Blog by Bett

Deerfield Beach Industrial Zoning Changes

2012-01-21T16:04:00.000-08:00

At Tuesday January 24’s Commission meeting there will be a public hearing on the rezoning of the industrial area designated Broward County M3 and M2 to City zoning I2. The city has already had a public workshop at which residents voiced their concerns. The residents were a powerful force and gave their testimony passionately but with class and decorum. Commissioner Bill Ganz gave clear and reasoned reasons for allowing the rezoning.

The only area in Deerfield Beach with M3 and M2 zoning is the industrial area west of Powerline by Independence Bay and Waterford. The County did away with that zoning category some time ago.

The Independence Bay and Waterford housing developments never should have been allowed to be built. The whole area was zoned industrial and should have stayed that way. But years ago it was changed for developers to build the developments.

The residents now live between Mt. Trashmore and industrial businesses. It is a ridiculous place for a housing development, even if it is on a scenic lake. But some developer saw $$$$$$$ and now we have a predictable outcome; residents against industrial zoned land owners and businesses.

The businesses, even if they are in compliance with all codes, EPA regulations and city ordinances, (and some are not) cause some dirt. Residents complain of a constant film of soot on their patio tables and cars, eye irritation, respiratory distress and, of course, the smell.

After the area was annexed from the county into the city in 1990, the city had to wait 10 years to rezone anything. All the property owners and businesses were notified that rezoning could take place at any time after that. Well, it took a little longer, the city dragged its feet and the rezoning didn’t make it to the top of the to-do list until now. And now comes the conflict: the business and land owners want things to stay the same; the residents see some small relief in their quality of life if the changes are enacted.

What is the city hoping to accomplish with the redoing of the zoning? It will put the area under city regulations, where permits and building will have to be approved by the city Planning and Zoning Board, and the Commission. Currently the area is still under the more lax regulation of the obsolete County policies.

But most important to the residential residents are the changes of allowed uses. The I2 zoning, according to Jerry Ferguson, Director of Planning and Growth Management, has some 200 or more various categories, and the vast majority of them will stay, but some currently allowed will not. Some of them are:

Penal institutions,
Medical waste facilities
Propane storage facilities
Salvage or wrecking yards, or Junkyards
Cemetery Crematories,
Fertilizer, compost and mulch facilities.

This list was compiled with input from residents, the city has been meeting with the industrial land owners who are not happy with losing some possible uses on their land. BUT, many of the owners bought the land knowing rezoning was in the offing, and the others have known it for the last 10 years. The city has the right to rezone this area, now they are doing it.

The changes are very few and quite modest, completely legal and in no way would rise to the level of a Burt Harris type taking as some owners have threatened. But, the changes are important, as they will help add value to the surrounding industrial area, and the commercial parcels across the street and peace of mind to the nearby residents.

Comparison Chart
M-3 & M-4 Industrial and Most Common Heavy Commercial Uses Presently Allowed per the Annexation Bill & Proposed I-2 Uses

Use	M-3	M-4	I-2
Assembly	P	P	P
Asphalt Manufacturing	P	P	P*
Autmobile, truck & equipment auctions	P	P	P
Automobile repair	P	P	P
Autmobile storage or transport facility	P	P	P*
Automobile , truck & recreational vehicle salvage or wrecking yards	P	P	NP
Boarding Kennel	P	P	P
Building & construction materials manufacturing & storage	P	P	P
Concrete batching and/or mixing	P	P	P*
Crematory	P	P	NP
Equipment rental and leasing	P	P	P
Essential servies (utilities)	P	P	P
Fertilizer, compost and mulch compounding, storage & distribution (outside activities)	P	P	NP
Food processing, packaging & distribution including meat packing (no slaughtering)	P	P	P
General Commercial & Retail	P	P	P*
Indoor Commercial Recreation	P	P	P*
Industrial Sales	P	P	P
Junkyards	NP	P	NP
Laboratory (medical, dental, research & development)	P	P	P
Manufacturing	P	P	P
Medical waste transfer station	P	P	NP
Medical waste incineration or sterilization	P	P	NP
Metal manufacturing (from raw materials)	P	P	P
Motor freight terminal or moving & storage company	P	P	P
Offices	P	P	P
Penal institutions	P	P	NP
Pest control services	P	P	P
Petroleum products & bottled gas bulk storage	P	P	NP*
Processing & packaging	P	P	P
Recording & broadcasting studio	P	P	P
Recycling facility	P	P	P*
Repair Shop	P	P	P
School, trade or vocational	P	P	P
Showrooms	P	P	P
Storage yards (operable vehicles, usuable equipment or other items)	P	P	P*
Trade shops	P	P	P
Trash transfer station	P	P	P*
Vehicle sales, rental or leasing	P	P	P
Warehouse, self-storage	P	P	P
Warehouse, distribution	P	P	P
Wholesale	P	P	P
Wireless communication facilities	P	P	P

History you may not have known:

2012-01-13T04:57:00.000-08:00

Fred Grimm unearthed some interesting history about Sylvia:

MIAMI HERALD

Posted on Wed, Jan. 11, 2012

Poitier: Still crooked after all these years

Fred Grimm

fgrimm@MiamiHerald.com

Remorse for an ethical transgression was not much on display as Sylvia Poitier left her sentencing hearing in the Broward County Courthouse Wednesday. “I want the whole world to know that I’m not guilty.”

A jury, after a three-day trial in November, had thought otherwise, deliberating just 90 minutes to find the suspended Deerfield commissioner guilty on four misdemeanor charges. But Judge Melinda Brown decided to let the 76-year-old Poitier off Wednesday with a $1,000 fine, 200 hours of community service, a year’s administrative probation and court costs. The judge withheld adjudication.

Perhaps the judge was acknowledging that Poitier, after a long career flouting ethics and conflict-of-interest rules, was technically a first offender.

And there she was after the sentencing hearing, in the hallway outside Judge Brown’s courtroom in her black sweater, leaning on her hand-carved cane, surrounded by her happy supporters, talking about reclaiming her seat on the Deerfield Beach commission. It was as if she had interpreted the judge’s decision to go easy on her as something like redemption.

“I think I am the most morally correct politician in the world, because I have not done anything wrong,” she insisted.

Poitier clearly thought the prosecution was misguided and the jury verdict unfair. And from her perspective, maybe it was unfair, or least ironic, that a politician with such a long and ignominious history of ethical lapses and undisclosed conflicts was finally nabbed on piddling misdemeanors.

The jury found Poitier guilty of falsifying city records by shrouding her brother’s financial interest in a non-profit housing agency seeking a bail-out from Deerfield Beach.

It was her first criminal conviction, but Poitier has been indulging in questionable behavior since she was first elected to the Deerfield City Commission 38 years ago. Just a few months into office she was admonished for using city stationery to bolster her private business deals. As mayor, in 1976, she had managed to exhaust much of the city’s travel budget on unauthorized junkets.

Her behavior as a Broward County commissioner, from 1985 to 1998, hardly improved. There was that infamous moment, for instance, when Poitier couldn’t remember just who had paid for her junket to Liberia. And she seemed to have hired a phantom campaign worker, paid $1,000 a week from her campaign contributions, with an address at an abandoned house.

She was the county commissioner who pushed relentlessly for a minority-owned convention hotel to be built on county-owned land — a potentially lucrative deal in which she had secretly invested $60,000 of her own money. When The Herald uncovered the blatant, undisclosed conflict and killed the deal, Poitier charged our reporter with racism.

County voters finally tossed the scandal-plagued commissioner out of office in 1998, but in those days, the State Attorney’s Office had little enthusiasm for prosecuting errant local politicians. She was free to run for her old seat back in Deerfield Beach.

One can understand her confusion last year when she was finally arrested for neglecting to disclose that a non-profit asking the city for financial help happened to owe her brother $46,000. But times have changed. Some 16 other Broward County public officials, including the mayor and a fellow Deerfield Beach city commissioner, have been busted on corruption charges over the last six years.

Unseemly behavior by election officials is supposedly no longer tolerated in Broward County. Though in the courthouse hallway, the message seemed to have eluded Poitier.

At Wednesday’s hearing, two of her supporters testifying as character witnesses called the Poitier’s trial a “waste of time.” Listening to Poitier afterward, it was hard not to conclude they were right. The old scoundrel made a $1,000 fine and a withhold of adjudication sound like a lot like vindication.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/11/v-print/2585201/poitier-still-crooked-after-all.html#storylink=cpy

Deerfield Beach Clothing Bins, OK for Some, Just not the Salvation Army

2012-01-05T07:55:00.000-08:00

A reader sent me the location of 5 clothing bins, they are in the parking lot of the Doctors' offices next to the Armstrong Fitness Center on Country Club Blvd. in Deer Creek. They have been there for a very long time. Notice they do not say who benefits from the donations. (Click on picture to enlarge.)

No to the Salvation Army, Yes to Kiwanis?????

2012-01-04T14:25:00.000-08:00

I just found out from a reader that the Kiwanis has shoe collection bins in various locations around the city. I don't know if anyone got permission from the city for them or not, but bins are located at many businesses.

Kiwanis sticker on Bin at Duffy's Sports Bar.

Charity Begins at Home. Help the Salvation Army. Allow the Bins.

2012-01-04T07:23:00.000-08:00

Jim and I are fans of the Salvation Army. We support them with donations and volunteering, and have taken their disaster response, first aid and CPR classes. This Christmas Jim and I uncrated, sorted and stacked hundreds of boxes of toys at the Salvation Army facility in Fort Lauderdale. The Salvation Army is one of the few charities which uses most of their money for their clients, not administrative uses, advertising, or begging letters. They do good work and a lot of it.

So, when one of the hard working volunteers showed up at the Deerfield Beach Commission and asked permission to place bins for clothing donations I was all for it. I was shocked to hear the commission turn them down citing a regulation against outdoor storage.

Look around the city, not only will you find clothing donation bins but many other instances of outside storage. Restaurants are allowed to have outside seating but the regulations do not say they can have outside storage, in fact it is NOT allowed, but many have carts and bins for storing service items, I believe some have fully stocked bars. What is a dumpster if not an outside storage container? How about vending machines, they certainly qualify as storage.

Once again we have Deerfield Beach using selective enforcement. I hear that the owners of the clothing storage bins that are in violation can’t be contacted to remove them. Well, DUH! Gather them up for scrap if they are such egregious violations. Want to know where they are? Ask the Salvation Army guy, he had pictures of them.

What’s the excuse for not allowing the bins? They might overflow and be unsightly. Really? Well that would be the time to sanction them, not before it happens. I think regulations similar to those about garbage cans and dumpsters should do it.

Guess what I found while reading our codes; outside storage is allowed as a conditional use in some of our districts, nobody bothered to tell the Salvation Army man about that.

I think an ordinance allowing a legitimate charity to have donation bins on public property and, with permission, on private property should be enacted. Have a heart, these are very hard times and charities are suffering from reduced donations. Charity starts at home, let’s give it a home in Deerfield Beach.

Government Ethics in 1880. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose*

2012-01-04T05:48:00.000-08:00

From the www.cityethics.org blog:

Henry Adams on Government Ethics

Henry Adams' 1880 novel Democracy is a must-read for those interested in government ethics. It's also a first-rate novel, full of wit, excellent writing, and a good portrayal of post-Civil War Washington. It's available free from Project Gutenberg, in six e-book formats.

The climax of the novel is an exchange between the Secretary of the Treasury (Ratcliffe, formerly a senator) and the novel's protagonist (Madeleine), a wealthy widow fascinated with politics. The exchange is all about government ethics. Here are a few wonderful quotations from the novel, including from the climax:

"[D]emocracy, rightly understood, is the government of the people, by the people, for the benefit of Senators...

Ratcliffe: [N]o representative government can long be much better or much worse than the society it represents. Purify society and you purify the government. But try to purify the government artificially and you only aggravate failure.

Madeleine on Ratcliffe: The audacity of the man would have seemed sublime if she had felt sure that he knew the difference between good and evil, between a lie and the truth; but the more she saw of him, the surer she was that his courage was mere moral paralysis, and that he talked about virtue and vice as a man who is colour-blind talks about red and green; he did not see them as she saw them; if left to choose for himself he would have nothing to guide him. Was it politics that had caused this atrophy of the moral senses by disuse?

Ratcliffe: If virtue won't answer our purpose, we must use vice, or our opponents will put us out of office, and this was as true in Washington's day as it is now, and always will be.

Mrs. Baker, a lobbyist: "Well! we got our bills through ... Some of them liked suppers and cards and theatres and all sorts of things. Some of them could be led, and some had to be driven like Paddy's pig who thought he was going the other way. Some of them had wives who could talk to them, and some — hadn't," said Mrs. Baker, with a queer intonation in her abrupt ending.

Madeleine: the thought of … the endless succession of moral somersaults she would've had to turn, chilled her with mortal terror.

Ratcliffe: It is the act of my public life which I most regret— not the doing, but the necessity of doing.

Madeleine: Where did the public good enter at all into this maze of personal intrigue, this wilderness of stunted natures where no straight road was to be found, but only the tortuous and aimless tracks of beasts and things that crawl?

Ratcliffe: I might say: Perish the government, perish the Union, perish this people, rather than that I should soil my hands! Or I might say, as I did, and as I would say again: Be my fate what it may, this glorious Union, the last hope of suffering humanity, shall be preserved.

Madeleine (powerful thought about government, but not about government ethics): Had she not penetrated the deepest recesses of politics, and learned how easily the mere possession of power could convert the shadow of a hobby-horse existing only in the brain of a foolish country farmer, into a lurid nightmare that convulsed the sleep of nations?"

*The more things change, the more they stay the same

Happy New Year

2011-12-24T12:28:00.000-08:00

Cove Shopping Center Dedication Spoiled by a Snub

2011-12-11T06:07:00.000-08:00

The Cove Shopping Center renovation was dedicated Saturday. This is the renovation that Mayor Noland called putting lipstick on a pig. Except on Saturday when she was congratulating the commission for getting it done. What a hypocrite. She did everything she could to stop it. Only when she saw voters, who had taken part in the design of the center by attending the workshops then Commissioner Pam Militello planned, were overwhelming in favor of the fix-up did she reluctantly agree to it. Also, she can count, 3 of the 5 commissioners wanted Pam’s project.

So, because of pressure from the public and dogged determination by Pam, the Shopping Center is now the gem Pam and the neighborhood envisioned. The opening dedication was beautifully done, a fun event run by the CRA staff. The parking lot looks beautiful, so the city is planning a number of events there.

What is happening? New businesses are coming in, the stores already there are sprucing up their façades and people are spending time there walking around, and shopping. Just as was predicted. The nay-sayers said that wouldn’t happen. Well I am happy to say to them, “I told you so!”

One great disappointment on Saturday was that while the Mayor was taking credit for the renovation she completely ignored Pam. Pam wasn’t invited to attend the dedication and she wasn’t asked to come up on the stage to say anything. This was childish and petty. There is no love lost between Peggy and Pam, but right is right. Pam should have been an honored guest at the event. Someone told me that Peggy asked for Pam at the ribbon cutting; a little too late and a lot too little Peggy. You didn’t even ask Pam to come over to the ribbon cutting; if you wanted her there and didn’t want to speak to her personally a simple “Would any of the past commissioners please join us” would have sufficed.

I remember when the swimming pool was dedicated, at that time Peggy was not on the commission and Pam was. Pam, recognizing the work Peggy had done to get the pool invited her to come up on stage. I guess we know who has class in this city.

No Probable Cause, They Got it Right!!!!

2011-12-08T05:05:00.000-08:00

From The Florida Commission on Ethics report

"The Commission found no probable cause to believe that PAM MILITELLO, former Deerfield Beach City Commissioner, failed to report a gift on a quarterly Form 9 to a City-sponsored festival that was valued in excess of $100. No probable cause was also found to believe that she solicited tickets and passes to the festival from a lobbyist of the City or that she accepted tickets and passes to the festival from a lobbyist of the City. Deerfield Beach Commissioner SYLVIA POITIER and former Deerfield Beach Commissioner STEVE GONOT were also cleared of the same allegations with a finding of no probable cause.

The Commission found no probable cause to believe that AL CAPELLINI, former Deerfield Beach Mayor, failed to report a gift of festival passes on a Form 9. No probable cause was also found to believe that he accepted passes to the City-sponsored festival from a lobbyist of the City.

The Commission found no probable cause to believe that Deerfield Beach Commissioner MARTY POPELSKY accepted tickets or passes to a City-sponsored festival from a lobbyist of the City. No probable cause was also found to believe that he failed to report a gift valued at more than $100 on a Form 9."

Harmful Messages from the Media

2011-11-13T19:47:00.000-08:00

Girls get a harmful message from media: http://missrepresentation.org/the-film/
"Like drawing back a curtain to let bright light stream in, Miss Representation (90 min; TV-14 DL) uncovers a glaring reality we live with every day but fail to see. Written and directed by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the film exposes how mainstream media contribute to the under-representation of women in positions of power and influence in America. The film challenges the media’s limited and often disparaging portrayals of women and girls, which make it difficult for women to achieve leadership positions and for the average woman to feel powerful herself.

In a society where media is the most persuasive force shaping cultural norms, the collective message that our young women and men overwhelmingly receive is that a woman’s value and power lie in her youth, beauty, and sexuality, and not in her capacity as a leader. While women have made great strides in leadership over the past few decades, the United States is still 90th in the world for women in national legislatures, women hold only 3% of clout positions in mainstream media, and 65% of women and girls have disordered eating behaviors.

Stories from teenage girls and provocative interviews with politicians, journalists, entertainers, activists and academics, like Condoleezza Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Katie Couric, Rachel Maddow, Margaret Cho, Rosario Dawson and Gloria Steinem build momentum as Miss Representation accumulates startling facts and statistics that will leave the audience shaken and armed with a new perspective.
" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gkIiV6konY

Dania Beach Activist Makes a Difference

2011-11-09T05:02:00.000-08:00

David Clark is an activist in Dania Beach who has been working to get his city to change how campaigns are financed. After a lot of hard work, he got an ordinance he initiated passed by the commission. The commissioners were not happy about it; basically they were shamed into passing it.

At the meeting they pontificated with the usual noise about how nothing that they are given changes how they vote yadda, yadda, yadda. Anyone with even a few functioning brain cells knows that if donations didn’t influence commissioners there wouldn’t be any corporate or lobbyist donations. Duh!

Well done David!!!

Here’s what it does:

“The attached Ordinance would only permit natural persons to make contributions to any candidate for the office of Mayor or City Commissioner.

The Ordinance would prohibit all entities and organizations (including, but not limited to, corporations, LLC’s, sole proprietorships, banks, labor unions, political committees and unincorporated associations) from making campaign contributions to any candidate for the office of Mayor or City Commissioner.

Additionally, the Ordinance would make it unlawful for any candidate for the office of Mayor or City Commissioner to accept contributions from any entity or organization.

Definitions have been included to further define the entities and organizations that are prohibited from making campaign contributions to candidates for local office.”

(From a memo to the commission from David M. Wolpin and Anthony Soroka on behalf of Weiss Serota Helfman law firm.)

To read the entire ordinance go to: http://dbagenda.com/2011-11-08/Exported%20OV%20Docs/Item%209.1/index.html and click on the items on the very top of the page.

Posted on www.deerfieldbeachusa.com Citizen's Right to Speak

2011-11-03T13:51:00.000-07:00

Jeff writes about "The Citizen's Right to Speak" and concludes:

If citizens are not respectful of the commission, it's because they don't trust or respect the commission. But building an environment of mutual respect starts at the other end — with the public officials.

Read his entire article here: http://www.deerfieldbeachusa.com/

The 3 Minute Rule

2011-11-02T10:09:00.000-07:00

During Tuesday’s meeting Commissioner Ben Preston brought up something that has been a bone of contention for me for years - the uneven application of the rules covering the three minutes the public is allowed to address the commission.

A person has three minutes only, to speak his or her piece. This might be at the beginning of the meeting if applied for in writing in advance. It might be in reaction to a public hearing item on the agenda, or at the end of the meeting without prior notice.

What happens in reality is the three minute rule is flexible depending on who you are and who you know. The mayor is supposed to enforce the rule; the city clerk times the speakers and notifies them when the time is up.

Often the speaker wants to say a few more sentences or maybe more than a few; that is when the mayor and her hammer come into it. She is supposed to end it there and then and get the speaker to sit down. If they are stubborn the BSO officer escorts them away from the mike.

However, depending on the situation, the three minutes can be 4 or 6 or more. The most frequent transgressors are the mayor’s favorites. When one of her pets or a favored lobbyist gets up to speak and runs a little over she gives her famous helpless eye squint and shoulder shrug and with a wave of her hand allows the extra time.

Contrast that with what happens when an “ordinary” resident, or one out of favor steps up to speak and the buzzer sounds the end; many people are allowed to finish a thought or sentence but, depending on who they are, others are not even allowed this courtesy. To these un-favored, Noland’s reaction would have listeners believe that civilization as we know it would come to an end if an extra 5 seconds were permitted. She jumps right in at the sound of the buzzer and if her curt “Sorry, time’s up” doesn’t do it she can get downright nasty and personal, taking up far more time than the speaker wanted to begin with.

Commissioner Preston’s apology to the other commissioners for asking that one of his constituents be given a little more time was accepted by the Mayor without even a hint of irony. Not one of the commissioners spoke up to say that they had all done the same thing at one time. He was left feeling that he had indeed done something wrong, and that isn’t right.

