I think we need a mission statement. My suggestion, just off the top of my head, is that it should have something to do with the success and welfare of Biscayne Park, Florida. I know Biscayne Park, Florida, is only a tiny and seemingly inconsequential neighborhood, barely appropriate to be called a municipality, but it's a nice place, and we especially might feel a fondness for it.
Biscayne Park is small, only about 1300 homes and a population of only about 3000, and it's purely residential. The populace is representative of the broad area of the County: Anglos and Hipanics, some Haitians, the occasional European immigrant, blacks and caucasians, average or low average income, last calculated at about $67K. Politics range from the very liberal to the very conservative, with all maintaining a nice friendship. There are retirees, lawyers, doctors, (no Indian Chiefs), teachers, secretaries, artists, musicians, builders and architects, policemen, other professionals, entrepreneurs, students, and kids. The streets are narrow and quiet. There is one non-residential and non-administrative building, which is a church that has been in "The Park" since soon after its incorporation. The big attraction, at the center of "town," is a recreation center, with a meeting house, a ball field, a basketball court, and some climbing toys. This little burg holds events of one sort or another a few times or so a year. They're just modest get-togethers for "Park" residents and residents of surrounding areas, and they include a couple of holiday events and other seasonal fetes, and the occasional movie night or music soiree. It's nothing much, but the residents seem to like it. They even hold contests, for the best decorated house around Christmas time, and the best Easter costume. And "The Park" does love its Halloween bash.
An important distinguishing feature of "The Park" is its low key and "natural" ambiance. It fashions itself a kind of bird sanctuary, and it has earned the distinction of "Tree City USA" for three years running. Unlike some other nieghborhoods, it has a concentration of medians in a number of the streets and avenues. Some of these are thin and poorly developed, and do little more than sport some mixed trees, while they separate single traffic lanes providing travel in opposite directions. Others are much more spacious, almost the size of small parks themselves, and rimmed with trees. A number of these larger medians are particularly charming, in that they are situated in their own tiny sectors, often contained within culs-de-sac. They, too, are undeveloped.
"The Park" governs itself with a Commission of five people elected at large. Much of the work of the neighborhood is done by employees, under the direction of a professional manager, and a number of managerial and advisory groups of residents who volunteer their time. There are perhaps five or so of these groups, and each one is manned by about five residents. Although only about 30 devoted residents could do all the non-professional work needed to be done to manage "The Park," it seems devoted residents are not easy to find. The Commission might at times have its hands full just trying to keep the few groups of volunteers adequately filled. Keeping the signature medians well-planted and cared for might also occupy much of the neighborhood's attention. And planning and executing the occasional Village event requires cooperation and work. To complicate matters, because "The Park" has no commerce, and generally modest homes, with tax revenues that are likewise modest, the Village has to depend on the extra efforts, and often the extra contributions, of its residents.
But not only are some "Park" residents not necessarily interested in making their neighborhood the best it could be, and are frankly not generous about supporting it, but at times, the governing Commission loses sight of what the neighborhood is, and what it's about. In that Biscayne Park is situated in Greater Miami, some get caught up in the dynamics of the larger environment, and they forget to cultivate their own garden, so to speak. Some Commissioners find themselves more interested in neighboring municipalities, or even non-neighboring municipalities, than they are in Biscayne Park. They imagine that their interests are in Coral Gables, or South Miami, or the Port of Miami. They are concerned with the ecology of these other jurisdictions, and they forget that the medians right in Biscayne Park are often inadequately kept. While they claim to prefer the look and ecology of native Florida plants elsewhere, they object to the removal of dead trees, and they move to protect invasive and destructive species, in Biscayne Park.
They forget that Biscayne Park is their responsibility, and should be their primary interest. The Mayor, whose name is not Mr Smith, does not attend local County meetings, claiming he doesn't have time, but instead, he made a trip to Washington DC, where he seemed to imagine he was somehow representing Biscayne Park. As far as I know, he did not address the Congress, and he did not meet with the President, but he says he had some reason to go to Washington DC on behalf of the Village. One would think that with that level of ambition, he would attend local seminars on the administration of government. One would be wrong if one thought so. This same Mayor also decided that he should tell the government of the State of Florida how he thinks they should regulate firearms. But when it came to turning in some vouchers to get Thanksgiving turkeys for lesser financially endowed residents of "The Park," he either forgot, or he lost the vouchers. The Mayor also recently moved to handicap one of the two most important volunteer resident groups by removing a dedicated member, and replacing him with a completely disinterested resident who refuses to attend group meetings.
And while all this highfalutin showboating and grandstanding is going on, the medians are without adequate development, and the volunteer work groups are not adequately manned. Some Commissioners not only don't bother to meet this minimum responsibility, but some don't contribute anything at all to the neighborhood, and some don't attend neighborhood events. And maintenance and preservation of the neighborhood, through commitment to the Codes, is neglected by some Commissioners, who seem too uninterested or too lacking in devotion to remind residents that this is the foundation of their neighborhood.
Either some Commissioners have lost sight completely of the scope of their mission, or they have invented a mission "The Park" doesn't know about, or their interests and ambitions are elsewhere than "The Park." Although the residents of Biscayne Park might regret that they are not in a fiscal position to pay their Commissioners more than nominally, it might be just as likely that they're glad they're not wasting more money than they are, since the people they pay seem to be trying to represent almost anyone except the residents of Biscayne Park.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Something Old is New Again. Proper Sausages.
(Adjustments made, per comment from Freddy Kaufmann.)
When I was in college in the Boston area, and for years after that, there was a uniquely charming feature of the North End. This had been for years, and largely still is, the Italian section. When I worked in the local clinic, I took Italian lessons at night school, because some of the North End residents, who had lived there for decades, did not speak English. The North End, like few neighborhoods in this country any more, had various shops that sold only produce, or meat, or baked goods, or deli offerings. The meat markets--old time butcher shops--had poultry and rabbits dressed and hanging in the windows, and trays of the various meats. These were not pre-weighed, wrapped, and priced, like they are in Publix. You saw what you wanted and negotiated to get the right piece or amount. And the floors had sawdust on them. Probably none of this meets hygiene codes for food handlers now, but that's how it was then and there. It was a distinctly European model.
You rarely see butcher shops any more. Part of the reason is that so many fewer people eat meat, or at least not as much as Americans used to. And so many fewer establishments of many kinds specialize. The closest we come now is farmers' market stores, which have actually made a kind of resurgence, with the focus on produce and organics. Laurenzo's has a produce store. Aaron's produce is about two blocks away. And there are the CSA's, one of which is distributed by a BP resident on 118th Street, and another of which operates in Little Haiti. Also, there are several pop-up farmers' markets around. One of them happens on Thursdays in front of MOCA. It started as a very well-represented bazaar, but it has dwindled, mainly through lack of enthusiasm of the possible clientele. It was at that market that I met Freddy and Danielle Kaufmann, the owners of Proper Sausages. Do you want to guess what they sell?
Freddy and Danielle met in a restaurant. Freddy was in the kitchen, and Danielle ran the dining room. But being tied to the restaurant business didn't suit either of them, so they found their way into the business of devising recipes, especially for sausages.
Two things distinguish Proper Sausages. One is that Freddy and Danielle are brilliant chefs. I know, "brilliant chefs," right? Like what chef isn't claimed to be "brilliant" these days? Well really, they are. I know, because I've eaten what they cook. They used to serve it for lunch at the farmers' market. Sausage sandwiches. If you didn't have one, you don't know. You can take my word for it or not. And I've bought their sausages to take home and cook for myself. They have several sausage recipes, including The Proper, The Dub, Whisky Cherry Venison Sausage, one with stout beer, one with harissa, one with figs and cheese, and various other flavors, each with its own recipe, concocted by Freddy and Danielle.
The other distinguishing characteristic of their sausages is that they do not get their pork from Publix. Or Costco. Or a restaurant food supply company like Sysco. They get Berkshire pork from a farm in Iowa. These are pigs that live the lives pigs should live, roam freely, and eat the wonderful delicacies pigs love to eat. The good news is that you can definitely tell the difference in the taste. The bad news, for the pigs, is how you know. Either deal with it, or don't.
Anyway, Freddy and Danielle were itinerant butchers until they got the idea to go old school. So they opened an old fashioned butcher shop, sans saw dust, in the 9700 block of NE 2nd Avenue in Miami Shores. It's on the west side of the street. They sell their sausages, of course, but they also sell whole cuts of pork, as well as Florida Wagyu beef cuts. Wagyu beef is to beef what Berkshire pork is to pork. It does not taste the same. We're talking about cattle that have lived the good life cows should live, though they didn't die of old age. They were happy, and they ate as well as cattle were meant to eat. I have other beef from grass fed, free-roaming cattle, and it's not as good. Wagyu is different. May I say, you have no idea.
I went to the actual store today for the first time (I'm embarrassed to say), and I got myself dinner of a Wagyu hamburger and a lamb hamburger. Each was specially seasoned, per Freddy and Danielle. Freddy also gave me two rolls: the very same rolls used by Dan Serfer of The Blue Collar (one of Freddy and Danielle's customers). I very lightly broiled my dinner, as instructed by Freddy, and I was richly rewarded. Here's another bad news/good news dilemma: my two hamburgers were expensive. They cost me $11 together. But boy, were they worth it. I wouldn't eat this way every day, but when I want to treat myself or someone else, you bet I would splurge.
Proper Sausages also sells a very small selection of wines and beers, some salads the Kaufmanns make (they had three-bean salad and rice salad today), and a tiny selection of other artisan foods, mostly provided by people Freddy and Danielle know. But this establishment is largely a butcher shop, in the old style. Proper Sausages is low key, but upscale. You won't find meat like this anywhere else.
