annexation position

Until The County says, in writing, that THEY will be responsible for any further pollution cleanups in the proposed annexation areas, I would have a very difficult time voting for it. The supposed 2.3 million in benefits are based on 2008 numbers, when property value were 30-40% higher. Until those numbers are adjusted to show the actual values NOW and the further projected 14.5% drop during this year, the mitigation numbers AND the overall benefits do NOT reflect accurately what we would gain from this action. Doral is paying one million a year in mitigation fees for properties that are worth 40% less today, than when they were annexed. Until the zoning is resolved where WE have total and complete control over the quality and quantity of the businesses in the proposed annexation areas, I would have a hard time voting in favor of this proposal. Its called doing DUE DILIGENCE, a concept that the Mayor and Council havent attempted in a long while, but is a process that should be done PRIOR to any major action. When one buys a house they look at it for possible structural damage, termites, traffic patterns, suitability, schools, taxes, financing, flood potential,etc. THAT is called DUE DILIGENCE, and the principles are the same here. Dr. Mel P. Johnson

Forum comments

The $150,000 for the bathrooms, the $1.8 million dollar gym, the losses in the state fund, the breakeven at the golf course, the obvious lies about the pool finances, the $75,000, no make that $80,000 no wait $89,000 a year rec director,etc. This poster has accurately captured some of my thoughts about the City Managers performance, or lack of it, over the past couple years. The Giglio incident was another example of poor judgement and the vetting process was nonexistent prior to the situation growing out of control. One could also add the CC fiasco and the 350k that disappearred there, etc. If elected, and the other Council members wanted to give Gym another chance to redeem himself, I could live with a brief period, say six months, where his performance would be closely monitored and supervised. A re-evaluation would be conducted at that point and some kind of decision made then. regarding mr Stiff, I am not demeaning any contributions he has made to our community in the past. I AM saying that if he WAS elected and had to vote on the new gym issues it could be seen as an obvious conflict of interest if he WAS one of the contractors, no? It is a potential conflict of interest because he isnt officially one of the subs YET. I am merely pointing out that fact. If he is for honesty, transparency and accountability in government, he will address that issue I am sure. For Best to say he believes that due diligence WAS done in deciding on a new gym is an incredulous statement! When, exactly, was the Pistorino option discussed and debated by the Council? I would like to know the exact date that happened so I can get the verbatim transcription, videotape, or CD of that meeting. To me, the best idea to come out of the Forum was the possibility of diverting traffic around the Circle and adding rumble strips to the incoming bridge entrance to slow down traffic. Local traffic only would be allowed to enter our business district, at 20 MPH, and the rest would be diverted around the Circle. It could allow customers for our businesses while protecting the pedestrians from fast traffic cutting thru downtown. It is not necessarily my idea but a synthesis and merger of the ideas presented last night. I would favor a further look at the possibilities in the form of a traffic analysis. Dr. Mel P. Johnson

rolling the dice

Sigh. What did junior high kids do in the past, BEFORE the Internet, to amuse themselves? While I believe that criticism of a public figures performance, or lack of same, is fair game for this forum, I cant see any benefit in attacks of a personal nature in resolving the issues. It is interesting how those who call others names, etc. usually FORGET to sign their names tho. They use the anonymous nature of this platform in the EXACT SAME MANNER of those they accuse. Go figure. One of the most important issues at tonights council meeting was the annexation pamphlet, which extolls ALL the benefits that we will get and NONE of the drawbacks! Apparently the Council believes that issues like pollution cleanups, mitigation fees, questionable numbers, costs of policing and a new substation, and zoning are IRRELEVENT and IMMATERIAL. As they failed to do in the new gym issue, nothing CLOSE to DUE DILIGENCE has been done! Dotson asked for DERM to show up and explain the possible pollution issues but the City manager has faikled to produce anyone from DERM, TWICE. Why would we annex polluted property? First, we cant build on it, so we wont be collecting taxes. Second, we may very well be charged with the cleanup of those polluted areas if the previous owners are out of business. They have acknowledged that 27 sites are currently being cleaned up but we have NO assurances that there are no more polluted sites, or who will clean them up if they are found. We are just rolling the dice and HOPING there will be NO more pollution found. Thats BAD business, and poor management priciples. Dr. Mel P. Johnson

