PB: Palmer Resolution – My Kingdom for a Grammarian
by SDM
SDM recommends you read the new Palmer resolution, which is part of the Staff Analysis and Resolution for the August 29, 2012 public hearing.
SDM Observations on the Whereas Clauses
1. What is with all the “Whereas” clauses? Are the Three Amigos trying to fuel a third party appeal of the resolution, assuming it passes? The Whereas clauses appear to be re-litigating the case. For example:
WHEREAS, during the discretionary appeal the Village argued, amongst other legal and factual issues, that the Village had adhered to the direction of the 11th Judicial Circuit and that the 11th Judicial Circuit Appellate Panel erred in directing the Village to approve 1,150 students as the Court could only remand the matter and could not direct a certain action be taken as any such direction would be contrary to the mandate authority of the Court in a Certiorari action and inconsistent with the holding of Broward County v. GBV Int’l Ltd., 787 So. 2d. 838 (Fla. 2001); … (Emphasis in the original.)
SDM cannot figure out any other reason to include this paragraph in the resolution except (a) to lay out a basis for a neighbor to appeal, or (b) to further the CYA process. (BTW, amongst?) The next two are both clear examples of CYA:
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2012, the Third District Appellate Panel, consisting of Chief Judge Wells, Senior Judge Schwartz, and Judge Lagoa, held oral argument on the merits of the Village’s discretionary appeal; and,
WHEREAS, despite what appeared to be a favorable outcome to the Village during oral argument, the Third District Appellate Panel, in a unanimous decision, on July 5, 2012, denied Villages (sic) Writ of Certiorari, leaving in place the 11th Circuit Appellate determination as to the mandate and motion to enforce the mandate, intact; …
What’s the point of naming the judges? Is someone sending a message to the court? The second paragraph is almost amusing. Everyone knows oral arguments are meaningless; only the final, “unanimous decision” against the village matters.
On the Conditions
2. Sec. 4.9 – Community Relations Committee – Palmer must create this committee, composed of 3 representatives from the neighborhood (within a 2500 foot radius) appointed by the council, 3 representatives appointed by Palmer, and one appointee from the Village Manager’s office. The committee must meet at least twice per year for the purpose of “communication, discussion and resolution of any items.”
SDM will look forward to the selection of the 4 village representatives. Who will be the Village Manager’s sacrificial lamb? Will Mayor Stanczyk approve his selection in advance? How will a council of 5 select 3 representatives? SDM boldly predicts the SOPs will nominate a slate, the Three Amigos will rubber stamp it, and the committee will turn into a circus.
3. 4.11 – “The applicant will comply…with the Village’s Art in Public Places Ordinance.”
SDM says: Palmer should pay its students to install the artwork, but it won’t be easy. To do so, Palmer must comply with this nonsense first:
Prior to issuance of a final building permit, a temporary certificate of occupancy or certificate of occupancy, the applicant or developer for projects subject to this Division shall be required to…[p]lace artwork, which shall have been approved by the board and Village Council, and which shall have a minimum value of 1.25 percent of the value of the proposed project development, on the property on which the development project is located, not to exceed $400,000.00, in lieu of the fee… Sec. 30-160.8(b)(3), VPB Code of Ordinances.
So which is it? Palmer must install all this art before the building permit, before the TCO, or before the CO? This village can’t even draft an ordinance that makes sense. And what if the “board and Village Council” and Palmer don’t agree on what is “art” or that the art meets the minimum value? SDM boldly predicts more litigation in Palmetto Bay’s future.
3. Sec. 6.1 – “The Applicant shall not use the athletic fields for commercial purposes such as renting, leasing, or allowing third-parties unaffiliated with the operation of the school (no third-party organizations or groups) to use the recreational facilities. Applicant shall annually provide proof of existing division-type play, tournaments, organized sports and uses of its facilities to the Village. Prior to the beginning of each season, for each sport, the Applicant shall provide the Village with a list of proposed events – tournament and league play.”
SDM doesn’t understand this provision. What is a commercial purpose as far as this provision goes? What happens if the schedule for a particular sport changes – as they often do – after the season starts? SDM gets the idea that the neighbors don’t want Palmer to rent out its stadium to a circus but this language is just confusing. SDM says: Confusing language is a recurring theme in Palmetto Bay.
4. Sec. 6.3 – “Solely one (1) athletic tournament, jamboree, or division-type play (where numbers of spectators and opposing team(s) are invited to play on site) shall take place at one time on the property… To be clear, this condition relates to holding one event. Not several events, different sports, at same time. Any athletic tournaments, etc., may take place after normal school operating hours (after 3:00 p.m.) and weekends from 10:00 am and 3:00 p.m.”
SDM’s ninth grade English teacher just rolled over in her grave…so many terrible sentences, so little time. Judge SDM holds this paragraph to be an incomprehensible and unenforceable piece of crap.
5. Sec. 6.7 “…The pool shall not be constructed during Phase 1 and is not to be constructed for at least five (5) years after final zoning approval.”
Is this really necessary at this point? The school has been held up for SIX YEARS already. Now the kids can’t even have a swim meet until 2017? By the way, what does “constructed” mean? Does that mean Palmer can’t ask for a building permit until 2017 or the pool can’t be certified for occupancy until 2017? SDM says: Please clarify.
6. Sec. 7.2 “The Applicant shall covenant that no improvements…shall be permitted within the confines of the buffer area (i.e. no roads, parking, storage sheds, recreational, sports, or any other use that may negatively impact the buffer).” (Emphasis added by SDM.)