By the way, last year I wanted to make a dish with rabbit. Freddy didn't have any, and he didn't have a connection with anyone to get any. Now, he does. He tells me he can get me rabbit, or any other meat I want. (I wound up using what they sell frozen at Publix. Or did I go to Markey's? I can't remember. Whatever it was was OK, but not the best rabbit I've had, and I wouldn't in future go anywhere but Proper Sausages.) So if you're interested, and you don't see what you want, it appears you can request. If Freddy or Danielle isn't there, Mike will be. Enjoy. Not to gild the lily, but these are very nice people as well as exceptional chefs.
When I was in college in the Boston area, and for years after that, there was a uniquely charming feature of the North End. This had been for years, and largely still is, the Italian section. When I worked in the local clinic, I took Italian lessons at night school, because some of the North End residents, who had lived there for decades, did not speak English. The North End, like few neighborhoods in this country any more, had various shops that sold only produce, or meat, or baked goods, or deli offerings. The meat markets--old time butcher shops--had poultry and rabbits dressed and hanging in the windows, and trays of the various meats. These were not pre-weighed, wrapped, and priced, like they are in Publix. You saw what you wanted and negotiated to get the right piece or amount. And the floors had sawdust on them. Probably none of this meets hygiene codes for food handlers now, but that's how it was then and there. It was a distinctly European model.
You rarely see butcher shops any more. Part of the reason is that so many fewer people eat meat, or at least not as much as Americans used to. And so many fewer establishments of many kinds specialize. The closest we come now is farmers' market stores, which have actually made a kind of resurgence, with the focus on produce and organics. Laurenzo's has a produce store. Aaron's produce is about two blocks away. And there are the CSA's, one of which is distributed by a BP resident on 118th Street, and another of which operates in Little Haiti. Also, there are several pop-up farmers' markets around. One of them happens on Thursdays in front of MOCA. It started as a very well-represented bazaar, but it has dwindled, mainly through lack of enthusiasm of the possible clientele. It was at that market that I met Freddy and Danielle Kaufmann, the owners of Proper Sausages. Do you want to guess what they sell?
Freddy and Danielle met in a restaurant. Freddy was in the kitchen, and Danielle ran the dining room. But being tied to the restaurant business didn't suit either of them, so they found their way into the business of devising recipes, especially for sausages.
Two things distinguish Proper Sausages. One is that Freddy and Danielle are brilliant chefs. I know, "brilliant chefs," right? Like what chef isn't claimed to be "brilliant" these days? Well really, they are. I know, because I've eaten what they cook. They used to serve it for lunch at the farmers' market. Sausage sandwiches. If you didn't have one, you don't know. You can take my word for it or not. And I've bought their sausages to take home and cook for myself. They have several sausage recipes, including The Proper, The Dub, Whisky Cherry Venison Sausage, one with stout beer, one with harissa, one with figs and cheese, and various other flavors, each with its own recipe, concocted by Freddy and Danielle.
The other distinguishing characteristic of their sausages is that they do not get their pork from Publix. Or Costco. Or a restaurant food supply company like Sysco. They get Berkshire pork from a farm in Iowa. These are pigs that live the lives pigs should live, roam freely, and eat the wonderful delicacies pigs love to eat. The good news is that you can definitely tell the difference in the taste. The bad news, for the pigs, is how you know. Either deal with it, or don't.
Anyway, Freddy and Danielle were itinerant butchers until they got the idea to go old school. So they opened an old fashioned butcher shop, sans saw dust, in the 9700 block of NE 2nd Avenue in Miami Shores. It's on the west side of the street. They sell their sausages, of course, but they also sell whole cuts of pork, as well as Florida Wagyu beef cuts. Wagyu beef is to beef what Berkshire pork is to pork. It does not taste the same. We're talking about cattle that have lived the good life cows should live, though they didn't die of old age. They were happy, and they ate as well as cattle were meant to eat. I have other beef from grass fed, free-roaming cattle, and it's not as good. Wagyu is different. May I say, you have no idea.
I went to the actual store today for the first time (I'm embarrassed to say), and I got myself dinner of a Wagyu hamburger and a lamb hamburger. Each was specially seasoned, per Freddy and Danielle. Freddy also gave me two rolls: the very same rolls used by Dan Serfer of The Blue Collar (one of Freddy and Danielle's customers). I very lightly broiled my dinner, as instructed by Freddy, and I was richly rewarded. Here's another bad news/good news dilemma: my two hamburgers were expensive. They cost me $11 together. But boy, were they worth it. I wouldn't eat this way every day, but when I want to treat myself or someone else, you bet I would splurge.
Proper Sausages also sells a very small selection of wines and beers, some salads the Kaufmanns make (they had three-bean salad and rice salad today), and a tiny selection of other artisan foods, mostly provided by people Freddy and Danielle know. But this establishment is largely a butcher shop, in the old style. Proper Sausages is low key, but upscale. You won't find meat like this anywhere else.
By the way, last year I wanted to make a dish with rabbit. Freddy didn't have any, and he didn't have a connection with anyone to get any. Now, he does. He tells me he can get me rabbit, or any other meat I want. (I wound up using what they sell frozen at Publix. Or did I go to Markey's? I can't remember. Whatever it was was OK, but not the best rabbit I've had, and I wouldn't in future go anywhere but Proper Sausages.) So if you're interested, and you don't see what you want, it appears you can request. If Freddy or Danielle isn't there, Mike will be. Enjoy. Not to gild the lily, but these are very nice people as well as exceptional chefs.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Even Less Power to You. Too Good to be True?
I just had another energy survey. This one was from a private company called Sun Star Energy. You can look 'em up at sunstarenergyllc.com. Their approach was different from FPL's. They don't just tell you how you can reduce your electric usage by turning off lights when you're not in the room, keeping your house less cold during the summer, etc. They sell stuff that's designed to lower your usage, and your bill. Here's what they proposed to sell me, and why it was presented as an offer I had no rational reason to refuse. Pretty much.
The current program is for a solar water heater, special "NASA" insulation applied under the roof, not over the ceiling, and an electricity regulator. The latter is designed to prevent the surge of power usage that reportedly happens when you switch something on. Not only can these items "not be purchased in stores," and are based on the many patents owned by the company's owner, but "for a limited time only" there is "no purchase required" at all. I'm quoting here not because this is what the salesman said to me, but because this was the idea, as silly and trite as it sounds. So, "if purchased separately," these three improvements would cost $11,289. But because of federal government incentives, and a $1000 incentive from FPL, there is no cost at all to homeowners. What you have to do is promise to turn over to Sun Star Energy all the incentives that will start appearing in your mail. In case this sounds like the most blatant scam in the world, the work will already be done by the time you start receiving the incentives, and you couldn't receive them if they were not, in reality, available. And Sun Star Energy is licensed, etc. By the way, of course I asked, and a program to install solar panels to produce electricity for the house begins in June. Stay tuned, I guess.
There are a few peculiarities. One is that the program is available to everyone, regardless of need. So if you thought it was worthwhile, and you could easily afford to pay for all or part of the improvements yourself, you would still get all the incentives. In that sense, it's a waste of government money. Second, the total of the incentives is $12,000, which is $711 more than the improvements cost. But I'm told they'd be happy with the $11,289. If you keep the $711, no one will come after you. Also, because of the generous incentives, the costs of the improvements are no doubt inflated. Finally, the profit margin is presumably so luxurious that the company will give a fee of $200 to anyone who refers another customer. It appears the program is only in Florida at the moment.
There's one other peculiarity. And it's a cause for concern. This program is presented as costing homeowners nothing. The incentives will cover all the costs. They'll cover more than all the costs. All you have to do is remit them to Sun Star Energy. Sun Star is quite sure about this. Is the homeowner quite sure, as sure as Sun Star is? The FPL incentive is in the bag. I checked, it's for real, and the money is already committed to me if I decide to go ahead. But what about these storied government incentives? Suppose they're not what Sun Star says they are. Or suppose the pool dries up, or the government ends the program. No possible way, says Sun Star. OK, well how about this, then, I propose: you write into the contract that you agree to accept whatever the incentives are as full satisfaction of my obligation to you. If all the incentives come through, you're fully paid. More than fully paid. If for some reason they don't, you don't come after me. Nope, we can't do that, they say.
So there it is. They do not put their money where their mouths are. They were right about FPL. Are they right about the rest of it? Maybe. But they're only willing to bet your money, not their own.
The good news, if you, or I, want to do this is as follows: if you believe in these energy-saving measures and appliances, and you would be willing to pay for them if you had to, you can contract with Sun Star. The worst that could possibly happen is that you would get $11,289 worth of green upgrade for $10,289. If you don't get the electricity regulator, which even Sun Star admits only saves you 9% of your electric bill, you can save $1500. So now, your maximum exposure is down to $8789, for a solar hot water heater and extra good insulation. If any of the other incentives come through, you would pay less. If they all do, you pay nothing. So they're risking your money, but you do get something good for it, if worse comes to worst.
Is this interesting? If it is, call Paul Buzzella at 888-377-3111. The home office is in Boca Raton. Don't mention my name, since I don't want the $200. Tell him to deduct it from your costs. If you have any, of course. Which he will reassure you you don't.
The current program is for a solar water heater, special "NASA" insulation applied under the roof, not over the ceiling, and an electricity regulator. The latter is designed to prevent the surge of power usage that reportedly happens when you switch something on. Not only can these items "not be purchased in stores," and are based on the many patents owned by the company's owner, but "for a limited time only" there is "no purchase required" at all. I'm quoting here not because this is what the salesman said to me, but because this was the idea, as silly and trite as it sounds. So, "if purchased separately," these three improvements would cost $11,289. But because of federal government incentives, and a $1000 incentive from FPL, there is no cost at all to homeowners. What you have to do is promise to turn over to Sun Star Energy all the incentives that will start appearing in your mail. In case this sounds like the most blatant scam in the world, the work will already be done by the time you start receiving the incentives, and you couldn't receive them if they were not, in reality, available. And Sun Star Energy is licensed, etc. By the way, of course I asked, and a program to install solar panels to produce electricity for the house begins in June. Stay tuned, I guess.
