Pinecrest | South Dade Matters

April 19, 2013

PB: Roundabout Roundup

Palmetto Bay’s village council met on Wednesday and received a report from staff regarding a proposed traffic circle (or roundabout) for the intersection of SW 136th Street and Old Cutler Road. SDM was very supportive of putting in the traffic circle because we just like them better, but then we received a fascinating comment that added to our enthusiasm. (Definitely click on the comment and watch the video.)

Apparently, roundabouts are well known to be good things because, among other benefits, they reduce fuel usage and automobile emissions while making intersections safer. SDM did not know that left turns at traffic lights are the most dangerous maneuvers and that traffic circles eliminate them. Makes sense when you think about it.

But you didn’t come to SDM to hear all the good stuff; we look at things closely here so we have some criticisms to level.

The Village Manager provided to the council a bunch of documents and other facts related to the traffic circle, but none of those documents are posted on the website or made part of the COW agenda. (He also provided a financial report that was likewise omitted from the agenda package.) When will our village staff understand that WE want to see these documents contemporaneously with the meeting? If you let the public view your little secrets Mr. Manager, maybe they would be less skeptical of your plans.

During public comments, Peter England – a candidate for Mayor last time around – noted that SW 67th Avenue (Ludlam Road) was not part of the traffic circle plan. He noted that leaving Ludlam out was a dumb idea and SDM could not agree more. Then again, SDM has no way of knowing what is in the plan and what is out because the Manager keeps them in his pocket.

SDM Says: If you are going to install a major traffic solution at this crazy intersection, fix it all and do it once. Go to our Members of Congress and get them to donate part of the Department of Agriculture property to the project. (Doing so will increase the value of the federal property, SDM has no doubt.) Make the circle a landmark and immediately steal Mr. Tolbert’s excellent idea of installing both pine trees (for Pinecrest) and palmetto (for Palmetto Bay). Make the intersection pedestrian and bike friendly so that all the folks out exercising can safely navigate the area. Lastly, but probably most importantly, GET THE TRAFFIC MOVING on all the roads that intersect there.

3 comments

November 14, 2012

PB: Pariser only wanted half a village

One of the advantages of age is that you tend to recall things that some folks would like to forget. For instance, do all of you who live South of SW 168th Street know that Vice Mayor Pariser never wanted you to be part of Palmetto Bay? Yes, that includes all of you CCOCI folks, too.

Oh, you don’t believe SDM? Look at this article from the Miami Herald dated March 23, 1995:

NEIGHBORHOODS SEEK STUDY ON INCORPORATION GROUP EAST OF U.S. 1 SEEKS FACTS

OSCAR MUSIBAY Herald Staff Writer

Prompted by efforts of other Dade neighborhoods to incorporate, some residents living east of U.S. 1 between Southwest 136th and 168th streets want a study of how much it costs them to be a part of Metro government.

Residents of East Grove Estates and five other neighborhoods are circulating a petition asking Dade County to compare taxes paid by residents within the area to money spent for Metro services. The area is mainly made of single-family homes.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean we want to incorporate, but we want to know the facts,” said Brian Pariser, president of the East Grove Estates Homeowners Association. “We don’t want to be left out of something, nor do we want people to be makers of our fate.”

The coalition of residents will have a town meeting at 7:30 p.m. Monday at St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church Parish Hall, 14260 Old Cutler Rd., to discuss the issue.

Pariser’s group wants the county to provide a feasibility study of about 20,000 people who live between Southwest 136th Street on the north, 168th Street on the south, Biscayne Bay on the east and South Dixie Highway on the west.

Areas to the north and south of East Grove Estates already are investigating incorporation.

In November, residents of Perrine and Cutler Ridge to the south formed a steering committee to report on whether Perrine, Cutler Ridge and Saga Bay could support their own government.

Pariser said the study area is too wide and would thin resources.

To the north, the Pinecrest/Palmetto area also is meeting to assess its chances as a municipality.

If anyone thinks SDM is overstating Mr. Pariser’s position, why not ask some of the key founders who are still around? Eyewitnesses are invited to comment on this post. Tell SDM how this blog’s version of events is wrong.