SDM begs: Please hire a grammarian! If the idea was to prohibit uses in the buffer, then you shouldn’t include the modifier: “that may negatively impact the buffer.” SDM would argue Palmer can put anything in that buffer so long as it does not negatively impact it, whatever that means.
6. Sec. 7.13 – “Applicant shall provide annual update, plan, as to the maintenance for the buffer areas.”
SDM says: See grammarian comment above. Does Palmer have to provide an update or a plan or both? Anyone?
SDM ran out of gas reading all the punitive provisions in the resolution…they seem to go on forever. The idea that the neighbors were somehow left “unprotected” is only true in the sense that some provisions are so poorly drafted that they may be unenforceable. SDM concludes: There is some irony in that.
A few years ago, the town of Cutler Bay entered into an agreement with the school board that allowed the town to build a lighted soccer field with a walking path on the Cutler Ridge Elementary School property. Both the school and the community benefited from the agreement. Section 6.1 above appears to prohibit any chance of a similar agreement. A shame really.
Grammarian? These idiots should be sent back to grammar school to learn how to read, rite and do rithmatic . . . preferably at Palmer Trinity. Now that would be an apt punishment. Could you see Stanczyk trying to sit in a school seat? And Lindsay, who claims to have been a teacher of children — I fear for the future — Can’t wait to see whether this resolution passes. Is it up for a vote? Or is it an implicit threat to the judiciary? Perhaps Stanczyk, Lindsay and Pariser should be placed on a government watch-list. WHEREAS, when are these morons going to wise up and scratch the check, and stop delaying with useless, illegal moratoriums.
SDM Ed. Note: You are testing the limits of SDM’s editorial capacity. Though you made SDM LOL, you must calm yourself. This is a family blog.
It never ends. Once more the Three Amigos are using the power of office to extract the most punative measures against their ultimate adversary, Palmer Trinity School. I, like SDM, have never favored recall as a political remedy. I’m now ready to make an exception.
Actually, this makes me sick. I just see more litigation on the horizon and the blatant misuse of power by the village. Their vendetta against Palmer Trinity has blinded them into making poor decision after poor decision. Their need to stifle the school is disgusting. Other small municipalities worry about improving their parks and schools while our village tries to ruin them. Calling our village the “Village of Parks” is a joke. Imagine the wonderful facilities we could have had with the money that our elected officials used to try to keep Palmer Trinity from expanding. We can thank Joan Lindsay for that, as she lives very close to the school and vowed to fight them with all she had, and as I see it, all of what we, the taxpayers had as well. The fact that Stanczyk and Pariser have gone along with her is disgusting. They obviously cannot think for themselves, as they have become her puppets. I only wished we had not gone down this path of incorporation. This village is being run by a kangaroo court that has nothing better to do than work on their personal agendas. I only hope that the rest of the village wakes up before it is too late and we are left with a village filled with haters and schemers. It is just fitting that Pariser would have people stealing signs. SDM you are so right that you can’t make this stuff up. I am waiting for Allen Funt to jump out and tell us that we have all been on Candid Camera. This would all be funny if it wasn’t so serious. Please Palmetto Bay residents, WAKE UP!!!
They had better pass a straight up resolution for 1150 students. Anything more will likely end up back in court. The court did not say it, but any new restrictions is outside of the scope of the courts opinion and will not be looked upon favorably by the court.
We need separate cameras recording Stanczyk, Pariser and Lindsay as they taste the crow and choke it down and tell us how Palmer is really the bully. The cameras will also been needed to make sure there are no baseball signals coming into them from the CCOCI attorney who has been directing them from the start.
I hear that former president Jimmary Carter and other vote watchers from the Carter Center will be flying in and attending the Council Hearing to make sure the Three Amigos play fair. The Carter Center will also be watching the aggitators of CCOCI to make sure they do nothing to disrupt the meeting and the vote. Palmetto Bay’s Public Works Departmetn is on stand by ready to replace any directional signs that Brian Pariser supporters may be planning to remove to misdirect the Carter Center watchers away from Village Hall.
Brian Pariser has already been in contact with certain Miami-Dade polticians to see if the Palmer Vote can be done by absentee ballots so they can try to manipulate the vote.
Oh what a crazy little town CCOCI and the three amigos have created.
When this whole thing started way back when, I thought, wouldn’t it be great if the Village negotiated a usage arrangement with Palmer so that the Village’s residents would have access to the great athletic facilities they were building. Our Village needs more field space for sports. In exchange for the usage of these Class A facilities, the Village would welcome the additional students and promote the expansion as a positive to the community by encouraging Palmer families to move into our Village. This whole situation could have been turned into a positive experience rather than the nightmare it’s become. Our children need more green space, more educational opportunities. Why, if everyone played nice at the beginning, perhaps scholarships could have been negotiated for PB children in need. Why are our leaders putting us in a “win-lose horribly” scenario rather than a “win-win”? If I was Palmer Trinity, I would now fight to the bitter end. These restrictions on usage are outrageous and do nothing to help our children grow into responsible citizens. Nobody is thinking about the kids in this entire mess.
Well said “What about the kids”. To think that both Lindsay and Stanczyk were teachers is even more absurd. Their selfish actions have cost the village hundreds of thousands of dollars and put an incredible wedge between residents. When the signs stating “Save Our Palmetto Bay” were spread across the Village, that is when their deceptions began. It made those that were not in their camp feel like second class citizens. Well it is not only their Palmetto Bay, it is mine too and I don’t want to spend the money to fight a school that is entitled to their own rights. These restrictions are absurd and will result in more litigation. I hope Palmer Trinity, Christ Fellowship and all the other schools and churches fight to keep their rights preserved. I would not blame them one bit!