The Problem With Speed Traps.

On my walk this morning, I had two experiences that reflect each other.

First, I was talking to two of my BP friends (about this blog, and particularly about the last post), and one of them suggested we need speed traps.  I told him I don't think we do, and that what we really need is conspicuous enforcement, or just patrolling.  My friend was thinking about attracting drivers' attention by nailing them with a ticket for speeding, and how they'd think about that next time they're in our area.  My thought was that if our cruisers are visible, then drivers are already thinking about the rules, and if we do no more than stop them for a little safety chat, we will have gotten their attention sufficiently (and wasted more of their time than they intended to invest driving through BP).

Second, I turned from Griffing onto 119th, on the final way home, and when I reached about 5th, I saw one of our cruisers on 119th heading west, and stopped at 6th.  The turn signal was not on, so I imagined maybe the officer was waiting for a break to cross 6th.  As I got to 6th, the cruiser turned onto 6th, going south.  By the time I could see where the cruiser went, I saw it tucked onto the swale off the right side of the road, maybe at about 117th or 116th.  This was very clearly a speed trap.

So, here's the problem.  Speed traps are intended to fool people into doing what they're not supposed to do, then punish them for doing it.  At the very best, the goal is either to raise money from writing tickets, or give the driver such a horribly memorable experience that s/he will either obey the rules in the future, or drive somewhere else.  But in the meantime, speed traps seduce, or enable, people to do exactly what we don't want them to do.  But if we don't want them to do it, then we should think of something preventative, and not just impose a consequence after they've already done this thing we don't want them to do.

From the driver's perspective, the best version of the bad news is that they get punished (hundreds of dollars in fines for maybe only going 36 mph on a 30 mph street, points, increased insurance premium).  The worst version of the bad news is that they crash, into another car, a house, a pedestrian, a concrete FPL pole, have lots of damage to their car, maybe get killed, or kill someone else.  Because we think we're being clever and mischievous, and popping out of hiding just in time to sting them with a radar gun and a ticket book.

Two days ago, someone on a motorcycle apparently got hit by a car crossing the street.  The motorcyclist was reportedly speeding, and the car driver didn't see him or her, or wasn't paying attention.  As best I understand, all of this happened in the southbound lane of 6th, right around 121st.  A BP cruiser stealthily waiting to pounce at 117th or 116th wasn't going to prevent any of that.  Had that cruiser been at that spot on that day, s/he would have missed the whole thing.  Is it a lot less work and trouble to sit in a cruiser with a radar gun?  Sure it is.  But we don't pay half of our budget for officers to take the easy way out of enforcement.

We simply need very visible cruising by marked BP cruisers.  It doesn't do good to blame people for doing the wrong thing.  We should try to prevent them from doing the wrong thing.  And if they need a safety chat, about their speed, or being distracted by their phones, we can add that as a bonus intervention.  No charge.

Paying For Our Mistakes is Sometimes Not Cheap.

I just got a text message from one of our neighbors who lives on 6th Avenue.  Apparently, we can stop waiting.  I am told there was a "possible fatality crash" on 6th Avenue, and it involved a motorcycle.

If it was only a motorcycle, then 1) I doubt the driver was using a mobile phone, and 2) there was presumably no other vehicle involved (if the person who sent me the text message was correct that this event only involved one vehicle, and it was a motorcycle).

It's not wet out this morning, and the only things that come to mind to account for this event are excessive speed or an oil patch.

I'm up and down 6th Avenue often enough.  It's very uncommon I see a BP cruiser there, and when I do, they're almost always sitting between sections of median (not driving/cruising on 6th Avenue).

The "Don't Even Think About Speeding" signs are not posted in the Village any more.  I don't know where they are.  Either they're stored somewhere, or they've been discarded.

If we are a real municipality, and worthy of the designation, then we simply must do better than we have been.  We need those signs back, and we need the enforcement and cruising to show we mean it.

6th Avenue has always been our most precarious street.  It has always accounted for almost all of our speeding tickets.  It's a problem street, and it's not under our control.

What is under our control, and always has been, is enforcement.  We are endangering other people and ourselves by ignoring our biggest traffic problem.

If we can't man ourselves up, and rise to this occasion, then I agree with Bryan Cooper: we should close up shop as an independent municipality, and let ourselves be controlled by someone who cares.  Most likely, that would be CNM or the county.  Either one would be better than what we're doing.

Here's My Beef with Mac Kennedy.

I essentially don't have one.  Everyone in the world has his or her style, and those styles can be more or less effective, for whatever is the purpose.

I have spoken to Mac, who is a friend of mine, many times, and I've talked about it in this blog, that his tendency to fill a room with himself, and talk a lot, and remind everyone that he's a Commissioner, and that they voted for him, and that he works hard at being a Commissioner, is unnecessary.