SDM Wonders: Why did Mr. Pariser want to cut-off the village boundary at SW 168th Street? SDM heard rumors for years it was because Pariser and his neighbors thought the southern neighborhoods weren’t compatible with the northern ones. (Not compatible is a code word for some other very unkind terms.)

Fortunately, the narrow-minded Mr. Pariser was overruled by the wise founders who argued pragmatically that a city of the size Pariser imagined could not support itself.

SDM Says: If one wonders about the roots of Mr. Pariser’s divisive tenure on the council, one should start at the beginning when his words were unguarded.

14 comments

October 24, 2012

PB: Guest Post by David Singer

Mr. Singer wrote this comment to an SDM post. SDM liked it so much that it rates its own post. Without further ado:

The Village of Palmetto Bay’s direction and future is at stake on November 6th.

The election of candidates and charter changes related to the Village of Palmetto Bay – the choices that you will make on this election cycle’s ballot - is a referendum on how best to define COMMUNITY.

The present Council, including Mayor Stanczyk, Vice Mayor Pariser and Councilwoman Lindsay have demonstrated during their tenure that their definition of COMMUNITY can be defined as purely residential housing and nothing else.

They support policies that result in the restriction of private schools that could ultimately eliminate them from our neighborhoods.

They feel that residents should leave the Village to worship, eat and shop because those activities are an annoyance to residential living.

They feel that reasonable noise and lighting from children playing baseball, football and basketball is more of a nuisance to them than it is a joy to those of us who are parents and a benefit to our future generation.

They’ve all been a part of depleting the Village coffers by 10+ million dollars in three years, part of which was on an overblown Village Hall as an extravagant monument to their wasteful bureaucracy.

And, maybe this is the worst of all, they support policies that build a virtual moat and wall around the Village to out keep non-village residents. To them, COMMUNITY stops at our borders.

Candidates running for office including John Dubois, Jim Araiza, Karyn Cunningham, Howard Tendrich, believe in a different definition of COMMUNITY.

While I am in not endorsing any of them by including their names or pointing this out, their view includes a measured balance of homes, schools, churches, businesses and opportunities for children. Furthermore, they support a sensible, responsible fiscal plan going forward.

This [post] isn’t meant to disparage the Mayor, Vice Mayor or Councilwoman. If you asked them, they would admit they desire to have ultimate control of all growth, lighting, noise, traffic and construction and they certainly have a right to their point of view.

But to what end? Should a church be allowed to expand if they have the land to do so? Should children be permitted to play outside even if you can hear their distant laughter in your yard? Wouldn’t you like to eat and shop in your COMMUNITY rather than driving 20 minutes or more?

Is it really sensible to place virtual roadblocks in an attempt to keep non-village residents out of our COMMUNITY? Is that what you do if you’re proud of where you live? Imagine if Pinecrest, or Coral Gables, or Cutler Bay did that to us?

This is not a type of atmosphere, which I choose to live in. I love the fact that there is the possibility for our Village to be an all-inclusive COMMUNITY to live in.

I’m requesting that before you vote on November 6th, you take the time to delve into what the candidates are advocating. I would request that you ignore lawn signs and petty tit-for-tat issues. I would hope that you vote based on the definition of COMMUNITY on its most all-encompassing meaning.

For the record, and hopefully to give you a level of comfort about my intentions: I, David Singer, have not given any contributions, committed my vote, endorsed, placed signs, run, walked or played patty cake with any candidate in this election. I am beholden to no one and no one is beholden to me. That’s just how I roll.

On November 7th, the day after the election, everyone in our COMMUNITY will still wake up, go to work, pay our bills, feed our families and celebrate life. The real question is in what type of COMMUNITY would you like that to be? Only you can decide with your vote.

David Singer

SDM Says: Sometimes others just say what SDM is thinking, only better.

2 comments

October 15, 2012

PB: SDM’s first guest post – David Singer asks some good questions

SDM took a little liberty with the blog today to post a comment from David Singer. SDM has never met Mr. Singer nor have the two of us ever spoken. His words are powerful, though SDM cautions that whenever a resident attempts to discuss a public entity’s budget there is a risk that he or she may misunderstand the document.

