I've Decided to Go in a Different Direction

I have lots of stuff.  It's right to say I have too much stuff.  I just get interested, and the next thing I know, I have more stuff.  But it's not entirely haphazard.  I always mean something by it.  At least, I think I do.

A few years ago, I happened to be in Tennessee, and I happened to visit the Lodge factory store.  Lodge makes, in the US, cast iron items, and particularly, they make cast iron kitchen ware.  I was very intrigued, I already had one Lodge skillet, which I think I found a reason to use once or twice, and I decided to get two new frying pans.  I think they're 10 inches and 12 inches, or maybe they're 12 and 14.  Everyone who says anything about cast iron skillets raves about them, and I had every good intention, of course.  I seasoned them properly, probably three times by now.

If it isn't obvious where this discussion is going, the fact is I didn't fall in love with my cast iron skillets, and I don't use them much.  I think I had some fantasy about what cast iron cooking would be (I read too many glowing write-ups), and that's just not what happened.

I have other pots and pans, and for whatever reasons, I'm simply more content with them.  So, I'm giving up my cast iron skillets.  Normally, with something like this that I just don't want any more, I would give them to Goodwill, around the corner on W Dixie.  But there's something about these Lodge cast iron skillets.  I don't really mean this the way it's going to come out, but they just seem too good to give away to Goodwill.  And they're the kinds of items a lot of people would want.

So, if you want them, I'm giving them to you.  Just contact me, and they're yours.  I might even throw in the one I got many years ago.  It's a low skillet, and it has a custom wood base/trivet.  It's super nice.  They all are.

"It Would Be Comical, If It Wasn't So Tragic."

That's what one of my friends said, referring to something about tonight's Commission agenda.  My friend was right, and we'll come to that tragedy.  But it wasn't the only one.

After the difficult topic was removed from the agenda, the meeting got under way.  And it was a good thing the difficult topic did get removed.  It was only last month that Will Tudor was bemoaning, sort of, the Commission's failure to accomplish anything, even though it has a rock solid majority, and addressing the difficult topic-- driveways-- might have led to an actual accomplishment.  No one, not even Will, complained when that topic was removed.  Well, Roxy Ross complained, but she doesn't count.  As we soon learned.

You might remember that last month, Roxy intended to introduce a discussion topic, and it was about meeting structure.  The theme Roxy had in mind involved proper decorum among Commissioners, and from the Commission to the non-Commissioner residents of the Park.  You might also remember that Harvey Bilt bizarrely took the liberty to suggest that the Commission not discuss Roxy's issue, and the rest of the stooges sheepishly and foolishly went along with Harvey.  Well, tonight the topic came back.  And there was no more mood to accommodate Roxy's wish for order and respect now than there had been last month.  Bobblehead after bobblehead dutifully concocted non-reasons why not, and one was lamer than the other.  A favorite was that we're a small municipality, so we shouldn't pattern what amounts to a decorum resolution after a larger municipality.  Moronic, but repeated by the kids.

But the beauty here was the contribution of Big Mama Truppman.  Big Mama summarized some of the other claptrap her stooges sputtered out, and she added some perspective.  (No, of course it didn't make any sense, but that's not the point.  The point is it's the twisted nonsense she has to produce somehow to combat Roxy Ross.  And let's remember that Big Mama specializes in complete disrespect for her neighbors and her Commission colleagues.  Does she want a system of interaction among any of them that would require her to act decently to other people?  Right.)  So Big Mama pointed out that if things had to be orderly, we'd have meetings that would last "four or five hours."  And the Commission wouldn't be able to do the business of the neighborhood.  Big Mama appeared to have ignored the facts that 1) our meetings already take four to five hours (tonight's only took two, because the goofballs unloaded the real business), and 2) this Commission doesn't accomplish anything for the Village anyway.  Big Mama, don't you remember it was just last month that your boy Tudor complained about that?  As I said, it was desperately foolish stuff, designed mostly to frustrate anything that was introduced by Roxy Ross, and, just as my friend said, "it would be comical, if it wasn't so tragic."