questions persist

Does ANYBODY think the possible (probable?) problems with pollution in the proposed annexation areas will be discussed in the pamphlet? How can it be? The DERM guy hasn't even made an appearance to explain the pollution possibilities and/or probabilities out there. Does anybody believe the zoning problems will be fully discussed? The mitigation fees? The polluted FEC property next door? The TRIPLING of the millage rates in those areas? The resultant possible lawsuits from the 250 residents there? The police station that will be a warehouse? The infrastructure that the County is planning to do there, and its costs? The wishing and hoping that we don't get hit with a big pollution cleanup? The declining property values there that will adversely effect the taxes taken in? No, it will be a focus on ALL the money we will get from the taxes there! All Sunshine and Roses! No problem! This Mayor and Council are really saying they have done DUE DILIGENCE? They never even talked to DERM. Lets check them to see if their noses are growing, even as they speak. Rumor is that it can be an indicator of whether or not the truth is being told, OR NOT. The Mayor and Council didn't do DUE DILIGENCE on the building of the new gym and they ARENT doing it here either. There are too many unknowns for me to support this annexation in its current form. If the County agrees to be responsible for any cleanups IN WRITING that part of the puzzle will fall into place, for me. Other questions persist, however, as mentioned above. When are we going to get answers to those questions? Pinocchio, are you listening? Dr. Mel P. Johnson

commentary

In the same issue of the Gazette the Editor opines that the bloggers on this site do not have all the facts of the Rec Director situation, which is true. Few facts, if any, were released and when facts are withheld, people speculate. The best way to dispel any rumors, etc. is to present the facts so the people can decide for themselves. Did the City Manager do due diligence in vetting the new Director, or not? If not, why not? He vouched for the new Rec Director so it is assumed that he checked him out thoroughly and completely. Why would he recommend to the Council somebody who HADNT been checked out comprehensively for " the most important job in the City". Is that a job one would recommend a casual acquaintance for? The standard policy and procedure for hiring any candidate includes a thorough background check, etc., no? Why was this NOT done in THIS case? Could this be a case where the resume AND the background checks were both fabrications, to one extent or another? Is the Mayor and Council aware of these possibilities? Does the Mayor and Council approve of these possible omissions or fabrications, if they occurred? Are they concerned? If not, why not? If so, what are they doing about it? We need to know if the City Manager is doing his job to protect the employees and the residents- or not!

haters found

Here is where the HATERS of government ignorance, incompetence and/or corruption come to vent their outrage, disappointment, disgust, and disbelief in what their elected officials are doing. Those who HATE HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of their tax dollars disappearing with every construction project undertaken, can commiserate with those who HATE public giveaways by secret handshake deals that cost them a LOT of monies too! Those who HATE the Mayor and Councils lack of fiscal responsibility or any oversight and/or supervision of the City Manager are welcomed here gladly. Those who HATE that the residents havent been allowed to vote on BIG issues involving longterm multimillion dollar projects can find their voice here. Those who HATE that personal legacies have taken precedence over the needs of the residents will always be welcomed here, along with those who HATE the fact that DUE DILIGENCE has NOT been done in either the new gym or annexation issues- they can all voice their displeasure here. Fiscal irresponsibility HATERS can let their voice be heard here, along side haters of arrogance, fabrication, and deception- WELCOME! This IS an exercise in American democracy- no more, no less! With all its warts, democracy is STILL the best system in the world, and its the Internet and blog sites like this that allows these voices to be heard! Dr. Mel Johnson

changes are needed

Happy New Year everyone! Looking forward to hearing what the HR lady found in her report. Heard that the new Rec Director left there under highly questionable circumstances. If true, why didnt Gym reveal that when he was checking his buddies references out? Wonder if Wilton Manors would hire him again? It has always been a stretch to believe that a guy could reach back 28 years and recover the knowledge and skills he once MAY have had, during that possible one year of being a Rec Director at Wilton Manors. It DOES show the problems involved when the City Manager does NO due diligence in checking the candidate out and hires him on a smile and a handshake. Too many handshake deals in this City. Not enough DUE DILIGENCE. The Mayor and the Council should be embarrassed, if not outraged! Its a complete and utter failure to do DUE DILIGENCE on the part of the City Manager when vetting for the position that has been called, "the most important job in the City!" How much more of this arrogance, incompetency, outrageously expensive construction projects, backroom handshake giveaways, blatant disregard for the wishes of the Council, and failure to do even the basics of DUE DILIGENCE are we going to stand for? Start the New Year with a new City Manager!

handshake agreements

What does the COUNCIL have to say about these "handshake" agreements? Were they aware of them? If so, why did they approve a $200 a month pool rental by the City Manager? Did they do ANY due diligence in this matter? If they didnt know, WHY didnt they know? Is it NOT their job to supervise and oversee the actions of the City Manager? Isnt this just ANOTHER case of their carte blanche approach to the City Manager and the operations of the city? Does the Mayor and Council generally agree that handshakes are an acceptable method of doing the business of the City of Miami Springs? If yes, how long have they felt like that? Why have they NOT been on record as favoring handshakes for city business in the past? How many handshake agreements does the city have? Does anybody know? If not, why not? Are there ANY other areas of City business that has handshakes as a basis for doing that business? When and where did the Council approve of handshakes as a basis for doing city business? Did the City Attorney approve of this method? What did the City Attorney have to say about this whole topic? so many questions; so few answers.

