Have Amy and Mariana Got a Deal For YOU!

Here's what happened.  Amy Alonso and Mariana Ferro put in a pool.  They made some other improvements, too, and they really spiffed up their property.  Part of the pool project was a pool shed/cabana.

It wasn't really anyone's fault, per se.  Just some signals that got crossed.  It turns out that the wrong person gave Amy and Mariana the wrong advice, and they wound up buying a shed that was bigger than our Code permits for the place they wanted to put it.  It couldn't even be slid in with a variance.  By the time all of this came to light, the shed was already bought.  Amy and Mariana then had to get another shed, smaller than the first, and in keeping with our Codes.

Now, they own an extra shed they can't use.  And I have to say, it's a really nice shed.  It's 8 feet by 10 feet, with 8 foot walls, a hurricane grade hip metal roof, and a glass door.  It also has three windows.

This is what it looks like:

Amy and Mariana paid $4800 for this shed, and they would not like to lose money over the mistake.  If anyone is interested, for him- or herself, or for someone else you know, let Amy and Mariana know about it.  You can reach Amy at 305-975-6933, or you can e-mail her at jupiter247@me.com.  The shed is here in BP.  

This Town's Plenty Big Enough For Both of Us. Welcome, biscayneparker.

There's a new blog in the Village.  You'll find it at www.thebiscayneparker.blogspot.com.  Our neighbor, Milt Hunter, decided to start his own blog, and that's the address.  So far, Milt is only talking about the water situation in the Park (as in, whether we really have a water situation), but I'm sure he'll soon enough be onto other topics.  He already has a few followers, and no doubt he'll quickly have more.

Milt's blog is very classy.  It has a great layout, with nice background art and a smart look.  I don't know if the background photograph is one Milt took himself, but it would be cool if it is.

blogspot blogs are set up to accept comments from readers, and Milt's got them, too.  There's a lively and pleasing conversation going on about the water situation.

So take a look at Milt's blog.  Become a member, if you like it, and join in on the conversations.

Welcome, Milt, and welcome, biscayneparker.

What?!!! He Can't Be Serious! I Hope What We Need Is a New Police Chief.

I got from Chuck Ross, our CrimeWatch Chairman, an e-mail about crime events over this past weekend.  Our police chief, Cornelius (Rusty) McKenna, had the nerve to make the following statements about us:


THEFTS: Four cars were illegally entered by an unknown person(s) overnight. Two were on NE 116^th St near 7^th Ave, one was on NE 119^th St. near 9^th Ave, and one was on NE 115^th St. near 7^th Ave. All of the four cars were unlocked. A Dell Laptop computer was taken from one car, and a child’s lunch pail was taken from another car. All four of the cars were ransacked. If you have any information about any of the thefts, please contact Detective Lieutenant Pineda at 786-447-7122.


I have highlighted in red, and italics, and bold, the outrageous assertion Rusty made.  The outright nerve of this man.  What kinds of rubes does he think we are, anyway?  Well, what kind?  To accuse us--at least four of us-- of walking away from our cars, and going into our homes for the night, and not locking our car doors!  Does he think we were born yesterday?  Anyway, if the Chief, or even Chuck Ross, thinks it's important that we lock our car doors, why didn't they ever tell us that?

And as if this wasn't insulting enough, he also took the trouble to point out that one of our very own neighbors saw something very suspicious, and didn't even intervene personally!  Instead, the neighbor called 911.  The result of this tactic was to invoke police action, further resulting in the detention of someone who had two loaded handguns with him.  If Rusty is suggesting that BP residents themselves aren't courageous enough to confront an unknown trespasser who has two loaded handguns, I can't see how he could have been more patronizing.

Clearly, I intend to take all of this up with Heidi Siegel, our Manager.  Just wait until she finds out what Rusty is saying, for worse and for "better," about BP residents.

Agree to Disagree

Or, as the late Rodney King famously asked, "why can't we all just get along?"

What seems to happen to us all too often is that we take positions, we become entrenched, and we become embattled.  And the problem is not just that we don't see things the same way.  It's more than expected that that would happen.  The problem is that we have no mutual understanding.  One of us doesn't just disagree with another of us.  One of us rejects the other of us.  One of us has no idea what the other of us is talking about.  And doesn't care.