And then, onto Board memberships.  Most of them were easy, in that there were just fewer applicants than vacancies, so the applicants could simply be elevated to membership without discussion.  One Board was different, though.  There was a curiosity about the Biscayne Park Foundation.  That Board has three members, out of five it's supposed to have, and one has her house up for sale.  So the Board needed two new members right now, and maybe a third before too long.  About two months ago, I applied.  I had been on the Foundation before, I know and like the people on it now, and I needed something useful to do for the Village.  It was a natural.  I might have been appointed when I applied, but the day I applied was a day too late to make it onto the agenda.  The next month, there was a mix-up, having to do with whose decision it was.  Some thought the Commission had to decide, and some thought the Foundation could decide.  Well, it turned out the Commission had to decide, and by the time this became clear, the next Commission meeting had gone by.  So tonight was the night.  Mine was the only application, so it would be automatic, like the other Boards.  Then, last Friday (3/30), Nicole Susi applied.  This could be great for the Foundation.  Nicole is terrific, full of ideas and enthusiasm.  And a super nice person, and fun to work with.  It would be Jorge Marinoni, Marie Smith, Erica Pettis, until she and Walter sell their house, and move to North Carolina, Nicole, and I.  So that was it, as of Friday, March 30.

On Sunday, April 1 (you don't have to say it), four applications are received.  They come from Laura Graves, Judith Gersten, Barbara Watts, and David Goehl.  If you don't know who Laura and Judith are, you're forgiven.  They're nice women, but they keep extremely low profiles, Village-wise.  They attend nothing, they participate in nothing, and they contribute to nothing.  If you're wondering how they even knew there were Foundation openings, and why they suddenly wanted to be part of something (on a Sunday, April Fool's Day), those are very, very good questions.  You probably know Barbara Watts.  She ran for Commission about six or seven years ago, because Steve Bernard insisted on it, and she couldn't find someone else to do it for her, so she wouldn't have to.   She won her seat, and she never once connected to anything that had anything to do with the Village.  Although she was one of the votes in favor of hiring Heidi Siegel as manager.  Mostly, she just complained and criticized. And had weird crusades about other parts of the County.  The other odd thing about Barbara was that just before this past Sunday, April Fool's Day, she was conspicuous for canvassing various blocks, pleading for someone (to replace her?) to apply for the Foundation.  It seems she couldn't find anyone. And David Goehl.  David was a BP Commissioner many years ago, and like many of the prior Commissioners, he went back under ground after his term was up.  He had nothing further to do with the Village, except he still lives here.  And you might ask the same questions about Barbara and David that you might have asked about Laura and Judith: how did they suddenly come to know there were Foundation openings, and why on earth did they apply, on April Fool's Day?

So those were the applicants.  I guess Laura and David figured they'd find out the result later, since they didn't come to the meeting tonight.  (Unless they already knew?)  Judith came, but she didn't stay to find out whether or not she was chosen to be on the Foundation.  And Nicole was there.

And the envelopes, please.  Roxy Ross selected Nicole and me.  All of the other four selected Laura, and three of them also selected David.  Only Will forgot, I mean messed up, I mean independently liked the idea of Barbara.  So it was unanimous for Laura (yeah, OK, it wasn't unanimous, because Rox didn't select Laura, but I already told you, Rox doesn't count), and one short of unanimous for David.

It's a hell of a coincidence, really.  I mean, think about it.  Four Commissioners happen independently to think it would be a great idea to appoint to the Foundation someone who has absolutely no activity in any Village function, and doesn't even attend Village events.  And who somehow only thought of the idea on a Sunday, two days before the meeting. And three of them had the same completely independent idea about a long past Commissioner about whom you might have wondered if he even still lived here any more.

What the Commission managed to do was prevent the seating of two people of proven devotion by substituting two people of proven disinterest.  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

As my friend said, it would be comical, if it wasn't so tragic.  A Commission now self-identified as accomplishing nothing, based on wanting nothing, padding a Board with members who have no reason to accomplish anything, because they don't want anything, either.  We elected ourselves one hell of a Commission.

