delightful person.  He's very outgoing and friendly.  I told him I like him.  I also don't trust Rafael.  I told him that, too.  He's willing to do stupid things, like learning on the job, and he expressly considers it unnecessary to start anywhere near the bottom of the ladder.  He has, at best, tremendous confidence in himself.  That's the careless part.  If Rafael was only careless and didn't have the world's best judgment, I could maybe forgive him for that.  I think Rafael considers himself very smart, and I don't disagree with him.  I do think Rafael gets a bit ahead of himself, since he isn't deterred by finding out how little he knows, and he's an early morning person who is taking on a responsibility part of which occurs at night, and even relatively late at night.  Rafael fell asleep during this week's Commission meeting.  Would Rafael force himself to stay awake if he was on the other side of the Commission desk?  Maybe.  Probably.  But as Chuck Ross said to Rafael and to me, Rafael is doing the equivalent of cramming for an exam.  All of a sudden, Rafael is coming to Commission meetings, and board meetings.  If he can't stay awake when he's cramming and the exam is the next day, it's maybe not looking great.

But that's not my big problem about Rafael (who, by the way, is on the circulation for this blog, and is more than welcome to post a comment).  My big problem is the other reason I don't trust Rafael.  I don't know where Rafael's candidacy came from, and Rafael isn't saying.  I know, and Rafael acknowledges, that he's friends with, or thinks particularly well of, Krishan Manners.  I have no reason to think Rafael would even have known about the Commission or the openings had it not been for Krishan tapping him on the shoulder.  Rafael knows I'm skeptical about this, and in his stated attempt to prove to me at least that it isn't Tracy Truppman seducing him into running, he told me some story about Tracy's having approached him after this week's Commission meeting, to confirm that he was Rafael, as if Tracy wasn't sure who Rafael Ciordia is.  But Tracy is a control freak.  Even if it was Krishan who dug up Rafael, Tracy would have known all about it.  And no doubt have met and spoken at length to Rafael.

Rafael also told me and Chuck his version about how he decided to run for Commission, and why, for example, he didn't start out at some other level of "service" (Rafael likes to say he's inspired to "serve" the Village).  He simply got the calling.  It was simply time.  He didn't get the calling two weeks or two months or two years before Betsy Wise and Jenny Johnson-Sardella resigned, and we declared we had to have a special election, and there were empty board seats.  No, Rafael got the calling only when we suddenly needed two new Commissioners.

And then, it gets slightly worse.  In recent weeks, there's been a lot of talk about a proposed agreement between us and CNM.  The subject was the medians on 121st St.  The bottom line is that the agreement was in some sense terrible for us.  There have been e-mails circulated around about this problem of the terrible proposed agreement.  No one who had a word to say about it thought it was anything but bad.  It came up at this week's Commission meeting.  And important background is that it is alleged that it was either David Hernandez, Krishan Manners, or both of them who hatched this terrible proposed agreement with CNM idea.  The Commission had to decide whether or not to resolve to accept it.  Bizarrely, this hot button, highly scoffed at, proposed agreement that would be dramatically disadvantageous to BP was placed on the consent agenda.  This is supposed to mean it's so obviously acceptable that it doesn't require any discussion.  Who on earth placed it there?  Beats me.  But it was only Dan Samaria who had sense enough to take it off the consent agenda, so it could be discussed.  By the time the discussion was over, not one of the current Commissioners approved of this obviously acceptable (placed on the consent agenda) agreement, and even David Hernandez admitted it had some, um, drawbacks.  But the very next day, in a group e-mail discussion, Rafael was still saying-- and he was apparently by then the only one saying this-- that he liked the proposed agreement.

I don't trust Rafael, because I don't know who is his sponsor, or his client, or whom he represents.  I don't know what he's about, and apart from the slogans and the platitudes, he isn't telling.