Battle lines seem to get drawn before there's anything about which to disagree.  An idea is unacceptable, or stupid, or toxic, or sabotaging, because of whose idea it is.  In that sense, every issue is an ad hominem issue.

Really, who cares about the dais?  Suppose a dais cost $24K, and suppose it lasted 48 years.  That's $500 a year for the dais.  That's less than 1/2 cent per house per year.  So what's the issue?  That we could have gotten a dais for $12K, and it would have cost $250 a year?  So instead of my paying, or your paying, less than 1/2 cent per year, we could have paid less than 1/4 cent per year?  Really?  BP resident Gavin McKenzie could make that dais, or BP resident Charlie Easton could.  Yeah, and?

In whose interest is it for Charlie Easton to build a dais, instead of for Gavin McKenzie to build one?  Certainly not Charlie Easton's.  The offer was that he would build it for free: he would volunteer his time and labor, and that of some others of our neighbors.  When George W Bush ran for president, there were people who advocated for "ABB:" Anybody But Bush.  The current effort to avoid the plan that includes Gavin McKenzie is a lot like that.  The proposed dais is too expensive.  It should be made movable (read more expensive), despite the fact that there is no reason to think anyone would ever want to move it.   (And amazingly, it's generally the same people who complain about the expense, and insist on making the dais movable.)  It should be made of some other wood than the one planned.  Any other wood.  We can adorn our "magical" newly renovated log cabin with a dais still composed of plastic folding card tables finished with Velcro-attached nylon skirting.  Anything on earth but what was proposed.

It's not about anything.  It's just fussing.  And it's really two problems.  One is the blind, ad hominem squabbling.  The other is the refusal on either side to comprehend the interests of the other side.  That's not to say that if either partisan understood the interests of the other partisan, they wouldn't disagree.  They probably would.  But it would be an honest disagreement, about real matters of philosophy.  Or particular interests.  But it's very different if anyone can say of someone else, I understand where you're coming from, but the other consideration seems more important to me.  Fair enough.  I wouldn't quarrel with anyone who just disagreed with me, as long as I knew they understood my position.

Last Tuesday night, at the Commission meeting, someone from 5th Avenue got mad at me.  Actually, it was more than one person, and they got mad at me before the meeting began.  It's very possible that one of the reasons they came to the meeting, which neither of them ever does, was to let me know how angry they were at me.

You know about the incident at 5th Avenue and 121st Street, about a week ago.  Someone from the CNM side of the street was arguing with someone else from there, and shots were fired.  One of the combatants fled down 5th Avenue in his car, and the other combatant shot at him while he was fleeing.  Fired shots clearly terrified BP neighbors, and one even struck the truck of a workman parked on 5th Avenue.

Two of those neighbors wrote to the Commissioners, not only to inform us of the matter (as if we hadn't heard all about it), but to let us know how insistent they were that something be done.  The preferred something was closure of the 121st Street median, the opening in which created the get-away path used by the fleeing and shot-at driver from CNM.  And two correspondents added an incentive for the Village and its Commissioners: we were now alerted, and if we don't somehow make something happen, quickly, any subsequent event, endangering and terrifying BP residents, will be our fault.  We will bear legal responsibility.  One of the writers made sure to point out he is an attorney.

I wrote back to these neighbors, some of whom I know, and some of whom I don't, to tell them that we all knew about this episode, that it would of course be taken very seriously and attended to in any way we could address it, but that it didn't do good for BP residents to threaten the Village.  What I got back immediately was a confrontation that neighbors had not threatened the Village.  What I got back at the Commission meeting was being glared at and addressed (dressed down), for how wrong I was to have said these neighbors threatened the Village, and for clearly having no understanding, let alone empathy, about the matter.

In the lobby, during the interval, I approached one of the people who was so mad at me.  I hadn't actually ever met nor seen him before, so I introduced myself and tried to smooth things over.  He was having none of it.  I said "I get it."  He said he had no reason to think so.  I pointed out I live on 119th Street, which has plenty of its own traffic issues, but he was not one bit assuaged.  He was sure I didn't understand his problem, since I wasn't enraged and swearing guaranteed and relatively expeditious correction.  It seemed clear he had neither understanding nor patience for the Village's dilemma-- we can't close the median, even if we agree it's the right thing to do, without cooperation from CNM, and there are reasons to think they are not in the mood to be cooperative with us.