As we were leaving, another of my friends said he imagined I would refuse to participate in anything the Foundation does, because I'm not a member of it.  Was he kidding?  Of course I will.  I have great affection for the Village, and for the Foundation.  And I'm not like Big Mama.  I don't take out my personal grudges on the Village.  And not everything has to be about me.  Like it does with Big Mama.

Nothing But Net. Well, Maybe the Occasional Rim Shot. Always a Goal, Though, and Most Often a Three-Pointer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK8f6GsmJa4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSVzuOvKTXI

(I'm sorry.   These are not live/hyper links.  You have to highlight them, then enter them as destinations.  Or, you can go to youtube.com yourself, and look for Dance Heginbotham.)

The South Miami-Dade Cultural Arts Center is 27 miles from my house.  That means it's 27 miles from your house.  It's in Cutler Bay.  It's a long way to go to hear a concert or see a show.  And it's very well worth the trip.  It's a magnificent venue, ticket prices are low, parking is free and easy, and the people who work there could not be friendlier and more welcoming.  You feel like a treasured guest at SMDCAC.  It's a treat and a joy to go there, for anything they put on.  Their managing director is Eric Fliss, who has an wonderful ear and eye for talent, and who lines up amazing show after amazing show, and incredible season after incredible season.  A couple of times a year, I wind up at SMDCAC two days in a row.  Once or twice, I have seen two different shows there on the same day.  I can't get enough of the place.

This coming Saturday night, they're presenting Dance Heginbotham.  Here's what SMDCAC says about this company:  "Dance Heginbotham is celebrated for its vibrant athleticism, humor, and theatricality, as well as its commitment to musical collaborations. For this Miami performance, Dance Heginbotham will be accompanied on stage by musical guest performers the Amernet String Quartet, guitarist Marco Sartor, and Celia Fonta of Siempre Flamenco alongside Castanet performers."  The music is by Lalo, von Dohnanyi, and Boccherini.

Ticket prices are $25-$45, depending on where you sit.  You will pay double or triple at the Arsht, for a less interesting show, you'll deal with parking, and you'll put up with a component of discomfort (seats are too small).

SMDCAC is offering a 15% discount.  The promotional code is DANCEH.  You're now under $40 for the best seats in the house.  Do yourself a favor.

And Then, I Listened to the Recording of the Rest.

Marlen, you correctly noted that we're "different" here in BP.  So why are you suggesting we staff up the way they do at the County, with their "zillions" of employees?  You can't have subordinates and helpers.  You are a subordinate and helper.  Are you aware that you have predecessors?  Do you know that all of them got your job done by themselves, and all or most of them did it better than you do?  I think you made a mistake applying to work here.  Presumably, you needed a job.  So your employment with the Village solves your problem.  But you're not welcome to make yourself, and your apathy and lack of devotion, our problem.  I suggest you find some other place to work, where you can be a smaller cog in a bigger wheel, and you can get away with not doing much, and no one will notice.

Harvey, what grotesque disrespect, disdain, and arrogance you showed in your decision to remove from the Agenda a discussion item that wasn't yours.  Clearly, you're part of the machine, and (most of) the other stooges will accommodate your scheme.  But that doesn't make it right.  It just means you're all disrespectful, disdainful, and arrogant.  I'm still trying to figure out what on earth you're doing on the Commission.  You don't seem to want anything, which is the disease you caught from the rest of the majority of which you're a part.

Jenny, you show a consistent discursive and sterile uselessness.  You have no meaning, except to be a number on which Tracy and the other bobbleheads can rely.  You're part of the majority in votes that are 4-1 or 3-2.  But you don't offer anything.  As is true of Harvey, you don't want anything.  You're just there, voting as Tracy needs you to vote.  Interestingly, though, you did at one point offer to donate your next Village check to Pelican Harbor, so the Village would not squander, as you seem to see it, Village residents' money.  What you were doing, in effect, is transferring taxpayer money from yourself to Pelican Harbor.  If what you're saying is that giving taxpayers' money to you is squandering it, but giving it to Pelican Harbor is not, I agree with you.  I think this was an apt insight you had about yourself.