In Mr. Singer’s case, SDM has confidence in his comments because he focused on the fund balances, which in lay terms is the amount of cash the village will have on hand at the end of next year’s budget cycle. It’s a pretty tough number to fudge. If Mr. Singer is correct, there is big trouble in River City.

This email and documentation went to the Mayor and Council this morning.

To all,

I have not been able to meet, after repeated attempts, with the Palmetto Bay’s Director of Finance [Desmond Chin]. This meeting was imperative to either confirm or refute my calculations below. Thus since no meeting occurred, this will be the story I will be submitting to the Miami Herald. Of course it will be more detailed.

In accordance with the attached Summary of Funds that I downloaded from the Village website, the beginning Fund balance on October 1, 2012 is $15,061,167. The ending Fund balance budgeted for September 30, 2013 is $8,298,573. Therefore the use of funds during the upcoming year, based on the current budget is going to be $6,762,594. You are spending almost seven million dollars of reserve. That’s not what you said on the record.

If you look further into the numbers of the attached document, you will see that the use of reserve funds over the past three-year period has been $10,014,568. That is really horrendous for a Village that ran in the Black for the first eight years of operation. Where did the 10 million dollars go?

Looking further down on the attached document, you will see that the Unassigned Fund balance ending as of September 30, 2013 is $5,440,180. This Unassigned fund balance, or ‘reserve,’ if you will, is lower than any other local municipality I have investigated, which includes Pinecrest, Miami Lakes, Coral Gables, and others. There were references made at the budget meeting that the Village had more money in reserves than other many municipalities in Miami-Dade – a total misrepresentation on the part of the Mayor.

At no point in the final budget meeting, and I’ve watched it repeatedly, was a $6,762,594 use of reserves mentioned. $6,762,954 is the number budgeted to be spent in FY 2012-2013 regardless of what was represented verbally at a public hearing. In fact, everyone who spoke about the numbers is on record as saying that only $2.3 million would be used. And that was only after they finally admitted that the $900,000 which they originally floated was deemed to be a misrepresentation during my simple questioning. If you need reminding, the budget hearing is on video, unless of course there is a Nixonesque deletion of the hearing in the near future.

At no point in the final budget meeting was there disclosure that there is only $5.4 million in unassigned reserves rather than $8.3 million. $8.3 million turns to $5.4 million because $2.8 million has been earmarked as “committed” and can’t be used for a contingency (unless you have your own accounting definition of what “committed” means.) In fact, when Vice Mayor Pariser asked for current reserves Manager Willams noted they were $9.8 million – another incorrect remark. If the Manager has not been able to review his copy of the Budget, he could always check it on the Village Website – that where all this information comes from.

At the last budget meeting, the Mayor accused me of disseminating misinformation, but it’s the Mayor and Village Manager that continue to mislead the public. But what is of further concern is that no other Council member corrected the financial information that was being disseminated. Somebody needs to be looking at the numbers. At least one Council Member, though, had the good sense to vote against the budget. It seems to me that there is enough to go the State Attorney’s office involved.

And as a personal aside, Eve [Boutsis, village attorney], I’m not being superfluous and inflammatory as you have accused me of previously – but you can only cover up the current administration’s incompetency for so long. I’m planning on making an appointment at the State Attorney’s office sometime this week if you would like to join me.

It is far from palatable what is occurring at Village Hall. Budgeting and correct financial records are a bedrock of any democracy. I guess the only transparency in the Village of Palmetto Bay resides in Meighan Alexander’s office where information is provided on a timely basis.

There used to be a saying when I was working in public accounting “NUMBERS DON’T LIE, PEOPLE DO.”

I look forward to seeing everyone at the Wednesday event [the State of the Village speech by Mayor Stanczyk].

David Singer

THERE WILL BE MORE INFORMATION TO FOLLOW.

SDM Wonders: Why wouldn’t Finance Director meet with a resident who has a question about the budget? If he was told not to meet with Mr. Singer, who gave the order and why? Inquiring minds want to know.