These kinds of hostile stand-offs have become increasingly frequent in the Village.  I moved here in 2005, and there was already an established group of residents who occasionally threatened to sue the Village for one thing or another.  They have receded, but they have been replaced by another group, who either identify problems, or they invent them, and they threaten the Village with one thing or another.  Sometimes, it's as simple and routine as threatening Commissioners with being overturned at the next election.  Sometimes, it's a more energetic and concerted recall of them.  And it's always the accusation that they fail to understand and accede to the "will of the people."  (On one occasion, it was even suggested that if Commissioners or the Manager advocated for a new direction about something, the clear explanation was that they were taking graft.  Yup.)

Even if we subtract the invented controversies, there will always be disagreement among people.  It's anticipated, it's understood, and it's often even advantageous.  But there doesn't have to be a portrayal of injury, when there is disagreement, and when one person's position has to give way to another's.  Can't we just agree to disagree?

You Busy? You Know About Miami Light Project, in Wynwood? I Think I Might Have Mentioned.

The first time I went to MLP was about three years ago.  I had for some reason gotten turned onto a guy named Reggie Watts, and amazingly, he was coming to Miami.  To MLP, at 404 NW 26th Street (the Goldman Warehouse) in the Wynwood section.  So I packed up myself, and Chuck and Roxy Ross, and went to experience Reggie Watts.  Wow, what an experience it was.  I've become a regular at MLP ever since.  You know how it is when they know you?

MLP is a very funky organization.  Everything is off-beat and experimental.  I've seen plays and concerts there.  I meet people I would not otherwise encounter.  It's where I encounter 20-somethings with weird hair, hardware, and tattoos, but who want theater.  Yup, they exist.  Their parents and grandparents go to MLP, too.

The Goldman Warehouse, no doubt named for Tony Goldman, is in a district that was perhaps home to warehouses.  It's a lot of discount, "to the trade" showrooms of clothing now.  Some will sell to you retail, and some won't.  Austin Burke's Men's Wear is there someplace, too.  (If you're not young, and you've been in Miami for decades, you might remember the TV ads, in which you were promised that "little old Burky will fit you personally."  He'd peel off layer after layer of jackets, to show you the different looks.  I'm quite sure little old Burky is long gone by now.)  There's also a very cool shop that sells clothing and objets d'art from India.  It's called Rupees.  Operated by two very nice guys.  And there are murals on the buildings.  Loads of murals, super interesting.  It's continuous from the murals on Miami Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue.

Reggie Watts was my favorite show there.  My next favorite show was the "Tiger Lilies."  They're a British trio who paint up their faces and dress oddly and perform stuff that sounds like it was done during the time of German expressionism.  You watch and listen to them, and you think you're in the movie "Cabaret."  Google them and Reggie Watts, and you'll see what fun they like to have at MLP.  They love local talent, too, at MLP, and there's a resident playwright/director named Teo Castellanos, whom they frequently feature.  He did a terrific one man show, which he wrote, last year.

The room is small.  All seating is essentially excellent.  Tickets are usually $25, but you can pay $50, if you want "VIP seating."  VIP seating is at a little table (think cabaret) at the foot of the stage, and you get a free glass of wine, too.  I don't do this any more, because the wine isn't good enough to pay for, and all the seats are equally great.

Parking can be a bit of a problem, although it's not impossible.  The machines used to have two-hour limits, which was a regular problem when the shows were longer than that.  But now, I think they've extended the limits on the machines.  It's all on-street parking, though.

The other somewhat bad news is the cost of tickets for events at MLP.  I almost always wind up feeling like I've cheated someone, because they don't charge enough.  So I make up for it by giving them a donation in support.  I don't know how much it helps them, but it makes me feel like less of a thief.

The first concert this year is on Friday, October 9.  The lead performer is a jazz saxophonist named Carlos Averhoff, Jr, who appears to be the real deal.  You can google him, too.  I have about five or six other events to attend at MLP this season.  All cool stuff.

So think about it.  You can look up Miami Light Project, and see if anything appeals to you.  If you call them, you'll probably speak to Ivonne Batanero.  You don't need to know if she's a knock-out, right?  I mean, it has nothing to do with it.

My Hero. As Long As He Feels Safe.