Tracy, I don't think you understand.  The problem with your having been present at a meeting between Krishan and WastePro was not what you allege you said.  It was that you were there.  We don't know what you said.  You're not honest, so your reporting what you said doesn't mean anything.  And Krishan wants to keep his job, so he's going to agree to anything you claim.  You've made it very clear that you'll fire him in a heartbeat, if he doesn't do whatever you say, and back you up.  You claim to have transmitted concerns or complaints made by Village residents, but no one knows who these supposed Village residents are, or what were their complaints.  No one knows how many Village residents made a particular complaint, against how many said the opposite, or didn't complain at all.  No Village resident complained that WastePro trucks make too many right turns.  That was your idea.  And you told WastePro whatever you told them on your own.  You dominated that meeting the way you dominate every meeting that includes you.  Krishan was a silent partner.  The right way for things like this to happen is as a result of open meetings in the Village, with Krishan in attendance, some consensus from the Commission, and Krishan comes to understand the problems, and works out with WastePro the solutions.  Krishan is the Village manager.  You hired him.  Read the Charter.  Understand what is his role, and what is yours.  The Village is not Tracyville.  You're not allowed to do what you're doing.

Will, what you typically have to offer is stumbling, bumbling, rambling empty nonsense.  No one missed you the last two Commission meetings, when you weren't there.  There was just a little bit less time wasted in your absence.  Tracy had her majority without you, and you don't add anything.  This time, though, you had something to say.  You observed that nothing has gotten done since you took office (which is correct), and you tried to blame it on "infighting."  Let me explain something to you, Will.  You are part of a very reliable majority which is usually a supermajority.  The good news about being part of a majority is that you get to do whatever you want, and you can't be stopped.  The bad news is that whatever is done, or not done, is on you.  You can't blame anyone else.  The only thing different from the foolish and destructive drone that comes from Tracy, you, Jenny, and Harvey, is the voice of reason, perspective, and intelligence that comes from Roxy.  But the four of you ignore her and outvote her, and she's not your problem.  She's not an excuse for you.  If the present Commission is a gross failure, which it is, it's not because of any "infighting."  It's because four of you are inept, you have no aim or agenda, and three of you simply do what one of you says.


It was actually mildly less sickening to listen to the recording than it would have been to have stayed there.  At least you can't confront anyone, when there's no one else there.

I Was Wrong. I Thought We Had Hit Bottom.

I stayed at the Commission meeting tonight for a very short time.  I got to the beginning of Public Comment, at which point it was already too sickening to watch.  The part I heard was the Additions and Withdrawals section.

Harvey Bilt wanted to withdraw something.  He wanted to withdraw one of Roxy Ross' New Business items.  I still have no idea how this works: that one Commissioner can propose to withdraw another Commissioner's item.  And in any normal group of normal Commissioners, it wouldn't work.   But this is no normal Commission.

Harvey's motion was to "pull" Roxy's item.  Before the complete insanity set in, it appeared Harvey's motion to shut Roxy up would go unseconded, and therefore die.  But Jenny Johnson-Sardella came to Harvey's rescue, and offered a second.  She didn't really give any reason, and she only mentioned some theory of "deferring" the item.  (Why?  Until when?)

At that point, Tracy "Big Mama" Truppman stepped in and started griping about "50 pages" of backup, and "not enough time" to read it.  By my count, Big Mama and two stooges/bobbleheads/children settles the matter.

Roxy tried to say that she extracted from a possible 50 pages (it was unclear where Big Mama got the "50 pages" from, since there were no 50 pages, and Big Mama was complaining she didn't have time to review what she was given) about 7 pages of material she hoped the Commission would discuss.

Roxy is apparently not a baseball fan.  She doesn't understand what three called strikes and a crooked umpire are about.

But Big Mama didn't want to come across as entirely cold-blooded (starting when?), so she suggested that maybe deferring the matter to some other time/year/decade would be a good idea.  "Yeah," parroted Harvey, "that's what I said; let's defer it."  No, Harvey, you did not move to defer the matter.  You moved to pull it.  Never mind that it's not your call, except in Big Mama's universe.