alien concepts

Perhaps one explanation of why nobody in Wilton Manors has ever heard of him is because it was 28 YEARS ago! Surely there is Human Resources information available, right? Some oldtimer who might remember him? resignation letter? Date of resignation? Something? Starting and ending employment dates at the very least, right? Perhaps a performance evaluation? What does Mr. Giglio have to say about his time there? his reasons for leaving? All of this would have been good for the Council to know, PRIOR to his hiring, if they had been the least interested in doing their job (oversight and due diligence). Unfortunately due diligence and oversight has somehow become a 4-letter words and alien concepts to these city officials that they want NO part of, in ANY way, shape, or form. So they simply DONT do it, or anything close to it, and things slip thru the cracks. Whoooops!

theory vs practice

Its good to know that the hiring of a Rec Director is solely the responsibility of the City Manager. If they do well, he deserves some of the credit. If they DONT turn out well, he deserves a significant portion of the blame. Surely the City charter doesnt absolve the Council of their duties and responsibilities to oversee the activities of the City Manager, does it? Making sure that a thorough and comprehensive vetting of employess would seem to fall under their area of supervisory responsibilities, wouldnt it? At least in theory, because in practice they havent supervised the City Manager for a LONG time. It would not be surprising to find that due diligence has NOT been done in this case, as the Council themselves have not been accused of doing due diligence themselves, in YEARS!

due dilgence denied, again

The City Manager DID assure the Council that he had PERSONALLY vetted the resume of Mr Giglio, right? any discrepancies would be HIS responsiblity, right? He vouched for Mr Giglio when he pitched him for the job, right? There IS a video record of that, or eyewitnesses, right? Since there was NO other interviews, job search, or advertising done for the job, the Council has gone completely on the word of the City Manager regarding his background, experience, and character, right? Some might say the Council has a lot of confidence in the City Manager. Others might say the Council is being lazy and totally negligent in their oversight duties. Why didnt Mr Giglio come in front of the Council to answer any questions they may have regarding his background, experience, or character? Of course the only one who would have been prepared and asked any substantial questions would have been Mr Dotson, but he never got a chance. Wonder why. Talk about buying sight unseen! for the "most important job in the city?". Where was the DUE DILIGENCE done there?" AGAIN. NONE. Would anybody buy a CAR based only on the salesman's word? Ridiculous. Incredibly irresponsible!

commentary

I agree with the Good idea below-put up or shut up! otherwise this is just ANOTHER case of the Mayor and Council providing NO oversight of the City Manager! Another lack of any resemblance to due diligence being done. Whatever you say, Gymbo! A pathetic excuse for city government. A poster child for rubber-stamp flunkies. The "most important job in the city" gets NO job search? NO debate? NO serious inquiries? NO double checking of his qualifications? Simply unbelievable! All need to be replaced, and soon!

annexation issues

As far as anyone can see, VG has done NO due diligence or addressed any of the other issues with annexation, besides talking to some of the owners of some of the possible annexed properties. Talking to several VG residents suggests NO other issues has been revealed or discussed with them in ANY Council session. The dozen or so didnt even know the other issues existed. If VG wants to annex polluted lands, that is up to them. If they want to have NO CONTROL over zoning and what can and cant be put into their lands that is THEIR business. MS has FIVE times their population and has a bigger stake in the proceedings, so if VG doesnt want to do DUE DILIGENCE, that is their choice. We do want, and REQUIRE, due diligence from our City officials before making any decisions. Who decided that VG should get the cream of the crop in those areas between 36th st and 41st street? That is clearly MS area, on the North side of 36th strett. Let VG have area 9.

due diligence finally?

VG has done "proper research and planning"? When was THAT done? At least a dozen people I have spoken with in the past 3 weeks know NOTHING about the pollution, zoning, contiguity, and mitigation fees issues. NONE, and at least ONE works for the Village. What was the results of their RESEARCH into any possible pollution concerns? Mitigation fees? Zoning? Contiguity? Boundaries? FEC? How did they derive the numbers they used in this RESEARCH? Where are those numbers posted? Who came up with the numbers? What are their qualifications? How much, if any, of this information is posted online so that others can examine it? NONE of the 12-15 residents I spoke with had even HEARD of these other outstanding concerns. All of those issues need to be addressed before ANYONE can make an informed decision, and it appears that the neither the Village Council nor the Springs Council have done anything CLOSE to DUE DILIGENCE. Isnt it their duty and obligation to the residents who elected them to look into ALL the options before making any decision? If not, WHY not?

