PB Agenda Quick Bites: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
by SDM
EDC Getting Some Love
SDM was glad to see that the village will be sponsoring the Economic Development Council’s golf tournament, which is a major component of the annual EDC’s funding. For those not familiar with the EDC, it is the only economic development organization dedicated to our area and it is where local businesses go to learn about opening their doors here.
Palmetto Bay is right to participate in the fundraiser and should consider doing more.
Karyn Cunningham Staying Involve
Former Vice Mayor Candidate Karyn Cunningham looks to be appointed to the village’s educational compact committee, which is good for all of us. Ms. Cunningham deserves the opportunity to remain involved in village politics so that we may see her run again. SDM was favorably impressed by her campaign and is glad to see that she is willing to donate her time to village causes.
Tying Auto Insurance to Property Insurance is a Bad Idea
Councilman Fiore has included on the agenda an item urging the legislature to require any company writing auto insurance to also write property insurance. What Mr. Fiore may not know is that this experiment in exercising regulatory muscle was tried and failed in New Jersey.
New Jersey residents faced increasing auto insurance rates because many companies chose to exit the market rather than expose their businesses to the complexities and risks associated with the property insurance market.
Before the village council assents to Mr. Fiore’s idea, they should spend some time researching the issue to see if it will serve the purpose intended.
Other Bad Ideas in the Legislative Package
Supporting the school district’s legislative package in toto. This is not a bad idea in the sense that assisting the school district is a bad idea; rather, this is a bad idea because SDM would bet a campaign contribution that none of the council has read the district’s legislative package. Our school district is a political body just like all the others and they deserve scrutiny and not blind assent.
Supporting expansion of early voting sites and hours. SDM has only one question: Who will pay for this? It’s as if our elected officials have no interest in digging into these questions when they push for new ways to spend our money. Do we even know if this will actually work?
Opposing legislation that restricts or eliminates municipal revenues generated through communications services taxes and by local business taxes. SDM’s readers are a wise and intellectual bunch. Do you understand what this item means?
SDM Codebreaker: We will be sending our village lobbyist to Tallahassee to support these taxes being imposed upon our businesses! We are paying our taxes so that the Mayor can go and keep us paying other taxes. Doesn’t this make you feel good about your government?
The First Fix to the Broken NPO: Give the Village Special Treatment
Item 12C is an ordinance that grants village parks – including Wedding Central at Thalatta Estate – special dispensation. If the ordinance passes, village parks will be permitted to violate the supposedly sacrosanct maximum decibels as written into the NPO.
You see, the village just figured out that children playing in the parks may be occasionally loud enough to violate the village’s noise pollution standards so – of course – Mayor Stanczyk and Councilwoman Lindsay have decided to exempt themselves.
But what about children playing at churches and private schools? Well, their joyous laughter will continue to be squashed by the village because Councilwoman Lindsay wants her peculiar version of peace and quiet.
SDM Wonders: Do Councilwoman Lindsay and Mayor Stanczyk believe that the folks living near Palmetto Bay’s parks have rights inferior to those living near Palmer Trinity School?
SDM Says: In a hyper-regulatory environment like we have in our little village, residents face a choice: silence all the children or silence none. SDM supports the latter.
I recently received a Village of Palmetto Bay Public Hearing notice for a February 25th meeting Usually, I toss these in the trash, but this one caught my eye because it relates to Coral Reef Park’s tennis courts. The Village has set up a Public Hearing to address revisions to the master plan of the park to include two new batting cages, replacement of tennis court lighting and the addition of benched seating areas.
A little research reveals that the Neighborhood Protection Ordinance (NPO,) passed by the Mayor and council in November, or thereabouts, prohibits the tennis court lighting to be replaced at their current height. To meet the requirements of their own ordinance the Village must reduce the height of the new light poles for a cost that is budgeted at whopping $250,000. Or they can just take the easy way out and exempt themselves from the rules that they demanded be in place to protect the residential character of the Village.
Best I can tell, the Village is not asking for a one-time variance for this park update, but to exclude the park completely from the new NPO in perpetuity. They are attempting to do at tonight’s council meeting – see Item 12C on their posted agenda.
The last council’s main thrust – spearheaded by Joan Lindsey, backed by Mayor Shelly Stanczyk and their ousted pal Brian Pariser – consumed over six months, hundreds of man hours and thousands of dollars of taxpayer’s money working to pass their magnum opus of activist government: the Neighborhood Protection Ordinance. This was all done, as we were told, to protect the residents of Palmetto Bay from the ills (light pollution, noise pollution, traffic, garbage collection, etc.) associated with activities that occur on large parcels of land in residential areas that are not residentially zoned. They claimed repeatedly that they were not targeting churches and schools. And if the Village is successful in excluding Coral Reef Park and the other parks from the NPO, what properties does the NPO regulate? The answer remains the same: Churches and Schools — the same Churches and Schools that the Ms. Stanczyk and Councilperson Lindsay have been out to punish since their Palmer Trinity litigation defeat.
The true tragedy of this situation is the shamelessness on display by certain council members. The last council created the crippling NPO targeting large parcels of land and was able to craft ballot language which was opposite of the NPO’s true discriminatory intent. This resulted in easy voter passage. Proponents on and off the council have touted that the NPO was passed by a substantial voter margin — a sure sign of rock-solid backing by the public. But now that the Village finds itself to be subject to the parameters it has created for others, they can’t stand the overbearing regulation. So they plan to rewrite the rules only for themselves.
One or two or three or four or all five of the council should do the honorable thing and speak out at length against this deceptive dishonorable banana-republic-style action. Someone up there on the council needs to make the plea and decry the utter duplicity and unfaithfulness to the public trust. Maybe it will be Mr. Fiore — he has shown to be a minority voice on the right side of issues time and time again. Or Mr. Dubois who has demonstrated himself in short order to be a sensible breath of fresh air. Or maybe Mr. Schaffer has this opportunity to cement his reputation of a man of honor early on. But it would be best if it was all three. Three votes to two.
What is at stake is a basic ethic and American value: the law must be applied uniformly. All large parcels of land must be subject to the rule of law or there must be relief uniformly applied to all affected parties. If the Village gets exempt, so should the Churches and Schools. If not the Churches and Schools, then not the Village either. This attempt at preferential treatment smacks of discrimination. How many times had we heard from the prior council that the ‘rule of law’ must be followed without exception? Make no exception here, ladies and gentlemen of the council. May the rule of law be applied uniformly — no exemption for the Village without equal protection under the law for all other affected properties whether private or public. An American bedrock principle — be sure to stand by it.
Co-Written by David Singer and Douglas Zargham.
Isn’t Corradino on the EDC? And other usual suspects. Nice front to line up contracts. Also, don’t they do FPL’S bidding too?