From Noah Jacobs' facebook page:

Barcaloungers for all

Someone gave me the heads up that Dr. Jonas thinks I'm childish, and further suggests that the Dais is not that big an expense.... apparently if all the residents just pony up $20.00, this would be paid for no problem. If this was such an easy sell, why didn't he and the other elected officials put this up for a Village wide vote? I wonder...
As far as childish, that seems a curious sentiment coming from him, and I will respond in kind... I believe the proper response is, "it takes one to know one", or maybe "I know you are Dr. Jonas, but what am I".
Honestly, and a bit more seriously, Fred has pushed this $20 a person idea before. He suggested this when he was on the Biscayne Park Foundation. For some reason residents balked at the idea then. Amazingly, now that he is no longer the face of it, the Foundation has done a remarkably better job in regard to fundraising.
As a government official he has a responsibility as do the others to properly and judiciously manage the finances of the Village. Spending money on a throne so that he has a nice cushy place to put his fanny is not a well thought out expenditure of Village revenue.
But let me delve into the $20 a person idea, there are roughly 321,873,982 people in America; imagine that the federal government raises your tax rate to the highest in the Western World, (bear with me, I am going somewhere with this), then the IRS sends you a nice little letter that says they are asking that you give them an extra $20 for every one of you and your family. They intend to spend it in a way that makes certain Congressmen and Senators would get top of the line seating.

Does that seem like a good use of...hold on (20 * 321,873,982)=
$6,437,479,640? I didn't think so either....

The meeting is Tuesday the 6th, please go and have your voice heard... Oh by the way its still in the Rec Center, because the really fancy Annex with the place that might have thrones isn't finished inside, I wonder if this project is over budget? For a look at the Agenda, here is the link...
http://www.biscayneparkfl.gov/…/Agenda_ONLY_Regular_Commiss…

I'm so ashamed.  What could I say?:

Noah, if you want to fuss about something, bother to know what you're talking about.  It was $20 per household, not $20 a person.  And yes, you're right.  If each home contributed $20, we would very easily pay for the new dais, with money to spare, "no problem."

I'm curious about your "cushy...throne" reference.  This is not the first time I've heard it.  The proposed dais is a long table that will sit on the same floor as all the other seats and tables in the room.  My guess is that we will use the same chairs the Commission uses now.  Tell us more about your "cushy...throne" fantasy.  What did you think this was about?

As far as taxes are concerned, you are at a disadvantage.  You are not a property-owner here, and you don't pay taxes.  You have no reason to know that property values in BP are comparatively low, so that a given millage, which might sound high, is not a lot of dollars in taxes.

Also, our Village is unique.  It is unique in its charm, and it is consequently unique in some limitations it has.  It has an unusually limited way of raising revenue.  We have no commercial component here, so it is essentially the contribution each of us property owners makes that pays the bills.  Other income is based on residence, but not necessarily on ownership.  Thus, we have non ad valorem revenue, too, but most of the income is ad valorem.  So our limited ability to hold a high millage is what keeps us as afloat as we are, which is not exactly healthy, let alone luxurious.  The current Commission is trying to make improvements as we can.  We have a vision for the Park, and we understand that improvement requires commitment.  In the early days of the Village, if residents wanted a log cabin, they dug into their pockets to get the money for the materials to build one.  None of them would have tolerated the mean and mealy attitude you adopt.  Had you been here to spout off then as you're spouting off now, you would have been run out of town.

I am personally proud of the commitment I have made to this Village.  As is true of every other area of my life, I aim to give more than I take.  If I ask my neighbors to pony up $20 per house for a very worthy cause, you can be sure I commit much more than that myself.  I don't know how to answer you about the Foundation in its earlier years, when I was a Trustee of it.  We all did the best we could.  We worked hard, and we were as creative as we could be.  Did we disappoint you?  I'm sorry to learn of it.  Have you joined the Foundation yourself, or have you joined any of the Boards, to show your own commitment, and your skill in making things happen?  I don't know whether the Foundation right now is doing better, worse, or the same as we did then.  It never felt to me like a competition.  I do know that the Foundation has recently committed about $2000 to the Village, for a lighting project.  The job costs twice that, but the Foundation could not raise more than the $2000.