There are a few peculiarities. One is that the program is available to everyone, regardless of need. So if you thought it was worthwhile, and you could easily afford to pay for all or part of the improvements yourself, you would still get all the incentives. In that sense, it's a waste of government money. Second, the total of the incentives is $12,000, which is $711 more than the improvements cost. But I'm told they'd be happy with the $11,289. If you keep the $711, no one will come after you. Also, because of the generous incentives, the costs of the improvements are no doubt inflated. Finally, the profit margin is presumably so luxurious that the company will give a fee of $200 to anyone who refers another customer. It appears the program is only in Florida at the moment.
There's one other peculiarity. And it's a cause for concern. This program is presented as costing homeowners nothing. The incentives will cover all the costs. They'll cover more than all the costs. All you have to do is remit them to Sun Star Energy. Sun Star is quite sure about this. Is the homeowner quite sure, as sure as Sun Star is? The FPL incentive is in the bag. I checked, it's for real, and the money is already committed to me if I decide to go ahead. But what about these storied government incentives? Suppose they're not what Sun Star says they are. Or suppose the pool dries up, or the government ends the program. No possible way, says Sun Star. OK, well how about this, then, I propose: you write into the contract that you agree to accept whatever the incentives are as full satisfaction of my obligation to you. If all the incentives come through, you're fully paid. More than fully paid. If for some reason they don't, you don't come after me. Nope, we can't do that, they say.
So there it is. They do not put their money where their mouths are. They were right about FPL. Are they right about the rest of it? Maybe. But they're only willing to bet your money, not their own.
The good news, if you, or I, want to do this is as follows: if you believe in these energy-saving measures and appliances, and you would be willing to pay for them if you had to, you can contract with Sun Star. The worst that could possibly happen is that you would get $11,289 worth of green upgrade for $10,289. If you don't get the electricity regulator, which even Sun Star admits only saves you 9% of your electric bill, you can save $1500. So now, your maximum exposure is down to $8789, for a solar hot water heater and extra good insulation. If any of the other incentives come through, you would pay less. If they all do, you pay nothing. So they're risking your money, but you do get something good for it, if worse comes to worst.
Is this interesting? If it is, call Paul Buzzella at 888-377-3111. The home office is in Boca Raton. Don't mention my name, since I don't want the $200. Tell him to deduct it from your costs. If you have any, of course. Which he will reassure you you don't.
Saturday, April 6, 2013
Freedom of Speech. It Isn't Easy Being a Hypocrite.
Some time ago, Chuck Ross and I started a petition. We wanted the Biscayne Times to stop dumping the paper on every lawn in Biscayne Park every month. And for the purpose of this discussion, I intend to be as open and honest as it is within me to be. There were two issues. I don't know whether to say they were of equal value, or whether one was more offensive than the other. It may well have been a toss-up.
One issue was Gaspar Gonzalez. As you remember, he used to be assigned to cover BP, and he was called the Biscayne Park Correspondent. That was back in the days when Jim Mullin could be bothered to pretend to have any interest in BP. Gaspar was deeply slanted, and he was ruthless in attacking everything about the Park, except Steve Bernard, Bryan Cooper, and Noah Jacobs. And once, he said he thought the police did a good job. It was painful to read Gaspar's harangues, and occasionally to be the brunt of them. To make matters worse, Jim, the owner/publisher/editor of the BT, was himself quite slanted in his approach to us, seeming to enjoy the trashing of our neighborhood. He was lavish in providing plenty of space to people who wanted to accuse and criticize, people like Gaspar and Steve Bernard, but he would generally become quite stingy about space when someone had "the rest of the story," or some sort of effort to defend himself, to present. Only on one occasion for each, he allowed Bob Anderson and Roxy Ross space to defend the Park and themselves.
The other issue was the fact that the BT was delivered, whether it was requested, wanted, or not, to every property in the Park every month. The paper was not placed at the front door, or even close to the entrance to the house. Generally, it was in driveways or lawns, relatively near the street. Sometimes, papers could be spotted at the side of the road, sometimes in the bushes, where homeowners were unlikely to see them, and sometimes even in medians. Papers were left at properties which were uninhabited. That fact should have been obvious to the distributor, since there would commonly be a collection of such debris, clearly old, at these properties. Not only did this degrade the appearance of the neighborhood, but it also signaled to prospective burglars that no one was home, or at least no one with a modicum of strength, so the light was green for invasion.
The petition, which was signed by about 85% of randomly chosen property-owners (presented door-to-door), asked that our Commission ask the BT to make other arrangements for distribution. We suggested using the US Mail, or placing a distribution box, like the ones used for other papers, in a convenient place, so interested residents could easily get one, and uninterested residents would not be bothered. And there would be no more papers lying around in the grass and bushes for weeks or more. The Commission declined to make this request of the BT, and the BT itself challenged the initiative, largely on the basis of a claim of freedom of speech, or freedom of the "press." Of course, no one suggested curtailing these freedoms, only slightly adjusting the distribution process. But sensitivity to the ideas of these freedoms was so acute that the Commission could not bring itself to make even the slightest request for relief on the part of BP residents.
I recently submitted a proposed advertisement, for which I was prepared to pay $150, in the BP newsletter. My issue is that I have a very limited opportunity to inform BP residents that this blog exists, and I wanted to try to get more exposure. All I wanted was for BP residents to know the blog is here, and how to access it. I clearly understand that my thoughts and my style are not for everyone (whose are?), and there will be people who will not want to bother to look, or people who will look once or twice and not be interested to look again. But since the content of this blog is very specific to the interests of residents of Biscayne Park, my feeling was that if more people knew about it, more people would read it. And I was willing to spend $150 of my own money to get that to happen. FYI, this blog is my pleasure. I get neither money nor anything else for doing it. At most, what I want is feedback: that people agree with me, that people think I'm out of my mind, or that people have their own opinions, similar or different, that they, too, would like to share. And I make room for anyone who wants to express his or her own opinion.
So I composed an ad saying the blog exists, what it's about, and how to find it, submitted it to the Village Staff, and guaranteed to pay $150 for a "1/2 page" newsletter ad. What caught me completely by surprise is that the Staff did not automatically accept my ad. They accept other ads, and they have accepted from me quotes I like, which are not identified in the newsletter as coming from me. But not this ad. Instead, a legal ruling was sought from the Village Attorney, and the matter was taken up at the Commission meeting on April 2. There was no clear conclusion, but after some song and dance, it appears the Mayor unilaterally decided that the Village has a policy (it doesn't), that the policy is that there is no policy (you can see how the meeting went), and that somehow it's possible to prevent me from having my ad placed.
So it appears we have a conflict here. When it comes to the Biscayne Times, which was, as it coincidentally happens, very sympathetic to the current majority of the Commission, freedom of speech is the overriding principle. They are not to be confronted in any way about anything, even in ways that have no practical impact on their wish to be widely distributed. They are to be given complete access, and any access they want, to every home in BP. Their interests are to be placed above the interests of the Village and its residents. But when it comes to a Village resident placing a superficially informational advertisement in the newsletter, about something far less provocative than the one-time BP column in the BT, there is great concern for the possibility of offending someone's sensibilities. So much so, that such communication should be blocked. This is the very same Commission that decided Commissioners should be welcome to write their own newsletter columns, containing provocative material, divisive material, and outright lies.
As I said to the Village Staff, I am different from the BT in that I don't lie, and I don't create debris and eyesores. And I'm open and transparent.
One issue was Gaspar Gonzalez. As you remember, he used to be assigned to cover BP, and he was called the Biscayne Park Correspondent. That was back in the days when Jim Mullin could be bothered to pretend to have any interest in BP. Gaspar was deeply slanted, and he was ruthless in attacking everything about the Park, except Steve Bernard, Bryan Cooper, and Noah Jacobs. And once, he said he thought the police did a good job. It was painful to read Gaspar's harangues, and occasionally to be the brunt of them. To make matters worse, Jim, the owner/publisher/editor of the BT, was himself quite slanted in his approach to us, seeming to enjoy the trashing of our neighborhood. He was lavish in providing plenty of space to people who wanted to accuse and criticize, people like Gaspar and Steve Bernard, but he would generally become quite stingy about space when someone had "the rest of the story," or some sort of effort to defend himself, to present. Only on one occasion for each, he allowed Bob Anderson and Roxy Ross space to defend the Park and themselves.
The other issue was the fact that the BT was delivered, whether it was requested, wanted, or not, to every property in the Park every month. The paper was not placed at the front door, or even close to the entrance to the house. Generally, it was in driveways or lawns, relatively near the street. Sometimes, papers could be spotted at the side of the road, sometimes in the bushes, where homeowners were unlikely to see them, and sometimes even in medians. Papers were left at properties which were uninhabited. That fact should have been obvious to the distributor, since there would commonly be a collection of such debris, clearly old, at these properties. Not only did this degrade the appearance of the neighborhood, but it also signaled to prospective burglars that no one was home, or at least no one with a modicum of strength, so the light was green for invasion.
The petition, which was signed by about 85% of randomly chosen property-owners (presented door-to-door), asked that our Commission ask the BT to make other arrangements for distribution. We suggested using the US Mail, or placing a distribution box, like the ones used for other papers, in a convenient place, so interested residents could easily get one, and uninterested residents would not be bothered. And there would be no more papers lying around in the grass and bushes for weeks or more. The Commission declined to make this request of the BT, and the BT itself challenged the initiative, largely on the basis of a claim of freedom of speech, or freedom of the "press." Of course, no one suggested curtailing these freedoms, only slightly adjusting the distribution process. But sensitivity to the ideas of these freedoms was so acute that the Commission could not bring itself to make even the slightest request for relief on the part of BP residents.