Big Mama consulted with the Attorney for a ruling (like she really needs a ruling) about one Commissioner's moving to pull another Commissioner's item.  Well, said the attorney, Robert's Rules of Order says...  (Except we don't use Robert's Rules of Order in the Village.)

So Big Mama and her two stooges/bobbleheads/kids muzzled Roxy, Big Mama moved on to Public Comment, and I moved on to reality.  As I was leaving, I heard Big Mama remind whichever Village residents wanted to speak that they should keep in mind "decorum."  (We don't have a decorum resolution, either.)

The Oscars

I have no use for the Oscars.  I don't think they mean anything, or at least not anything that has to do with the quality of movies and the talents of the people involved with them.  And since I don't even care what gowns which women are wearing, who's there with whom, and what's behind Jennifer Garner's change of clapping pace and facial expression, there isn't much left for me.

I first decided the Oscars were meaningless, at least for the purpose I imagined them to have, when Jane Fonda won best actress for "The China Syndrome," which I happened to have seen that year.  She beat Bette Midler, who was unbelievable in "The Rose," which I also saw that year.  But Bette Midler was new, and Jane Fonda was established (Jane Fonda, of the Fonda Fondas?), and Bette Midler's character was a bad girl, and "the Academy" decided, for completely non art-related reasons, to honor Jane Fonda.  That was it for me.  I saw "The China Syndrome" once, when it came out.  I was not interested enough ever to see it again.  I've seen "The Rose" many times, I own it, I love it, and no actor/actress was ever better than Bette Midler.  Alan Bates was fantastic, too.

The fact is, I don't typically see movies that much.  I used to rent them sometimes, when you could do that, and if I find something intriguing at Goodwill, I buy it for $3.  But I'm not big on spending $10 or more (only $9 at O Cinema, me being old and all), plus parking, to see a movie I might well not like.

This past year was slightly different.  I didn't see many of the movies that got nominated for awards, but I saw some of them.  I saw "The Shape of Water," "Lady Bird," and "A Fantastic Woman."  I wanted to see "Three Billboards..." and the thing about Churchill, but I was just too busy.  Maybe some other time.

"The Shape of Water" was an excellent movie.  I really liked "Lady Bird," which was more quirky than great, until the last few seconds, when the lead character calls her mother on the phone from big, bad NYC.  That was not the way I wanted to see her evolve.  It killed the movie for me.  And "The Shape of Water" had a flaw in the plot, too.  How could the lead actress get into the special room where the beast/man was?  It was a high security room.  They wouldn't allow her access to clean the room alone, and certainly not to eat her lunch there.  Ridiculous.  But it was still a very well put-together movie.  Spectacularly acted, too.

So, was "The Shape of Water" the best movie this year?  How should I know?  I didn't see the rest of them.  It was good, though.  Better that "Lady Bird?"  Yeah, OK, better than "Lady Bird."

"A Fantastic Woman?"  "Best Foreign Film?"  Pu-lease.  It was an interesting premise, but the movie was very poorly constructed/directed and poorly acted.  What might have been an interesting punchline fell completely flat, because it wasn't developed properly.  The story-telling quickly became idiotic.  And the camera work was awful.  Although it's true I didn't see the others, so maybe it was better than they were.  If it was, they must have been pretty bad.  Do they have to nominate movies, etc, if they're all bad?  What is it, like grading on a curve, so someone, no matter how deficient, has to get an A, and someone, no matter how accomplished, has to fail?

Here's the thing about "A Fantastic Woman," though, at least this year.  The lead character was transsexual, and in real life, so is the actor/actress who played her.  And this is the year of hating men, who are sexual beasts and predators.  It's "MeToo," destroy someone first and ask questions later*, and it's a real lynch mob mentality.  So there was a huge sentimental and politically correct factor that operated in favor of "A Fantastic Woman," no matter how unworthy was the cinematographic effort.  Well, in my opinion it was unworthy.