I urge the commission to think about this, I urge the commission to apply the rules evenhandedly. I urge the commission to recognize that all residents have the same rights to their three minutes and to the application of the exceptions to the rule. What you do for one, you must do for all. Fair’s fair.

Broward's Ethics Code Under Attack

2011-10-23T09:16:00.000-07:00

Remember last fall when county voters, sick of hearing about convicted and corrupt politicians, (Fifteen Broward politicians or their family members have been charged with or imprisoned for public corruption crimes in the last two years, and there are more to come.) approved an ethics code and voted to have it apply to county and city officials? Well as predicted, and as sure as power corrupts, the long awaited code was immediately loathed by elected officials and the whining for change began. What they are moaning about sends a clear message about why they ran for office.

The county ethics committee, as was their charge, assembled a tough code. Within milliseconds of its publication the County Commissioners were inundated with calls to water it down. In response (and in a CYA self defense move) the county asked the League of Cities to look it over and make suggestions for revision.

The League of Cities is made up of elected officials, enough said. They came up with a revised code which, with a wink at ethics, was guaranteed to allow things to continue as they are by inserting a bunch of loopholes .

The County code bans all gifts from lobbyists, the League revision seemed to say, our politicians are hungry and lobbyists have lots of money, let them buy us dinner, what can it hurt? Of course we won’t feel indebted to them, or any more inclined to vote their way. Yeah, right.

The County code says elected officials may not lobby before any municipality. Whoa, the League said, no fair. OK we won’t lobby our own commission, but the others should be fair game. Of course their being commissioners won’t sway the vote. Yeah, right.

The League proposed that municipal commissions be allowed to vote to opt out of the code by a four fifths vote by the commissioners. I guess that went even too far for the members of the League as it was withdrawn at the last minute. I give them credit for honest emotions in this one, it showed how much they fear and hate the code; I guess they thought it might not go over well with the voters, Duh! (Mayor Peggy Noland tried to eliminate the Deerfield Beach code and is still stinging from the reaction from throngs of residents who came to the commission meeting with “keep the code” signs.)

For more on this see: http://www.cityethics.org/content/broward-league-cities-poor-ethics-recommendations
and
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/matrixethics.doc

The League of Cities asked the municipalities to vote on the changes. Of 30 cities who voted on whether to water down the code and accept the League of Cities changes, 15 voted YES, 6 including Deerfield Beach Abstained, only brave little Oakland Park voted flat out NO (pretty sure we can thank Mayor Suzanne Boisvenue for that, she is one of the rarest of the rare, a politician who cares about the people and not her own gain.) http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/2011/06/which_broward_cities_voted_for.html

Yay! For the County Commissioners who voted no to the League changes and approved the tough code.

Did the whining stop? Nope, we now have elected officials deliberately misunderstanding the code provisions and coming up with ludicrous reactions to it. The Wilton Manors Mayor Gary Resnick says some commissioners will quit if they can’t lobby. Coconut Creek Commissioner Lisa Aaronson objects to not being able to get a bottle of water from a lobbyist. The most ridiculous reactions are from Lauderhill Mayor Kaplan, who now won’t talk to reporters as he says they are lobbyists, and Southwest Ranches Councilman Breitkreuz who won’t talk to residents concerned about their neighborhood unless they register as lobbyists and pay a fee (nothing in the new code about that).

Why these over the top reactions? These are the opening shots in the war to get rid of the code. Politicians are fond of saying that codes shouldn’t be needed as we should elect honest people, such as them. Yeah, right.

New Website from the Florida Hometown Democracy Group

2011-10-19T12:20:00.000-07:00

The PriceOfSprawl.com website is now live. You are among the first to get a preview of our site that will soon be released to the public.

We are hoping that PriceOfSprawl.com will be a good tool for activists, as well as those folks not yet informed about the costs of over-development. You’ll be able to see your local city or county approved and unbuilt residential development, the costs, property value decline of existing housing, vacancy and water supply --all from one place. In addition, articles and studies from other sources will corroborate website facts.

This is the untold story that politicians have ignored and do not want you to know. Our goal is to put this information readily at hand so you can see for yourself the economic and quality of life costs you will pay for new residential housing. It will be easy to share this information with your neighbors, politicians and the media.

It is our goal to depict 100 Florida Cities and Counties. So far we have about 60, so check back to see new city/county information and articles.

Please sign up for our email list, “like” us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter. You will not receive further emails from us unless you are “connected” through PriceOfSprawl.com .

Thanks for the good you do for Florida.

Sun Sentinel Ethics Editorial Gets it Right

2011-09-29T05:32:00.000-07:00

South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
About time Broward cities get their own ethics rules
Sun Sentinel Editorial Board
September 29, 2011

Despite all the whining and angst, ethics rules are about to become law for all 31 Broward cities soon. It's about time.

After a seemingly endless list of Broward public officials were seen taken away in handcuffs, the public clearly had enough of corruption and demanded strict ethics rules. County commissioners adopted tougher ethics laws last year, and every Broward city will soon be living under those rules, similar to the situation in Palm Beach County.

Are the new rules nitpicky? In some cases, yes. But the number of indictments, plea bargains, arrests and actions that failed the smell test makes the rules necessary. This was not the result of one or two isolated cases. The public rightfully got tired of having its trust violated by those with their hands out.

The new rules state that elected officials can't accept anything from somebody who does busi-ness with the city. Sure, it's doubtful you will see an ethics complaint filed against a public offi-cial who takes a bagel from a contractor or a lobbyist, but that's the rule. Good. That's the way it should be. Hopefully, public officials will understand the real meaning of the word "no."

Many of the new rules are common sense, and if some public officials think they are too tough, maybe public service isn't the right vocation for them.

Among the rules:

• Elected officials in various cities can't moonlight as lobbyists in other Broward cities, and neither can their spouses. Nor can they lobby the County Commission.

• Elected officials must disclose any fundraising for charities, and can't use city resources to raise the money.

• Elected officials who work outside jobs have to report, quarterly, where they work and how much money they make.

• Cities must keep online logs showing every contact the elected officials have with lob-byists, even if the meeting is outside the office.

Ethics training will be required each year. And voters also approved a new corruption watchdog, Broward Inspector General John Scott, last year.

Various city officials were seeking more watered down rules, but they will rightfully have to ab-ide by the same rules that the county does.

This shouldn't be that tough. While it certainly won't eliminate corruption, it should at least make public officials think more about any questionable actions. If an elected official has a question as to whether something is legal, all he has to do is ask one of the many lawyers who work for the cities and the county.

Better yet, if there is a real question, the word "no" does wonders.

Copyright © 2011, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

DCA Dead as a Doornail

2011-09-05T10:52:00.000-07:00

The DCA growth management office is no more. Scott killed it.

In 1985 tough growth laws were enacted; the vision was to protect Florida from future sprawl and overdevelopment that had already wreaked havoc on so much of the state.

As soon as the laws were in place the watering down began, and by 2011 the tiger had become a declawed house tabby. But even though DCA approved 94% of projects, there were some really bad ones stopped, and others made smaller. And the laws made cities think long and hard about proper land use and zoning as the plans had to be submitted to the DCA for approval.

BUT, NOT ANY MORE

No longer will a city or county Land Use Plan have to get State approval. All lobbyists will have to do is convince the local commissioners if they want to get a land use change. How hard will that be? Think back on how easy it was for the Chait boys to convince the Tamarac and the County commissions to cave into changing a golf course to a housing development. All it took was some bribery and fast talking.

No longer will the State demand that developers put roads, schools, infrastructure and parks in their new developments. Guess who will have to foot the bill for that? Now we will be paying taxes to help line the pockets of land speculators. The city and county can pass ordinances demanding developers pay for roads and parks etc. but then who would donate to their campaign chests?

No longer will a developer have to convince the DCA that their project is needed, it won’t matter that there are hundreds of available units on the market, they will be allowed to build more anyway. So your used house will have to be even cheaper to compete with the shiny new ones.

Do you want to fight the plan to put a giant “whatever” in your neighborhood, you think it is incompatible with the area? Forget it, the new laws make it almost impossible for a grass roots movement to win, also forget going to referendum to put land use amendments in place. That option is now banned.

We can only hope that we get rid of Scott before the economy turns around.

BSO is in

2011-08-18T10:02:00.000-07:00

It’s done. The decision to have Deerfield’s fire rescue department operated by BSO was approved Tuesday evening. . After looking over the numbers and the agreement, I, who am very wary about giving the BSO control of over 50 percent of the city budget, think now that it was probably the right thing to do. Probably!

But, only time will tell; numbers aren’t everything. Most likely the commissioners think the same way, hoping against hope that they made the right choice.

In the agreement the city retains ownership of our fire stations and equipment which might make it possible to take back control if the BSO costs get out of line, however I wonder if after the 5 year contract is up whether any of the “equipment” we own but are letting BSO use will be in any condition to be useful. Maybe, I hope so, only time will tell.

This merger may well be the most important decision Deerfield Beach ever had to make. Do I think that there should be a referendum on the decision? Yes I do, but the city has a legal opinion that it is not necessary. Get two lawyers together and you will have two opinions. It would take a lawsuit to decide this.

I also think that there should have been meetings in all of the districts about the plan before the final decision. Ben Preston, newly elected District 2 commissioner voiced his disappointment that his district had no input into the decision making because Sylvia Poitier was suspended shortly after the beginning of the process.

This is the kind of highhanded decision making that years back, forced the OSOB to have a petition drive and referendum to amend the City Charter so that if the city wanted to lease or sell any city owned property worth more than $750,000 they would have to go to the voters in a referendum.

Everyone agrees that this is a very important decision. Everyone agrees that the commissioners are elected to represent what the residents want. What reason could there be not to share the unfolding of the plan and the projected savings and benefits?

Unfortunately, too many politicians get the idea that they know better than the voters who elected them, and that they can make decisions that are good for the city whether the residents agree or not. Their defense is that they are elected to do the will of the people and the people should let them do it. That is only valid, if the politicians actually know what the WILL of the people is. And in this case, without a referendum or at the very least city hall meetings sharing information, how could they know?

My guess is that the city residents would have, in view of the tanked economy, voted in favor of the merger, but we will never know.

Chaz? Not Now, Not Ever!

2011-08-13T10:45:00.000-07:00

“For now.” That is what Peggy Noland told the reporter. Chaz Steven’s will not be appointed to the Housing Authority Board “for now.” Is she leaving the door open for sometime in the future?

It seems so.

Thanks to Ben Preston, his appointment was found to be done improperly and due to the uproar of concerned residents, he won’t be reappointed at the next commission meeting.

Peggy, I cannot believe it!!! Chaz calls you a “cunt” and you think that is OK?

From the Urban Dictionary: “CUNT” – “Derogatory term for a woman. Considered by many to be the most offensive word in the English language”.

Would Chaz do a good job? After all he (and only he) says there is something wrong with the DBHA. He says he has studied how the Authority works and only he of all the appointees will be able to get it to straighten up and fly right.

Who would be better? ANYONE is better than Timothy Stevens. Why? Because a person is known by their actions and deeds. And, anyone who has read Stevens’ blog over the last couple of years, back to when he started with soft porn pictures, knows he is immature and spiteful, and has absolutely no regard for accuracy or people’s feelings.

A board member needs to be able to work with others; honoring others’ ideas and values. Chaz has not shown the ability to do this. If someone doesn’t agree with him, or ignores him, or is old, or chubby (even people with whom he has never had a single conversation) they get hauled over the coals.

Unlike a real journalist, he doesn’t talk to the people he heaps scorn on; he has no use for their opinions, or reality. If he gets it into his head that they disagree with him, he infers they are homosexual and/or makes up offensive nicknames. Chaz is a master of insinuation. All he has to do is see a person in a setting and he fantasizes in print about what they might be doing. He is seldom right, but that doesn’t bother him at all.

He tries to ruin people’s reputations rather than appreciate that they are working toward improving the city. Notice that NO ONE lives up to his standards.

Recently he made a racist remark about Pam Davis, and was naive enough to think that an apology would clear the air. The deed defines the man.

After he apologized for saying Mrs. Davis needs things written in Ebonics to understand, he wrote, “I should have said she is a liar, a cheat, and an idiot.” Do we really want someone like this representing our city?

Who better????? ANYONE, but especially Sally Potter who is on the appointment list, she is a whiz with numbers, if there is anything even slightly “off” about the Housing Authority, she will spot it quickly. She will be up to speed on how the Housing Authority works in short order, all without calling anyone an idiot, or retarded.

Let’s get real; Chaz is not needed, not now, not ever.

Ben Preston, Best Choice

2011-07-22T14:01:00.000-07:00

Congratulations to Ben Preston on his win, District 2 is lucky to have him as commissioner as is the entire city. A commissioner is not just a representative of his or her district but a commissioner for all of Deerfield Beach, and Ben will be a refreshing presence on the commission.

The Housing Authority

2011-07-18T19:25:00.000-07:00

Attorney Tom Connick sent a scathing letter to the Deerfield Beach Commissioners concerning the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority. The following excerpt about the board members describes the hard working volunteers who have given their time to the board and are about to be thrown under the bus by Peggy Noland.

The entire letter is below the excerpt.

The Board of Commissioners of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority are citizen volunteers who freely give their time and efforts to the community in providing through the DBHA affordable housing to those in need and access to self-sufficiency and community programs. These DBHA Commissioners work without compensation – they give of their time and effort to the community for free. And, for their efforts in assisting the community, Mayor Noland wrongfully smears them by publicly announcing that she plans on bringing charges against the entire DBHA Board of Commissioners because the Mayor lacks the backbone to stand up to Chaz Stevens’ bullying. Despite the DBHA reaching out to the Mayor and Commission, neither the Mayor nor any City Commissioner has shown any interest in meeting with the DBHA Executive Director or the DBHA Board. The DBHA Board of Commissioners are flesh and blood people who are in good faith performing their volunteer duties for free while being vilified by Chaz Stevens and the Mayor:

A. Keith Emery, Chairman, has devoted 19 years as a member of the Board, with 11 of those years as Chairman. Mr. Emery is President of CMS-Construction Management Services, Inc. His company has a thirty-two year history in Deerfield Beach. The motivation behind Mr. Emery’s dedication in devoting his time and construction expertise as a citizen volunteer stems from his concern for promoting the development of self-sufficiency in individuals with limited resources. His primary focus is providing to those less fortunate affordable housing and new opportunities for success. Chairman Emery's expertise in construction has been instrumental in all aspects involving the facilities of the DBHA, including his tireless efforts in the development of the Palms of Deerfield Beach Town Homes. It is rare that a local volunteer Board has the good fortune to have someone with Mr. Emery’s construction expertise that is so crucial to the DBHA, and it would be a serious long-term loss to the DBHA and community to remove him from the Board.

B. Richard Sales, Vice Chairman, served as DBHA Commissioner from 2001 through 2005, and was reappointed in May of 2007. A member of the local business community since 2000, he is the owner of Reflections Printing in Deerfield Beach. In addition to Mr. Sales’ community volunteer activity as a Board member, Mr. Sales has also supported Deerfield Beach by his involvement with the Deerfield Beach Chamber of Commerce, NE Focal Point and Deerfield Beach High School’s School Advisory Board.

C. Caryl Berner, Commissioner, was appointed to the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority in April of 2010. She has contributed to the community as a substitute teacher in the Broward County School System since moving to Florida. She devotes herself to many civic and governmental works. She has served as a volunteer on the Board of Master Management in Century Village East, was instrumental in having the City provide a no smoking beach area and working with City staff to institute a Casket Flag Ceremony to honor fallen heroes. She also serves as Chair of the CVE Walk-A-Thon in conjunction with the DB/LP Relay for Life to combat cancer. She is honored to serve the DBHA in their mission to advocate and provide quality of life and opportunities for success to individuals and families.

D. Lee Giannino, Commissioner, is a thirteen-year resident of the City of Deerfield Beach, and has served as DBHA Commissioner since January 2002. Despite his business being severely adversely affected by the national economic downturn, he still takes the time and effort in devoting himself to the mission of the DBHA. Mr. Giannino's other community involvement includes serving as a past Vice President and member of Crime-Stoppers for over ten years and serving on the Broward County Land Development Board.

E. Ernestine Gray, Commissioner, was appointed as Commissioner in June 2008. Ms. Gray has been Affordable Housing resident at the Stanley Terrace Apartments in good standing since 1998. She also currently serves as a board member of the Stanley Terrace Resident Council. Ms. Gray is active in doing her part to contribute to the community in improving the lives of others.

F. Dr. Alan Leavitt, Commissioner, is a sensitive caring chiropractic physician who is dedicated to providing professional care and treatment and in assisting his patient's in staying healthy. Dr. Leavitt is very supportive of the mission of the DBHA and devotes his volunteer time generously to it.

The DBHA Board of Commissioners are decent, well meaning people whose volunteer efforts should be appreciated by the Mayor and City Commissioners, rather than being the unfair objects of Chaz Stevens’ and the Mayor’s false statements. It is morally wrong for the Mayor to use her office to tarnish these volunteers’ reputations by saying she has legal cause to remove them from the DBHA Board.

… It is hoped that since the Mayor refuses to meet with HUD and the Executive Director of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority while she awaits the results of the Inspector General evaluation, that the Mayor and City Commissioners will not act prematurely in wrongfully judging the DBHA Board and/or Executive Director guilty before the Inspector General’s evaluation, especially in light of the facts presented in this letter and attachments demonstrating the misunderstanding the Mayor has concerning true facts. Of course, the Mayor and City Commissioners have the power to engage in a Stalinist show trial and wrongfully prematurely condemn the entire DBHA Board as the Mayor threatened on June 21st. But, perhaps there might be a glimmer of thought given to the public purpose of such a blatant sham, and the long-term negative consequences to the City of such reckless and imprudent action. Since the Mayor wanted an Inspector General evaluation and she has gotten her wish, she should at least wait for the results of that evaluation.

LAW OFFICES
BOUTWELL & CONNICK
A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
POST OFFICE BOX 1186
411 EAST HILLSBORO BOULEVARD
DEERFIELD BEACH, FLORIDA 33441

ROBERT E. BOUTWELL, P.A. TELEPHONE: 954-428-0300
A. THOMAS CONNICK, P.A. FAX: 954-428-6506

July 15, 2011

Mayor Peggy Noland
Vice Mayor Marty Popelsky
Commissioner Joe Miller
Commissioner Bill Ganz
150 NE 2nd Avenue
Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441

Re: Deerfield Beach Housing Authority (“DBHA”)

Dear Mayor and Commissioners:
I am writing this letter as special co-counsel for the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority (hereinafter “DBHA”) in this matter.

The DBHA desires to fulfill its mission of providing quality affordable housing and self-sufficiency programs that improve the quality of life for individuals and families in Deerfield Beach. Interfering with that mission have been the relentless attacks, harassment and misinformation of Chaz Stevens that has been accepted by the Mayor. The DBHA Board of Commissioners in fulfilling their duties as unpaid volunteers have sought to reasonably and fairly protect the Housing Authority. In that effort, they continue to be attacked by Chaz Stevens and the Mayor. The DBHA is responding to these attacks. The contents of this letter and its Attachments are to give you factual information and reasonable inferences to be drawn from that factual information.

The DBHA again requests that the Mayor meet with the DBHA Executive Director and HUD, something the Mayor refuses to do. The DBHA again requests that each member of the City Commission meet with the Executive Director concerning any questions that a City Commissioner may have, which invitation has never been responded to.

HUD’s Favorable Evaluations of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority

1. The Deerfield Beach Housing Authority is run in a proficient manner as determined by HUD in numerous evaluations.
Did you know that 88.88% of the funding for DBHA is from HUD?
Did you know that the funding for DBHA for the last fiscal year (ending 9-30-2010) was:
88.88% - HUD
9.16% - Tenant Revenue
1.78% - other revenue
.18% - Interest
(See Audit - Attachment “5”, page 7).
Did you know that the DBHA must comply with HUD rules for those matters in which HUD is the source of funding?

So, while the DBHA is a Housing Authority created under Chapter 421, Florida Statutes, which statutorily provides that the Mayor has the authority to name and the City Commissioners the right to approve the DBHA Board of Commissioners, the rules and requirements that the DBHA must meet are under the control of HUD. The following recent satisfactory evaluations from HUD are attached (there are no unsatisfactory evaluations from HUD) and these reports (with the exception of the Audit in subparagraph E) have been previously provided to the Mayor and City Manager:

A. Attachment “1” – January 19, 2011 letter indicating that the Housing Authority of Deerfield Beach’s final Section 8 Management Assessment Program score for the fiscal year ending 9-30-2010 was 93% which places the DBHA’s overall performance rating as High.

B. Attachment “2” – January 21, 2011 Public Housing Assessment System Score was 84 out of 100, with Management scoring 30 out of 30 and Financial scoring 27 out of 30.

C. Attachment “3” – February 1, 2011 HUD On-Site Monitoring Report January 26-27, 2011 indicated that there were no issues concerning the ARRA funds.

D. Attachment “4” – February 4, 2011 Limited Procurement Review.

E. Attachment “5” – Most recent Audit of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority, done by a CPA firm that is familiar with auditing Housing Authorities and is capable of auditing Housing Authorities.