annexation issues

VG is "moving forward" without ANY inquiry into pollution, mitigation fees, contiguity, or zoning issues?? There is NO evidence that VG has looked into ANY of these issues either, just like Miami Springs. What happened to doing DUE DILIGENCE by either Council? Both governing bodies have somehow decided that DUE DILIGENCE is no longer an obligation of theirs to the people who elected them. How did they come to that conclusion? Was it divine inspiration? Rigged and unsubstantiated numbers? A decree of the King? A voice from above? A LARGE payoff? There is no evidence that VG has done ANY more DUE DILIGENCE than MS has, and that is precious little. Conversations with several VG residents in the past month has confirmed this. IF VG residents allow their Mayor and Council to make decisions based on highly questionable numbers, thats their business. If MS does that, and they ARE, that is all MS residents business, and that was clearly demonstrated yesterday with the petition for the people to be able to vote on annexation. The residents of VG need to start their own petition, so THEY can vote on it too.

due diligence finally?

Apparently Mr Dotson has had enuf of the childishness and drivel that heas been posted here in the past; to the point where he rarely has much to do with this site anymore. I would encourage him to return again as there is considerably more substance and civility than before now. Interesting letter in the Gazette this week about millage rates in various cities in S Fla. The writer was tentatively right about the possible benefits of annexation IF 1) we could get an equitable settlement of boundaries and not just take whatever VG dictates 2) their is no significant pollution, as one million-dollar cleanup would wipe out any possible benefits 3) if we can get a fair and equitable settlement of mitigation fees from the County so we wouldnt have to pay them ad finitum for doing nothing 4) if we can control the zoning so we can control the quality of the businesses there and guarantee that a bevy of low-income high rises, peep shows, and/or sex motels are not built there, then it might make make sense for Miami Springs. All of that would require DUE DILIGENCE, something the Mayor and Council refuse to do. They wont even let the people vote on multi-million dollar projects that will affect the financial strength and social character of Miami Springs for decades. The Mayor and Council take whatever numbers the City Manager gives them as gospel, even tho he has a consistently laughable record of construction cost estimates and cost overruns for projects he is responsible for in the past three-plus years.

due diligence discombobulated

While its not difficult to outperform the Springs Council at almost anything, neither they nor VG has really done anything close to due diligence on this annexation issue. There has been little or no mention of zoning, possible pollution, or mitigation fees so far by either entity. If the County at some point in the future decides to dump all their peep shows,sex motels, and or low income housing into these unincorporated areas because they are out of the way, what redress will the municipalities have if they have NO control over zoning? If the County is sure the pollution concerns are minimal, they should put it in writing that THEY will be responsible for any cleanups necessary, or take out a multimillion-dollar insurance policy against that possibility. Equitable boundaries are still an issue and the development potentials, and lack of same, are concerns that need to be addressed still. What about the 100+ million dollars in infrastructure needed and planned for by the County from 36 st to 58 st? Are there similar plans for South of 36 street? Area 9? What about the MIA developments? For anybody to compare themselves with the MS Council and management is not setting the bar very high as they have a LONG history of VERY expensive projects, fiscal irresponsibility, disorganization, waste, lack of transparency,questionable numbers, and mismanagement throughout the city administration. While they are surely not the only ones with these issues, this ineptitude and incompetency affects us directly and comes out of our pocket, at the end of the day. Larry, Moe,and Curly make a lot of people look smart. There is NO doubt that MS is horribly mismanaged and/or corrupt. However there are NO responses coming from VG regarding ANY of the issues raised above. Could it be that VG hasnt even LOOKED at those issues and has no clue regarding zoning, possible pollution, MIA, mitigation fees, or infrastructure? They need to do their homework and be prepared before they can hope to influence others. The same sad story is also true of the MS Council and City officials, of course. What are the chances on EITHER one actually DOING due diligence? NADA.

due diligence denied?

Is VG applying to annex Area 9? If so, on what basis? Are they saying they have ANY contiguity? If so, where? MS has the ONLY contiguity with Area 9 of all the cities looking to annex. For VG to support our possible interest in area 9 in exchange for our support of their getting ALL of 36 st is ridiculous! There is no doubt as to who has contiguity with Area 9. MS does. VG doesnt. End of story. Has VG done their DUE DILIGENCE regarding possible pollution? mitigation fees? zoning? boundaries?

MS certainly hasnt. Is the Mayor, in his infinire wisdom, going to dismiss all of those concerns AGAIN as being irrelevant? like he did the Pistorino report during the gym debate? Is DUE DILIGENCE really going to be done this time, for a change? Are we going to allow VG, a village of 2358 residents, call the shots and push us (13,000+) into an ill-advised decision, AGAIN without doing our DUE DILIGENCE?