So, no, I don't watch the Oscars.  I don't care about them.  And everything I hear, including this year, reinforces for me why I'm right not to care, and not to waste my time.


*I was a very big fan of John Oliver.  I watched his shows on youtube more or less faithfully.  That was until I saw his panel discussion which included Dustin Hoffman, who was in the midst of fending off accusations about himself as a former masher.  At least he was said to have engaged in some relaxed conversations with women with whom he worked.  Oliver said he simply had to raise this issue, even though it had nothing to do with the panel discussion, and he was tenacious with Hoffman.  Hoffman tried to deflect a bit, really mostly by asking Oliver if he believed everything that was said about Hoffman.  Yes, Oliver asserted, he did believe it all.  And he was willing to indict Hoffman on what rumors and allegations were coming through the grapevine.  No "process," and certainly no due process, necessary.  You couldn't describe a lynch mob mentality better than that.  So I have stopped watching John Oliver entirely.

One Free Ticket

I have one ticket for March 17 at Miami Light Project.  The show starts at 8:00 PM, and the theme is their yearly Global Cuba Fest.  The performer that night is Omar Sosa.  I don't know what Omar Sosa does, but you can look him up.  I've never seen a less than excellent production for MLP's Global Cuba Fest.

Seating is general seating, not reserved seating.  So if two people want to go, and they have one ticket, they can just buy another ticket, and sit together.

If you've never been to MLP/The Lightbox (in Wynwood), you really should.  It's a very unusual venue.  Very funky, nice crowds, good entertainment.  Some of it is experimental, and not all of that is great in itself.  Global Cuba Fest is not experimental.  It's established and high quality artists.

Let me know if you want my one ticket.

Not Specifically BP, But Interesting Stories.

These are both from my homepage:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/airline-employee-saves-girls-from-sex-trafficking-plot/ar-BBJfJsE?li=BBnbfcL

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/students-to-boycott-schools-until-congress-acts-on-guns/ar-BBJfLXf?li=BBnb7Kz

In connection with the second story, I have written an 8300 word/16 page paper about the "Second Amendment" (to the US Constitution).  I'm pitching it around, to see if I get anyone who will publish it.  It's too long for most publications, and way too short for a book.  So it's a bit tricky.  But I think I have a good lead now.

If Galileo Isn't Rolling in His Grave, He Should Be.

No, the earth does not revolve around the sun.  But neither does the sun revolve around the earth.  Or not generally so. All of it revolves around Tracy Truppman.  Or so Tracy is working to reconfigure the cosmos.

At this week's Commission meeting, Chuck Ross expressed concerns about Tracy and her autocratic commandeering of the Village.  He had a lengthier statement, from which he read parts.  Chuck identified a number of areas where Tracy simply acted alone, or she acted with the subordination of the Village Manager, but not with the agreement, or even knowledge, of the Commission.

In her one+ years on the Commission, Tracy has corralled and limited her neighbors, her colleagues, and, with the enabling of the latter, Village staff.  Tracy, who was never, ever one for self-restraint or limitation, has come down hard on her neighbors.  She controls, more than any other Mayor I've witnessed, how much they're allowed to speak in Commission meetings.  Twice (once more than second place, and twice more than any other Mayor), she has threatened to have her neighbors removed from meetings (for speaking more than three minutes, or for speaking from their seats), and she has attempted to give such orders to Village police (who adultly ignored her).  Tracy, running in part on a platform of offering to be the voice of her neighbors, has, more than any other Commissioner in my experience, completely and grossly ignored the clearly expressed wishes of her neighbors.  Tracy's construction of the Commission of which she is a part is completely separate from, and functions wholly independently of, the people who live and own property here.