I recently submitted a proposed advertisement, for which I was prepared to pay $150, in the BP newsletter. My issue is that I have a very limited opportunity to inform BP residents that this blog exists, and I wanted to try to get more exposure. All I wanted was for BP residents to know the blog is here, and how to access it. I clearly understand that my thoughts and my style are not for everyone (whose are?), and there will be people who will not want to bother to look, or people who will look once or twice and not be interested to look again. But since the content of this blog is very specific to the interests of residents of Biscayne Park, my feeling was that if more people knew about it, more people would read it. And I was willing to spend $150 of my own money to get that to happen. FYI, this blog is my pleasure. I get neither money nor anything else for doing it. At most, what I want is feedback: that people agree with me, that people think I'm out of my mind, or that people have their own opinions, similar or different, that they, too, would like to share. And I make room for anyone who wants to express his or her own opinion.
So I composed an ad saying the blog exists, what it's about, and how to find it, submitted it to the Village Staff, and guaranteed to pay $150 for a "1/2 page" newsletter ad. What caught me completely by surprise is that the Staff did not automatically accept my ad. They accept other ads, and they have accepted from me quotes I like, which are not identified in the newsletter as coming from me. But not this ad. Instead, a legal ruling was sought from the Village Attorney, and the matter was taken up at the Commission meeting on April 2. There was no clear conclusion, but after some song and dance, it appears the Mayor unilaterally decided that the Village has a policy (it doesn't), that the policy is that there is no policy (you can see how the meeting went), and that somehow it's possible to prevent me from having my ad placed.
So it appears we have a conflict here. When it comes to the Biscayne Times, which was, as it coincidentally happens, very sympathetic to the current majority of the Commission, freedom of speech is the overriding principle. They are not to be confronted in any way about anything, even in ways that have no practical impact on their wish to be widely distributed. They are to be given complete access, and any access they want, to every home in BP. Their interests are to be placed above the interests of the Village and its residents. But when it comes to a Village resident placing a superficially informational advertisement in the newsletter, about something far less provocative than the one-time BP column in the BT, there is great concern for the possibility of offending someone's sensibilities. So much so, that such communication should be blocked. This is the very same Commission that decided Commissioners should be welcome to write their own newsletter columns, containing provocative material, divisive material, and outright lies.
As I said to the Village Staff, I am different from the BT in that I don't lie, and I don't create debris and eyesores. And I'm open and transparent.
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Is the World Shrinking, or Is His Head Getting Bigger?
The word of the day is arrogant. It was taken to a new level in tonight's Commission meeting. Noah Jacobs was quite full of himself, pointing at those who were allowed to speak, shutting off those he'd had enough of. He'd lost sight of his usual allies. Tonight, he had one ally: himself. Even Bryan Cooper was shut down when Noah tired of his babbling. But Cooper asked for it. When he was joining Jacobs in trying to stifle Roxy Ross, he told her Noah runs the show. But when Cooper thought his master gave him carte blanche, and he started in with some of his nonsense, he resisted Noah's telling him he could not, in fact, continue his rant. Cooper then decided he had to reject the master's directive. The master wouldn't let him. I have no idea whether that was the reason Cooper left at 9:30.
Cooper, before he left, gave us a dazzling display of the combination of his lack of knowledge about boat maintenance, and his willingness, perhaps eagerness, to speak authoritatively about it.
And on the subject of boats, we were asked to consider that permitting boats on residential property, something apparently few or no municipalities do, makes us a haven for boat owners, who might, we're further told, pay top dollar for their properties. We'd quickly fill vacant properties with them. We're also asked to imagine that people who own boats are well off. Why these rich folk leave rotting, unused hulks of one-time watercraft in their yards for years and decades was not explained. But I do appreciate the logic here. We can be creative. We're considering being more restrictive than the rest of the County or the State regarding gun ownership. Perhaps we can get less restrictive regarding things like, let's say, prostitution and drug manufacture. If we can move to legalize those two pursuits, I'm guessing we can have a neighborhood full of brothels and meth labs, with not a vacant house in the Village, and there's great money in it for us. These can be treated as businesses, like ALFs, and we can tax them.
Noah produced some remarkable statements and postures tonight. Directing and instructing speakers, Noah declared "I'll hear..." as if there was no one else there. No one else who mattered, anyway. It wasn't "there's a motion and a second," or "we have a motion and a second." It was "I have a motion and a second." When Cooper suggested items be taken out of order, for reasons that were never clear, Noah picked right up on the idea, declaring imperiously "I'll take 8b before 8a," having already essentially shut Roxy Ross down by simply talking over her. At one point, Noah wanted to make a motion of his own, and he passed the gavel, with obvious pain, to Roxy, his Vice Mayor Cooper having already gone off to fry bigger fish. He made his motion, and when it was seconded, he declared "I've got a second." He couldn't give up the throne for even a minute. Not to Roxy, anyway.
Noah had his way with the residents in attendance, too. He had seemingly generously, and in a conciliatory way, offered to sit down with Linda Dillon after last month's meeting, to craft better language related to the gun issue. But as Linda pointed out, he never contacted her. It appears he had no use for her after all. He did allege having sent Gary Kuhl an e-mail about a Code, but Gary didn't remember having received one from him. It seemed as if Noah relinquished any sense of needing to be honest at all. He would simply say whatever he wanted.
Noah got himself in surprisingly high gear tonight, especially after Bryan Cooper jettisoned himself. The loss of that dead weight seemed to have accelerated Noah, who was increasingly irrepressible. He had the Commission fly through issues, all the while impressing himself with his repartee. He seemed to have considered himself immensely clever. And he clearly felt most imperial. "I can talk fast if I have to," he twittered.
There was one point during which Noah became somewhat subdued for this meeting. The discussion was over what to do with Dale Blanton and the Code Compliance Board. It seems Roxy and Bob Anderson both had ideas about how to get Dale back involved. There was way more discussion than was needed, in part due to Roxy's tortured effort to create for Dale a status that was as an Alternate, but somehow not phrased that way. Roxy was working way too hard to accomplish something that was frankly simple. But the underlying problem, as we discussed in a previous post, was that Noah had irrationally pulled Dale in favor of Carmen DeBernardi, who had a prior stint on the Board and never showed up, and has now begun her newest stint by failing to show up to the only meeting scheduled since her reappointment. Noah wasn't really much a part of this discussion. Although I will say frankly that it seemed painfully clear and simple to me how to solve this problem of finding a way to include Dale, it was apparently not one bit clear to Noah. So he listened while others talked. But in case I'm failing to understand important nuances here, let me ask: suppose you have to choose one team member. One possible choice has shown long and consistent dedication to the team, and has great wisdom and equanimity. The other possible choice has shown consistent disinterest in the team, fails to come to meetings of the team, and has written publicly about how much she dislikes the other team members and the prospect of working with them. Am I missing something to say my instinct would be to choose prospect number 1?
Truth be told, the wind really did catch the sails, especially after Bryan's departure. Bryan seemed to feel as witty (and pretty? and bright?) as Noah did, but he really was ponderous. And both of them were a bit more blatantly hypocritical than usual. They're not supposed to confer outside Commission meetings, but they may have been drinking the same Koolaid. For a little while, they acted like two attack dogs.
So it was a disturbing evening, though occasionally comical when either of the lads went a little further off the deep end than usual.
On the other hand (you bet there was another hand), Rosemary Wais dazzled us, too. She made her usual and wonderful apple crumb cake, but this time, she also made a cherry crumb cake. She wanted a verdict. I'll tell you what I told her: they were both terrific, but I gave a very slight edge to the apple.
Cooper, before he left, gave us a dazzling display of the combination of his lack of knowledge about boat maintenance, and his willingness, perhaps eagerness, to speak authoritatively about it.
And on the subject of boats, we were asked to consider that permitting boats on residential property, something apparently few or no municipalities do, makes us a haven for boat owners, who might, we're further told, pay top dollar for their properties. We'd quickly fill vacant properties with them. We're also asked to imagine that people who own boats are well off. Why these rich folk leave rotting, unused hulks of one-time watercraft in their yards for years and decades was not explained. But I do appreciate the logic here. We can be creative. We're considering being more restrictive than the rest of the County or the State regarding gun ownership. Perhaps we can get less restrictive regarding things like, let's say, prostitution and drug manufacture. If we can move to legalize those two pursuits, I'm guessing we can have a neighborhood full of brothels and meth labs, with not a vacant house in the Village, and there's great money in it for us. These can be treated as businesses, like ALFs, and we can tax them.
Noah produced some remarkable statements and postures tonight. Directing and instructing speakers, Noah declared "I'll hear..." as if there was no one else there. No one else who mattered, anyway. It wasn't "there's a motion and a second," or "we have a motion and a second." It was "I have a motion and a second." When Cooper suggested items be taken out of order, for reasons that were never clear, Noah picked right up on the idea, declaring imperiously "I'll take 8b before 8a," having already essentially shut Roxy Ross down by simply talking over her. At one point, Noah wanted to make a motion of his own, and he passed the gavel, with obvious pain, to Roxy, his Vice Mayor Cooper having already gone off to fry bigger fish. He made his motion, and when it was seconded, he declared "I've got a second." He couldn't give up the throne for even a minute. Not to Roxy, anyway.
Noah had his way with the residents in attendance, too. He had seemingly generously, and in a conciliatory way, offered to sit down with Linda Dillon after last month's meeting, to craft better language related to the gun issue. But as Linda pointed out, he never contacted her. It appears he had no use for her after all. He did allege having sent Gary Kuhl an e-mail about a Code, but Gary didn't remember having received one from him. It seemed as if Noah relinquished any sense of needing to be honest at all. He would simply say whatever he wanted.
Noah got himself in surprisingly high gear tonight, especially after Bryan Cooper jettisoned himself. The loss of that dead weight seemed to have accelerated Noah, who was increasingly irrepressible. He had the Commission fly through issues, all the while impressing himself with his repartee. He seemed to have considered himself immensely clever. And he clearly felt most imperial. "I can talk fast if I have to," he twittered.