The question is whether, apart from its being unnecessary, it works in any way counter to his goals.  The adverse possibility is that his Commission colleagues would either be offended or jealous, and take positions against him, because they don't like his style.  (They would take positions against the Village and its residents, who are their neighbors and constituents, because they want to get back at Mac Kennedy?  Yikes!)  But I'm sorry (for them) to say they're seemingly not sophisticated, strategic, or perhaps mature enough even for that.  They are essentially inert, and they offer nothing to any of us, or this place where we all live together.  Because we have chosen to live together, we depend on each other.  It's a small place.  To take one example, if your part of the Village looks nice, it's good for me, too.  And vice versa.

This blog is more or less about one thing: BP.  You might think that people who are, let's say, elected officials in BP would care about the topics discussed here.  Three (of the five) of them never comment (or request guest authorship, so they can talk to us about their vision, or whatever else is on their minds), and give no evidence of reading these posts, knowing what issues are discussed, or caring what's discussed.  Another chimed in a couple of times, but couldn't stand the heat, and asked me to remove him from the new post announcement circulation.  Yeah, someone who insists upon having a job in the kitchen, but can't stand the heat.  Great.

I don't agree with everything Mac thinks.  I don't have to.  But I trust him to have at heart goals that he genuinely believes are adaptive and progressive for the Village.  And Mac is the only one of the current five Commissioners who can be bothered to engage with his neighbors/constituents here.  There is no apparent alternative but to conclude that he's the only one who cares.  And all of the evidence is that he cares a lot.

 By: Kelly Mallette

Just this week, the state of Florida announced $404 million in flooding and resilience grants (http://publicfiles.dep.state.fl.us/CAMA/FRCP/Resilient%20Florida%207.14.21%20Resources/Resilient%20Florida%20Grant%20Program%20Awards%20Fiscal%20Year%202021-22.pdf).  A bipartisan vote on the 2021 state budget demonstrated a bipartisan commitment flood prevention and resilience throughout our state and provided communities with unprecedented access to funds to address such needs.  

The list includes over $160 million for Miami-Dade County - funds for dozens of projects for the County as well as cities both large and small.  Included in these awards were funds for our closest neighbors:  Miami Shores and El Portal.   Miami Shores received $1.0 million for its Bayfront Park Seawall Elevation project and the Village of El Portal received $926,962 for its El Jardin Storm Water Improvements. Guess which community is notably absent from this list?  That’s right… the Village of Biscayne Park.  I don’t know whether or not our community even put in an application for said grant, if they did not, it begs the question, why?  Don’t we have a need to address flooding in our community?

Now, now, I can probably predict what the response to my inquiry will be…we don’t have the money for matching funds, we don’t have the staff to write such a grant.

Well, that response does not hold much water for me.  Approximately 15 years ago, the Village of Biscayne Park voted to support a professional manager form of government.  As voters, we were told professional management would improve our Village and that a professional manager would be able to apply for grants and we would see progress like we had not seen in decades.  Early on, with Village Manager Ana Garcia, we did see some progress.  Renovations to park facilities and later, a new administration building.  The new admin building is nice, but did it do anything to increase your property values?  When that was approved, we were told that the Log Cabin could be rented out for events and that would raise funds and we would be able to use those revenues for other city improvements.  That never happened.

Of course, while Biscayne Park still cries poor, revenues have grown over time – without doing much.  That is because our taxable values have grown.  So, even if we don’t increase the millage, we are getting more money simply because homes are selling for more.  That does not include additional revenues from permits and redevelopment of existing properties.  Now, I know our expenses have grown too and that’s the case for everyone.  Who is working to find efficiencies?  On the occasions that I have asked, I am always given a list of all the things the administration needs to function better.  What about the residents?  Who is putting us first?

The resilience grant is not the only one we won’t be getting.  For several years, the state Legislature has fully funded the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program (FRDAP) small project grant list.  The FRDAP grant is for recreation and the small development grant provides $50,000 for projects, no match required.  Does anyone think we could use $50,000 for our park? What about some of our larger medians that are, in many ways, passive parks?  Could any of those use $50,000 for irrigation, lighting, trees, benches?

Here’s some improvements that I think should be considered.  Some are urgently needed.

• Flood control on many, many streets
• Road paving (anyone driven down 121^st Street lately, between 6^th and 7^th.
• Tree trimming.  I have seen occasions where trees in the median have overgrown into resident properties.
• Reimagining of our park – our ball field is nice, but it’s not used much.  Lots of places have pickle ball courts – they are gaining in popularity.  Has that been considered? How about new play equipment, or programming?  These thoughts may not be what the residents want, but is anyone exploring what they do want?

I would imagine those reading this, my neighbors, probably have some thoughts about improvements as well.

We need to demand more – more effort and more accountability.  It’s been too long since we have seen progress.