Raising money is not easy.  You often have to ask people who are not eager to contribute.  They'll fuss and resist over no more than $20.  If I remember correctly, when there was an effort to find money to pay for the mural outside the recreation center, and the private fund-raising came up woefully short, the Commission of which you were a part simply raided Village coffers for the rest, which was almost all of it.  Your neighbors all pleaded with you not to do it, and two of your Commission colleagues objected.  But you and your other two colleagues ignored everyone, and just snatched the money.  Is that what felt to you like a successful fund-raising effort?

When I have had a more personally inspired project, and I didn't need to depend on the formal participation of a group of other people, I have joined a few other ambitious Village residents and made things happen.  You will see three pieces of public outdoor sculpture around the Village.  The Village now owns two of them, and it is about to be presented with the third.  All of these represent the hard work and personal sacrifice of some of your neighbors, not, unfortunately, including yourself.  We spent a lot of time knocking on doors, we took "no" for an answer a lot (if we couldn't persuade the neighbor that "yes" was the right answer), and we paid more to compensate for those who paid less.  We would love to have been able to include your $20, or $200, or $5, but you never made anything available to us.  By "us," of course, I mean the Village.  The municipality where you choose to live for a little while.   The one to which you commit nothing, and from which you seem to demand a lot.

I Rest My Case, or You Can't Make This Stuff Up; Or Can You?

Letter written in response to Biscayne Times article.  Not sent to them, as they are not likely to publish it.


I'm still not sure what was Erik Bojnansky's point with his article about Biscayne Park and a collection of unconnected issues ("$24K Question," BT 10/2015).  I guess the title and the column inches suggest he wanted mostly to address the log cabin renovation, and the dais that is to be created there.  

Bojnansky cited BP resident Steve Bernard more than he cited anyone else.  He quoted three Commissioners, which I imagine is supposed to mean he spoke to them.  He did not speak to me, and I don't know if he spoke to the other Commissioner, either. But he did speak to Bernard.  Bernard was a Commissioner here some years back.  He no longer attends meetings, and he is not seen at information-gathering and opinion-expounding sessions, but that doesn't seem to prevent him from forming opinions.  And it seems not to prevent Bojnansky from relying heavily on him.

Bernard told Bojnansky, seemingly as a complaint, that the Village is not run by its residents any more.  Now, it is run by a professional manager.  What Bernard seems to have forgotten to mention to Bojnansky is that the change occurred on advice from a Charter Review Committee of Village residents, and that it was Bernard himself who chaired that Committee.  Bernard has never told anyone why he thought professional management was such a good idea, but then he spent the remainder of his time, both on and off the Commission, bucking the managers and lamenting, as he does here, that residents don't run the Village any more..

I was also unclear what to make of the juxtaposition of BP's having gotten a very large grant from the State, for construction of a new administrative building and renovation of the historic log cabin, and Bojnansky's quote of Commissioner Barbara Watts. who thought continued use of plastic folding card tables, covered in blue nylon drape attached with velcro, was good enough for us.  I wonder if we would have gotten that grant from the State if they had known our level of devotion and sophistication, or at least Commissioner Watts'.

Then, there's the matter of that "movable" dais.  Bojnansky quotes BP resident Barbara Kuhl as having thought it would be an advantage to have a dais that could be moved "out of the room."  I hope that's not really what she told Bojnansky.  No one has imagined such a thing.  The dais, unless it's those plastic folding card tables Commissioner Watts likes, will be a very heavy and well-made piece of furniture that isn't going anywhere.  At most, it could be moved toward a wall, but there's no way anyone could move it out of the room.  And there's no place to store it anyway.  This, of course, is assuming anyone would ever have a need to move it, which, according to imaginings of uses other than for Village meetings, would be almost unheard of.

Christina McKenzie, who originally said she didn't want a fixed dais, will be relieved to know that there will be no yoga classes in the log cabin.  They'll take place in the recreation building, as they always have.  And she doesn't want us to "get stuck on tradition?"  That was the whole point of the renovation.  In any case, we're then told she changed her mind.  The message here is what?  Where is Bojnansky going with this?

As for Bojnansky's glancing swipes about outsourcing sanitation, and annexation, we can talk about those alleged "some 300" people who didn't favor outsourcing.  I'll explain to Bojnansky about the petition that was the basis for this conclusion, but maybe his stomach can't take it.