There was one point during which Noah became somewhat subdued for this meeting. The discussion was over what to do with Dale Blanton and the Code Compliance Board. It seems Roxy and Bob Anderson both had ideas about how to get Dale back involved. There was way more discussion than was needed, in part due to Roxy's tortured effort to create for Dale a status that was as an Alternate, but somehow not phrased that way. Roxy was working way too hard to accomplish something that was frankly simple. But the underlying problem, as we discussed in a previous post, was that Noah had irrationally pulled Dale in favor of Carmen DeBernardi, who had a prior stint on the Board and never showed up, and has now begun her newest stint by failing to show up to the only meeting scheduled since her reappointment. Noah wasn't really much a part of this discussion. Although I will say frankly that it seemed painfully clear and simple to me how to solve this problem of finding a way to include Dale, it was apparently not one bit clear to Noah. So he listened while others talked. But in case I'm failing to understand important nuances here, let me ask: suppose you have to choose one team member. One possible choice has shown long and consistent dedication to the team, and has great wisdom and equanimity. The other possible choice has shown consistent disinterest in the team, fails to come to meetings of the team, and has written publicly about how much she dislikes the other team members and the prospect of working with them. Am I missing something to say my instinct would be to choose prospect number 1?
Truth be told, the wind really did catch the sails, especially after Bryan's departure. Bryan seemed to feel as witty (and pretty? and bright?) as Noah did, but he really was ponderous. And both of them were a bit more blatantly hypocritical than usual. They're not supposed to confer outside Commission meetings, but they may have been drinking the same Koolaid. For a little while, they acted like two attack dogs.
So it was a disturbing evening, though occasionally comical when either of the lads went a little further off the deep end than usual.
On the other hand (you bet there was another hand), Rosemary Wais dazzled us, too. She made her usual and wonderful apple crumb cake, but this time, she also made a cherry crumb cake. She wanted a verdict. I'll tell you what I told her: they were both terrific, but I gave a very slight edge to the apple.
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Dogs, dogs, dogs.
I'm doing a favor for friends in Ft Lauderdale. Her mother suddenly became imminently terminally ill, there's a possible reconciliation available, and they had to scramble to get to Massachusetts ASAP. I'm keeping their dogs for a week and a half. These are big dogs. And, as my friends reminded me, I'm not a dog person. I agreed that was true, but I am a friend person. So I offered, they accepted, and I have dogs for a while.
I am reminded every day, all day, why I'm not a dog person. Either they take a lot of time, or I feel like I'm neglecting them, or both. And since I don't want them roaming through my house, they're consigned to the garage, pretty much all the time. Except when I walk them, which is way more time in the day than I want to spend fussing with dogs. And when I'm not walking them, or not home, I worry if they're OK, and not despoiling my garage. It beats worrying that they're either despoiling or chomping on something in the house, though.
Happily, my daughter and her boyfriend, who are dog-lovers, are visiting. Since I can't persuade them to move here (from Boston), an occasional visit is all I can have. Yesterday, we met my brother and his dog at a dog park. It was a sad day for my brother's dog. The dog's bad seed, instigator, destructive, terrorizing sister had just been returned to the pound that same morning, and my brother's remaining dog was a bit lost without his sister, who was clearly the leader of that small pack. The lone brother needed some consoling, and some socializing with dogs which were not the spawn of the devil. I never knew where any dog parks were, but it turns out there's one (actually two; one for smaller dogs, and one for larger dogs) at the southeast end of the Haulover complex, just over the bridge from Bal Harbour. It costs $2 to park for as long as you like. My brother said it was $2, the sign at the parking area says $6, and the attendant agreed with my brother.
The dogs appeared to have had a wonderful time at the dog park. I think it was some sort of big adventure for them. Even my brother's dog seemed somewhat and transiently interested in the other dogs. I have a sense that my friends don't take their dogs to dog parks. This suspicion was confirmed when I finally reached the husband today, as he never called back yesterday to tell me if it was OK to take the dogs to the park. He said he would have advised against taking "Mrs Peel" to the park, since she might be too aggressive. (Wrong. She had a great time. And so did her partner, "Voltaire." You can see what kinds of friends I have.)
There's a very interesting difference between walking dogs in the neighborhood and taking them to a dog park. The obvious thing is that in the neighborhood, the dogs are leashed, which they seem very much not to appreciate. They're not interested in me. They're interested in other dogs, cats, squirrels, and the subtle aromas of the excrement of other dogs. So since they're tethered, they're somewhat frustrated. In the dog park, they're completely free to be dogs, which I must say is very pleasing to me. It certainly seems so to them. But the more interesting thing is this: in the street, dogs are wary of each other. They growl, bark, and charge at each other. It seems a notable proportion of my time is spent preventing dog fights, though my friends' dogs are very friendly, to people and to other dogs. At the dog park, there is a very different democracy, or hierarchy, that is settled subtly and with surprisingly little disturbance. The dogs approach each other for the sniffing ritual, of course. There's an instant of presenting themselves to each other, in a way that looks ephemerally as if it could be forceful. But what looks like a fight waiting to happen in the street doesn't look at all like that in a park. You wonder if what happens on the street is either the dog protecting its owner, or displacing onto something else, like another dog, its resentment and discomfort at being so frequently choked for wanting a little socialization, fun, and satisfaction of curiosity. This, by the way, is one of the reasons I'm not a dog person. I don't want to dominate a dog.
We had considered a dog park in Biscayne Park. It was John Ise's project about 5-7 years ago when he lived here, and the Foundation considered it about a year or two ago. During that consideration, or negotiation, we found there was a certain amount of support for a dog park, and quite a few people who said they would delightedly take their dogs to one. The factor that killed the whole deal, though, was that no one actually wanted a dog park next to them. NIMBY. Whether that was an adjacent vacant lot, of which there were two, one of the "pocket parks," like the ones on either side of the 6th Avenue bridge, "Griffing Park," where the sculpture is, or one of the large medians.
So we remain bereft of a dog park. I never thought much about it one way or the other before, since it didn't and doesn't apply to me, but having experienced it, I really think it's a nice idea. It seems good for the dogs, and it's kind of nice for the people, too. At the Haulover park, we sit at park benches together working out the same social decencies the dogs do.
I am reminded every day, all day, why I'm not a dog person. Either they take a lot of time, or I feel like I'm neglecting them, or both. And since I don't want them roaming through my house, they're consigned to the garage, pretty much all the time. Except when I walk them, which is way more time in the day than I want to spend fussing with dogs. And when I'm not walking them, or not home, I worry if they're OK, and not despoiling my garage. It beats worrying that they're either despoiling or chomping on something in the house, though.
Happily, my daughter and her boyfriend, who are dog-lovers, are visiting. Since I can't persuade them to move here (from Boston), an occasional visit is all I can have. Yesterday, we met my brother and his dog at a dog park. It was a sad day for my brother's dog. The dog's bad seed, instigator, destructive, terrorizing sister had just been returned to the pound that same morning, and my brother's remaining dog was a bit lost without his sister, who was clearly the leader of that small pack. The lone brother needed some consoling, and some socializing with dogs which were not the spawn of the devil. I never knew where any dog parks were, but it turns out there's one (actually two; one for smaller dogs, and one for larger dogs) at the southeast end of the Haulover complex, just over the bridge from Bal Harbour. It costs $2 to park for as long as you like. My brother said it was $2, the sign at the parking area says $6, and the attendant agreed with my brother.
The dogs appeared to have had a wonderful time at the dog park. I think it was some sort of big adventure for them. Even my brother's dog seemed somewhat and transiently interested in the other dogs. I have a sense that my friends don't take their dogs to dog parks. This suspicion was confirmed when I finally reached the husband today, as he never called back yesterday to tell me if it was OK to take the dogs to the park. He said he would have advised against taking "Mrs Peel" to the park, since she might be too aggressive. (Wrong. She had a great time. And so did her partner, "Voltaire." You can see what kinds of friends I have.)
There's a very interesting difference between walking dogs in the neighborhood and taking them to a dog park. The obvious thing is that in the neighborhood, the dogs are leashed, which they seem very much not to appreciate. They're not interested in me. They're interested in other dogs, cats, squirrels, and the subtle aromas of the excrement of other dogs. So since they're tethered, they're somewhat frustrated. In the dog park, they're completely free to be dogs, which I must say is very pleasing to me. It certainly seems so to them. But the more interesting thing is this: in the street, dogs are wary of each other. They growl, bark, and charge at each other. It seems a notable proportion of my time is spent preventing dog fights, though my friends' dogs are very friendly, to people and to other dogs. At the dog park, there is a very different democracy, or hierarchy, that is settled subtly and with surprisingly little disturbance. The dogs approach each other for the sniffing ritual, of course. There's an instant of presenting themselves to each other, in a way that looks ephemerally as if it could be forceful. But what looks like a fight waiting to happen in the street doesn't look at all like that in a park. You wonder if what happens on the street is either the dog protecting its owner, or displacing onto something else, like another dog, its resentment and discomfort at being so frequently choked for wanting a little socialization, fun, and satisfaction of curiosity. This, by the way, is one of the reasons I'm not a dog person. I don't want to dominate a dog.
We had considered a dog park in Biscayne Park. It was John Ise's project about 5-7 years ago when he lived here, and the Foundation considered it about a year or two ago. During that consideration, or negotiation, we found there was a certain amount of support for a dog park, and quite a few people who said they would delightedly take their dogs to one. The factor that killed the whole deal, though, was that no one actually wanted a dog park next to them. NIMBY. Whether that was an adjacent vacant lot, of which there were two, one of the "pocket parks," like the ones on either side of the 6th Avenue bridge, "Griffing Park," where the sculpture is, or one of the large medians.
So we remain bereft of a dog park. I never thought much about it one way or the other before, since it didn't and doesn't apply to me, but having experienced it, I really think it's a nice idea. It seems good for the dogs, and it's kind of nice for the people, too. At the Haulover park, we sit at park benches together working out the same social decencies the dogs do.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Code Red
We've spoken before in this blog about the Village Codes (well, Gary Kuhl and Sira Ramos have spoken about them), and we're about to do it again. We're having some "issues" about the Codes.