2. Over the past 21 years, the DBHA has consistently benefitted the City of Deerfield Beach by providing affordable housing to residents of Deerfield Beach. In addition to fulfilling all of its other obligations, the DBHA as recently as 2008 brought a major affordable housing project success to Deerfield Beach with the Palms of Deerfield Beach Town Homes, a sophisticated complex venture utilizing 4% tax credits and low-income credit tax bonds. It was DBHA’s skill and innovation along with positive cooperation of a number of governmental agencies that was responsible for bringing 56 Affordable Housing Units (townhomes) to Deerfield Beach in project known as Palms of Deerfield Beach Town Homes (it is noted and appreciated the cooperation given at that time by the City, including the Deerfield Beach Building Department cooperation).

3. The DBHA Properties:

A. DBHA owns and operates Stanley Terrace, a 96 unit family housing complex,

B. DBHA owns and operates The Palms, a 100 unit elderly housing complex.

[Because low cost housing is provided, tenant revenues account for only 9.16% of the DBHA income (as indicated above, 88.88% of DBHA funding comes from HUD)].

C. DBHA also manages the 56 unit Palms of Deerfield Beach Town Homes.

D. The DBHA also administers 481 Housing Choice Vouchers (previously referred to and still commonly referred to as “Section 8 Housing”).

4. The DBHA also:

A. DBHA runs the Family Self-Sufficiency Program.

B. DBHA is a certified Housing Counseling Agency, which benefits the City in the City’s efforts to assist for first time homebuyers. DBHA has been successful in obtaining grant resources for self-sufficiency and family and children service programs.

C. Owns and operates the Business Skills Center.

5. The activities of the DBHA are responsible for bringing Money and Jobs to Deerfield Beach as a result of the construction work from funding resources.

The Board of Commissioners of Deerfield Beach Housing Authority consists of Citizen Volunteers giving for free to the Community

6. The Board of Commissioners of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority are citizen volunteers who freely give their time and efforts to the community in providing through the DBHA affordable housing to those in need and access to self-sufficiency and community programs. These DBHA Commissioners work without compensation – they give of their time and effort to the community for free. And, for their efforts in assisting the community, Mayor Noland wrongfully smears them by publicly announcing that she plans on bringing charges against the entire DBHA Board of Commissioners because the Mayor lacks the backbone to stand up to Chaz Stevens’ bullying. Despite the DBHA reaching out to the Mayor and Commission, neither the Mayor nor any City Commissioner has shown any interest in meeting with the DBHA Executive Director or the DBHA Board. The DBHA Board of Commissioners are flesh and blood people who are in good faith performing their volunteer duties for free while being vilified by Chaz Stevens and the Mayor:

A. Keith Emery, Chairman, has devoted 19 years as a member of the Board, with 11 of those years as Chairman. Mr. Emery is President of CMS-Construction Management Services, Inc. His company has a thirty-two year history in Deerfield Beach. The motivation behind Mr. Emery’s dedication in devoting his time and construction expertise as a citizen volunteer stems from his concern for promoting the development of self-sufficiency in individuals with limited resources. His primary focus is providing to those less fortunate affordable housing and new opportunities for success. Chairman Emery's expertise in construction has been instrumental in all aspects involving the facilities of the DBHA, including his tireless efforts in the development of the Palms of Deerfield Beach Town Homes. It is rare that a local volunteer Board has the good fortune to have someone with Mr. Emery’s construction expertise that is so crucial to the DBHA, and it would be a serious long-term loss to the DBHA and community to remove him from the Board.

B. Richard Sales, Vice Chairman, served as DBHA Commissioner from 2001 through 2005, and was reappointed in May of 2007. A member of the local business community since 2000, he is the owner of Reflections Printing in Deerfield Beach. In addition to Mr. Sales’ community volunteer activity as a Board member, Mr. Sales has also supported Deerfield Beach by his involvement with the Deerfield Beach Chamber of Commerce, NE Focal Point and Deerfield Beach High School’s School Advisory Board.

C. Caryl Berner, Commissioner, was appointed to the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority in April of 2010. She has contributed to the community as a substitute teacher in the Broward County School System since moving to Florida. She devotes herself to many civic and governmental works. She has served as a volunteer on the Board of Master Management in Century Village East, was instrumental in having the City provide a no smoking beach area and working with City staff to institute a Casket Flag Ceremony to honor fallen heroes. She also serves as Chair of the CVE Walk-A-Thon in conjunction with the DB/LP Relay for Life to combat cancer. She is honored to serve the DBHA in their mission to advocate and provide quality of life and opportunities for success to individuals and families.

D. Lee Giannino, Commissioner, is a thirteen-year resident of the City of Deerfield Beach, and has served as DBHA Commissioner since January 2002. Despite his business being severely adversely affected by the national economic downturn, he still takes the time and effort in devoting himself to the mission of the DBHA. Mr. Giannino's other community involvement includes serving as a past Vice President and member of Crime-Stoppers for over ten years and serving on the Broward County Land Development Board.

E. Ernestine Gray, Commissioner, was appointed as Commissioner in June 2008. Ms. Gray has been Affordable Housing resident at the Stanley Terrace Apartments in good standing since 1998. She also currently serves as a board member of the Stanley Terrace Resident Council. Ms. Gray is active in doing her part to contribute to the community in improving the lives of others.

F. Dr. Alan Leavitt, Commissioner, is a sensitive caring chiropractic physician who is dedicated to providing professional care and treatment and in assisting his patient's in staying healthy. Dr. Leavitt is very supportive of the mission of the DBHA and devotes his volunteer time generously to it.

A. Before becoming Executive Director in 1989, Pamela Davis had previous jobs assisting the poor in South Florida as an employee of Legal Aid of Broward County and as the Property Manager of the Boca Raton Housing Authority.

B. In 1989, over 21 years ago, the condition of the Housing Authority was a shambles:

- Broward County Health Department had violations against the Housing Authority for rat and insect infestation

- The City had health and safety issues concerning the Housing Authority

- The residents of Stanley Terrace were on a rent strike - The Housing Authority could not pay its current bills - The Housing Authority had no credit

- The Housing Authority had no reserves

- The Housing Authority had over $30,000 in indebtedness to Internal Revenue Service for non-payment of withholding taxes and Social Security taxes

- The renovation at Stanley Terrace was being mismanaged

- The Housing Authority only had 50 Section 8 vouchers that had not even been administered

- The Housing Authority had no resident initiatives

C. In 1989, Pamela Davis accepted the job as Executive Director and the daunting task of turning around the DBHA. Pam Davis has quietly and professionally administered the DBHA in an exemplary manner for the past 21 years with the direction of the DBHA Board of Commissioners and the oversight of HUD. Pam has never been involved in politics and has devoted herself to a career in which she believed that if she did her job satisfactorily, that was sufficient. Decency, hard work and competency by a good governmental administrator like Pam Davis should be valued, rather than having her career attacked by mean, vicious people. Chaz Stevens can lie and misrepresent, but it doesn’t change the truth, and the truth is with Pam Davis. Mayor Noland can believe and parrot the lies she is told by Chaz Stevens, but that does not make them true.

The Deerfield Beach Housing Authority addresses issues raised by Mayor Peggy Noland during her comments at the end of the June 21, 2011 Commission meeting (the DBHA had no idea that the Mayor was going to speak about the DBHA at that meeting, and only found out about the Mayor’s comments after the meeting had occurred):

7. The Deerfield Beach Housing Authority in good faith believes it has submitted to the City of Deerfield Beach those records requested by the City. The following documentation is attached:

A. Attachment “6” - May 28, 2010 letter with attachment from City to DBHA. This request was exceedingly voluminous and would have required review of voluminous records and redaction of information to insure that there was not a violation of Federal and State law concerning the privacy rights of tenants.

B. Attachment “7” – June 23, 2010 letter from City to DBHA. The significance of this letter and attachment is that it clearly states it is a REVISED RECORD REQUEST, thus the attachment to the June 23, 2010 letter became the operative record request, replacing the attachment to the May 28, 2010 letter.

C. Attachment “8” – emails from DBHA to City indicating the records being provided by DBHA to City. Please note the second to last page of Attachment 3 in which the DBHA advises the City that line item 5 that had previously not been provided would be provided on January 7, 2011. Also note that the last page of Attachment 3 indicates that line item 5 was available for pick up January 7, 2011. The DBHA never received anything further from the City indicating that the City desired any additional documents from the DBHA.

Based upon the above documentation, the DBHA in good faith believes that it provided the City with everything that the City requested. The DBHA believes that the Mayor has been misinformed concerning the DBHA not providing records that were requested, and she continues to repeat this misinformation.

The DBHA does not have any record of the City requesting any further documentation after January 7, 2011. The DBHA believes that there is no such documentation. Consequently, the DBHA requests that the City immediately provide the DBHA with what the City claims is written documentation to the DBHA after January 7, 2011 that indicates that the City desired additional documents that were never provided by DBHA. In the event that the City is able to provide such written documentation of such a written request by the City to the DBHA after January 7, 2011, the DBHA will apologize and immediately furnish pursuant to the DBHA’s public request procedures.

8. The City never provided the DBHA with the Kessler Report dated February 28, 2011 and the City never asked the DBHA for any comments concerning the report. After being advised of the Mayor’s comments at the end of the June 21, 2011 Commission meeting, the DBHA later that week obtained a copy of the report. DBHA promptly forwarded that Kessler Report to HUD. HUD and the Executive Director of the DBHA requested to meet with the Mayor, but the Mayor has refused to meet with the DBHA Executive Director and HUD as is discussed in the immediately following paragraph 9.

By the way, the February 28, 2011 Kessler Report contains a blatant lie by Kessler on page 10 of the Report, wherein Kessler states, “Although numerous records were requested by Kessler, DBHA did not supply these documents.” (Attachment “9”) Kessler never requested any records from the DBHA. The DBHA requests that the City demand from Kessler written documentation to back up his false claim that he (Kessler) requested records from the DBHA, because Kessler did not. It will be conclusively shown that Kessler never requested records from the DBHA. It is clearly stated in paragraph 7 immediately above that the City requested records from the DBHA and that history is provided in Attachments “6”, “7” and “8”. But that request was from the City, and those records requested from the City were in good faith provided as discussed in paragraph 7 immediately above. No documents were ever, I repeat: No documents were ever requested by Kessler to the DBHA, so Kessler is blatantly lying when he says he requested records from the DBHA that were not supplied.

Is the Mayor so determined to condemn the DBHA, its Board and its Executive Director that she will rely upon a lie from Kessler falsely claiming Kessler requested records from the DBHA? Will the Mayor accept the fact the DBHA in good faith supplied the City with all documents the City requested of the DBHA and that the City never after January 7th requested additional documents or indicated what, if any, records the City had requested that had not been supplied?

9. DBHA has requested meetings with the Mayor, but the Mayor refuses to meet with the DBHA.

- Executive Director Pam Davis met with City Manager Burgess Hanson on March 31, 2011 and June 29, 2011 in order to improve communication between City and DBHA. The DBHA believes that the City Manager sincerely desires a good relationship between the City and DBHA. However, the City Manager is the Chief Administrator for the City, and not the Mayor or a City Commissioner.

- Attachment “10”: June 2, 2011, DBHA sends an email to City’s scheduling secretary for Mayor and Commissioners requesting opportunity to meet separately with Mayor and Commissioners. DBHA also requests that the Mayor and City Commissioners attend a “meet and greet” with the Board of Commissioners of the DBHA and the DBHA’s desire to provide the City Commission with an overview of the DBHA. The Mayor and City Commissioners never responded to that email.

- Attachment “11”: June 29, 2011 letter with attachments from Chairman of DBHA to the City Manager very briefly addressing the issues that the Mayor raised at the end of the June 21, 2011 Commission meeting, and requesting that the Mayor and Commissioners meet with the DBHA Executive Director. That letter has never been responded to.

- July 6, 2011, the Executive Director contacted the Mayor requesting a meeting with the DBHA Executive Director and HUD. The Mayor refused such a meeting, claiming that she (the Mayor) will not meet since there has been a presently pending request for an Inspector General evaluation. Obviously, the DBHA and HUD cannot force the Mayor to meet.

Kessler’s February 28, 2011 Report is Not an Audit.

10. As pointed out above, the DBHA is overseen by HUD, which provides 88.88% of DBHA’s funding (9.16% funding from Tenant Revenue; 1.78% from other revenue; .18% from interest). The City acknowledges that the City does not have the legal right, power or authority to do an audit of the DBHA.

Yet the City Commission in this time of extreme fiscal constraints wasted taxpayer money in the approximate amount of $30,000 (the exact amount will be known through a public record request by the DBHA general legal counsel to the City of Deerfield Beach) to have Kessler do a report, not an audit, concerning the DBHA, despite the fact that the DBHA is under the supervision of HUD and despite the fact that the HUD has a huge stake in the funding of the DBHA.

The situations involving investigation of the Mango Festival, in which the City spent considerable funds, or an investigation of City departments, which are under the direct authority, supervision and control of the City are far different than the City wasting precious taxpayer dollars on a superficial report from a non-CPA of an independent Housing Authority. The DBHA is overwhelming funded by HUD, overseen by HUD, has inspections and evaluations done by HUD and annually has an audit by a Florida CPA firm that is both experienced in HUD audits and can do HUD audits. It simply made no reasonable economic sense to waste City taxpayer dollars on a private individual’s (Chaz Stevens’ bizarre obsession).

KESSLER DID NOT DO AN AUDIT. Kessler cleverly uses words – he does not purport to do an “audit” yet Kessler freely allows others to mis-describe what he does as an “audit”, knowing that Kessler’s superficial work product is not an “audit.”

Kessler Has Serious Impartiality and Credibility Issues.

11. There are serious impartiality and credibility issues with Kessler. The City Commission has known about Kessler’s serious impartiality and credibility issues since at least as early as June 2010. I provided written documentation to the Mayor and Commissioners concerning the below subparagraphs in June 2010 (except for subparagraph “C” which happened after June 2010, but was predictable in light of Kessler’s lack of impartiality and credibility). And, the City had the opportunity to obtain additional information from its own due diligence. Yet despite this knowledge, the Mayor and City Commission allowed Kessler to continue on his report and paid Kessler Deerfield Beach taxpayer funds in the approximate amount of $30,000 (the exact amount will be known through a public record request of the City of Deerfield Beach) for Kessler’s worthless superficial February 28, 2011 “Report”. The City has never contested, challenged or contradicted the following facts:

A. Kessler is not a CPA. Attachment “12” is information from New York State listing Certified Public Accountants. Michael Kessler’s name is absent. Michael G. Kessler is also not listed as a CPA in Florida. It is the belief of the DBHA that if the City Commission truly wanted an impartial audit, it would have selected one of the many capable Florida CPA firms who do audits or a CPA firm that has experience in auditing Housing Authorities, rather than a destructive small private investigation company located in Long Island, New York.

B. Kessler’s website and self-promotion as it existed at the time Kessler obtained his contract with the City was intentionally misleading. Attachment “13” shows Kessler’s website in June 2010 indicating that “Kessler International” had far sweeping prestigious Office location addresses in Class “A” offices both nationally and internationally. Attachment “14” is a composite Attachment showing how these offices are really a phony façade to give the misleading impression of a large international firm with prestige office locations throughout the country and world. The impressive photographs of Kessler office locations are in reality “mailbox locations” where Kessler does not really conduct regular business. Included in Kessler’s farce of “mail box” locations are Kessler’s alleged “World Headquarters” at Rockefeller Plaza and, of significance to Deerfield Beach, a Brickell Avenue, Miami location.

C. Kessler’s company is so unprofessional and fawning over Chaz Stevens that Kessler further tarnished itself as a credible company by creating a vanity award for Chaz Stevens named “The Chaz Award.” Further substantiation of the serious lack of impartiality and credibility is that in October 2010 Kessler formed a corporation in which both Kessler and Chaz Stevens are on the Board of Directors – this was formed during the same period that Kessler was preparing his report concerning the DBHA that was finalized and issued as the February 28, 2011 Kessler Report. What rational person would believe that Kessler could be impartial and credible when Kessler is so close to Chaz Stevens? The answer is: no one. What credible and impartial company would so intertwine itself with someone like Chaz Stevens while preparing a report involving an Agency in which Chaz Stevens has such an obsessive hatred? Answer: no impartial and credible company.

Do the Mayor and City Commission believe that in light of the above that the public or the DBHA Board of Commissioners were unreasonable in not believing that Kessler would do an unbiased and fair “audit” or report concerning the DBHA?

Chaz Stevens is a Negative Force seeking to destroy the DBHA, its Board and Executive Director.

12. Chaz Stevens is a negative force seeking to destroy the DBHA, its Board of Commissioners and Executive Director. Chaz Stevens’ public writings disqualify him from serving on any public Board:

A. Chaz Stevens has referred to Mayor Noland as a “cunt”, “Twat” and “Twatster” (see Attachments “15” and “16”).

B. Chaz Stevens has referred to Congressman West as, among other things, “Douche nozzle.” (see attachment “17”)

C. Chaz Stevens publicly taunts DBHA Executive Director saying, “Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.” (see Attachment “18”) and publicly taunts the Executive Director with criminal references like, “DBHA Director Davis Off to Jail?” (see Attachment “19”)

D. Chaz Stevens publicly speaks about Pam Davis in racist and criminal terms. Attached as Attachment “20” is an excerpt from Chaz Stevens’ blog “MOAS (“My Acts of Sedition”) of July 10, 2011, in which Chaz Stevens says the following (emphasis supplied):

Bullshit. Davis has been reading my emails. I hope she took the time to read the Kessler report (though it’s not in eubonic)…

Stevens goes on to reference: “… the clinking sound of handcuffs going around Davis’ wrist.”

Attachment “21” is the Urban Dictionary’s definition of “eubonics”: The supposed way black people speak.

E. Despite knowing the vulgarity of Chaz Stevens, around the same time period as the City Commission was voting to unwisely misuse City taxpayer funds for Kessler to do a report of the DBHA, in a 3-2 vote at the request of Mayor Noland, City Commissioners ratified her appointment of Chaz Stevens as a member of the Board of Commissioners of the DBHA (Vice Mayor Popelsky is commended for his strong opposition against Chaz Stevens being appointed to the DBHA Board of Commissioners).

Any reasonable person would have seen the placing of such a negative person on a public board as an indication by the Mayor and City Commissioners of a disrespect and contempt of the DBHA as well as sending a message to our children and young adults that such behavior is tolerable to the elected officials of Deerfield Beach because such behavior does not disqualify Chaz Stevens from being named to a public Board.

Would any rational person want their daughter, sister or wife working for an entity where this vulgar bully Chaz Stevens was one of her bosses? Of course not.

Would any reasonable person think that it was a responsible exercise of public policy for a Mayor to name and a Commission to ratify placing on a public Board a person to a public board who has such an unhealthy obsession with female genitalia name calling such as “cunt”, “Twat”, “Twatster” and “Douche nozzle” in referring to public officials? Of course not. Yet, knowing the despicable behavior of Chaz Stevens, the Mayor and City Commissioners placed Chaz Stevens on the DBHA Board anyway. Chaz Stevens resigned from the DBHA Board soon after his appointment.

Deerfield Beach Housing Authority will comply with Inspector General evaluation.

13. The Mayor refuses to meet with the Executive Director of the Housing Authority and HUD because she claims she cannot meet because there is an anticipated Inspector General evaluation. Of course, the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority will fully cooperate with the Inspector General. The Inspector General has proper authority and jurisdiction over the DBHA and whatever decisions it determines appropriate concerning the Housing Authority.

Conclusion.

14. It is hoped that since the Mayor refuses to meet with HUD and the Executive Director of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority while she awaits the results of the Inspector General evaluation, that the Mayor and City Commissioners will not act prematurely in wrongfully judging the DBHA Board and/or Executive Director guilty before the Inspector General’s evaluation, especially in light of the facts presented in this letter and attachments demonstrating the misunderstanding the Mayor has concerning true facts. Of course, the Mayor and City Commissioners have the power to engage in a Stalinist show trial and wrongfully prematurely condemn the entire DBHA Board as the Mayor threatened on June 21st. But, perhaps there might be a glimmer of thought given to the public purpose of such a blatant sham, and the long-term negative consequences to the City of such reckless and imprudent action. Since the Mayor wanted an Inspector General evaluation and she has gotten her wish, she should at least wait for the results of that evaluation.

Thank you for your courtesy in reading this letter and attachments.

Sincerely,

TOM CONNICK

cc: Congressman Allen West
Keith Emery, Chairman of DBHA
Richard Sales, Vice Chairman of DBHA
Caryl Berner, Commissioner of DBHA
Lee Giannino, Commissioner of DBHA
Ernestine Gray, Commissioner of DBHA
Dr. Alan Leavitt, Commissioner of DBHA
Pamela Davis, Executive Director of DBHA
William G. Crawford, Jr., Esquire, co-counsel for DBHA on this special matter and general legal counsel for DBHA
Burgess Hanson, City Manager
Andy Maurodis, City Attorney
Ada Graham Johnson, City Clerk

Ouch, that hurt!

2011-07-05T10:49:00.000-07:00

I just received a shiny "Water Quality Report" notice from the City of Deerfield Beach, printed in full color on 11x17 glossy paper. According to a quick Google price check it cost well over $1,500 to print and who knows how much to mail to every house. This is a slap in the face to everyone the city laid off and everyone who is now going to have to pay a utility tax because the city needs the money.