If, as Bojnansky says, "some residents...fear that annexation will actually cost the Village money," does that mean that other residents don't think so?  How many on each side?   Did Bojnansky research the financials at all, or is he just passing along the views of "some" people?

I knew in advance about Bojnansky's article.  I followed from a distance, since he never contacted me.  I was expecting something that was at least questionable, as are so many BT articles.  Bojnansky did not, in that sense, disappoint.  Unless I was looking for something honest, remotely adequate, and balanced.  But the BT doesn't seem to work that way, especially when it comes to BP matters.

Fred Jonas

Commissioner,

Biscayne Park

A Two-Way Street

At the special Commission meeting to approve the budget last night, the usual topics came up.  Included were Recreation Department funding, and the dais.

Why do we have to provide recreation services and facilities, some complained, when so many of the users are not even BP residents?  And why should we spend such a lot of money for a dais, some asked?

There are two things to remember about these issues.  One is that the State of Florida just gave us over a million dollars to build our new Administration building and to renovate our log cabin.  The State neither gets nor asked anything for this money.  We asked them for it, and they gave it to us.  Every resident of and visitor to the state contributed to that money.  Not one of them, except those of us who live in BP, will realize any benefit whatsoever from the money they gave us.  I have yet to encounter any BP resident who is unhappy about the grant.

But when it comes time for us to provide for others, by making available a nice field, a basketball court, and a recreation building with restrooms and a drinking fountain, we suddenly don't believe in sharing.  It's all only about us.

The other thing to remember is about those two blocks that contain the fields, the courts, and the recreation building.  Arthur Griffing did not put that there.  Those two blocks were developed with grants, again, from the State of Florida.  And again, they didn't ask for much.  They just gave us the money, so we could build facilities for ourselves.

And yet again, when the memory of the grant gets slightly hazy, we want the facilities only for ourselves, and we resent the idea that neighbors from adjacent municipalities come to us to use these facilities.  It's fine with us if the residents of and visitors to the state share their money with us, but we don't want to share what we used the money for.

We considered restricting those two blocks to BP residents only, and maybe to charge anyone else (to inhibit them from using the facilities), but we found out we couldn't do that.  It seems the State did want one thing for its money.  It wanted us to make the facilities available to anyone.

Some years ago, when our Manager was Ana Garcia, there was an idea to reclaim the recreation facilities.  We contacted the State, to offer to pay back the money they gave us, in exchange for which we would control the facilities.  If we wanted them only for our own use, we could restrict them that way.  No, the State said, they did not want the money back.  They wanted us to continue to share with our neighbors.

As for the dais, if the State of Florida was willing to give us, free, over a million dollars to provide for ourselves a new building and a renovated old one, can't we contribute to the project, too?  The new Administration building and the log cabin mean nothing to any citizen of or visitor to Florida.  They will never see or experience them.  But they gave us over a million dollars to make this nice.  These buildings, and their appointments and furnishings, mean a great deal to us, and we will see and experience them all the time.  We can stop being so cheap and so niggling, and show the State that this means more to us than it does to them.  Because it does.  Or it certainly should.

By the way, in response to the complaint about the cost of this dais, if we were simply to pay for it, and not borrow the money, it would cost each home (not each resident) $20.  Once.  Done.  It's a very small amount of money for a beautiful piece of furniture that will be a wonderful credit to the log cabin and the Village, and that will last many decades.

Too Late for Children; Too Early for Grandchildren.

My daughter is 32.  She got married last year, and she lives in Boston.  She and her husband are planning for a pregnancy in 2016.

My son is 35.  He just got engaged, and he and his fiancee are planning to be married in 2016.  He lives in San Francisco.  Children?  Who knows?

I don't know what to say about my experience of children.  I loved them, of course.  They were my children.  I raised them, I love them, I care about them.  And I could tolerate their earlier childishness, because I knew they would outgrow it.  They're good people now.

But really, I don't frankly love "children," as a general phenomenon.  They're high maintenance, they're noisy, they're unruly, and they make mischief.  "You gotta love 'em" to put up with it.  And you have to know, as I knew, it's temporary.

Yesterday, one of my friends alerted me to a facebook page called "People for a Better Biscayne Park."  A couple of postings were directed at me personally, and they also included complaints about the log cabin renovation and specifically about the dais.