There is one main purpose of municipal codes. They are to restrict what people can do. Without codes, anyone can do whatever he or she wants. And there are two reasons to restrict people's choices. One is to ensure stability of structures. If you need a reason that a municipality should have a say in how stable your house is, it's so your house doesn't blow apart or fall apart, into your neighbor's house. The other reason to restrict choices is to create and uphold a style and a standard for how a neighborhood looks. What's the reason a municipality should have that kind of prerogative over your private property? Because. You live among other people, in a shared place, and many such places have decided long ago that it's fair for you and your neighbors not to disturb each others' senses of place too much. And to make you feel better about BP, in some places, you can't distinguish your property at all. My ex-mother-in-law lives in a development where I have to remember her address, because I would never be able to find her house by looking. They are all identical. Even here, some decades ago, but within the residency of some people who live here now, all the houses were white, except those which were faintly off-white. Well, times have changed, but you still can't simply do whatever you want with your property. There are some color schemes you don't like, and the occasional zero lot line monstrosity which totally disrespects the concept of setbacks, but by and large we respect each other.
In fact, the whole neighborhood has a kind of theme and style to it. As a frame of reference, not only was it this way when each of us chose to live in Biscayne Park, but in many cases, it's the primary reason we chose to live here. We're essentially all residential, we have very few apartment buildings, and we have nothing greater than two stories. That's all in our Code. Also in the Code is that no one can have a fence in the front yard (though there are several or many that were approved somewhat informally decades ago, and now there are slightly looser provisions in the updated Code), and no one can have a metal roof. Even those metal roofs that look like concrete or terra cotta flat or barrel tile are not permitted. I personally worked hard to get that restriction lifted, but those who make decisions wanted it the way we have it. So it remains. The Code requires a level of maintenance of property. Right, your private property cannot be kept any way you want to keep it, whether you just like it unkempt, or you don't care, or you can't afford to keep it better. It's part of the price you pay for living in a municipality, instead of living in an unincorporated place out in the middle of the state somewhere.
As I said in the "Planning and Zoning" post, there's a balance to achieve in crafting and enforcing codes. In a neighborhood like ours, we want a standard of physical decorum, to keep a level of charm and style (let's call it class, for purpose of discussion). But we also acknowledge that people have different personal styles and preferences, and we want to accommodate a degree of individuality, too. Those are the finer points, and it wasn't my intention to dissect them too much in this post. What I do want to address are the larger themes.
Had it not been for a change in the Village Code, we would not have approved a school of any kind in the Church of the Resurrection. But our planners told us (some believe they were either mistaken or manipulative when they told it to us) we were required by the State to permit a school here, and the current Commission agreed to approve a facility of a limited type. Depending on what kind of facility the operators of the school decide to install, this addition creates a potentially significant change in the Park. Some feel the change is for the better, and some feel it's for the worse, but most agree it's a significant change. And it depended on changing the Code.
Some of us are now considering the idea of annexing an unincorporated area east of the railroad track, from about 122nd Street to about 117th Street. Most of this area is now commercial, though there are about 1000 residents, almost all renters, and there is a development that will house about 400 more, also renters. The idea, for those who favor it, is to increase tax revenues. I would say increase revenues to the Village, but with annexation, that area becomes the Village, too. It's no longer the Village as we know it. It's this plus that. It's no longer a municipality that has no commerce. It's no longer a municipality that is 70-80% homeowners. It's no longer a municipality that exists physically within a discrete upside down triangle bordered by 121st Street, the railroad track, and Griffing Boulevard. And it requires a change in the Code, as well a change in the Charter.
The proposed annexation affects the Code in another way, too. The area under consideration is not "to [our] Code" as it is. It includes tracts of land that are paved in ways our Code doesn't permit. No one would change that, and these properties would be "grandfathered in," but it creates a different look and feel than we have now. We would also have to adjust the Code to permit commercial properties and retail, since they exist there now. This in itself may seem like a small matter, since the area is not contiguous with the upside down triangle, and it's invisible to us, unless we go out of our way to go there. And we can still write a Code that prohibits commercial property in the upside down triangle.
But here's the big deal. We're looking at increasing the population of Biscayne Park by about 1400 people. They'd all be residents of Biscayne Park, just like you and I are. I have no idea how many vote, but let's say, again for purpose of discussion, it's half. So that's about 700 people. We've never gotten 700 voters in our best year under the old local voting regime. It'll get better starting in 2014, when the new system takes over, but still, 700 people is a lot of new voters. And these voters are content to live in the kind of area where they live. They're not looking for anything nicer, or better. And those residents may or may not care much about how a neighborhood, or this neighborhood, looks, but they have no reason at all to care about property values. They're renters, not property owners. Renters do not want the same things property owners do. Their stake in the neighborhood where they live is much different. They're often not looking far ahead. And the people who own rental property aren't looking for much, either. In many cases, it's been very difficult to get the owners of rental properties in BP to attend to required maintenance here.
So once they can vote in Biscayne Park, they can vote for everything the rest of us vote for. Not only Commissioners, but Code referenda. And not only do they vote for Commissioners, they can vote to become Commissioners. We've seen already what a small group of people can do to an election when it's small scale. Given enough of the right amount of organization, and an election that is small enough to manipulate, they can vote in the most improbable whack jobs you can imagine. You think 700 people who don't want what you want can't do that? Think again. They can have their way with the Codes.
I will confess to being one who would like the Codes here to be clearer and more stringently enforced. Or, in our new, friendlier parlance, better complied with. I agree with Gary Kuhl. And with Sira Ramos. And with Barbara Kuhl. And Bob and Janey Anderson. And Gage Hartung. And Andrew Olis. Obviously, they were all mistaken when they thought metal roofs wouldn't look good, but I forgive them, because what they all want, and what I want, is the best Village we can have. To get that, we have to step it up. In my opinion, expanding the church by adding a school, and annexing what's east of the tracks, is stepping it down. Is a school in the church an extra convenience for some? So some say. But with so many schools very near by, it isn't much of a convenience. And it expands and complicates the flow of traffic, which some in the Park worked hard recently to constrict and simplify. Does annexation bring in more revenue? Maybe. It depends on the tax rate. There are some envisioned rates, included as part of the planners' presentation, that result in our losing money with annexation. (If the rate remains at about 9.5 mills, we get about $280K more in ad valorem taxes per year. If we lower it to 7.5 mills, our overall increase is about $140K per year. At 5.5 mills, we start collecting less in taxes than we do now. And none of that takes into account what it costs us to have new territory to manage and monitor.) And all of this becomes harder to control once we reflect the implications of it in the Code.
There is one main purpose of municipal codes. They are to restrict what people can do. Without codes, anyone can do whatever he or she wants. And there are two reasons to restrict people's choices. One is to ensure stability of structures. If you need a reason that a municipality should have a say in how stable your house is, it's so your house doesn't blow apart or fall apart, into your neighbor's house. The other reason to restrict choices is to create and uphold a style and a standard for how a neighborhood looks. What's the reason a municipality should have that kind of prerogative over your private property? Because. You live among other people, in a shared place, and many such places have decided long ago that it's fair for you and your neighbors not to disturb each others' senses of place too much. And to make you feel better about BP, in some places, you can't distinguish your property at all. My ex-mother-in-law lives in a development where I have to remember her address, because I would never be able to find her house by looking. They are all identical. Even here, some decades ago, but within the residency of some people who live here now, all the houses were white, except those which were faintly off-white. Well, times have changed, but you still can't simply do whatever you want with your property. There are some color schemes you don't like, and the occasional zero lot line monstrosity which totally disrespects the concept of setbacks, but by and large we respect each other.
In fact, the whole neighborhood has a kind of theme and style to it. As a frame of reference, not only was it this way when each of us chose to live in Biscayne Park, but in many cases, it's the primary reason we chose to live here. We're essentially all residential, we have very few apartment buildings, and we have nothing greater than two stories. That's all in our Code. Also in the Code is that no one can have a fence in the front yard (though there are several or many that were approved somewhat informally decades ago, and now there are slightly looser provisions in the updated Code), and no one can have a metal roof. Even those metal roofs that look like concrete or terra cotta flat or barrel tile are not permitted. I personally worked hard to get that restriction lifted, but those who make decisions wanted it the way we have it. So it remains. The Code requires a level of maintenance of property. Right, your private property cannot be kept any way you want to keep it, whether you just like it unkempt, or you don't care, or you can't afford to keep it better. It's part of the price you pay for living in a municipality, instead of living in an unincorporated place out in the middle of the state somewhere.
As I said in the "Planning and Zoning" post, there's a balance to achieve in crafting and enforcing codes. In a neighborhood like ours, we want a standard of physical decorum, to keep a level of charm and style (let's call it class, for purpose of discussion). But we also acknowledge that people have different personal styles and preferences, and we want to accommodate a degree of individuality, too. Those are the finer points, and it wasn't my intention to dissect them too much in this post. What I do want to address are the larger themes.
Had it not been for a change in the Village Code, we would not have approved a school of any kind in the Church of the Resurrection. But our planners told us (some believe they were either mistaken or manipulative when they told it to us) we were required by the State to permit a school here, and the current Commission agreed to approve a facility of a limited type. Depending on what kind of facility the operators of the school decide to install, this addition creates a potentially significant change in the Park. Some feel the change is for the better, and some feel it's for the worse, but most agree it's a significant change. And it depended on changing the Code.
Some of us are now considering the idea of annexing an unincorporated area east of the railroad track, from about 122nd Street to about 117th Street. Most of this area is now commercial, though there are about 1000 residents, almost all renters, and there is a development that will house about 400 more, also renters. The idea, for those who favor it, is to increase tax revenues. I would say increase revenues to the Village, but with annexation, that area becomes the Village, too. It's no longer the Village as we know it. It's this plus that. It's no longer a municipality that has no commerce. It's no longer a municipality that is 70-80% homeowners. It's no longer a municipality that exists physically within a discrete upside down triangle bordered by 121st Street, the railroad track, and Griffing Boulevard. And it requires a change in the Code, as well a change in the Charter.