This could be printed on copy paper and included in the water bill. I don’t need to see the smiling faces of our commissioners and a sunset over Deerfield Beach in full color when reading about the fecal coliform contamination of our water supply.

Should Deerfield Beach Fire\Rescue Department go to BSO?

2011-07-02T05:04:00.000-07:00

Below are residents’ answers to the questions:

What do you think the pros and cons are of the Deerfield Beach Fire\Rescue Department moving to the Broward County Sheriff (BSO)? Are you in favor of the move or not? (As more answers come in they will be posted)

• I believe it will be the same employees so that is ok, no one looses their job. AND if it gets rid of the Fire Assessment, that it is a GOOD thing!! D.A.

• YES, it is a great move! It will save Deerfield Beach a lot of money both now and, what's even more important, in the future too. Let’s do it. Thanks for asking. J.H.

• I am very concerned about turning over more than 50% of our budget to BSO. While there are claims of savings for the first few years, these may be eclipsed in the near future by increases in BSO costs we will have virtually no control over. As we know, once you turn your fire or police over to BSO, it is extremely expensive to bring them back as city employees. The only way I would consider doing this is with a 10 year contract that would specify the number of officers we would have per thousand residents and hold the annual increases in our cost to a certain percentage. If my memory serves me right, the police BSO contract we had did have a maximum % increase that was allowed. I think the contract term was three or five years. My concern is also that BSO is under control of the county. If they tell BSO you have to cut the budget as they did last year, we have virtually no say in how BSO determines where to make the cuts. I think we need figure out how to reduce the cost of our fire department and keep them as city employees. The vast majority of our fire fighters do not live in Deerfield. So from their perspective, they probably want to go wherever the pay, working conditions, pension and advancement opportunities are the best. As for getting additional use of high tech equipment if we go to BSO, I believe we can use this now, if we really need it. I cannot really think of any good reason to do this unless we actually save a lot of money over an extended period of time. P.M.

• I have changed my mind several times on this subject. The only thing I feel strongly about is that it should not be "voted on" by the public. We have elected officials for a reason. The big "con" is the lack of home rule and the fact that DB would have all of its "eggs" in the BSO basket. In the middle, is the thing that you always hear me talking about; what are the hard numbers? The savings need to be greater than just turning our equipment into cash. Having spent some time looking into what is happening is other parts of the country I feel that taking an early step towards regionalization is the only thing that makes sense. That is therefore the big "pro". At the end of the day I come down on the side of reducing our budget and going with BSO AS LONG AS THERE ARE SOME VERY SERIOUS SAVINGS. S. P.

• I previously voted to not move forward with the consolidation. My confidence in our City government has diminished to the point that I trust the County more than our elected officials. H.A.

• I support the move to BSO and believe that the die was cast years ago when the commission passed generous pension increases the city can't afford to pay. D.G.

• Sheriff Lamberti was not fair to the FireFighters that are currently employed with BSO. Ask their Union President. K

• In favor S. J.

• I still haven't decided. I still think we are still over staffed. J.Z.

• I am not really in favor of it…And I am concerned about what the Sheriff’s department may try to do and actually do to our parking lot behind the fire station. I doubt they will leave it as is. I highly suspect that they will make changes that diminish our use of our publically owned land. The Broward County Sheriff’s Department has grown so large! We would be just another notch on their gigantic corporate-like bed post. They will almost certainly call for renovations to our existing facility. Who’s going to pay for that? Not the Broward County Sheriff’s Dept. I’m sure. In this initial; round of negotiations, has this been discussed? M.B.

• It depends on the service lose/gain and our cost$$$ up/down. C.M.

• I know at least two firemen and their families who are for the move. I have been told that it will save the city money and they have contracted for the same level of service. That will be proven correct or not as time goes on. I guess that means I am for it.

(However, I am currently working on trying to stop a Detox facility from being located adjacent to the Cove neighborhood. We are looking for support and ideas for the July 7th planning meeting. The neighborhood had a meeting last week at the Old School house which was well attended. Way more people than chairs. Even our Mayor and District 1 Councilman were present, both very last minute additions. Joe Miller says he has proposed banning FUTURE operations from being located in residential areas and has said privately that he did not understand what he was voting for last year when the council amended the zoning to allow this (Unanimous approval, no discussion in minutes). Frankly, I think if it isn’t a good idea for the future, then it isn’t a good idea now either. The proposed location is the building that used to house “Reel Smokers World” on Federal. This property butts up to family residences with no security proposed. I would really like to give you more info, get ideas that your readers would like to share and get the word out to as many people as possible to attend the Zoning and Planning meeting July 7th. Which was moved yesterday to the Old School house. I guess we will have to bring our own chairs. http://www.facebook.com/pages/No-Detox-Facility-in-Our-Neighborhood/227225527305046 ) M. S.

• Don't know enough about it to have an opinion. E. M.

• The City could do a better job and and create a greater cost-savings than a BSO merger ever could. D.C.

• I think turning over more than 50 percent of the City’s Budget is a problem. I also think that this issue should go to referendum so that the Voters will have a say. The Mayor was told by the city attorney that she could vote on the BSO Merger, but I don’t understand why, when there is definitely a conflict of interest on her part. Commissioner Popelsky said that he believes in home rule, but wants to see the figures in the contract before he makes a decision. I think Commissioner Popelsky is correct about seeing the figures and hopefully the contract proposal will be open to the public, so both the commissions and the Public are more enlightened about this possible Merger. M. H.

• PLEASE talk to the Fire Fighters UNION chiefs they have a huge story to tell! Then ask the Fire Fighters that work for the City (all of them) and get their input! K.

• Great move, this should save the ccity a little more money. E.J.

Scenic Highway Video

2011-06-17T08:49:00.000-07:00

This video is just out, showing the Scenic Highways in Florida, I was on the committee to get A1A in Broward Coundy designated as a Scenic Highway, it took YEARS of documentation and paperwork. Recently it was accepted by the state. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVw5ouyrFlY

It's Working!! The Cove Shopping Center is Lookin' Good!

2011-06-15T11:08:00.000-07:00

It’s WORKING!! Redoing the Cove Shopping Center parking lot is attracting upgrades and new businesses exactly as area residents predicted when the parking lot fix-up was first proposed many years ago.

Fixing up the center was a priority for Pam Militello when she was elected to the commission. She worked to make the center what the residents and businesses wanted. After many meetings and workshops and proposals, a plan evolved.

Getting the plan off the ground took much too long, cronyism and politics reared their ugly little heads. It took much too much fighting with the commission to get the peoples’ will done, but finally the Cove is starting to look better. And the predicted is happening.

The Station House Restaurant started things off; their Key West style building set the tone for the rest of the center. A couple of the existing businesses took advantage of the CRA funds for façade upgrades and painted and added some Key West type touches. The 2 Georges Restaurant has applied for a CRA façade improvement incentive with plans to do a really spectacular re-do.

At Tuesday’s CRA meeting a discussion of the problem with new businesses and allotted parking showed the city looking to make things easier for new businesses moving in, and we heard about a proposed new upscale Italian Restaurant.

In spite of the gloom and doom of the naysayers, including our mayor, the Cove Shopping Center will soon not only look better, but it will have businesses that will attract many visitors and will be a “destination” in Deerfield Beach.

Let me say a loud, I TOLD YOU SO!!!

Vote on BSO Use

2011-06-10T07:48:00.000-07:00

I was wrong when I stated that the intent of the charter provision about a vote on city property was restricted to city property going to developers. The intent is to have voter control over the USE of the property, and having BSO, not the City of Deerfield Beach, use the facilities should trigger a vote. I am strongly in favor of the issue going to the voters. I also think that the voters deserve a complete disclosure of what the BSO proposal will entail now and in future years.

My feeling about the merger has not changed. I am against giving BSO control over what now is 52% of our budget, and who knows to what the percent will grow in future years. The voters of the city have the right to say what should be done with property they own, WE deserve to decide.

BSO Merger

2011-06-08T08:05:00.000-07:00

Seeing Joe Miller forcefully stand up for his position was almost worth the agony of the long drawn out session Tuesday evening. It gave me a glimmer of the person he could be if he continues to think for himself with his constituents in mind, and stops trying so hard to make the commission into one happy family.

Marty Popelsky won the evening with his clear thinking about the BSO proposal. He was absolutely right to question the amount of savings the merger would bring, and to want to move forward with the proposal to see the hard numbers. His reasoning was spot on. We need to see the numbers and get a complete understanding of what a merger would entail. We should know all the pros and cons. No one, neither the commission nor the public, in the event of a vote, can make a decision without seeing the proposal.

I agree with Bill Ganz that voting on the property use (which would be, in effect, a vote yes or no to merge with BSO) is a good idea, but I was persuaded by the argument by the city manager and the city attorney that the intent of the original referendum was not to prevent the city from allowing governmental use of the buildings. The intent was to prevent city owned property from being leased or sold to developers without the approval of the voters.

I know the budget crisis calls for innovative fund raising ideas. But, I still think giving the sheriff long term control over 52% of our budget is a mistake. Marty said he is a fan of home rule, again I agree with him.

(To watch the video of the discussion go to: http://deerfieldbeach.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2
click on June 7, video and scroll down on the agenda items to agenda item #26)

Cheaper Isn't Always Better

2011-06-06T08:14:00.000-07:00

Should we merge our fire/rescue with BSO? This proposal worries me. I say NO, NO, a couple of million times NO. This is purely a money saving decision and will prove to be penny wise and pound foolish. We will save money this year and maybe next, and then the upward spiral will start, by the time we realize this was a bad decision, it will be too late and we will be stuck if we want to change anything.

In yesterday’s paper we saw a report of disgraced Sheriff Jenne’s plush office furnishings, part of our police costs went to furnish that palace; do we want to add our fire budget to this kind of abuse? The new sheriff may be better, but what about future sheriffs? What about negotiations for salary, what if we want to go in a different direction with the makeup of the fire department. CONTROL will be out of our hands. What would happen, for example if down the line we want to separate the fire from the rescue, or add trained volunteers to cut down costs? If we are with BSO those possibilities would be impossible. What if we decide we need more coverage and in an improving economy we want to expand, if the sheriff says no, that’s it. We will have lost control.

BUT, the most compelling reason for not merging is if we have BSO for both police and fire, OVER 50% of our yearly budget, EVERY YEAR, will be controlled by the sheriff, we will be handcuffed to whatever budget he comes up with. We will have no control over salaries etc. Will the savings continue? Or, is this a low ball figure which will go higher and higher as the years go by? I heard that Lake Worth is regretting their switch to PBSO and now cannot afford the upfront costs to go back to a city managed force.

When the referendum is on the ballot to vote yes or no to allow the BSO to use our fire/rescue facilities I intend to vote NO.

RIP Growth Management

2011-06-04T10:24:00.000-07:00

Listen closely....I think I hear a bugle playing "Taps" for Florida.

(Graphic thanks to http://eyeonmiami.blogspot.com/2011/05/i-cant-say-how-i-feel-with-words-by.html)

June 3, 2011

An obituary for Florida Growth Management
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/an-obituary-for-florida-growth-management/1173456

By Times Wire

Growth management, an imperfect but noble effort to protect Florida from selfishness and greed, died Thursday (June 2, 2011). The cause of death was legislation passed by a Legislature lacking perspective and signed into law by Rick Scott, a new governor ignorant of the state's history and indifferent about its future. . Growth Management was 26 years old. The agency that oversaw it, the now-vanquished Department of Community Affairs, is survived by a handful of relatives not up to carrying on the mission: water management districts decimated by spending cuts; regional planning councils and similar agencies with little authority; and county commissions with neither the will nor the vision to stand up to developers.

Born in 1985, Growth Management was supported in its youth by governors and legislators from both political parties who looked beyond the next election and were determined to keep Florida from strangling itself. The state had been growing wildly for decades, with local governments unwilling to say no to sprawling subdivisions, strip shopping centers and other commercial de-velopments of all shapes and sizes. Huge chunks of undeveloped land disappeared almost over-night, traffic jams became routine, and overcrowded schools became suburban fixtures. Flori-dians feared their slice of paradise was being lost.

Growth Management was an ambitious attempt to bring some sanity to the mad rush to pave over Florida. It required cities and counties to plan for growth, determine where and how much devel-opment would be permitted, and forecast how roads, utilities and other services would be paid for to accommodate it all. Most important, the 1985 law gave the state the authority to approve or reject those plans. And under a concept called concurrency, developers eventually were forced to help pay for new roads, schools and parks to accommodate the growth their projects generat-ed. In the late '80s and early '90s, Growth Management was a given. The question was how to pay for it. Florida never resolved that question, and now the state has given up on the very idea of managing growth.

A proud legacy

Before its demise, Growth Management claimed many successes. Taxpayers did not get stuck with the entire bill for public expenses created by private development. Communities planned better. Many developments moved forward after being redesigned, such as the West¬shore area in Tampa. The state appropriately overruled counties that embraced such shortsighted schemes as allowing development closer to the Everglades in Miami-Dade County, dredging a state aquatic preserve to accommodate a marina and hotel in Taylor County, and building hundreds of condos on a mobile home park site on a barrier island in Palm Beach County.

Yet the empty shopping centers, backlog of housing and clogged roads are clear evidence that Growth Management did not choke off development. In fact, over the last four years the De-partment of Community Affairs approved changes to county plans to allow for more than 1 mil-lion new residential units and 2.7 billion square feet of commercial development. With the eco-nomic recession and the collapse of the housing market, much of that capacity has yet to be built.

Growth Management had powerful enemies: developers who did not want to pay their fair share; legislators who railed against government regulation; local officials who were too cozy with builders and land-use lawyers. Tom Pelham, who served as secretary of the Department of Community Affairs under two Republican governors and deserves a medal for his commitment to saving Florida, was all but hung in effigy. In the final years, Pelham was the first to acknowl-edge regulations could be overhauled to more fairly assess road costs and better steer develop-ment to urban areas. Rather than fix Growth Management, opponents seized on the economic recession as an opportunity to kill it.

The painful end

Growth Management had been on life support for months as legislators, developers and business groups shamefully repackaged a visionary effort to save Florida into a demon to be slain. Gov. Charlie Crist signaled the beginning of the end in 2009 when he signed the precursor to this year's death sentence. Scott demonized Growth Management as he campaigned for governor last year, and he joined state lawmakers this year in claiming less regulation will create more jobs. They said virtually nothing about creating a quality of life - clean water, clear roads, good schools, nice parks - needed to attract and keep businesses and workers.

A last-ditch plea for a reprieve by former Democratic Gov. Bob Graham, who signed the 1985 legislation into law, and Republican environmentalist Nat Reed failed to sway Scott. Now the state has given up virtually all of its oversight of development and its authority to require devel-opers to help pay for roads, schools and parks. Local governments can pretty much do as they please. Florida has turned the clock back three decades.

Growth Management died quietly. There were no bill-signing ceremonies or front-page headlines to mark its passing. But for Floridians who care about the future of their state, the loss is devas-tating.

Corruption Chart

2011-06-01T06:18:00.000-07:00

Sun Sentinel Corruption Chart

Click on the title above to see which public and Broward County officials are under investigation or serving prison sentences

It's a Mystery

2011-05-30T17:59:00.000-07:00

I don’t know Chaz Stevens, but I know what he has done. I also don’t know why he does what he does, it would take a psychotherapist to figure that out; but the results of his actions are clear.

Constructively he is going after corruption; destructively he has disgusting things to say about everyone except himself who tries to do or write anything about Deerfield Beach. On the one hand he excoriates people for not joining him in his jihad (help he doesn’t really want and would reject if offered) and then criticizes them for what they do.

This Timmy-Come-Lately’s brand of “schadenfreude” (It is not enough that I succeed, you must also fail) is damaging in many ways to the people of Deerfield Beach; especially in discouraging anyone who might want to run for office.

Only a few people care enough about the city to go to commission meetings, to run for office, or to write about the goings on. These few voices have kept watch on our Commission for years, reporting and reacting to what they see, they have made a big difference in the transparency of how our city is run. We have come a long way from the days, not so many years ago, of all business being done behind closed doors prior to each meeting.

These people are to be praised and encouraged, not ridiculed and discouraged. Agree with them or not, the brave few, from the raging granny with the guts to speak her mind week after week, the OSOBs who keep a watch on overdevelopment, a passionate young man, David, who is learning by trial and error, how best to stand up for his beliefs, bloggers Wayne and Jeff, to Arnold, Marge, Pam, Jean, Beulah, Kathy, Joan, Tom, Caryl, David, Jerry, and others, as Peggy puts it, “The same 5 people who go to all the meetings” (many more than 5, but not a crowd) now have to put up with accusations developed from a fertile imagination and being called nitwits, turds, fat, ugly, old and much, much worse.

For what sin? What have they done to deserve this treatment? These are private individuals whose only crime was to come to the attention of Stevens by having an opinion or to publically voice that they had never heard of him, or to ignore him, or support someone whom he is going after.

So what? You say. Well for me, nothing, I will continue to watch and report. If I see, what to me are bad projects I will do what I have done for over 12 years, stir the pot. Save some green space here and some trees there. I am not a nitwit and I have never claimed to be a genius but I will stack my IQ against Stevens’ any day of the week, and nothing a sociopath calls me can change my opinion of myself.

But I have heard others say they will never again speak out in public, or write a letter to the editor, or consider running for office or go to or speak up at commission meetings because of him. That is his devastation. That is just wrong.

Dear Deerfield Beach Mayor and Commissioners:

2011-05-23T12:46:00.001-07:00

There is no doubt in my mind that if you decide to have BSO take over the fire/rescue department you must hold a referendum to approve their use of the city owned facilities. It is very clear in the Charter.

The Deerfield Beach Charter (Section 7.09.) covers a mandated referendum on public property worth more than $750,000 in the case of: “Sale, gift, trade, transfer or lease”. The wording in the charter that makes a vote necessary if BSO takes over the fire/rescue operations is: “Lease is defined as a contract for possession or use of real property.”

Just in case your thinking is “We’re going to do this anyway and let someone try to stop us.” I must say that is not a wise course of action. Very likely there will be a lawsuit brought if the city tries to allow BSO to use the facilities without following the Charter provision.

I assume that a suit will cost more to defend than an election which could be relatively inexpensive if done by mail. Costs aside, think of the results of entering into a contract with BSO, followed by the inevitable lawsuit. The city would undoubtedly lose the suit, forcing a referendum. Think of the mess if the voters refuse to allow the use after already having a signed contract with BSO.

You already have residents up in arms about the possibility of the Commission making this decision without public input, legally mandated or not. The last time the city was deliberating a move to BSO, following the direction of the charter, a referendum, asking if the voters favored allowing the city owned properties to be used by BSO, was voted down. The important impact of that vote was not just the yes or no vote, but that there was a vote at all. Clearly the legal opinion was that it was needed, as it is in the current case.

If the commission votes that they would like to switch to BSO, let the voters have the information that convinced you. Let’s have the pros and cons, spell out your reasons. And then let us vote. It’s the law, and even more important, it’s the right thing to do.

Bett Willett
Co-president, Original Save Our Beach Committee

Why We Need a Vote on the Fire/rescue BSO Proposal.

2011-05-19T14:44:00.000-07:00

The Deerfield Beach Charter (Section 7.09.) covers a mandated referendum on public property worth more than $750,000 in the case of: “Sale, gift, trade, transfer or lease”. The wording in the charter that makes a vote necessary if BSO takes over our fire/rescue operations is: “Lease is defined as a contract for possession or use of real property.”

That’s pretty clear, if BSO is going to use our firehouses which are surely worth over $750,000 there has to be a referendum vote by the Deerfield Beach voters.

The last time that question was up for a vote a vast majority of voters turned the idea down. Now, the proposal is being considered again and considering the savings to the city, the vote might be different.

Yes or NO? It is certain that the move is only being considered to save money.

Concerns that have been raised are that if both fire and police are handled by BSO, over 52% of our budget will be controlled by the sheriff. We will have no control over salaries etc. Will the savings continue? Or, is this a low ball figure which will go higher and higher as the years go by? At lunch today I heard that Lake Worth is regretting their switch to PBSO and now cannot afford the upfront costs to go back to a city managed force.

So the jury is out, we need to go to the meetings and listen to the presentations by BSO, before we decide. This is a decision that needs more than a knee jerk decision.

Going with BSO will eliminate the possibility of getting creative and coming up with a different style of service with our fire and rescue in the future.

Staying with the city force may cost us millions.

To Vote, or Not to Vote, That is the Question

2011-05-19T08:34:00.000-07:00

Steve Gonot Guilty

2011-05-13T13:13:00.000-07:00

Steve Gonot was found guilty. I guess justice was done. I met Steve Gonot when he was first elected to the City Commission. He is to be commended for bringing better fire and police protection to West Deerfield, but he was not a friend of the Original Save Our Beach (OSOB) committee. We despaired when he voted in approval of various horrendous projects including, at first, voting in favor of the massive pier restaurant.

But, then wonder of wonders, after looking over the financials of the project, Steve saw the city was getting the fuzzy end of the lollypop in the deal and started to campaign against it. That is when the OSOBs and he joined ranks. We didn’t care why he changed his mind, just that he had.