It turns out that the "People" who claim to want a "Better Biscayne Park" are primarily Elizabeth Jacobs, and secondarily her husband, Noah Jacobs.  It takes a bit of probing to get them to identify themselves.

What I discovered is that after the Jacobses go on about what gripes them, and take whatever swipes it pleases them to take, they get really quiet when someone else, like me, responds to them, answers their questions, and confronts their "Bevis and Butthead-"like approach to complaining.  Some of those responses were lengthy, pithy, and informative.  Soon enough, I also learned, they collapse into "You win," but they add a couple more swipes to that.  It seems that once you challenge them, you discover that their entire approach is ad hominem spitball launching, with no actual substance.  Except the spit.

The next thing that happens, which appears to be the last thing that happens, is that they then remove all of my comments (those that demonstrated how breathtakingly wrong these "People" were), but they claim I removed them, as if I would even know how to do that, if it's even possible for a commenter to remove his own comments.  Sadly, I think I must have made very clear to them how tech-unsavvy I am.  So no, kids, I did not remove my own comments.  I don't know how, and why would I?  You removed them, and you lied about it.

In any case, I now see what children I have to deal with, between the old days of my own children and the coming days of my grandchildren.  I wanted my children.  I signed on for that.  It was my pleasure and my honor to have been the part of their lives I was and continue to be.  I'll want and love my grandchildren, too.  I take full responsibility for my children, and I'll play a role in the development of my grandchildren.  But I didn't count on having to deal with the "People for a Better Biscayne Park."  These children are not my responsibility, and frankly, they are not welcome parts of my life.

Written to Biscayne Times 5/3/14. Never Printed, Of Course.

In reading the letters in the May, 2014, issue, I was struck by a curious pattern.  Three people wrote to you about a story about the Cushman school, and they all complained.  Their complaint was the same in each case: the author got it wrong.  They weren't complaining that the author came to different conclusions than they did, or that he interpreted differently than they did.  They said his facts were wrong.  The author of the next letter, about development on Biscayne Boulevard, made the identical complaint, about a different author of a different story.

I have written to you many times over the past few years, and my complaint has always been the same as your other letter-writers'.  BT writers seem not to be good about getting the facts correct.  I also remember a long response you got from Bunny Yeager, about a story done about her.  Same complaint: a long string of wrong facts.  There was an identical complaint that came from Morningside about some issue.

There are two questions about this pattern: what does it mean, and how does it happen?  Not being the publisher myself of a periodical, I don't know the rules, and I don't know the expectations.  Is it considered acceptable for authors/journalists to get a proportion of stories wrong?  The BT is not a daily, or even a weekly, and we would imagine authors have plenty of time to do adequately careful (not careless) research.  How do you want your readers to understand and absorb inaccurate stories?  These stories are presented as if they were intended to be informational.  For myself, it is not my reflex to assume they are merely fanciful and intended only to entertain.  Have I gotten it wrong?  If I have, the letters suggest I'm not the only one.

Then, there is the question as to how it seemingly so frequently happens.  If "facts" are presented, and they're wrong, should readers assume they were only made up by the author?  Why would an author invent facts?  Does he think a story would be more interesting if told a certain way, even if it's not true?  Sometimes, the "facts" result from quotes of people to whom the author spoke.  If "facts" are wrong, should we assume sources are not quoted accurately?  For some of these stories, when I know a lot about the content, I can see the author is highly selective about whom he interviews, or whom he quotes.  Is that the source of the trouble?  Too many eggs in one basket, and the author should have spoken to more people who might have corrected inaccuracies?

I have said before, and I will say again, you employ some very fine writers.  If they could only get their facts straight, or if they had an honest intention to do so, it would make a great difference to your readers.

And by the way, occasionally printing letters of complaint and correction is not nearly as valuable, or as fair, as simply getting it right to begin with.  And who knows how many of these letters you don't print.  I know you don't print most of mine.

Fred Jonas



Apparently, Erik Bojnansky of the BT is sniffing around looking for information for a story.  It seems the story is to be about the dais, but also about outsourcing sanitation and annexation.  Bojnansky has spoken to at least one of the Commissioners, but not to me.  It is of course unknown who alerted the BT/Bojnansky to these situations and controversies.