It remains a mystery why Tracy's Commission colleagues are mindless and spineless on the Commission.  Either they're in awe of Tracy, or they're afraid of her, or they simply have no independent thoughts, and it's easier for them just to do whatever Tracy wants.  It's caricaturish, but not comical (it's certainly not funny), to watch them fold each and every meeting.  Either they simply vote to uphold whatever Tracy makes clear she wants from them, or they sputter, ramble, and stumble, until they finally accede to her.  A month ago, we saw Tracy demand accession from two of her stooges/bobbleheads, and they both voted stupidly to uphold a document it became clear they had never seen.  In a comment from the blog post that immediately precedes this one, Dan Schneiger described watching Harvey Bilt shrivel completely as soon as Big Mama Truppman ordered him to belt up.  I have never seen this on a Commission dais.  And I have known Harvey Bilt for a long time.  I generally like him.  He has shown long and seemingly heart felt devotion to the Village.  He can be quirky at times, but he always seemed fundamentally reliable.  Until now.  He's gone.  He's absent.  He's nothing but an empty puppet for Tracy to control.  You can still sometimes see the occasional odd, and sometimes goofy, proposal from Harvey.  But Dan Schneiger described it as well as it can be described.  Harvey isn't Harvey any more.  He's one of Tracy's little people.  (I was going to say one of Tracy's little men, but it's hard to think of Harvey as a man any more, at least once Tracy takes her throne.)

With the deaf, blind, and mindless (and unwavering) support of Tracy's stooges/bobbleheads, she orders whatever she wants from the Village Manager and the Village Attorney.  It's unknown if she also orders around other Village employees, which the Charter forbids, but it doesn't matter, since the Manager will clearly do any of Tracy's bidding anyway.  She gets away with this, because the Manager and the Attorney want to keep their jobs more than they insist on propriety, and because Tracy has demonstrated that anyone who doesn't do what she says will be fired.   And her three Commission stooges/bobbleheads have shown they will back her up.

If a past Mayor like Noah Jacobs went out of bounds from time to time, Tracy has obliterated the concept of bounds, if only for herself.  And to do it, as Chuck Ross points out, she has also had to ignore the Charter.  She has no use for accepted process and protocol, and she flatly tramples laws.  She signs orders and makes deals without, as the Charter requires, even reporting to the Commission, much less relying on its agreement (which she can be assured of getting anyway, compliments of the stooges/bobbleheads).

As an aside, it's also interesting about Tracy's idiosyncratic, and idiotic, fixations.   She seems to fancy herself an "engineer," and she claims to have some training in engineering, the result being that she always wants the input of engineers.  She wanted an engineer to be our Village Manager.  Chuck Ross' comments included a description of Tracy's complete reliance on advice that may or may not have been worthy and relevant, because that advice came from an engineer.  What's even more interesting here is that our established consultant/contractor in these matters, Craig A Smith, is an engineering firm.  But they're not Tracy's engineers.  They submitted hundreds of pages of data, analysis, and recommendation.  Tracy's engineer submitted five pages of boilerplate, with a brief suggestion that the Village had issues.

Tracy sees the Village, and the universe, as extensions of herself, or as entities the purpose of whose existences is to serve her.  Personally.  She got her neighbors to vote for her, she has three of them (Commission colleagues) entirely under her thumb, and she acts the lord/lady of Village employees.  Has this all worked out well anyway?  Not at all.  Not only has Tracy caused increasing disinterest in her neighbors, who either don't attend meetings any more, or they leave early in disgust, and not only has she cost the Village one good employee and the independent input of two others, but she may, as Chuck pointed out, have created a huge fiscal problem for the Village.  And she has accomplished nothing.  We're making progress on our fiscal reports to the State?  That would have happened anyway, with the direction of the Manager Tracy ousted.  Police enforcement is better?  It was already better, under the new Chief, who was elevated by the Manager Tracy ousted.  We cleaned up a big mess from a hurricane?  It's beginning to appear that Tracy's autocratic personal management of this clean-up not only didn't make things any better, but it may have made them worse, by Tracy's having failed to get the right pieces in place at the right time.  Unfortunately, Tracy won't let a manager manage, and she won't even listen to the voice of experience and reason, which comes out of Roxy Ross' mouth.