As a result of his decision to fight the pier, I am sure that Mayor Capellini, and Larry Deetjen, buddies of Boinis and the pier project, started the movement to oust Gonot. Boinis warned Gonot that he would find and fund someone to run against him, he did, but Gonot won reelection. That made Boinis et.al. furious.

Then, no coincidence, the recall Gonot effort started, with a bogus charge of Sunshine Law violation. Believing he was being railroaded because of his stand against the Boinis project, a number of OSOBers and I worked against the recall.

The city was so polarized with such misinformation that many of us also supported the new Reunite Our City (ROC) effort to get out the truth about the pier restaurant, Gonot’s recall and other controversies in the city. Some of us attended the city wide parties thrown by ROC. The goal was to get people from different districts together to meet and talk. ROC published a newsletter with the same goal.

Thanks to our efforts, the massive restaurant was voted down, and the OSOB Vision for the pier area has now been implemented. To see the OSOB ideas go to:

http://www.originalsaveourbeach.org/OSOBPier.htm our vision was:

1. Keep Control of this Irreplaceable City Asset for the Public

2. Preserve the Special and Quaint Quality of the Pier

3. Have an Old Florida Authentic Small Pier Restaurant

4. Have a Special Place to Serve the Beach Goer (families with children)

5. Preserve the Current Parking Spaces for the Public and the Pier Fishers

6. Prevent the Traffic Congestion and Problems that Would Result from a Large Restaurant

The OSOB committee will continue to fight against over-development. I am convinced that as soon as the recession is over and builders start building we will be busy again, greed is not gone, it is just waiting for its next opportunity.

I Told You So when Amendment 4 was defeated

2011-05-08T07:13:00.000-07:00

This is my ~~Ha Ha~~, I TOLD YOU SO piece. I’m deleting the Ha Ha it as this is no laughing matter.

Governor Rick Scott and the Legislature are making the people in Florida who care about the quality of life in their neighborhood, the air we breathe, the water we drink, the traffic congestion and their taxes wish they had voted for Amendment 4.

Remember that one, the amendment that would have given the voters the right to vote on changes to their city’s growth management Comprehensive Land Use Plan, land uses, such as changing a golf course or a park to a housing development or an industrial park. It would have gone into the Florida Constitution, thereby ensuring that growth management and Comprehensive Plans would be required.

People fell for the massive media blitz telling them the fairy tale that Amendment 4 would cost jobs and create complications. Well we now have the folks in Tallahassee causing horrendous chaos and ensuring the loss of more jobs than the real estate bubble. All I see is workers and teachers being laid off, I haven’t seen any jobs created.

Our (not) representatives repealed growth management. Everglades and land conservation went down the drain. I fail to believe that the voters who put the current crop of slash and burners in really want to “put all the trees in a tree museum and charge all the people to see them.” but that will be the result of the elimination of the checks and balances and the Paving of Paradise to put up a parking lot.

Business friendly really means greed and gluttony wins the day, say good-by to clean air and water. Do we really want unregulated businesses whose entire focus is on the next quarter’s earnings?

Ex-Governor Graham, who instituted our Growth Management system around 1985 in reaction to the devastation caused by unrestrained development and sprawl thinks, according to Mike Mayo, that this session may be the lowest point in the history of the Florida Legislature.

No longer will developers be required to pay for schools, parks and roads in their projects, we the taxpayer will foot that bill unless our local commissions require it, and given who are the biggest contributors to their election campaigns I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one.

No longer will a developer be required to prove that their project will not harm the environment, if residents suspect it might, they will have to hire someone to prove it.

This fallacy that less regulation will equal more jobs is insane. There are millions of units of building already approved in this state and not being built because of the economy, not because of regulations. Regulations did not stop growth, over speculation did.

This is clearly an instance of the result of the massive power of the business lobbyist, and the lack of simple common sense on the part of the elected officials, or perhaps a strong desire to keep the deep pockets of businesses friendly and insure lots of campaign money for re-election time, as well as a lack of ethics and morals.

Whatever their reprehensible motivation, this group of scoundrels, heady with power, have royally screwed us.

The Trees are Safe!!!! The Yellow Tape is Gone for Good.

2011-05-04T05:30:00.000-07:00

At last night’s (Tuesday) commission meeting we heard that the city is working with Broward County and FDOT to try to figure out a way to be able to use the grant money to improve the Hillsboro Boulevard Landscaping and not cut the trees, that would involve FDOT revisiting their rules, but if that can’t be done, our city will refuse the grant and not cut the trees. Phew!!

Here’s how it started. In 2008 the city applied to Broward County for a Broward Beautiful Grant, to landscape the Hillsboro median. The grant was awarded and the commission approved the grant agreement which said that the city would landscape the median and replace DAMAGED trees. Nothing in that 2008 agreement said anything about taking out healthy trees.

Then in 2010 when the plan was developed it was found that if the medians were to be redone at all, they all had to meet FDOT guidelines. So the plan was drawn which had most of the trees coming out.

Here is where the outrage starts.

The commission agreed to this plan with no resident meetings or input. How anyone could see this plan and not reject it is totally beyond me. I am told that the commissioners understood that the removal was mandated by FDOT and they agreed without questioning the facts. Not one commissioner, before voting for the plan in 2010, questioned this.

Kathy Maggie, a resident, alerted some of us and researched the paperwork, finding the original agreement which didn’t mention cutting healthy trees. She enlisted Commissioner Ganz who agreed to look further and uncovered more details. FDOT did not mandate the trees come out. Only that if the city was to redo the landscaping, then they had to comply with current guidelines. If the city did nothing except maintain the median as they have done all along, the trees could stay.

Also, after finding out that the yellow tape on the trees meant they would be axed, (and some being alerted by Kathy, Joan Maurice and me), residents flooded the city and the county with outraged letters, phone calls and emails, if they hadn’t we would be now looking at stumps instead of the beautiful canopy of trees.

Broward Commissioner Kristin Jacobs office told me that:

“…if all of you and the elected would not have banned together to ‘shake the trees’, as they say, we would not have been able to get to the hold (temporary stop order on the project).”

Saving this beautiful canopy, of native to our area trees, is enormous. The city tree canopy that I, up to now, took for granted was envisioned over 25 years ago by our then City Forester Zeke Landis. Mr. Landis is largely responsible for the planting of the stately wind resistant mahogany, live oak and other trees all around our city. He had a vision of Deerfield Beach as the Tree City and made it happen.

We owe a big thanks to the late Mr. Landis for our green city. And we can pat ourselves on the backs for saving Mr. Landis’ trees for future generations.

County Commissioner Kristin Jacobs is ON THE JOB!!!

2011-05-03T13:34:00.000-07:00

About the Hillsboro Boulevard Trees, From Marcia Monserrat, Senior Aide, Office of Broward County Commissioner, Kristin Jacobs 954-357-7002:

We continue to work with the city and FDOT to reconsider the scope of the project, because we all know that Broward’s cities need all outside sources of funding they can get.

We are encouraging the city and FDOT to revisit the rules they are citing in this situation in hopes of keeping the current canopy, as well as using these dollars to add new landscaping.

Hurray!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2011-05-03T11:24:00.000-07:00

The Hillsboro Boulevard Tree Landscaping project (AKA: the chainsaw massacre) has been put on hold pending further notice. Thanks to Commissioner Ganz, the project is being reviewed and will not proceed as planned.
Wonderful words, "on hold". Even more wonderful would be "PROJECT CANCELLED"

Friday April 29 is Arbor Day

2011-04-29T14:55:00.000-07:00

"God has cared for these trees, saved them from drought, disease, avalanches, and a thousand tempests and floods. But he cannot save them from fools." ~John Muir

Rare Native Trees at Risk

2011-04-29T06:34:00.000-07:00

Kathy Maggie writes about the plan to take out over 100 trees from the Hillsboro Boulevard median:

Per the cities landscape architects "Tree Report" there are 206 trees in the median. There are 76 Swietenia mahogani (Mahogany) in that total of which 29 are in good condition and will remain, 34 in good condition will be removed and 13 in poor condition will be removed. I will concede there are a few that do need to be removed. They all range an average height of 25 to 35' tall.

I must note: having lived in Deerfield since 1960 and being a tree lover, knowing and understanding what they do for us, until I needed to research for this un-noticed to the public project, (editor's note, the project never had any public meetings or unput) I never knew how rare this tree has become, nor, that Florida is the only place you can find them in the USA and narrowed even more with the fact they are only in Broward, Miami-Dade, Collier and Monroe Counties.

These Mahoganies are saturated throughout Deerfield, due to our prior City Forester, Zeke Landis and his dream of a canopy over our city which he created over 25 years ago. In his planting he was exact in his knowledge of what could take a storm and drought situations. What he planted all went thru the storms of 2004/2005 and today are beautiful again. Mr. Landis retired from the city due to illness and eventually passed away but the legacy he left us with, which is, the oxygen we breath and the shade that cools us, should not and can not be torn down.

Resident Shocked!

2011-04-29T05:25:00.000-07:00

I moved to Parkland in '85 from The Keys and then to Deer Creek in '98...I have been on Hillsboro Blvd. virtually everyday for the past 26 years.

When I heard of the city's plan of removing 126 trees I was in shock! I volunteer to be one of 126 individuals to Stand By My Tree when D day comes.

Jack

A Resident Speaks Up.

2011-04-28T14:38:00.000-07:00

A lettter to Commissioner Joe Miller, one of the many that the city is receiving about the Hillsboro Blvd. tree slaughter.

Dear Joe:

In the last few days I have been reading, with amazement, the plan to cut down many of the beautiful flowering trees that line Hillsboro Blvd. As you probably already know, these trees were originally selected for planting along the boulevard because (1) they are beautiful, (2) they have maximum resistance to high (i.e. hurricane force) winds, and (3) they are native species. They were planted a long time ago and are now, finally, at maturity and have reached their most beautiful state.

It is a travesty to have the City of Deerfield Beach now propose to cut down these trees. We have one of the most beautiful thoroughfares in the area, and the proposal is to destroy that beauty and replant, once again, with other non-native species that will take years to mature. The Royal Palms that are suggested for re-planting are not native to Florida.

I strongly object to cutting of the flowering trees along Hillsboro Blvd. If the trees require trimming in certain areas to allow for better traffic visibility, then let them be trimmed. Also, traffic signs should be erected stating that no trucks should be allowed to travel in the left lanes unless they will be turning left at the next intersection. This will remove the objection that the trees obstruct the vision of truck drivers who are seated high in their cabs. It will also remove the possibility of semi-tractor-trailer trucks damaging the trees in pursuit of their commercial profits.

I realize that the tree cutting will not take place in your district. However, this is an opportunity to let your voice be heard to keep the entire community of Deerfield Beach beautiful. In the last election you told us how you were going to stand up for keeping Deerfield Beach as the beautiful, desirable place to live. This is your opportunity to do exactly that. Please stand up, be heard on this topic, and support retention of the flowering trees along Hillsboro Blvd.
Sincerely Yours,
Your constituent,
Joseph Dsida

A Glimmer of Hope for the Hillsboro Trees

2011-04-28T05:05:00.001-07:00

I talked to Mayor Noland, Commissioner Miller and Commissioner Ganz after the CRA meeting on Tuesday. Those three stay late after the meeting, as during the meeting’s formal agenda we were told we couldn’t address anything not involving the CRA.

All three agreed to delay action on cutting the trees. The thinking seemed to be that no action has been taken since 2008 so a few more months to investigate wouldn’t hurt.

The often cited 2008 agreement, approved by Deerfield Beach’s Commission did not say any-thing about cutting all the trees. It stated the grant would be used for landscaping parts of Hillsboro Boulevard and to remove “DAMAGED” trees. Damaged, not healthy!

I knew it had to be something like that as Pam Militello was on the commission then and as sure as the sun rises over Deerfield Beach I know she would never have agreed to a plan to cut those trees.

On the city’s own spreadsheet, most of the trees are designated in “good” condition.

I have seen the 2008 agreement, and the current plan for the boulevard, but have not seen where that agreement to remove damaged trees turned into cutting down our entire mature tree canopy on the Hillsboro Blvd. median.

Now that we are promised a delay on the chain saw massacre perhaps we can get some right thinking planning which landscapes the median’s low bushes and ground cover, replaces the sick and spindly trees and keeps our healthy trees, including our beautiful oaks, the many majestic (wind resistant) mahoganies and those harbingers of summer, our signature yellow tabs.

My next door snowbird neighbor stopped by last evening and was so mad about the trees that she had called a group of her friends together to a breakfast at the beach this morning to talk about what they could do to save the trees. She especially said that everyone she knows loves the yearly blooming of the yellow tabs. You can be sure they will be calling city hall.

I heard a rumor that County Commissioner Kristin Jacobs has insisted that the plan be stopped pending an investigation. I hope that is true. Go Kristin!!!!!

Letter to the Editor

2011-04-26T11:48:00.000-07:00

Deerfield Beach is known for its beautiful Hillsboro Boulevard median trees, the canopy is one of the most mentioned features of Deerfield second only to the beach.

121 trees in the median of Hillsboro (the ones marked with yellow tape) are slated to be CUT DOWN. The mahogany and oak trees took decades to mature to their beautiful tall full canopied form.

The city’s rationale for this chain saw massacre is that the trees obstruct the visibility of tractor trailer trucks along Hillsboro Boulevard.

Deerfield Beach wants to cut down 71% of the live oaks, 59% of the mahoganies, and 100% of the geiger trees. Of the 121 trees the City of Deerfield Beach wants to remove, at least 56 or 46% are recommended "Wind Resistant Trees" according to the very publication the City cites as an authority. And all of the "Wind Resistant Trees" that the City wants to remove are also native species.

Yet of the 126 trees the City wants to use as replacements, only 52% are on the "Wind Resistant Tree" list, only if you consider Royal Palms as trees.

In summary, the City is planning to cut down 121 trees, and replace them with 126 trees (includ-ing palms), for a 6% net increase in Wind Resistant Trees.

The question of sight distance is not relevant because virtually all of the trees have canopies 5 feet or more above the sight line datum, which is consistent with DOT standards nor do the branches touch the trucks going by.

What is odd about this is the City says they applied specific criteria to determine which trees to cut and which trees not to cut, but the facts do not support their reasons.

Given this, how, in a county that is built out from ocean to the everglades can anyone justify allowing these majestic beauties fall to the chain saw?

Hillsboro Boulevard Trees Should Not Be Cut!!!

2011-04-26T04:21:00.000-07:00

From the President of the Broward Sierra Club, Phil Busey:

The City of Deerfield Beach lists the publication "Assessing damage and restoring trees after a hurricane" by Edward F. Gilman of the University of Florida as an authority for tree removal and replanting.

Let us accept the City of Deerfield's use of that publication, as a recommendation for the following "Wind Resistant Species":

Gumbo limbo, Bursera simaruba
Live oak, Quercus virginiana
Mahogany, Swietenia mahagoni
Geiger tree, Cordia sebestena

Yet these recommended trees are substantially the tree species the City of Deerfield Beach wants to cut down.

Of the cited "Wind Resistant Trees" on the recommended list, Deerfield Beach wants to cut down 71% of the live oaks, 59% of the mahoganies, and 100% of the geiger trees. Of the 121 trees the City of Deerfield Beach wants to remove, at least 56 or 46% are recommended "Wind Resistant Trees" according to the very publication the City cites. And all of the "Wind Resistant Trees" that the City wants to remove are also native
species.

Yet of the 126 trees the City wants to use as replacements, only 52% are on the "Wind Resistant Tree" list, only if you consider Royal Palms as trees.

In summary, the City is planning to cut down 121 trees, and replace them with 126 trees (including palms), for a 6% net increase in Wind Resistant Trees.

The trees to be removed did survive the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005, and remain standing upright years later in good health, which is proof that the Gilman publication is correct, and these low wind resistant should be kept.

The question of sight distance is not relevant because virtually all of the trees have canopies 5 feet or more above the sight line datum, which is consistent with DOT standards.

Repeatedly, the criteria that Deerfield Beach cites for removing trees, when examined, are arguments for not removing the trees.

Since the City indicated that they applied specific criteria to determine which trees to cut and which trees not to cut, you should ask them for the spreadsheet in which they listed the reason(s) on which they intended to cut each tree.

A look at Hillsboro Blvd.

2011-04-25T06:16:00.000-07:00

Comment from the Broward Sierra Club Prez. with pictures and a short video link:

"The marked trees were generally in fairly good shape. Those with multiple leaders or with a low crown subject to contact with trucks, were probably pruned incorrectly, something that will not necessarily change with new trees."

Clink the link below, and choose "slide show" from the menu: (Notice in the video that the tractor trailer has no trouble with the trees)

https://picasaweb.google.com/philipbusey/DeerfieldBeachTreeCutting?authkey=Gv1sRgCLb12ZPN-NTbPQ#

Trees on Hillsboro Blvd. that will be axed

2011-04-23T08:01:00.000-07:00

Just a few of the 120 or so trees that will be cut down. Look closely and you will see the yellow tape on the trees, some have come partly off and are flapping in the breeze, maybe the axmen will miss those.

CLICK ON THE PICTURE FOR A LARGER VIEW:

Un-tie that YELLOW RIBBON from the old oak tree!!!!

2011-04-22T08:31:00.000-07:00

All the trees in the median of Hillsboro that have the yellow tape around them will be CUT DOWN. Most of them are healthy and doing well. The oak trees took decades to mature to their beautiful tall full canopied form. As far as I am concerned there is no justification for this destruction.

A newspaper article by Betsy Roberts said: “During the next few weeks, Deerfield Beach will cut them down, as per a 2008 agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation. The reason, the state said, is that the trees obstruct the visibility of tractor trailer trucks along Hillsboro Boulevard. The trees will eventually be replaced by others that have been approved by the state.”

Let’s undo that agreement. Trim the trees. Restrict the trucks to the middle lane. SOMETHING!!! The new trees will grow also, duh!!!

Who's to Blame for Sylvia's Arrest?

2011-04-14T10:37:00.000-07:00

When I heard about Commissioner Poitier’s arrest I thought that it was long past time for her to step down it is just a shame that it has to be this way.

District 2, deserves a representative who is actively involved in the entire city, someone who makes the residents proud of his/her behavior, someone who takes the time and effort to comprehend the agenda items and understand what is going on in the entire city, and who is a role model for residents. Sylvia, unfortunately, has not been that for quite a while. Sylvia has no one to blame but herself if her actions prove to be illegal.

True, until recently, elected officials could almost ignore the laws governing their actions. Capellini’s frequent trips to the boys’ room, when certain votes came up, is a prime example. Because of this lack of oversight, officials had almost no risk of being taken to task. This neglect led to a lot of abuse of power county wide and almost universal complacency among elected officials.

I think a couple of things combined recently to change this attitude of law enforcement neglect. Maybe it was the Feds taking jurisdiction and cracking down on bribery, (the Chait developers in Tamarac e.g.). That made the residents (voters) furious that it took the feds coming in to make arrests, so then County Attorney Satz, seeing the writing on the wall (elections coming up), nabbed some baddies, and started acting like someone who gives a damn.

Whatever it was, the time of winking at lobbyists giving bribes and ignoring commissioners voting for personal gain turned into a time of let’s nail the bastards. Finally residents’ complaints were taken seriously. Unlike a couple of years ago when I filed complaints, which went nowhere, recent filings have been investigated.

So, who’s to blame for Sylvia’s “troubles”? To be sure Chaz Stevens dug deep into transcripts and minutes to discover the most minute whiff of smoke, hoping to find a bonfire. But there should NOT have been anything to find. Not only does the state hand out its ethics code to every elected official, Deerfield Beach holds workshops which detail what may and may not be done. There is no excuse for anyone on our dais not knowing about conflict of interest, or sunshine laws or gifts and bribery laws. No excuse, none.

Bribery 101

2011-04-12T07:57:00.000-07:00

Today’s local Broward section of the Sun Sentinel had some interestingly juxtaposed articles. In BIG LETTERS on the front page we have an article “CONSULTANT TELLS OF BRIBE CLAIMS” where Beverly Stracher rats out a bunch of elected officials to the Feds, who she said were bribed by the Chait developers to get the golf course land conversion in Tamarac.

She said the Chait boys bragged about how easy it was to bribe elected officials in Broward County. Reminds me of giant developer Terry Stiles who bragged about how easy it was to pave over Broward County and was looking forward to doing the same in Palm Beach County.

Then, on the second page the paper has “BILL SEEKS TO RELAX RULES ON GIFTS FROM LOBBYISTS”; an article about our state legislators who are upset because they aren't allowed to accept gifts from lobbyists and want to change the law so they may.

I am sure I was not the only one who saw the irony in this. Was it deliberate on the part of the paper staff? Naw, that would be too much to hope for.

Elected officials want to legalize their bribes. Imagine how much you could rack up if you were allowed to take $100 at a time from each lobbyist. Never mind how much under the table money you could tack on to that. No wonder the legislators are upset.

Lobbyists, are very well educated in how to influence people. They take courses such as

Corruption Made Easy 101
Make the Schnook Your Friend 201
Cash in Lunch Bags/Golf bags/Folded newspapers 301

and also advanced seminars in

Rationalization for Elected Officials,
How to Make Campaign Contributions From Everyone Including the Dog,

and the most popular one of all,

How to Talk to an Elected Official with a Straight Face (this one is taught by professional poker players to prevent the lobbyist from laughing out loud when the official eagerly agrees to vote in favor of whatever.)