As I said, I like Rafael.  I would like to trust him.  I would like to be behind him and his alleged wish to "serve" the Village.  But he's making it impossible to do it.  It's a great deal of song and dance, but no substance.  And he unwaveringly rejects advice like that he should not run for Commission now, but get on a board, learn what he admits he doesn't know, and run in the future.  He's in a big hurry.  Just when Tracy Truppman happens to be desperate for one more stooge.



5 comments:

  1. I don't like this. Linda Dillon asks me from time to time to post something for her. She says her computer won't allow her to post it herself. This is what Linda says:

    Fred,

    Am trying to be like “Switzerland”, the term Mac Kennedy has assigned to me at least until the “Meet the Candidates” event is over. But I feel I must say something about what you posted regarding Rafael Ciordia.

    At Tuesday’s Commission Meeting, I sat next to him to the bitter end. Well, to be totally honestly, there was a chair between us as I was saving it for Judi Hamelburg so that we could present our request to the Commission in tandem. (to waive the fees for use of the Rec Center in order to host a “Meet the Candidates” event) I noticed Rafael texting on his phone; but, I never saw him fall asleep. Judi noticed someone on the dais also appeared to be nodding off; but, from my vantage point, I could see that this individual was also texting. Neither fell asleep to my knowledge. Just wanted to mention what I perceived. But even if Rafael did fall asleep, it would seem to suggest that maybe much of what goes on isn’t worth listening to. For me, listening to them legislate from the dais makes me want to sleep or text, too.

    L.

    This was my reply to her:

    Linda,

    I was sitting behind and to the left of Rafael, and I wasn't looking at him. One person at the meeting, who could see him better, told me he was falling asleep. A different person sent me a photograph of Rafael dozing. I mentioned this fact to Rafael in an e-mail about something else, and he didn't deny it.

    What you should do is put a comment on the blog, and say it didn't look like that to you, but that perhaps what some interpreted as Rafael's dozing might instead have been his fiddling with his phone, and looking down at it.

    Your version of being Switzerland is not expressing an opinion. My version of it is telling things as they are, or as they seem to me to be. And I ALWAYS welcome correction. That's the Swiss in me.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi all.

    A few facts.

    I work in Coral Gables and Fred and Chuck didn’t seem to be available to meet on Sunday so I proposed 7AM on Monday morning so I could spend a full hour with two residents who were keen to chat, then drive to work to start my day. We actually spent 90 minutes together over coffee. I then headed to the office.

    It is TRUE. I absolutely fell asleep during the meeting. By my count three times. My husband’s primary and most frequent complaint about me is that come 10PM, no matter how compelling a movie or show, I will nod off. It’s likely a consequence of waking at 5 routinely. I find the morning hour to be most productive. NOTE TO SELF: a 30 minute power nap is essential on meeting days if I am fortunate enough to serve as commissioner.

    I purposefully left a seat between Ms. Dillon and I, as I began to feel a little under-the-weather. I considered skipping the meeting but thought I could manage. Anyway, I’ve been nursing Eddie through a nasty cold and didn’t want to pass it to her. When Linda say next to me, I felt equally guilty. Mac and Ginny are also aware because Wednesday we all met at Mac and Dan’s home to take a group selfie in a show of positivity and neighbors first spirit. I went to the Walgreen’s UHealth service. Very positive experience. I recommend it.

    I am fortunate to have sit/stand desk at my office and rarely sit. Much less 5 hours without a break. One of the most fundamental changes we need to make in our village is efficiency in meeting length. Not a criticism, rather an observation. Two hours should suffice to handle Village business. But I headed home after midnight after greeting several elected members on the dais. And yes, the Mayor met me three years ago during her campaign (and I’ve grown a beard) and she wasn’t sure who I was.

    Mr Jonas, no matter how many times I answer your question about why me, now, you choose to substitute your own conspiracy. It’s not that I am demurring. You just don’t like my answer. But it is the truth. I am running now because I have experience and skillset that complements what’s missing on the commission. And I know that it can help move the Village forward.

    Looking forward to ongoing opportunities to meet neighbors in this election cycle, and beyond. It’s quite an experience. And I am relishing it.