The proposed annexation affects the Code in another way, too. The area under consideration is not "to [our] Code" as it is. It includes tracts of land that are paved in ways our Code doesn't permit. No one would change that, and these properties would be "grandfathered in," but it creates a different look and feel than we have now. We would also have to adjust the Code to permit commercial properties and retail, since they exist there now. This in itself may seem like a small matter, since the area is not contiguous with the upside down triangle, and it's invisible to us, unless we go out of our way to go there. And we can still write a Code that prohibits commercial property in the upside down triangle.
But here's the big deal. We're looking at increasing the population of Biscayne Park by about 1400 people. They'd all be residents of Biscayne Park, just like you and I are. I have no idea how many vote, but let's say, again for purpose of discussion, it's half. So that's about 700 people. We've never gotten 700 voters in our best year under the old local voting regime. It'll get better starting in 2014, when the new system takes over, but still, 700 people is a lot of new voters. And these voters are content to live in the kind of area where they live. They're not looking for anything nicer, or better. And those residents may or may not care much about how a neighborhood, or this neighborhood, looks, but they have no reason at all to care about property values. They're renters, not property owners. Renters do not want the same things property owners do. Their stake in the neighborhood where they live is much different. They're often not looking far ahead. And the people who own rental property aren't looking for much, either. In many cases, it's been very difficult to get the owners of rental properties in BP to attend to required maintenance here.
So once they can vote in Biscayne Park, they can vote for everything the rest of us vote for. Not only Commissioners, but Code referenda. And not only do they vote for Commissioners, they can vote to become Commissioners. We've seen already what a small group of people can do to an election when it's small scale. Given enough of the right amount of organization, and an election that is small enough to manipulate, they can vote in the most improbable whack jobs you can imagine. You think 700 people who don't want what you want can't do that? Think again. They can have their way with the Codes.
I will confess to being one who would like the Codes here to be clearer and more stringently enforced. Or, in our new, friendlier parlance, better complied with. I agree with Gary Kuhl. And with Sira Ramos. And with Barbara Kuhl. And Bob and Janey Anderson. And Gage Hartung. And Andrew Olis. Obviously, they were all mistaken when they thought metal roofs wouldn't look good, but I forgive them, because what they all want, and what I want, is the best Village we can have. To get that, we have to step it up. In my opinion, expanding the church by adding a school, and annexing what's east of the tracks, is stepping it down. Is a school in the church an extra convenience for some? So some say. But with so many schools very near by, it isn't much of a convenience. And it expands and complicates the flow of traffic, which some in the Park worked hard recently to constrict and simplify. Does annexation bring in more revenue? Maybe. It depends on the tax rate. There are some envisioned rates, included as part of the planners' presentation, that result in our losing money with annexation. (If the rate remains at about 9.5 mills, we get about $280K more in ad valorem taxes per year. If we lower it to 7.5 mills, our overall increase is about $140K per year. At 5.5 mills, we start collecting less in taxes than we do now. And none of that takes into account what it costs us to have new territory to manage and monitor.) And all of this becomes harder to control once we reflect the implications of it in the Code.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Here Comes Biscayne Park
I'm very pleased to note, and to report, that the trees in the median in my block have been trimmed. I've thought for a long time how overgrown and profuse those oaks looked, and been frankly aggravated at seeing their lowest branches crowding the street, so that even small trucks couldn't get by without scraping them. I had wondered what was the best method of pruning trees like that, and I thought of doing it myself, if I knew how. Well now it's done, professionally, and the trees look just great. It was an expert job, the result being that the trees look strong and majestic, just as our future canopy should look. Thanks much, of course, to our Manager for getting around to this. The medians in the next couple of blocks west are also done, and the plan is Village-wide. It's just what we needed, and it will help our sense of enjoyment in the neighborhood, as well as the sense of value. Now all we need is definitive attention to the understory.
During my morning walk yesterday, I was listening to WLRN/NPR, as I always do. They're in the midst of their latest fund drive. You get a little bit of news, judiciously sprinkled into the seemingly endless drone of flogging listeners for contributions. One of the techniques, or tactics, used by the fund-raisers is to acknowledge some of the listeners who just contributed. So at about 7:40, I learned that "Joanne from Biscayne Park" contributed. About 15 minutes later, it was "Alberto from Biscayne Park" who gave. And we're talking about a fund drive that intensively covers three populous counties. Tiny Biscayne Park was cited twice in 15 minutes, out of the millions of people in those three counties? When I met up with my friend Chuck Ross later in the day, he told me he had become a "sustaining member," too, that same morning. If his name was announced, I was already done with my walk, and I didn't hear it.
We have a lot of potential here. And I don't think it takes so much to realize it. We're doing ourselves proud, as a "Tree City USA" for three years running. And we're arranging a suitable system of cared-for medians to mark the fact. With a little more attention and application, we're as good as the best. We have one piece of public art, owned by the Village, and there's no reason we can't have more. All it takes is resolve and a little bit of money. Public art says a great deal about a community and how it sees itself and values itself. We're even famous, in our modest way, as the home of dedicated listeners of the local public radio station. It's not only that it's true: it's that south Florida has been told so and knows it.
I donate to WLRN, too, like Chuck and Roxy Ross do. I also donate to WDNA, the community radio station down on Coral Way at about 30th Avenue. It's mostly jazz and ethnic or roots music. Once a month, on the third Friday of the month, they have a live jazz concert, in the lobby of the station building. It costs $15 a person to go to a concert, but if you're a "member," which you can be for $50 a year, you and a guest can go to all of the monthly concerts. But the concerts are "sponsored" by someone each month, too. I asked the station manager, or maybe she's just the organizer of the concert series, and she said the cost of sponsorship is about $1000 for a concert. It's not what you would call cheap, but it's doable. I was thinking whether a small group of people might like to pool $1000, and do a good deed for WDNA, or even whether it would sound good to say an evening was sponsored by the Village of Biscayne Park. It could be worth a thought.
We are, in our way, on the map. If we keep it modest and strictly local, with smart and pleasing medians, we've done ourselves a very good job, and something to be proud of. If we should happen to be known for something other than "Isn't Biscayne Park the place with the 'Don't Even Think About Speeding' signs," it's not a bad thing, either. We happen to have lots of creative people living here. There are many artists, musicians, way more architects than you would guess, and people who are simply artistic in the broad sense. We're modestly endowed, and the limit is far short of the sky, but there are things we can do to make ourselves not only happy, but prouder. Maybe we can even crow a bit. An interesting mural on the wall of the raquetball courts at the park might just be the next place for us to show what we can do. Perhaps we can go even a bit further than that in an effort to make ourselves a special place, the "better place to be."
During my morning walk yesterday, I was listening to WLRN/NPR, as I always do. They're in the midst of their latest fund drive. You get a little bit of news, judiciously sprinkled into the seemingly endless drone of flogging listeners for contributions. One of the techniques, or tactics, used by the fund-raisers is to acknowledge some of the listeners who just contributed. So at about 7:40, I learned that "Joanne from Biscayne Park" contributed. About 15 minutes later, it was "Alberto from Biscayne Park" who gave. And we're talking about a fund drive that intensively covers three populous counties. Tiny Biscayne Park was cited twice in 15 minutes, out of the millions of people in those three counties? When I met up with my friend Chuck Ross later in the day, he told me he had become a "sustaining member," too, that same morning. If his name was announced, I was already done with my walk, and I didn't hear it.
We have a lot of potential here. And I don't think it takes so much to realize it. We're doing ourselves proud, as a "Tree City USA" for three years running. And we're arranging a suitable system of cared-for medians to mark the fact. With a little more attention and application, we're as good as the best. We have one piece of public art, owned by the Village, and there's no reason we can't have more. All it takes is resolve and a little bit of money. Public art says a great deal about a community and how it sees itself and values itself. We're even famous, in our modest way, as the home of dedicated listeners of the local public radio station. It's not only that it's true: it's that south Florida has been told so and knows it.
I donate to WLRN, too, like Chuck and Roxy Ross do. I also donate to WDNA, the community radio station down on Coral Way at about 30th Avenue. It's mostly jazz and ethnic or roots music. Once a month, on the third Friday of the month, they have a live jazz concert, in the lobby of the station building. It costs $15 a person to go to a concert, but if you're a "member," which you can be for $50 a year, you and a guest can go to all of the monthly concerts. But the concerts are "sponsored" by someone each month, too. I asked the station manager, or maybe she's just the organizer of the concert series, and she said the cost of sponsorship is about $1000 for a concert. It's not what you would call cheap, but it's doable. I was thinking whether a small group of people might like to pool $1000, and do a good deed for WDNA, or even whether it would sound good to say an evening was sponsored by the Village of Biscayne Park. It could be worth a thought.
We are, in our way, on the map. If we keep it modest and strictly local, with smart and pleasing medians, we've done ourselves a very good job, and something to be proud of. If we should happen to be known for something other than "Isn't Biscayne Park the place with the 'Don't Even Think About Speeding' signs," it's not a bad thing, either. We happen to have lots of creative people living here. There are many artists, musicians, way more architects than you would guess, and people who are simply artistic in the broad sense. We're modestly endowed, and the limit is far short of the sky, but there are things we can do to make ourselves not only happy, but prouder. Maybe we can even crow a bit. An interesting mural on the wall of the raquetball courts at the park might just be the next place for us to show what we can do. Perhaps we can go even a bit further than that in an effort to make ourselves a special place, the "better place to be."
Friday, March 15, 2013
Is MiSO the Best Ticket in Town? Arguably, It Is.
If all you're looking for is the best in symphonic music, performed by a first rate orchestra and under the direction of a talented conductor, you won't have much trouble finding it. Go to the Boston Symphony Orchestra, the New York Philharmonic, the Cleveland Symphony Orchestra, or any of a number of organizations, and you will be pleased. Come to the Miami Symphony Orchestra, and you'll get what you're looking for, too.