No official should take anything from someone trying to influence their vote. NOTHING. If the reason they are getting the cup of coffee, the buffet lunch, the ride on the jet is because they are an elected official they should not be allowed to partake. Period.

Corruption is subtle, like drug addiction. The eroding of morals and the love of the power of the office go hand in hand. Soon the official, subjected to flattery, kow-towing, and favors from sycophants gets used to being above the common masses and thinks these things are their due. The step from a cup of coffee to $35,000 in a golf bag is not uncommon.

More from Reef Rescue

2011-04-08T15:33:00.000-07:00

The latest on the Deerfield Beach/Hillsboro Beach dredging:

Friday April 8, FDEP Enforcement issued a letter to the Town of Hillsboro Beach warning they may be facing fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars for misrepresenting turbidity monitoring data and for damaging coral reefs and shoreline habitat.

Link to FDEP letter of noncompliance: http://www.scribd.com/doc/52607956/WarningLetter-4-8-11

This would not have been possible without the days and nights of tireless effort by Reef Rescue, Cry-of-the-Water, STOP and Vone Research volunteers, local scuba dive boat operators and divers who all helped collect evidence of permit violations.

We hope this is the last beach renourishment project that is allowed to run wild and lay waste to the coastal ecosystem. Because, the only thing different on this dredge and fill project was not the flagrant disregard for the environmental permit requirements it was the number of witnesses who stepped forward to demand enforcement action.

Continue to follow the Hillsboro renourishment saga at the Reef Rescue Coral Reef Blog.
Thank you to everyone,

Palm Beach County Reef Rescue

PO Box 207 * Boynton Beach, FL 33425 * unsubscribe

Letter from Ron Coddington to Deerfield Beach City Manager Burgess Hanson and CRA Director Keven Klopp

2011-04-04T05:18:00.000-07:00

Burgess, Keven,

I am not sure if either of you are aware of the problems with the dredging at Hillsborough Beach. This contractor has been operating outside of the permit conditions for most of the project and has severely damaged the economic engine off our beach known as the Deerfield reef.

Continued High turbidity levels, siltation on the reef, and pipeline damage at the crossing have all taken a toll on our reef, and what for? To help Hillsborough take away our sand and trash our reef in the process.

This borrow site was exhausted years ago and this dredge project is trying to pull the last remaining volume of acceptable sand from our coast. The problem is they have removed all the acceptable sand and now are dredging silt from the borrow area, much of what was deposited by past dredging project. This borrow site should never have been used and its use will be to the detriment of the coastal system off our city boundary. We will see changes in wave action, and erosion which may put our beach in peril.

As City manager, both management and the commission need to step up, make Broward County DEP, and Florida DEP fully investigate the damage to the reef and make sure Great Lakes is held accountable for what they have done.

Much of the reason we have such a good beach is the protection from ocean swells that this reef provides for us. If the reef is damaged structurally or if the living bottom community is killed off, the result will be deterioration of the reef and loss of the beach erosion protection which we enjoy due to the reef's proximity to our shore.

Sorry I am not there to help you with this one, but you need to step up.

Don't be fooled by the fact that you can't see the reef. It is there. It was healthy for many years, and it is the reason we have a beach and not a pile of rock on the shore.

Make sure you get with the proper authorities and make sure the dredge contractor is held fully accountable for the damage and its restoration.

I will be in DC next week in meetings with NMFS and will make sure I bring up the damage and make sure the proper authorities step in to hold Great Lake feet to the fire in fixing what they have done. This is not an easy fix, and may cost much more than the dredging did in the first place.

Call me if I can be of any assistance.

Ron Coddington, P.E.
954-818-2673

Deerfield Beach and Hillsboro Beach Renourishment Project "Cover Up"

2011-04-03T07:41:00.000-07:00

The coral reef is being covered up in more than one way.

The city seems to be seriously downplaying the reason the beach renourishment project has been shut down. The real reason shows a callous disregard by the contractor and precious little over-sight by either Deerfield Beach or Hillsboro Beach.
It looks like the feds only stepped in after private citizens complained about the damage to the coral reef. The city notice gives no reason for the “delay” of the project. HOW COULD THIS BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE FOR DAYS AND DAYS, AFTER EVEN ONE DAY SHOWED PERMIT VIOLATIONS?

The city posted a notice saying that:

“The renourishment work in Deerfield Beach has been temporarily delayed. As soon as an update is available, it will be posted on this (http://www.deerfield-beach.com/) website.

Turbidity Monitoring

As a condition of environmental agency permits, state, federal and local agencies are required to stringently monitor turbidity in the coastal zone and in the borrow area, at different depths, mul-tiple times a day. If any of these samples reflect a reading greater than 29 NTUs, the contractor is required to cease all operations and make corrective actions.”

This from the Reef Rescue folks is a “bit” more detailed about why they were shut down:

"Feds issue Cease and Desist Order to shut down beach renourishment project

Amid reports of massive silt plumes and coral reef burial the US Corp of Army Engineers, on Friday (April 1, 2011), issued an order to the Town of Hillsboro Beach to immediately cease beach renourishment activities. A copy of the order can be viewed at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/52174475/C-D-ICA-NON .

Environmental groups have been gathering evidence since the project began in mid-March of daily permit violations that have resulted in silt plumes travelling for miles beyond compliance requirements. Cleanup and mitigation costs for project environmental impacts could exceed many millions of dollars.

On Sunday March 27, beach-goers braved a sea of mud as silt levels measured 10 times the project permitted standards. (Reef Rescue photo)

Palm Beach County Reef Rescue
www.reef-rescue.org
PO Box 207 * Boynton Beach, FL 33425"

I would think the chamber of commerce would be up in arms about this. Oops, we don’t have a functioning chamber of commerce. We have a social club who went bankrupt and now spends all it’s time trying to wheedle money out of big businesses. Any small business or our tourism trade has to go whistle in the wind for any support.

What do you think the Deerfield Beach Chamber of Commerce is? (adapted from a post on the National Chamber by Allison Fisher Outreach Director Public Citizen’s Climate & Energy Program)

(A) A supportive group, representing small businesses like your favorite restaurant or a local car dealership.

(B) Related to the United States Department of Commerce, a federal government agency.

(C) The official voice of the entire business community.

(D) A group, (like their parent organization) made of lobbyists who push damaging policies that benefit big business at the expense of people and businesses on Main Streets across America.

The correct answer, of course, is D.

The Chamber of Commerce does not speak for you or me. It speaks for giant corporations who want to pollute our democracy, our economy and our planet in their never-ending pursuit for profits.

How sad for our Country, how sad for our City, how sad for the coral reefs.

Really, Really, Bad Idea: Golf Courses in State Parks

2011-03-28T19:38:00.000-07:00

Everyone knows that Florida has too many golf courses competing for too few players. Hard times have come to Florida’s golf courses, the economy, an aging clientele, fewer snowbirds, and a shrinking year round population all have made it harder to make a profit.

But now we hear about a dastardly idea from Jack Nicklaus and Rick Scott called the “Jack Nicklaus Golf Trail of Florida” act. This is sponsored by Sen. Thrasher and Rep. Pat Rooney, a scary pair who I am sure would have no scruples about also paving over the rest of the Everglades.

This insanity will put new golf courses in a minimum of 5 state parks financed by bonds and designed by guess who?

Look what happens when the government tries to run a golf course, this from a post by Mark Woods:

“Perhaps our politicians should look at Georgia. The state has golf courses in 10 state parks. Most consistently lose money. So a couple of years ago Georgia tried to privatize the ones it runs. Didn't get any qualified bidders. And in this economy, nobody is building new courses.”

“…Last year, even with cut rates, the number of rounds played on the First Coast was down by 9.6 percent. And in the last five years, a half dozen courses in North Florida have closed - including one designed by another legendary golfer, Arnold Palmer.”

But “business friendly” Scott who wants to privatize everything else wants to pollute our parks, and ruin the beautiful natural environments that draw 20 million visitors a year without even the need for putting greens.

There can be no argument that golf courses are water hogs and are liberally strewn with herbicides and pesticides, a byproduct of which is arsenic contamination and nitrate polluted runoff water. Oh, yes, and in doing this he doesn’t seem to care that he will be taking business away from the courses that are already there.

One park named to be co-opted by Nicklaus is the Martin County Jonathan Dickenson Park. A park surrounded by golf courses already struggling for players. Won’t they be thrilled by the competition? The list below is of the courses in Martin County’s 752.79 square miles, one course for every 16.7 square miles. But Jack and Rick think we need another one.

Martin County Golf Courses http://www.golfable.com/golfcourses/county/Martin_County_FL :

1. 76 Golf World

2. Admirals Cove Golf Course

3. Admirals Cove Golf Village - North/West Course

4. Admirals Cove Golf Village - South/North Course

5. Admirals Cove Golf Village - West/South Course

6. Champions Club at Summerfield

7. Cobblestone Country Club

8. Cutter Sound Golf & Yacht Club

9. Cypress Links Golf Club

10. Eagle Marsh Golf Club

11. Eaglewood Country Club

12. Evergreen Club, The

13. Floridian Yacht & Golf Club

14. Golden Bear Golf Club at Hammock Creek, The

15. Golf Club of Jupiter, The

16. Harbor Ridge Yacht & Country Club - Crane Creek Course

17. Harbor Ridge Yacht & Country Club - Golden Marsh Course

18. Harbor Ridge Yacht & Country Club - River Ridge Course

19. Harbor Ridge Yacht & Country Club - Tower Course

20. Heritage Ridge Golf Club

21. Hobe Sound Golf Club

22. Indian River Plantation Golf Club

23. Indianwood Golf & Country Club

24. Island Dunes Country Club

25. Jonathan's Landing at Old Trail - Fazio (Jonathan's Landing) Course

26. Jonathan's Landing at Old Trail - Fazio (Old Trail) Course

27. Jonathan's Landing at Old Trail - Hills (Old Trail) Course

28. Jupiter Dunes Golf Course

29. Jupiter Island Club

30. King Mountain Condo Association

31. Loblolly Pines Golf Course

32. Lost Lake Golf Club

33. Loxahatchee Club

34. Mariner Sands Country Club - Gold/Blue Course

35. Mariner Sands Country Club - Red/White Course

36. Mariner Sands Country Club - The Gold Course

37. Mariner Sands Country Club - The Green Course

38. Medalist Golf Club, The

39. Miles Grant Country Club

40. Monarch Country Club

41. Pine Lakes Golf Club

42. Piper's Landing Country Club

43. Sailfish Point Golf Club

44. Willoughby Golf Club

45. Yacht & Country Club, The

To: Deerfield Beach - For the Record

2011-03-18T09:40:00.000-07:00

O.K. Ignoring Chaz Stevens didn’t work; all he did was poke the stick harder. I guess he is frustrated because all the sturm und drang he has stirred up over the last few years has resulted in absolutely no positive gain; no one convicted and all complaints dismissed. He has caused the city a bundle of money and his smearing public officials and candidates has made good people think twice about running for office. Even his famous Kessler Report resulted in a big zero; lots of inflated hyperbole, but almost no substance; nothing worth the cost, nothing that Burgess Hanson wasn’t already handling.

So, why does Chaz keep trying to get a rise out of me? I don’t know. Considering his “professed” wish to make the city better he should be in agreement with everything the OSOBs and I do.

His latest post about a rumor that I will run for mayor is ludicrous. Anyone who has ever talked to me or any of my friends knows very well that I have no intention of running for office. There is no such rumor. He must have had a slow day and an overactive imagination.

Unlike well educated people who value experience, he thinks “old” people should fade away as he constantly mocks anyone older than him. He also has a hang-up on physical appearance, he thinks no one who is overweight or less than magazine cover beautiful should exist. Check the mirror Chaz.

What crimes does he say have I committed? I thought it was a good idea to work toward resolving the differences among groups of residents. I was appointed to the Broward County Planning Commission by Ken Keechl who, knew I was a supporter of keeping open spaces such as golf courses free of development. I supported Amendment 4 which would have given residents a voice in what happens to land use in their cities. Oh, yes, I supported Ron Coddington for District 1 commissioner. Ron is a strong proponent of clean water, and sensible development.

What have I done for the city? I don’t shout from the housetops every time I take a drive. But some things I have done are: in addition to my OSOB commitment, I am a member of CERT, during Wilma I spent days at Westside Park helping the Salvation Army serve dinners, I work for the Relay for Life project, I am a member of the Broward County Sierra Club and a member of the Wildlife Foundation, and I am first vice president of the Woman’s Club of Deerfield Beach whose list of charitable donations is pages long.

Recently I helped the OSOBs make sure that attendance at the CRA meetings, discussing what to do at the beach parking lot, were well attended. The city was not getting the word out about the plans, so we did.

If not for the Original Save Our Beach committee, the city of Deerfield Beach would have:

A seven story, city commission proposed, 240 room hotel-condominium complex on the main beach parking lot.

Or a mixed use commercial development project misnamed “Ocean Park” also planned for the main beach parking lot.

The giant restaurant complex planned by Pete Boinis for our city owned pier. Because we fought and won against this we now will have a beautiful city owned beach facility in scale with the pier.

Because of the OSOBs:

The entire 28 acre beach area was prevented from being rezoned as a RAC which would have allowed much higher density and commercial development on the entire beach.
We lost this fight at the city commission level but when we took it to the Broward County Commission a study was undertaken and they agreed that this was a bad idea and because of our actions banned RACs on all barrier islands.

The Crystal Lake Golf Course will remain open space. Over and over we helped the residents fight against changing of land-use category from recreation to residential to allow a large housing project. The owners and the residents now have a great solution worked out by mutual agreement.

As a result of residents’ outrage about golf course conversions county wide, Ken Keechl sponsored a change to the BC Land Use Plan, for which, as a council member, I advocated. As a result, the Broward County Planning Council added a provision to its land use code which “strongly discourages” golf course conversions in the County.

Except for unashamedly greedy projects such as above, the Original Save Our Beach (http://www.originalsaveourbeach.org/) committee favors developments which meet code; we encourage business growth and redevelopment. We will fight against development which ignores the will of the residents and the building codes. Above all, to us, the quality of life of Deerfield Beach residents is paramount.

Our tactics are simple, find out what the residents want and work toward making that happen. We depend on volunteers to get the message out. We attend commission meetings and workshops to keep up with what is happening in the city.

We are the ones, representing a membership of over 300, and by extension the entire city, who show up at all commission meetings, budget workshops, CRA meetings and city events. We pay attention for you.

Unless it is simply his inflated ego and he is upset at being ignored, what Chaz’s beef with this is completely beyond me.

Post Election Thoughts

2011-03-09T05:01:00.000-08:00

Dear Joe,

Congratulations on your election but please don’t take it as a mandate that you should continue acting the way you did for the last 2 years. More people voted for the other two candidates than voted for Joe Miller so over half your district is not satisfied with you.

What to do? Start thinking independently with only the residents of the district in mind. Please keep in mind that we are in financial trouble and vote accordingly. You seem to have a fear of controversy, you fear displeasing people. Well stop that! You don’t have to please the other commissioners by your vote; you need to vote in the best interests of the residents, all of them not just your beach group.

The residents of District 1 like Deerfield Beach. Remember how many said they moved here because of the way it is. They do not want to be Boca Raton no matter how much Janice Becker would like that, the people who live here do not.

Get to know the people in the annexed area, find out what the people west of Federal Highway care about, and answer your phone and emails seriously and timely, get out and meet the people.

You seem to have developed a manner of acting while doing business which may serve you well when talking to individual customers but has come back to bite you on the commission. You must not try to please everyone. You have a habit of agreeing with the person you are talking to and then turning around and agreeing with the next person who has the opposite idea. You are trying to be a nice guy and be liked but that only serves to make people like me suspicious of everything you say. I don’t trust what you say to me because I find out later that you said the opposite to someone else. Cut that out!

I believe you want what is best for the city, but you don’t know what that is. Well, find out, by yourself. Talk to everyone in all parts of the city, rich and poor, homeowner and renter, business man and retiree, argue with them, debate with them, don’t just agree with them, and then, armed with valid information you will be able to make a decision. You can be a good commissioner, but not if you weigh the opinions of your beach buddies over the rest of the district and not if you continue letting others make your decisions.

About Sylvia:

Deerfield Beach residents who never go to commission meetings only know about Commissioner Sylvia Poitier by reputation, and what they hear in District 2 about how Sylvia works hard to bring benefits to the district.

And, in truth, I guess she used to, and I guess she still has the reputation. But a commissioner needs to be more than a district commissioner; a commissioner serves the whole city.

Those who don’t attend meetings regularly have not experienced the mess that happens during a commission meeting resulting from either Sylvia's lack of reading her backup, and/or bad memory and/or comprehension.

Too often seems that she has no idea what is going on or what is being voted on and this hurts the way the commission runs. She frustrates all the other commissioners with inane remarks and questions; she often has to be reminded what they are talking about and more than once she had them redo her vote almost getting the city sued. Sadly, this type of behavior creates ridicule.

For a while the Commissioners didn’t say much to her, probably because they didn't want to be called racist, as she plays the race card often, but eventually they couldn't stand it anymore and publically tried to get her to stop her rambling and interrupting to no avail. A signal light system was installed which she mostly ignores.

I don't know what has changed in her life but she really needs to retire. She said she would for the last 2 elections and then went back on her word.

I worry what will happen now that she is reelected I fear she will get worse and worse and really do some damage to the city and the image of elected African Americans, she may not know she is slipping, but everyone else does. She should wake up and step down for the good of her district.

Why Ron Coddington for Deerfield Beach District 1?

2011-03-06T10:10:00.000-08:00

Why a newcomer who can be brash and overly passionate? Great, I welcome passion about the city. Let’s get someone in District 1 who is not afraid to disagree with the person in front of him, and is not just a people pleaser; I want someone who’s every idea is not from someone else; District 1 has had two years of that, and it’s enough. I welcome someone who does not have an ulterior motive; someone who refuses campaign contributions from lobbyists and developers and people doing business with the city.

I am very upset about many of Joe Miller’s actions such as trying to prevent the Cove Shopping Center improvements and then his boasting about how he got it done. After his election I had hoped he would be a strong voice for the beach, but sadly that didn’t work out. Joe has Janice Becker working on his campaign that will tell you something about his priorities. She is the person who wanted the Cove to be like Boca Raton and told people she was ashamed to send people to Deerfield Beach stores; she is the over-development loving Deetjen supporter who drove the chamber into bankruptcy, person.

Cody Loomis is a great kid; he shows that we have some wonderful young residents. But, we don’t have time to wait for him to get up to speed; he simply does not have the background needed. He rarely votes, and has ties to the Noland family which could cause him some problems.

We need someone who can look at Deerfield Beach as a whole and see where we should be in five or ten or however many years from now and has the expertise to get us there. Not someone who’s every idea is filtered through the business community and real estate interests.

Ron Coddington has had experience with government and the red tape it can generate, experience with being lobbied and with contracts. We are in precarious economic times and deserve to have commissioners who understand budgets and government.

Ron will hit the ground running and will not need much time if any to learn the requirements of the position, we will have an advocate for the residents of Deerfield Beach, someone who is independent of special interests and whose only interest is that of the residents.

An Essay by John Hedrick

2011-03-03T04:55:00.000-08:00

(I wonder what the numbers would look like if we polled Deerfield Beach Voters?)

Towards restoring citizen control over their governments in Florida

By John Hedrick

Signs abound of citizen dissatisfaction with their local and state governments. Look at the recent Sunshine State poll. Almost half of Floridians say their state is worse off than 5 years ago. 65% say it will get worse or stay the same in the next 5 years. And 21% are seriously considering leaving the state. 71% think their government leaders do the right thing only some of the time or never do the right thing, and only 23-33% of Floridians think their government does a good or excellent job. Yet we have elections every year, two years, or four years. We've tried Term Limits for state politicians and some local governments, and we're about to try Fair Districts at the state level, but that's likely not enough either.

So what can bring government decisions back in line with people's needs and desires? Back in the early 1900s, when Americans faced similar concentrations of corporate and economic power, reformers managed to expose and remove political machines and bosses. The parallel today is the division between the Insiders and the rest of us.

A century ago, reformers sought to enable the citizenry to rule more directly, and thus they developed political safeguards called Initiative, Referendum and Recall. These three safeguards of citizen control have since been adopted, in various models, in about 25 states, including Florida . Yet existing safeguards have not gone far enough to give citizens a way to counteract undue money and insider control. What is needed are the following Constitutional Amendment initiatives:

(1) A “Legislative Initiative” at the state level and then, similarly, “Legislative Initiative” for all local governments. Only in this way can citizen voices be truly heard: citizens can petition and put an proposed law on the ballot, for their fellow citizens to decide.

We have “Constitutional Initiative” currently at the state level, which is very difficult to utilize, with its high percentage requirement of petition signatures and its 60% passage threshold. This “Constitutional Initiative” also results in measures such as Class Sizes being put into the Constitution instead of being made a statute. (And I might remind everyone that most state Constitution votes these days are the result of what the Legislature itself has voted to put on the ballot.)

Previous attempts to get our state legislators to create “Legislative Initiative” for citizens have gone nowhere. Years ago Don Tucker, the former Democratic Speaker of the Florida House, told me that a bill I was able to get out of committee creating “Legislative Initiative,”, would go no further -- and it didn't -- since it threatened politicians’ power.