10 comments

September 29, 2012

Pinecrest, Palmetto Bay & Cutler Bay: Election Season Report

SDM decided to take a look from 30,000 feet at the political races for local municipal offices in Pinecrest, Palmetto Bay and Cutler Bay. Never fear, SDM will get picky, too.

SDM macro observations:

Pinecrest differs from Palmetto Bay and Cutler Bay on the cycle for campaign reports. Pinecrest candidates followed what SDM thinks is the correct procedure, essentially reporting 4 times since April 1st. Palmetto Bay and Cutler Bay candidates reported only twice during the same period. Campaign reporting should not be so complicated that adults in three cities come to different conclusions as to when to report.
Palmetto Bay elected offices are far more expensive to seek. Compare: Palmetto Bay’s Cunningham had almost $16,000 on hand while Cutler Bay’s Wolmers reported having only enough to buy a pizza, and maybe some wings.
Palmetto Bay candidates have raised more than twice the amount raised by all the candidates in Pinecrest and Cutler Bay combined.

SDM Wonders: What is making Palmetto Bay so expensive? Maybe the chaos caused by the Three Amigos?

City	Race	Total Raised	Total Spent	Cash on Hand
Pinecrest	Seat 1
	Butler, Germaine	$1,600	$769	$831
	Ross, Robert C.	$4,945	$3,603	$1,342
	Wollmann, Jennifer	$950	$341	$609
		$7,495
Pinecrest	Seat 3
	Hingston, Robert A.	$7,847	$1,969	$5,878
	McDonald, James E.	$11,901	$2,157	$9,744
		$19,748

Palmetto Bay	Vice Mayor
	Cunningham, Karyn	$18,036	$2184	$15,852
	Dubois, John	$26,555	$17,352	$9,203
	Pariser, Brian W.	$11,480	$7,721	$3,759
		$56,071

Palmetto Bay	District 2
	Araiza, James	$9,360	$8,184	$1,176
	Schaffer, Tim	$6,825	$2,229	$4,596
	Tendrich, Howard	$5,250	$3,108	$2,142
		$21,435

Cutler Bay	Vice Mayor
	Sochin, Ernie	$7,825	$1,719	$6,106
	Wollmers, Ed	$200	$171	$29
		$8,025

SDM’s race by race comments:

Pinecrest Seat 1

Incumbent Bob Ross holds a narrow lead in fundraising but his sign presence in the area stands out to SDM’s eye. Former School Board Member Betsy Kaplan and former Pinecrest Council Member Cindy Blanck contributed to Ross’s campaign.

Not counting the candidate, Challenger Germaine Butler only has 2 campaign contributions. Not a sign of much depth of support…

Wollman is a late arrival, only joining the fray in mid-August.

+++

Pinecrest Seat 3

McDonald ended the last reporting period with twice the money reported by former Council Member Hingston. McDonald’s signs are all over South Pinecrest. He received financial support from local notables Charles Intriago, Ed Williamson, Ed Ludovici and John Pistorino.

Hingston is supported by Nancy Harter, who is vacating the seat; by Blanck, former Mayor Evelyn Greer, former Council Member Leslie Bowe along with other Pinecrest luminaries.

+++

Palmetto Bay Vice Mayor

Incumbent Vice Mayor Brian Pariser is facing a stiff challenge from newcomers Karyn Cunningham and John Dubois. Pariser boasts support from Palmetto Bay’s old guard.

Cunningham is a surprise. Her campaign enters the home stretch sitting on more money than any candidate in the tri-city area. Former Mayor Eugene Flinn headlines her supporters.

Dubois is on the ballot for the second time having lost to current Councilwoman Joan Lindsay two years ago. Dubois is supported by Michael Miller, publisher of the Palmetto Bay News, local activist Stanley Kowlessar, Cutler Bay Vice Mayor Ernie Sochin and many others. Dubois is rumored to have the full support of Commissioner Lynda Bell, too.

Dubois also has one of the weirdest campaign reports. He filed an amendment to the September 14 report that is literally incomprehensible. Perhaps someone uploaded a draft document or something. In any case, SDM chose to publish Dubois’s numbers as typed into the original report.