We're stuck with Tracy for almost three more years, unless she has the insight and decency to resign.  But we're not necessarily stuck with Tracy the uber autocrat for almost three more years.  As Chuck pointed out in a recent blog comment, if we can elect three Commissioners in November, none of whom drinks whatever Koolaid Tracy tries to force-feed them, then she has no more power, except for her one vote.  And the Village can return to function, in the interest and with the participation of the people who live and own property here.  Until then, the universe will continue to revolve around Tracy "Big Mama" Truppman.

Harvey Bilt Takes Some Initiative. Sort Of. Big Mama Lets Him. Sort Of. Harvey Offers "A Step" Toward Addressing the Feral Cat Problem. Well, No.

It's almost over now.  The little Villagers are still allowed to complain about things, for a firm three minutes, but the Commission's hand around Villagers' throats no longer provides even for the fake dignity of a response.  It's no longer on the Agenda.  And Tracy "Big Mama" Truppman now dictates the motions she wants made: "Do I hear a motion to say...?"  One of the bobbleheads-- almost exclusively Harvey Bilt, last night-- dutifully gives Big Mama what she wants.  If the other bobblehead doesn't second it, Big Mama does it herself.  For the second time in a row, bobblehead Will Tudor wasn't there.  We're not given an excuse.  He's just not coming.

Nothing on last night's painfully weak Agenda failed to get way too much discussion.  The vast majority of it was rambling.  It all seemed to be speakers who wanted to listen to themselves talk.  Fortunately, the attorneys acted as a tag team-- one had to leave, and another relieved him-- so we were never without an attorney to pay.

One Agenda item that got some advance attention was Harvey Bilt's proposal about the open feeding of wild cats.  Dan Schneiger, who was beside himself, and Mac Kennedy thought they understood that Harvey was proposing the more liberal feeding of wild cats.  That's wild cats roaming Biscayne Park, which is one of our really bad scourges.  Harvey smirked and shook his head, as if to say they were all washed up on this one, but Dan and Mac were so incensed that they couldn't stay for the discussion, which was a couple or more hours away.  But the time finally came.  And Harvey clarified.

No, Harvey reassured, he was not expanding the concept of the open feeding of feral cats.  Just the opposite.  He was limiting it.  From just any-old-where to the back yard.  Where no one has to see it.  I don't know if Harvey has a pet cat, and if he "keeps" it outside, but he seems not to understand much about outdoor cats.  A couple of people tried to explain to him that "wild" cats are wild, and they don't confine themselves to back yards, so Harvey finally offered that his proposal was a "step" toward controlling the problem.  And Big Mama agreed with him.  Big Mama says she has or had cats.  But she also complained about what she alleged were problem feral cats somehow associated with her neighbors.  So you'd think she would know better.

Let me explain, Harvey and Big Mama.  The reason they call feral or wild cats feral or wild is because they're feral or wild.  If you feed them, they'll eat what you give them.  In between times, they cull the profuse and unruly avian population of the Village.  And they leave, as Mac Kennedy so indelicately put it, "cat shit" all over the Village.  And these are cats we're talking about.  They're not horses.   They don't stay tidily in your back yard.  If you feed them behind your house, and they're interested enough to eat what you leave for them, they're there for a few minutes.  Then, they're all over the neighborhood. where no one wants them.  Tragically, I've been watching two large dogs for the past month.  I walk them four times a day.  I have never seen feral cats eating in the open.  But I spend a tremendous amount of time and energy restraining those two large dogs from chasing all the feral cats we encounter.  Do you want to know how many we see?

Harvey, and Big Mama, do you remember the experiment called "smoking sections" in restaurants?  Airplanes, psychotically, too.   It was someone's idea that some people would smoke, and the smoke would stay where the smokers were, and not affect anyone else.  We're talking here about smoke.  It's like feral cats.  The big difference is that smokers control how much smoke there is.  But the cats "control" how many cats there are.  And it looks like cats are more addicted to making more cats than smokers are to making more smoke.  Do you want to know how many cats there are?

Harvey and Big Mama, if you really want to control the feral cat scourge in BP, either get firmly behind a sterilization program, or have them killed.  Feeding them in someone's back yard, and pretending they're now out of sight, is so naive as to be childish (except even children know better than that).