For the Legislative Initiative, we should make the percentage of required signatures lower than for Constitutional Amendments; require only a simple majority to pass the statute; and provide that any statute created this way must be submitted to the voters a second time in the future, to alter or repeal it (to avoid the legislature simply passing something themselves that potentially thwarts the will of the voters). And locally, all citizens of local governments should be able to initiate ordinances, not just Cities or Charter Counties . Local governments should be allowed to set a lower percentage of required signatures, if they don’t want to follow the state-set percentage.

(2) Create expanded “Referendum powers” for all local governments. Citizens need a mechanism to be able to effectively challenge decisions by their elected officials.

(3) Enable citizens to Recall elected officials more easily. Astonishingly, there are various officials to whom recall does not currently apply, and it needs to. And, for all officials, though the percentage of signatures necessary to accomplish Recall needs to remain somewhat substantial, the primary reasons why you can recall an elected official need to be loosened. It's simply too difficult to make Recall fit the usual "misfeasance, malfeasance, etc." categories. I've had citizens gather signatures from 15% of registered voters within 30 days, only to have a court say they couldn't make their issues properly fit the Recall definition. If citizens are outraged enough at a decision that their elected official makes, they should be able to try to remove them right away. We should also lengthen somewhat the time frame within which the signatures can be gathered, to make it possible to use Recall.

Some would say that I haven't mentioned one obvious reform that would help citizens curb the influence of Big Money: it’s called “Clean Elections/Public Financing.” For example, we’ve just seen the grassroots Florida Hometown Democracy crushed by Big Money, and the same could well happen to a proposed ban on Offshore Oil Drilling. Unfortunately, unless and until the U.S. Supreme Court has its makeup changed to overrule the recent Citizens United and older Buckley decisions, or unless a federal constitutional amendment is enacted to overrule those decisions -- decisions that have both unleashed unlimited Big-Money influence on our politicians, the Supreme Court is currently composed to eviscerate any “Clean Elections/Public Financing” reforms.

It's important to note that Initiative, Referendum and Recall themselves are content-neutral and can be utilized by any citizen or organization. Enactment of the above reforms will go a long way toward restoring the power of the citizenry, curbing the influence of insiders, and moving Florida towards a better place than where it is currently headed.

John Hedrick has been an activist for 40 years, an attorney for 25 years; lobbied, been a candidate, run campaigns, studied Political Science and is chair of Panhandle Citizens Coalition and President of People's Transit Organization. He can be reached at johnhedrick13@yahoo.com .

Should the Deerfield Beach Commission be in Harmony? Nope.

2011-02-23T19:29:00.001-08:00

Harmony? In each of the recent candidates’ forums lately we have heard a lot about harmony. The candidates were quizzed about how they would bring harmony to the dais. I’m pretty sure that is not what people really mean, I don’t think harmony is even a good thing among commissioners.

Let’s think about that a bit. Remember back a few terms ago when we had a commission that was in harmony about everything, votes were taken quickly and unanimously with almost no discussion. We had a commission of bobble-heads. It was a very rare event when the vote was anything other than 5-0. Was that a good thing? I think we can all look around and know it was not. We had to force them by referendum to restore the building codes they eliminated to favor developers. They were the ones who proposed giving the main beach parking lot to developers time after time. Only a lot of hard work by alert residents prevented our beach from becoming Coney Island complete with a massive pier banquet hall.

A commission should discuss issues long and hard; sometimes they need to be loud. They must investigate the ramifications of a proposal, discover who benefits from its passage, make big noise about taxpayers’ money expenditures, cross examine each other’s motives, make sure staff tells the whole story, and make damn sure that anything that is approved is what is good for the quality of life of Deerfield Beach.

Commissioners should NOT always be in harmony. The only harmony the commissioners should aim for is harmony with the desires of the people they represent. Personal cheap shots should be condemned sure, having to sit through meetings that are an hour longer than they need to be because of childish rants and other nonsense is what has people frustrated and calling for “harmony”. Grow up commissioners, it is not all about you, in fact it should not be anything about you, it is about the residents. Check out the dwindling number of people who attend meetings, guess why.

However, arguments about issues should be encouraged; Florida is a Sunshine Law state. The only place that the commissioners are allowed to discuss issues among themselves is on the dais so I say go for it. I look forward to more loud “discussion” about how to better our city.

Deerfield Beach District 1 Forum

2011-02-20T06:42:00.000-08:00

Note from a Deerfield Beach Resident

2011-02-04T12:40:00.000-08:00

Bett: The last line of your post should be read and heard all the time:

"The residents are the ones who matter, the residents are the ones who should set the agenda. The residents moved here because of the quality of life in Deerfield Beach and they should not take a back seat to tourists and events."

On the street where I live, we took a backseat to every parade that closed Hillsboro. They would actually detour them down our little street, tractor trailers and all. Finally Pam Militello became a commissioner and listened to me and the road was closed during parades. Now that Pam is gone :( I have to email the sheriff's Office every time there is a parade so they don't forget. It does not make me very happy that I have to do that, but I do.

Residents Redux!

2011-02-04T08:10:00.000-08:00

The residents who attended last night’s (Thursday, 2/3) Deerfield Beach CRA public meeting were presented with the identical introduction by Keven Klopp, CRA Director as the previous meeting. (See the third post below)

Then residents spoke (to everyone, but especially to Keven and the commissioners who were in attendance).

People who were not at the last meeting spoke first and also emphasized NO PARKING GARAGE on the Main Beach Parking Lot. As at the first meeting the speakers were loudly applauded.

There were many others who cared enough to attend both meetings, who spoke again about improving the S curve, sprucing up the area, helping businesses in the cove with improvements, adding beach access points, buying Sullivan Park property and improving it, and other ideas, but mostly about the fear of a parking garage.

Generally the theme was enhance what we have, clean up the neighborhoods and put in curbs, sidewalks and landscaping. Improve the infrastructure. A suggestion to use CRA money to buy a show mobile by George Edwards went over very well. Dave Gravell spoke at length about not wanting a garage, and fixing up the side streets and the landscaping at the parking lot.

People did NOT want a permanent band shell. Many said the CRA should buy the old Riverview property at Sullivan Park; one mentioned buying the Chamber building.

Marge Hilton showed her parking lot photos which proved that even at the height of the season on a nice warm sunny day there were parking spots available at the lot. Keven quipped; “You saved the CRA the trouble of doing a parking study”.

Tom Connick asked that the CRA Board/Commission put to rest the fears of any building on the Main Beach Parking Lot, saying that the underlying uneasiness and lack of assurances from the city gets in the way of anyone thinking about other areas of the CRA. He stated that we need an unequivocal statement: “The city will not build on the Main Beach Parking Lot”.

I cannot see how the CRA Board could have missed the message; I look forward to the next CRA Board meeting and a vote not to build on the lot. Ever. Never.

I look forward to their vote to use some of the $5.8 million funds on hand to start on the suggested improvements now, and a plan to use CRA funds for infrastructure items in the CRA that would otherwise be funded by city money, thus freeing up money to benefit the rest of the city.

The residents are the ones who matter, the residents are the ones who should set the agenda. The residents moved here because of the quality of life in Deerfield Beach and they should not take a back seat to tourists and events. As one person said, “Sometimes you just want a quiet time at the beach”.

Ron Coddington for Deerfield Beach District 1 Commissioner

2011-02-01T06:11:00.000-08:00

Ron's Website: http://vote4ron.com/

Why am I running?

By Ron Coddington

Across District One, I have been asked the same question by many of our constituents. The ques-tion of the day has been “Why are you running for District One?”

The answer is simply. “ I am mad as hell and can’t take it anymore”. I know I stole that line from a famous movie, but it’s the way many of us feel these days. The City of Deerfield Beach is unique in character and history. We are a sleepy little beach town, and that’s why most of us live here. We all need to work together to improve the quality of life in our fine city and work toward a future that will make our kids proud of what we have left them.

In coming days and weeks, I will continue to share my vision of Deerfield Beach. I loved it be-fore I moved here, and I have loved my city for the 20+ years I have called it home. I have child-ren beginning to raise their own children and want our city to be a place we and our kids can call a home town we are proud of. In many ways, we have forgotten some of the jewels of our city while we have concentrated on development and redevelopment. We need to move into the fu-ture with a vision that includes preserving the exact things that made us love Deerfield all of our life.

The preservation of our fine small businesses is an important part of our future and I find a common theme among area businesses that their opinion is that our city is not friendly to our lo-cal businesses as we should be.

I strongly support all of the Mom and Pop businesses in our City and believe they are important in providing for a vibrant future in our City. I have seen too many new businesses delayed for months by not understanding how to navigate the city’s red tape. One of the first things I would ask for is a direct contact at city hall level whose job is to help new and existing small businesses navigate the city’s departments to insure that no new or existing business is delayed in any way which would be detrimental to the success of that business.

I am honored to be able to present my ideas and I enjoy the support of those of you I have talked to. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to try to help improve the quality of life in our city. There will be more to come about my ideas for our City of Deerfield Beach.

Deerfield Beach salary guide should reflect the times

2011-01-29T18:05:00.000-08:00

Wow! It is about time!! There has been long festering resentment among Deerfield Beach employees because of the Department heads and Managers who received raises above the top of the pay scale. Elgin Jones reports that the City is finally going to restructure the guide.

http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6315&Itemid=183

DRASTIC PAY CUTS

By Elgin Jones

Deerfield Beach city officials will move to roll back the salaries of about 45 employees who are being paid above the caps of their salaries. The group comprises the city’s highest paid managers and department heads, mostly. Without commission approval, the group somehow received pay increases several years ago totaling tens of thousands of dollars. In related news, the city is proposing to end all raises, increase the amount employees pay for healthcare and restructure its pay scales. City Manager Burgess Hanson presented the proposals at the outset of labor negotiations with the general employees union, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades.

Cities should restructure the pay guides every year, check over the categories, adjust the guide to reflect the numbers of employees in a level, and even out the steps. Perhaps the top of the guide should be revised upward, perhaps not.

These days I don’t think we have to fear the “good” employees leaving us to go to another city if we don’t pay them more, however when the economy improves and we can once again afford it, the guide should reflect the current worth of the job the employee does and not a years old obsolete salary guide.

The uproar about the employees who got paid above the top of the guide was justified. I don’t know if the raises were reasonable or not, perhaps the employees deserved the raises but the City Manager at the time and the Board had no authority to award those raises as they were above the cap for the position. It certainly was suspicious that the raises were awarded in such a sneaky way; why not just revise the pay guide? And when the hanky-panky was discovered, the raises were not rescinded, they were allowed to stand, and still no revision. We had years of “illegal” payments and the commission never demanded an accounting, never demanded a new salary guide there was some discussion, but no action.

Residents said NO PARKING GARAGE on the Main Beach Parking Lot!!!!!

2011-01-21T12:35:00.000-08:00

At the Deerfield Beach CRA public workshop last evening (Thursday, 1/20) the Commissioners and CRA Director Keven Klopp got their wish. People showed up to give their opinions, there were very few empty seats. And give their opinions they did!! In no uncertain terms, loud and clear over and over they stated “NO GARAGE on the Main Beach Parking Lot”.

We learned that there is $5.8 million in the CRA budget not designated and over the next 5 years, there will be $2.1 million TIF money coming in a year so we will have $16.3 million to spend on the CRA district.

The first resident to speak energized the whole room when she said “Beautify the Main Beach Parking Lot but do not put a garage on it”. The entire audience erupted in loud applause. Director Klopp’s interjection of: “It would only be one story under current regulations” met a chorus of “no ways” from most of the audience. We were warned by one speaker that there would be “turmoil” in the city if a garage were to be considered.

The consensus on Sullivan Park was that it would be a good use of the CRA funds to buy the Riverview Restaurant property and make the entire parcel a pleasant marine oriented park.

Residents were very much in favor of spending the CRA money to improve infrastructure. Using CRA money to improve the infrastructure of the CRA area would free up city money for infrastructure improvements in the rest of the city.

Speaker after speaker spoke about why they live in Deerfield Beach:

“We bought because the city said no to building on the beach parking lot; we don’t need more people on the beach”.

“When I saw a for sale sign on a certain Deerfield Beach house I knew it was right for me”.

“I chose to live here because it is a small hometown type of town”.

“We like the small, friendly, safe, nice feeling; this is why we are here”.

“Keep the integrity of the town”.

“I love the beach; I love to walk the whole area”.

“I like what we have, just make it nicer”.

“I have lived all over the world and Deerfield Beach is by far the best place, when what has already been started (Cove Shopping Center, Pier improvements, Hillsboro Blvd. improvements) is finished it will be spectacular ”.

They spoke about what should be built or what should be improved:

Other than a Chamber of Commerce representative who said “A vertical garage would give us more green space, and if not a parking garage on the lot then what?” - and, a suggestion to put a one story garage underground on the beach lot, and a businessman who wanted to hire a consultant (perhaps himself) to do a study to see if we need a parking garage, everyone who spoke about the beach parking lot said that it should be updated a bit but essentially stay the way it is.

It was said over and over that if the lots are full there is no room on the beach for more people anyway. Also mentioned was the parking garage on A1A which has lots of room except on days such as Founder’s day (the last time it was full according to one man who said he looked into the use of that garage).

Some other suggestions:

Put all the wires at the beach underground; get rid of the poles,

Improve the curbing,

Improve the dangerous pedestrian conditions on the S curve especially by the 7-11,

Better sidewalks, and pedestrian facilities,

Put signs in that tell people where parking is, especially the north and south beach locations,

Install bike paths,

Improve trash control,

Build a stairway down to Sullivan Park from off the bridge,

Put a kayak launch area in the park,

Replace rusting parking meters, or devise another system at the beach lot,

Maintain and protect what we have,

Be careful how much the city spends on property, the appraised value is often not the real value which lately is much lower, take a lesson from the overpayment for the Boinis beach strip, we are not using play money,

Move the historic Kester cottage to Sullivan Park,

Make the area more friendly to businesses trying to get permits, businesses can go broke while waiting for the city to approve plans,

Look at the Hillsboro Inlet Park and model Sullivan Park improvements on that,

Remove graffiti,

Buy the Royal Palm motel and make it into a park,

Get rid of the “crack houses” on 20th Avenue,

Buy the old Pal’s Restaurant site and put a garage there,

Put a band shell on the parking lot (did not get audience support, residents were afraid of the noise pollution),

Use CRA money to buy a building and create an Art Museum,

Widen the commercial district,

Don’t invite more business until the businesses we have at the beach are making money and all the vacancies are full,

Don’t allow other projects to take as long as the Hillsboro Streetscape project,

Put the turn lane back by 12th Avenue on Hillsboro Blvd.,

Improve the condition of A1A from Flanagan’s to the Boca line.

Home owners should get something for all the taxes paid, return the parking sticker cost to $50,

Do not turn our beach into Hollywood or Coney Island,

NO band shell in Sullivan Park.

There will be another CRA workshop at the Community Presbyterian Church, SE 5th St. between A1A and 18th Avenue. Address: Briggs Hall, 1920 SE 5th Street Thursday, February 3rd 6:00 pm.

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT MEETING ALSO make sure to attend, the Commissioners have to know we mean what we say, and my guess is that the overdevelopment crowd will be there in force.

Is Florida for Sale? (Again? Still?)

2011-01-16T06:17:00.000-08:00

Bob Graham asks below, "Is Florida a commodity or a treasure?" Residents in Deerfield Beach have been trying to convince Deerfield's Commission and the Broward County Commission that we are a treasure and NOT just a commodity for years - remember the RAC mess?

Bob Graham: the battle over whether Florida is for sale has re-emerged

Is Florida a commodity or a treasure? That is the question former U.S. Sen. and Gov. Bob Graham asked after his speech Friday to the Economic Club of Florida on the oil spill disaster in the Gulf. Although he chose his words carefully, his point is that the political climate today has revived the question which he believes was put to rest 40 years ago: Is Florida for sale?

Graham was governor from 1978-86 and U.S. Senator from 1986-2004. Here are his remarks to the Herald/Times:

"I think what's happening in Florida is the battle that many of us thought was over in Florida has emerged -- that is the battle to define what is Florida. For two-thirds of the 20th century, Florida was defined as a commodity. If you thought it was too wet, you filled it in. If you thought it was too dry, you dug it up and you packaged it and sold it.

"Beginning in the 1960s, the climate began to change and, ironically, it was largely driven by Republicans, people like (Sarasota Sen.) Warren Henderson and (Hobe Sound environmentalist) Nat Reed, as a civic activist. They were the sorts of people that raised the consciousness of Floridians and what they were doing to their own state. Instead of thinking of this as a commodity, they should think of Florida as a treasure that we have the opportunity to live in but have the responsibility to pass on to the next generation as good a shape as we got it.

"That’s the battle that many of us thought was settled and which has now re-emerged. It is now one, if not the central issue of Florida politics."

The oil disaster has also renewed Graham's admiration for the so-called Pork-Choppers, a band of North Florida conservatives who ruled Florida through the 1940s and 50s, he said. Although the Pork Chop Gang had a mixed reputation over the years, especially regarding reapportionment, Graham said they were prescient on some things. While neighboring Gulf states were opening their doors and coffers to oil drilling, the Pork Chopperse worked together to ban it in Florida.

"Along with this issue of commodity versus treasure is the theme of short-term or long-term vision,'' Graham said. "It’s really stunning how long the vision was of the Pork Choppers on a number of issues for which we are still benefitting.

"Does our generation of political leadership have the same ability to think over the horizon, and to act in an over the horizon manner even though there are no immediate rewards?"

Deerfield Beach CRA Meeting Advertised Poorly

2011-01-13T09:49:00.000-08:00

I am one of those people who attend city meetings whenever I can. I like to know what is going on in the city in which I pay taxes and I think that having interested citizens at meetings keeps the elected officials as well as the staff on their toes. Even with this citizen involvement, all too often we hear about iffy practices, imagine if they had no residents at all interested.

At the CRA Board meeting last Tuesday a lot of time was spent discussing how the city could attract more people to its second and third CRA CIP public meetings. The commissioners, in a belittling way, said that they were afraid that only the same few people would attend the capital improvement meetings that attend the budget workshops and city meetings.

They talked about how to improve attendance at the meetings by sending out letters, and about handing out flyers rather than just posting a notice on the city hall door and on the web-site. But nobody said let’s really tell the public what is going on.

Well duh! Considering how poorly the meetings are advertised and how little information is given about the content of the meetings there should be no mystery about the low attendance.

I believe this lip-service discussion was in direct reaction to the fact that the OSOBs, disgusted at the lousy information about the meeting from city hall decided to run a full page advertisement in the Observer paper to try to get more people to the meetings and let residents know what the city is proposing. The commissioners know that 75% of the voters voted against developing the Main Beach Parking Lot, but the city is entertaining the idea again.

Just imagine for a minute that the city had spent the big bucks and sent out a letter to everyone stating what it says on the city web site about the meeting. Who do you think would be interested in going?

This is what the web-site notice says:

“Public Hearings-CRA Capital Improvements Two public hearings have been scheduled to al-low the public to provide input on the Community Redevelopment Agency’s (CRA) Five Year Capital Improvements Plan. The first meeting will take place on Thursday, January 20, 2011 at Royal Fiesta Event Center, 1680 SE 3rd Court in Deerfield Beach. The second meeting will be held on Thursday, February 3, 2011 at Briggs Hall, Community Presbyterian Church, 1920 SE 5th Street in Deerfield Beach.
Both meetings will begin at 6 PM.
For inquiries about the Deerfield Beach CRA, call 954-480-4263. To receive automatic updates on projects of interest in the CRA, visit www.Deerfield-Beach.com and select “E Subscriptions” to sign up for notifications on projects of interest. “

Right, let’s have a big YAWN! I don’t think anyone would be excited much less even mildly interested by this notice and I really think that is their idea. (Remember the CRA director and 4 out of 5 commissioners didn’t even want to have two more meetings, thank Bill Ganz for forcing them, so I am sure they are not eager to hear from a bunch of residents who might not agree with them or their special friends about the area.)

Think if the notice said something like: YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO COME GIVE IN-PUT ON HOW YOU WOULD LIKE THE MAIN BEACH PARKING LOT DEVELOPED OVER THE NEXT 5 YEARS, AND WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN SULLIVAN PARK, AND THE REST OF THE BEACH AREA, just maybe people might be interested. Using the word encouraged, not just “allowed”, might make a difference also. People are busy, but if it affects them they will show up, they just have to know what’s up.

The city has expertise in advertising, they know how to word notices, if they wanted citizen involvement they would have no trouble wording a notice to attract participation, they know about newspaper ads, so ask yourself why they don’t, there is only one answer.

The OSOBs think that the future of the lot and the park is important enough that residents should be informed about the meetings so that’s why they ran a full page ad in the Observer. THAT’S HOW TO GET THE WORD OUT!

A Must Make Meeting, Deerfield Beach Projects Discussion

2011-01-12T19:37:00.000-08:00

WARNING!!!!

Here we go again!

In both 1999 and 2002 Deerfield Beach voters sent a strong message to the city and voted to protect the main Beach Parking Lot from development.

Now the Main Beach Parking Lot is under consideration for development again.