+++

Palmetto Bay District 2

Incumbent Howard Tendrich is an SDM favorite, but his fundraising is lackluster. He raised less than either of his opponents, although he enters October with more cash on hand than the big-spending Jim Araiza. Tendrich is supported by local famous person Don Noe, Flinn, former Councilman Ed Feller’s wife and better half Arlene, and former Councilman Paul Neidhart.

Jim Araiza once again has posted excellent fundraising numbers. He also has spent much of what he raised, leaving him short on cash – at least as of mid-September. Araiza is running again after failing to make a runoff in 2010 against Palmetto Bay’s sitting mayor. His supporters include legal and business representatives from both Palmer Trinity and Shores at Palmetto Bay, both of which are deeply embroiled in litigation against the village. Araiza is also supported by village activists David Zisman and Bob Orban.

The mysteriousTim Schaffer enters the critical September-October period with the most cash on hand. He also boasts contributions from village gadfly and chief NIMBY Marsha Matson and alleged sign purloiner Libby Williams. Schaffer is clearly a SOP (Palmetto Bay’s tiny reactionary minority group) candidate based on the cast of characters supporting him; SDM calls him the Fourth Amigo.

+++

Cutler Bay Vice Mayor

Incumbent Vice Mayor Ernie Sochin was surprised when Cutler Bay activist Ed Wollmers jumped into this race at the last minute. Today, Sochin has a huge lead in cash on hand, but Cutler Bay races are not customarily decided by money alone. In fact, a Ridge Rat might start asking questions if a candidate has a bunch of money.

While Sochin has carefully cultivated an image of everyone’s favorite uncle, his campaign reports are peppered with lobbyist contributions including $500 from a firm called Educational Management Services owned by Fausto Gomez – the town’s lobbyist.

Wollmers ended the last reporting period with just $29 in the bank. He better hope SDM is right about Cutler Bay’s electoral propensities.

9 comments

April 6, 2012

Charter Revision Committee: Outta Sight!

This is getting annoying, especially for SDM who has to continue to write about how the upcoming April 9 Charter Revision Commission meeting might as well be held in a cave in Afghanistan. Outta Sight, In the Dark, Under the Radar, blah, blah, blah… How many variations are there?

If you go to the village website and click on Charter Revision Committee, you will find that the last minutes available are from October 24, 2011 – last year! For crying out loud, tax day is almost here and all we know about the committee comes from last year’s meetings!

Now contrast Palmetto Bay with Pinecrest, the model before which village forefathers genuflected. Go to Pinecrest’s websit and search for “charter commission” you end up on this page, where you will find a link to the agenda. They don’t have minutes yet, probably because April 3, 2012 was the first meeting. If Pinecrest can publish the agenda in advance, why can’t Palmetto Bay?

The minutes are so out of date, SDM must conclude the administration really doesn’t want the public to know what’s going on at the Charter Revision Committee. Who’s bidding is the committee doing anyway?

For all you Ron Williams defenders out there: why does your manager keep PB residents in the dark? Why operate under the radar? Why stay outta sight? Ughh…

4 comments

August 21, 2011

Total Wine: Amazing; Not in Pinecrest; Goodbye Neighborhood Liquor Stores

.If you haven’t visited Total Wine super store across from the Falls, you owe it to yourself to visit. The selection of wine is overwhelming. SDM has found the Nirvana of alcohol.

But, as in all things, SDM has a couple of comments about this fine new establishment.

First, why does this establishment advertise itself as being located in Pinecrest? Sure, it’s near Pinecrest – right across the highway, in fact – but it’s definitely not located within the boundaries of Pinecrest. SDM guesses the marketing gurus must figure “Pinecrest” is better known than “the Falls” or “Palmetto Bay.”

Second, SDM notes that Total Wine will be open on Sundays. (SDM high five!) The Village of Palmetto Bay specifically prohibits Sunday package store sales of liquor so one byproduct of this new store is likely to be the closing of Crown Wine & Spirit on SW 136th Street and probably some other smaller liquor stores that may operate only 6 days per week.

Maybe it’s time for Palmetto Bay to walk briskly out of the dark ages and let these store compete with the mighty Total Wine.

South Dade Matters

Tag: Pinecrest