    Very sincerely.

    Rafael CIordia

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here we go again. From Linda Dillon:

      There you have it. Rafael admits that he indeed fell asleep. My apology, Fred, maybe I fell asleep, too, because I sure missed it. Anyway, all it took was a couple of meetings, maybe just one, for him to grasp that these Village Commission meetings are too long and inefficient. Anyone who can fix that issue would definitely help us get headed in the right direction. It would certainly help us save in attorney fees. But government is government and the wheels turn slowly. Considering how many meetings I have attended, especially when I was the last resident in attendance except for someone married to, or in a partnership with, a Commissioner, I am not convinced short and efficient meetings are possible in Biscayne Park. After Ed Burke, I believe the closest we ever came was when Richard Ederr was Mayor, and then a number of residents complained that they weren’t allowed to talk as long as they wanted. Enter the 3 minute rule, maybe it was 4 back then. Whatever it was, it just wasn’t stringently enforced like now, and there was a lot more civility among all.

      Delete
    2. Linda,

      Your memory is failing you. I moved here in 2005. The Mayor, until he died, was Ted Walker. I think. Then, it was John Hornbuckle. All of that lasted until I think 2009. Meetings were always 2-2 1/2 hours. And whether it was John Hornbuckle or his successor, Roxy Ross, we always kept track of the time, there was always a timer, like a kitchen timer, that sounded at three minutes, and the Mayor always allowed the speaker to complete a thought. In fact, when the Clerk was Ann someone-or-other, who I always thought had a crush on Steve Bernard, she used to turn off the timer immediately, and let Steve talk as long as he wanted to, which was always way more than 3 minutes. But whether the Mayor was Richard Ederr, Ted Walker, John Hornbuckle, or Roxy Ross (who I often wished would stop some people who babbled on interminably), you're right: the time-keeping was not as stringent as it has become under the present regime. David Coviello was more flexible, and even Noah Jacobs was not as heavy-handed as is Tracy. Of course, it's also true that all past Mayors and Commissioners used to listen to and take into account what their neighbors were saying, so it was important to know what it was. Tracy ignores all of us, so probably 15 seconds is as good and effective as 3 minutes.

      Delete
    3. Rafael, thanks for chiming in. It's good, and important, to hear from you.

      It's true Chuck and I did not happen to be available THAT PARTICULAR Sunday. You said at the time that you thought someone was in a big hurry for us all to meet. I still don't know who you thought was in such a hurry. But as you say, your next offer was 7:00 AM. Chuck and I thought you were playing hard to get. He tried to set something up on the preceding Friday, but you didn't respond. Then, it had to be right away, on a Sunday that neither of us happened to be available. Then, it had to be 7:00 in the morning. So we decided just to meet you when you said you could be met. If you get elected, you're going to need to find a way to be more flexible, with lots of people. By the way, you had told me and Chuck that part of your cramming was that you would attend the Charter Review Committee this past Thursday, but Chuck says you weren't there. I'm telling you, you have to be more available.

      I'm not sure what more to do with the matter of why you've chosen now to run. You cite your "skill set." You had that skill set when we had Commission elections last year, and the two years before that, and the two years before that, etc. You had that skill set every day a Board seat was vacant. But no, it's only right now. And I don't think I'm betraying a confidence to say that you explained it, exactly as I summarized it, or even quoted you: you awoke one day recently, and you suddenly felt the calling. That's what you told me and Chuck. Do I not "like" that explanation? Yeah, I suppose I don't like it. It's quirky, it's weird, it doesn't make sense (my nature is that I like things to make sense), and it happens to coincide with other developments that are in line with what you call my "conspiracy" theory. And it's not just why now. It's also why this. Not a Board first? You do admit there's so much you don't know. You don't want to learn before you accept the job? I'm telling you, Rafael, under the circumstances, it's a little bit creepy.

      I want to discuss something else with you, and I'll either do it in another comment, or I'll do a whole new post dedicated to it.

      Fred

      Delete