The city is considering changes to the Main Beach Parking Lot and Sullivan Park which is Next to Hillsboro Blvd on the Intracoastal.

If you care what happens to your money and your city you will want to make sure you and your neighbors ATTEND these 2 City sponsored hearings.

When? Thursday, January 20th 6:00 pm

Where? First meeting: Royal Fiesta Cove Shopping Center

Follow up Meeting: Community Presbyterian Church, Briggs Hall, 1920 SE 5th Street Thursday, February 3rd 6:00 pm

Do You Want A Parking Garage on Our Main Beach Parking Lot?

Plans for the Main Beach Parking lot that Deerfield Beach is considering:

Beachfront Park and Integrated Parking, or
Low Rise Structured Parking with
Community Facilities or with
Governmental Facilities or with
Commercial Facilities or an
Amphitheatre or Beautification/Modernization Only.

Attend the meetings to make sure the city knows where you stand, this is your chance to give input about what residents want in Sullivan Park and on the Main Beach Parking Lot.

CLICK ON GRAPHIC FOR LARGER IMAGE

Did you know we still dump sewage into the ocean?

2011-01-07T13:31:00.000-08:00

“We are the ones we have been waiting for” is a line from June Jordan's "Poem to South African Women and was used as a spring board, by Tom Atlee on his blog, (http://tom-atlee.posterous.com/) to his New Years blog post.

His headings, which I am using below, got me to thinking about how our elected officials don’t want to be the “we”.
.
The Broward County Commission is trying to weasel out of shutting down the pipes that dump “treated” sewage into our ocean in Pompano and Hollywood. Yup, even Kristin and Sue, unbelievable!

The pipe is one of six in Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties ordered closed by a 2008 state law, after a campaign by environmentalists who argued the pipes were polluting coral reefs and wasting fresh water.

The law, which set a deadline of 2025, requires wastewater authorities to improve treatment systems so the water can be used for purposes such as irrigating golf courses, watering lawns and recharging underground water supplies.

Broward’s water director says the treated water is clean. I don’t think so; the Reef Rescue people have pictures of greenish brown gunk pouring out of the pipe onto the reef, (see video above right) pictures of red algae bloom, fed by the “nutrients” that survive the treatment, killing the coral, the Reef folks say only the “chunks” have been taken out of the sewage, and they worry about the effect of the pharmaceuticals, pathogens and viruses that survive the current treatment

We are in this mess because of the horribly short sighted actions of past officials, who allowed unrestrained development without providing for land for waste treatment plants. Palm Beach County planned ahead and set aside land for the plants, so shutting down their pipe will be relatively inexpensive, but Broward? Nope.

We are the ones we've been waiting for.
Yup, you; our current officials, no more blaming the past, you have to step up, perhaps be unpopular to people who may have to pay more fees, it has to be done. The population was allowed to surge out of control, western cities were allowed to tap into the ocean sewer pipes instead of handling their own waste. Now you have to make sure our ocean stays clean and our reefs alive.

We are the ones who've been waiting for us.
Right, us. All of us. We may have to pay higher sewage bills, but then, maybe lower water bills. We have to make sure that pipe is shut down or the constant beach closings and dying off of the reefs will ruin our tourist industry, never mind the ecology. We need to be the “we” and make sure our County Officials do the right thing.

“We” must shut down the pipe and use the treated water for watering our landscape. 50% of our drinking water is wasted on our landscape. We would have no water shortage if we did this. Everybody else is doing it, all of Europe is doing it, and all the North East is doing it, but Broward? Nope.

We are the ones our parents were waiting for, to make the world new.
How many times have we heard that we have to fix what our parents ruined? We brought dead Lake Erie back to life; well, now we have to stop polluting the ocean before our grandchildren will have to bring IT back to life. The pipes and treatment plants will have to be done eventually, let’s do it before it is a crisis.

We are the ones who cannot wait any longer...
We need to lay the pipe system and build the better treatment plants and then spray the treated water on our lawns; it is time, beyond time if you look at all the beach closings.

The pipe discharges 32 million gallons of sewage every day from Parkland, Pompano, Deerfield, Coral Springs, Tamarac, Oakland Park, Lauderhill, North Lauderdale, Coconut Creek, Lauderdale Lakes, some of unincorporated Broward and Ft. Lauderdale.

(I’m glad I live in Deerfield Beach, the currents flow south. That’s why Deerfield’s beaches are seldom closed and Hollywood and Pompano’s often are, the excuses given about cat and dog poop being the reasons for the closings is just preposterous.)

“We” cannot wait any longer!!!

Broward County Inspector General, Will it Work?

2010-12-30T17:31:00.000-08:00

On tap in 2011:

A new anti-corruption inspector general for Broward

By Brittany Wallman
December 30, 2010 08:00 AM

"One of the milestones in the public corruption saga that plagued Broward County this year is the hiring of a new ethics watchdog, an inspector general.

Broward voters approved in November the concept of an inspector general who watches over all city officials in Broward, the government employees and the county

Read the rest of the article here: http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/2010/12/browards_new_inspector_general.html#more"

I have some questions about how this will work, and if it will be worth the money the new inspector general’s office will cost the taxpayers. The charter provision states:

“After completing his or her investigation and determining that there is probable cause to believe misconduct has occurred, the Inspector General shall notify the appropriate civil, criminal, or administrative agencies charged with enforcement related to the alleged misconduct.”

That’s it, NOTIFY THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY!!! It comes to mind that the "appropriate" agencies should be taking care of business and should be uncovering the "misconduct" without needing outside help.

Now we are going to have an entire office doing the jobs of the "civil, criminal or administrative agencies" that are being paid already to ferret out miscreants; does the word redundant come to mind?

OK, I realize that those “agencies” are not famous for bringing elected officials, or much of anyone to justice, after all it did take the FBI to start the ball rolling recently, but who is to say that a new guy/gal won’t also start worrying about stepping on certain powerful feet.

AND, after a referral is made, then what, will it be business as usual, years of half-assed investigations which result in nothing, or at best a slap on the wrist? If so, we will have a new “agency” that costs tons of money and goes nowhere.

Are we expecting hoards of residents to rush forward with complaints for the Inspector General to investigate? Don’t hold your breath. There will be no whispering in the ear of the inspector anonymously.

Our Commissioners changed the original wording and we now have a provision that if a person wants to make a complaint, the charter section says:

“…a complaint may only serve as a basis for a good cause finding if it is signed by an identified person who verifies the contents of the complaint by including the following statement: "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing complaint and that based on my personal knowledge the facts stated in it are true."

“In any case in which the Inspector General determines that a person has filed a complaint with a malicious intent to injure an Official's, Employee's, or Provider's reputation with baseless, spurious, or false accusations, or with a reckless disregard for the truth of the allegations, the complainant shall be liable for all costs incurred by the Inspector General in the investigation of the complaint.”

If you want to make a complaint to those civil or criminal “agencies” you don’t have to live in fear that you will have to pay all the court costs of the investigation, I think you just make a complaint and let the States Attorney, for example, carry out an investigation, if it comes to nothing, no harm no foul; and no fear for you that you will be held responsible for the whole cost of the investigation. And, I think that you can do some ear whispering to point them in the right direction without even signing anything.

Not so with our new IG, I wouldn’t trust that something that I SAY I know is a fact won’t wind up in court with an allegation that I am lying.

I love the idea that not only our elected officials but everyone doing business with government will be under more scrutiny. I love the idea that we will have more Gallaghers, Chaits, and Eggelletions being convicted, and I hope the new IG will find who is responsible for the rampant fraud, bribery, back room deals etc. in Broward County. I will wait and watch to see what happens.

Poll on Police and Fire Salaries

2010-12-26T10:24:00.000-08:00

51% polled think benefits etc. are about right, I wonder what Deerfield Beach residents would say?

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/12/florida-league-of-cities-poll-on-police.html

Florida League of Cities Poll on Police and Fire Salaries Shows Public out of Touch Regarding Benefits

An interesting Poll by the Florida League of Cities on Police and Fire Benefits shows the public is way out of touch with how generous police and fire benefits are. When asked if benefits were too high, most thought no. When given actual benefit levels most thought the opposite.

Here are snips from the executive summary and a few questions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

When it comes to the pay and benefits of police and fire fighters, voters are generally unaware of the array of benefits currently afforded them. Initially and by a large margin most respondents felt these benefits are “about right” or “too low”.

We asked an extended series of questions identifying the assortment of pay and benefits currently provided to most police and fire fighters. Almost without exception, voters feel that most of these benefits are too generous. For example, 63% felt retirement benefits should be consistent with other government employees, 66% opposed 20 years and out, and 73% felt that adding overtime to base calculations was unfair. Further, 70% oppose DROP, 71% felt $70,000 per year average salary was too high, and a whopping 84% felt they should not make the same when they retire as when they are working!

Oddly, more than 60% stated that increasing benefits could bankrupt local government yet 77% do not equate these pension benefits to taxes and instead correlate higher taxes to “other spending and other government programs”.

We can conclude, based on these findings, that the public is largely ignorant or agnostic to benefit packages and salaries currently available to police and fire fighters. However, once they are informed about these benefits, they believe they are excessive and have problems with several of them specifically.

1. Do you think that the salary and benefits provided to police officers and fire fighters are:

Much Too High 9%
Somewhat High 12%
About Right 51%
Too Low 28%

Just over half of respondents said that salaries and benefits provided to police officers and fire fighters are just right.

3. Which of the following comes closer to your opinion?

Police officer and firefighters should be allowed to retire after 20 years of
service because their jobs are hard. 37%
They should have retirement benefits that are consistent with other government employees. 63%

4. In some cities, police officers or firefighters can retire after 20 years of service and receive 80% of their salaries for the rest of their lives. This means that for many, they can retire in their early to mid forties and receive pensions as high as $80,000 per year for the rest of their lives. Do you:

Strongly Support 16%
Somewhat Support 18%
Somewhat Oppose 24%
Strongly Oppose 42%
Support 34%
Oppose 66%

9. If you knew that the retirement pay for an average police officer was over $70,000 per year would you say:
That is Too Low 1%
That it is About Right 28%
That it is Too High 45%
That it is Much Too High 26%

These results show just how effective police and fire unions have been on fearmongering campaigns as well as bitching about how little they get paid and getting the public to believe it.

Cities need to do a far better job at education the public just how exorbitant police and fire contracts are, and that it is tax dollars that support those untenable benefits, putting cities in financial jeopardy.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Deerfield Beach Residents: Only if you care.

2010-12-18T08:43:00.000-08:00

Everyone who cares about what happens to the Main Beach Parking lot should be at the upcoming CRA Workshop Meetings, 1/20/11 and 2/3/11 at 6:00 pm. The January 20th meeting will be held in the Cove Shopping Center’s Royal Fiesta Caterers on the south east side of the center.

The purported purpose of the meetings (which are only being held because Commissioner Bill Ganz insisted on it) is for the commissioners to gather resident input for the 5 year CRA capital improvement plan. This would include plans for Sullivan Park, the Main Beach Parking lot and the other CRA areas.

What is important to me is finding out what is being planned for the Main Beach Parking Lot.

Suggestions for the Main Beach Parking Lot from Keven Klopp, the CRA director, include: Beautification/Modernization Only, Beachfront Park and Integrated Parking, Low Rise Structured Parking, with Community Facilities, with Governmental Facilities, with Commercial Facilities, Amphitheatre. (See his proposal pictures below)

The Director says he wants input from “stakeholders”, and, as everyone in Deerfield Beach has a stake in what happens at our beach, we need to go to this meeting to make sure that there is a cross section of the community represented, and not just the usual lopsided turnout.

It seems that residents and business people, mostly, I imagine, realtors and Chamber of Commerce members, have contacted Mr. Klopp about the parking lot and he asked them to attend the last meeting to voice their preferences. And attend they did! These folks spoke about increasing parking with a garage and were favorable to ideas of commercial development on the lot.

Beach area residents know that there is only a shortage of parking at the beach on certain weather blessed weekends and on holidays, and, no matter how high they stack the garages, that will not change. People, who only go to the beach at those times, really believe there is never enough parking at the beach as their experience of the beach is only on those beautiful weather and warm water days, the rest of us see the mostly empty lot most days of the year.

The speakers had no data to back up their feeling that a garage was needed, and no facts about cost and revenue, all they had was general feeling that we need it.

Mr. Klopp was not here when the residents of Deerfield Beach told the city loud and clear that they did not want commercial development or a parking garage on the city owned beach lot. 75% (80% in some precincts) of the voters said no to the proposal. But like a bad penny, the idea keeps coming back.

The thing we need to keep in mind here for any change is WHO BENEFITS! Let’s make sure it is us, the residents.

We have at least one commissioner who wants to use the lot for a big brand new fire station funded with CRA money.

CRA Director. Klopp is a young ambitious professional looking to his future, and I understand that he wants to increase his chances of getting a job as a city manager sometime by having a lot of projects on his resume, but as we have seen in the past, what is good for the professional resume does not always translate into what is good for the people who live in Deerfield Beach. Let’s make sure what he wants is what WE want.

The commission and the CRA board SAY they want to do what the residents would like, so if you want input into what should be done, if anything, to the main beach parking lot, you need to go to these meetings. If not, the only people who will go are the people who have something to gain from developing the parking lot, and those will be the only people the commission will hear.

Attend the meetings, find out what they want to do, and let them know whether you agree or not.

CLICK ON CHART FOR LARGER VIEW:

Deerfield Beach Beach Parking Sticker Fee, Still $50

2010-12-07T06:15:00.000-08:00

Good news for Deerfield Beach residents. I see from the back of the water bill that the commission has not raised the beach parking permit fee. During the budget process the commissioners voted to raise the fee from $50 to $100. In this economy people may not want to buy the sticker even at $50.

I hope the reason that the fee wasn’t increased was because of an outcry from residents. It would be nice to know the commission was listening to their constituents. We should have some perks as residents; after all it is our taxes that pay for the maintenance of the beach.

Or, perhaps they did an informal survey as I did and found that people who use the beach infrequently just won’t buy a sticker. Many of my neighbors buy a sticker even though they only go to the beach once or twice a month, if that, they said the $50 was worth it for the convenience, however at $100 they said no way! Some said for the infrequent times they go to the beach they would use valet parking and save money over the $100 fee.

I am sure that the $100 fee would increase dramatically, the number of people who park for free at the Cove Shopping Center and walk over the bridge to the beach - that would not be good for the businesses there.

So, here’s a high five to the commission, (unless the fee printed on the back of the water bill was a mistake because they forgot to tell the employee responsible for the printing of the notices about the change, then, high five to whoever made the mistake and gave us a one year reprieve).

What do the residents want for Deerfield Beach's beach parking lot?

2010-11-11T13:36:00.000-08:00

The Main Beach parking lot is a topic of discussion again. It seems that every time we get new people in the city they just itch to come up with some plan for redoing the beach parking lot. The latest is from the CRA meeting.

Because of the budget problems the only place in the city that has money is the CRA* budget. So, because it is there, I guess it is burning a hole in the city pockets. It seems borrowing against its (possible) future revenue doesn’t faze our commission.

The CRA money has enabled the city to do some nice things; the city redid the beach area, side-walks, lights etc. Hillsboro Blvd and the Cove Shopping Center are getting facelifts, all because of the CRA tax increment money.

Now the city wants to know what “we” would like to do at the Main Beach Parking lot.

The attendees at the CRA meeting Monday were asked what they would like to see happen to the lot, the choices were not solicited from the audience but pre selected and presented as:

No Change – Beautification/Modernization Only

Beachfront Park and Integrated Parking

Low Rise Structured Parking

with Community Facilities

with Governmental Facilities

with Commercial Facilities

Amphitheatre

Other

There was no hint of this being a topic at the meeting but obviously some in the audience knew ahead of time and were prepared to advocate for the parking garage etc. The usual suspects popped up and wanted the city to go into debt for millions on a facility that has not been studied as to need; debt that may well have to be paid for years after the CRA sunsets.

This would have been the only public meeting if Bill Ganz had not insisted on more meetings. Deerfield Beach has a long history of ignoring the wishes of the residents. And here we go again.

From the list I deduce that the commission is looking to go to the public for a referendum to eliminate the restrictions in the charter for the Main Beach Parking Lot which prevents any commercial businesses on the lot. That is the only way they could possibly entertain some of the items proposed.

Make sure to keep an eye out for the next meetings on this and get involved, make sure the commission has the facts and shares them, about the money and the need before any project is approved. And, make sure that your voice is heard as loudly as those who will benefit from whatever is done to the lot.

*What is a CRA? Very simply cities are allowed to designate a defined area which is blighted and needs redevelopment. The plans for the area are governed by the Community Redevelopment Agency, which is a group appointed by the city commission, in our case they are the commissioners acting as the agency.

The year the CRA was initiated is the base tax year. The money that is now in the CRA fund came from money that the CRA improvements generated, Tax Increment Funds, which in other parts of the city go to the county as tax money. For example take a building that generated $100 in county taxes in the base year, from that year on, everything over $100 that the building generates goes into the CRA fund, the original $100 still goes to the county.

Because real estate was zooming before the crash, a lot of dollars went into the fund. This is money the city would have had to send to the county if they didn’t have a CRA. The money has strings on it; it can only be used in certain ways, and only in the defined area.

Thanks to all volunteers for Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment 4

2010-11-03T13:15:00.000-07:00

To all Amendment 4 volunteers:

Thanks so much for all you did. During our campaign I met wonderful passionate people who care about Florida. This is what I am going to take away with me from our effort, the people and the enthusiasm. We couldn’t fight the lies and the money, but we did make all of Florida aware that the people are fed up with the rubberstamping of overdevelopment and corrupt behavior of our elected officials. I am proud to be a part of Hometown Democracy, and doubly proud to call all of you my friends.

Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment 4 ... IF

2010-10-19T07:07:00.000-07:00

To Hollywood Commissioners

2010-10-18T15:35:00.001-07:00

Dear Mayor and Commissioners,

At least one commissioner has raised with at least one resident the specter of Memorial Hospital expansion requiring a referendum under Amendment 4.

The hospital expansion did not involve a land use change. It would not, therefore, have been covered by Amendment 4.

There are all too many of these "false facts" being bandied about. When they come from elected officials, one result is increased cynicism among the public.

Another is questioning the very competence of our elected officials. This is not helpful for any of us.

Sara Case
Hollywood Resident

Jill ( from North Florida) posted an open letter to Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment 4 supporters:

2010-10-14T04:46:00.000-07:00

Jill Yelverton's Blog:
http://floridahometowndemocracyamendment.blogspot.com/2010/10/regaining-control-of-our-communities.html

Regaining control of our communities

I'm not much of a gambler. I get nervous after forking over a dollar for a Lotto ticket. Investing your time, energy and effort into a political campaign has to be the biggest roll of the dice there is.

One of the news channels out of Orlando ran a piece on Amendment 4 today with the introduction: Twenty days until Election Day.

I have to admit, pressure is building.

Never having been involved in anything more political than casting my votes, being involved with Florida Hometown Democracy is teaching me things I never thought I'd learn.

Like, how your opposition can resort to outrageous predications of disaster when the system they are fighting to stay in control of is what has created the economic disaster we are experiencing today. Like confusing people who are unfamiliar with the issues about who the special interests are. Maybe this is just part of the political game.

I know for those of us rooting for Amendment 4 this is not a game. Most of us are regular people who learned a little something about land use and growth management and the way the system works when a developer came into our city or county and proposed a project that was so intolerable; we just couldn't sit back and let it happen without a fight.

When people speak out against a project or development at a city council or county commission meeting, developers are quick to fling the label NIMBY, "not on my backyard," at us.

Well, supporters of Amendment 4 come from all over the state. We are people living in cities such as Miami, Orlando, St. Petersburg and Tampa, in rural areas like Gilchrist and Citrus counties and in counties like Pasco and Hernando, St. Lucy and Manatee that fall somewhere in between. In a sense, we have taken on this effort because Florida is our backyard and we care. Not because it's how we make our living, like the developers, home builders and the Realtors who like the way the system works now because it's stacked in their favor, but because we care about the places we live and want more control over how they grow and the quality of our lives.

Amendment 4's opposition admits that Florida has not done a very good job of growth management; they admit that things should change but say that Amendment 4 isn't the answer. They say that because if Amendment 4 passes, it is they who will have to change. They will have to follow the rules and build where we have agreed in our comprehensive plans that growth should occur, not where it is most convenient for them. They want the rest of us to be the ones who have to compromise our quality of life to fit their greedy plans. And make no mistake about it, greed is a factor in this or the Florida Chamber of Commerce, the Florida Builders Association, the Florida Association of Realtors and the homebuilders who created the housing bubble wouldn't be forking over millions of dollars to see it fail.

In 20 days we will see the result of a seven-year effort by average people who want to level the playing field for all of us who just want a vote when their elected officials make radical changes to places where they live.

A lot of us are getting a little tired. It's tough being David in a David and Goliath fight. We are also a little scared that for all of our hard work, our truth may be outshone by the glare that a multi-million dollar media blitz can create.

For those of out here working to make this happen, I want to thank Lesley Blackner for having the courage to stand up for the rights of all Floridians who just want to have more than three minutes in front of a microphone at a commission meeting to protect the way they live. For giving us this chance to have the right to vote on issues that impact our property taxes, property values and quality of life.

Keep your chin up, Lesley; it ain't over 'til it’s over.