But if you want an unusual selection of pieces, ones you won't hear anywhere else, and you want to be engaged, personally engaged, by an orchestra and its artistic director, then you won't be happy anywhere but Miami. All top tier conductors are good. Many of them are at least somewhat dynamic. But how many of them wear blue velvet slippers for the first half of the concert, silver slippers with sparkles for the second half, and draw your attention to the fact that they're wearing red sparkly slippers tonight, as if you couldn't tell? And how many interact with the orchestra as if they were on the floor with it more than they are on a podium before it? How many conductors will wait while people deal with the cell phones they forgot to silence, or while stragglers seat themselves, or while audience members remember they forgot something and have to leave the hall ("she's a friend of mine," he tells us), all the while making affectionate sport of these disturbances with body language and expressions that are part Roberto Benigni, part Gene Wilder, part Marty Feldman, and part Victor Borge? Deadpan, but funny and charming. That's Eduardo Marturet, the genius behind the MiSO. And he's not kidding. He's very much for real. He gets intensely engaging sound out of his orchestra, too.
He also chooses surprising pieces, not at all part of the usual symphonic canon. Sunday night, March 3, it was Rodrigo's Aranjuez, but arranged for harp and orchestra. And if listening to and looking at Kristi Shade play Aranjuez wasn't enough of a treat on its own, she threw in a little encore, all by herself. That's like the MiSO concerts at FIU, where both times I've been there, the intermission was used to feature remarkably good organ arrangements, played by extremely talented organists.
Was the orchestra perfect? No, I guess it wasn't. Maylin Rete's English horn tone was slightly imperfect, though the playing was excellent. She's listed in the program as being on a leave of absence, so maybe being back from her leave has left her embouchure faintly rusty. And one of the two trumpets had a slightly off embouchure himself, on one note in the third movement of the Rodrigo. On the other hand, Isabel Thompson, who often plays bass clarinet, and is never closer than third string on B flat clarinet solos for the orchestra, was remarkable on B flat solos Sunday night. This was, by the way, a trimmed down ensemble, looking something like an early Baroque band. The full orchestra has almost 90 pieces. Sunday night, there were less than 50. And in typical Marturet fashion, everyone who soloed at all, got special attention from him when the piece was over. He walked down into the orchestra, and each person who soloed, concertmaster Danny Andai, the first violist, whose name I don't know, and anyone at all who distinguished him- or herself was asked to stand. The audience was duly appreciative.
So back to the question: Is MiSO the best ticket in town? It's not the cheapest ticket in town. It's less than any other symphony, though, and the quality is up there with the Cleveland and the New World. It's a better show than any other symphonic event, what with the interesting range of pieces and the floor show from Marturet. The face value of my ticket, which was for a very good seat, was $69. I don't know if it was less because it was part of a season ticket purchase, but it sure was less after I got the season on a 50% discount they were running. So for $35 or less, for the seat I had? Heck, yeah, it's the best ticket in town.
But if you want an unusual selection of pieces, ones you won't hear anywhere else, and you want to be engaged, personally engaged, by an orchestra and its artistic director, then you won't be happy anywhere but Miami. All top tier conductors are good. Many of them are at least somewhat dynamic. But how many of them wear blue velvet slippers for the first half of the concert, silver slippers with sparkles for the second half, and draw your attention to the fact that they're wearing red sparkly slippers tonight, as if you couldn't tell? And how many interact with the orchestra as if they were on the floor with it more than they are on a podium before it? How many conductors will wait while people deal with the cell phones they forgot to silence, or while stragglers seat themselves, or while audience members remember they forgot something and have to leave the hall ("she's a friend of mine," he tells us), all the while making affectionate sport of these disturbances with body language and expressions that are part Roberto Benigni, part Gene Wilder, part Marty Feldman, and part Victor Borge? Deadpan, but funny and charming. That's Eduardo Marturet, the genius behind the MiSO. And he's not kidding. He's very much for real. He gets intensely engaging sound out of his orchestra, too.
He also chooses surprising pieces, not at all part of the usual symphonic canon. Sunday night, March 3, it was Rodrigo's Aranjuez, but arranged for harp and orchestra. And if listening to and looking at Kristi Shade play Aranjuez wasn't enough of a treat on its own, she threw in a little encore, all by herself. That's like the MiSO concerts at FIU, where both times I've been there, the intermission was used to feature remarkably good organ arrangements, played by extremely talented organists.
Was the orchestra perfect? No, I guess it wasn't. Maylin Rete's English horn tone was slightly imperfect, though the playing was excellent. She's listed in the program as being on a leave of absence, so maybe being back from her leave has left her embouchure faintly rusty. And one of the two trumpets had a slightly off embouchure himself, on one note in the third movement of the Rodrigo. On the other hand, Isabel Thompson, who often plays bass clarinet, and is never closer than third string on B flat clarinet solos for the orchestra, was remarkable on B flat solos Sunday night. This was, by the way, a trimmed down ensemble, looking something like an early Baroque band. The full orchestra has almost 90 pieces. Sunday night, there were less than 50. And in typical Marturet fashion, everyone who soloed at all, got special attention from him when the piece was over. He walked down into the orchestra, and each person who soloed, concertmaster Danny Andai, the first violist, whose name I don't know, and anyone at all who distinguished him- or herself was asked to stand. The audience was duly appreciative.
So back to the question: Is MiSO the best ticket in town? It's not the cheapest ticket in town. It's less than any other symphony, though, and the quality is up there with the Cleveland and the New World. It's a better show than any other symphonic event, what with the interesting range of pieces and the floor show from Marturet. The face value of my ticket, which was for a very good seat, was $69. I don't know if it was less because it was part of a season ticket purchase, but it sure was less after I got the season on a 50% discount they were running. So for $35 or less, for the seat I had? Heck, yeah, it's the best ticket in town.
Food and Tunes, 3/15/13
Surprise! Surprises. I have to confess the Foundation is a bit weak right now, and it's feeling a bit weak. We're down to three members, one of whom is new, and we lost the two who happened to be most involved in setting up Food and Tunes. So it was a slightly daring ambition we had, and required the jobs of three yeomen, to pull off a Food and Tunes Friday evening. And it wasn't the smoothest of sailing, either. (Psst, you wanna be on the Foundation? We need members.)
We managed to arrange a band, which was Dave Wilder's "No Dice." They played for us once before, and they were well received. We also got two food trucks. Our first one ever, Jefe, was there, and a crowd favorite, "Fat Man," was back. I don't know who Jefe really is, but Fat Man is Ben Nelson. Mr Nelson is a spectacularly good cook, and he's a wonderful guy.
Announcements were late, and there was confusion about the time. Some announcements said the start was 6:00, and others said 6:30. And we just crossed into, or out of, daylight savings time. And it was getting cool. And the band was late. And few people were there by 6:00, or 6:30, or approaching 7:00. And then...
The music started. And the lines at the food trucks started. And people started to arrive. By 7:30, "the joint was jumping." It really was. The regulars were there, and new neighbors were there, and even some people who don't live in BP heard us and came by. There was frankly a nice crowd, and people really enjoyed the food and the tunes. Everyone had a good time. (This is exactly what Food and Tunes is supposed to be.)
We also had two musical guests, as the SNL people say. One was Mike Gerber. He and his wife, Atlanta, have been BP residents for many years. Mike happens to be an upper echelon pianist, specializing in jazz (had played with all the big names), but very capable in several genres. During No Dice's break, Mike played an original jazz piece, then Bach, then some country/western pieces, one of which was in response to a request. Mike is a remarkable pianist, whom some musically sophisticated Park residents had heard of, and he and his wife/agent/singer Atlanta would like a Food and Tunes date for themselves. Yikes!
The second guest was a young girl who sang. Alone. Gorgeously. I didn't know singing like that could come out of the throat of a girl who probably isn't 12 yet. Most impressive.
We did our 50/50 raffle. We would have made a modest but solid amount of money, except that the winner, Dale Blanton, donated his winnings back to the Foundation. And not only did the food trucks do reasonably well, but each vendor was so happy that each donated more than the requested 5%.
We broke even, even without a major sponsor or anything unusual to raffle off.
Does it get better than this?
We managed to arrange a band, which was Dave Wilder's "No Dice." They played for us once before, and they were well received. We also got two food trucks. Our first one ever, Jefe, was there, and a crowd favorite, "Fat Man," was back. I don't know who Jefe really is, but Fat Man is Ben Nelson. Mr Nelson is a spectacularly good cook, and he's a wonderful guy.
Announcements were late, and there was confusion about the time. Some announcements said the start was 6:00, and others said 6:30. And we just crossed into, or out of, daylight savings time. And it was getting cool. And the band was late. And few people were there by 6:00, or 6:30, or approaching 7:00. And then...
The music started. And the lines at the food trucks started. And people started to arrive. By 7:30, "the joint was jumping." It really was. The regulars were there, and new neighbors were there, and even some people who don't live in BP heard us and came by. There was frankly a nice crowd, and people really enjoyed the food and the tunes. Everyone had a good time. (This is exactly what Food and Tunes is supposed to be.)
We also had two musical guests, as the SNL people say. One was Mike Gerber. He and his wife, Atlanta, have been BP residents for many years. Mike happens to be an upper echelon pianist, specializing in jazz (had played with all the big names), but very capable in several genres. During No Dice's break, Mike played an original jazz piece, then Bach, then some country/western pieces, one of which was in response to a request. Mike is a remarkable pianist, whom some musically sophisticated Park residents had heard of, and he and his wife/agent/singer Atlanta would like a Food and Tunes date for themselves. Yikes!
The second guest was a young girl who sang. Alone. Gorgeously. I didn't know singing like that could come out of the throat of a girl who probably isn't 12 yet. Most impressive.
We did our 50/50 raffle. We would have made a modest but solid amount of money, except that the winner, Dale Blanton, donated his winnings back to the Foundation. And not only did the food trucks do reasonably well, but each vendor was so happy that each donated more than the requested 5%.
We broke even, even without a major sponsor or anything unusual to raffle off.
Does it get better than this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)