Friday, March 3, 2017

Village Manager’s Evaluation

Village Manager’s Evaluation on Tuesday
The review of our Manager will take place on Tuesday, March 7th during our regular Commission meeting. As this is an important Village wide decision, particularly at this time, please make every effort to come and voice your opinion during the Good and Welfare period. As a reminder, each of us will have 3 minutes to speak.
All of our new Commissioners have vowed to follow the will of the People, so come and be heard on the subject. In preparation for Tuesday, I would suggest (for those who haven’t already) to view the video links directly below this post.
As well, one of our neighbors has posted both a poll and a series of questions on the Next Door app. For any of you who are not a member there, I will copy and paste what he put up. Now head over there and vote!
The Commissioners will be evaluating our Manager during the next Commissions meeting on 3/7 and rumor has it that some may want to replace her then. Here are some potential problems for us if this happens and questions we need to ask ourselves whichever side of the fence you find yourself.
P.S. Please come to the meeting on Tuesday 3/7 and speak your minds.

1. I've heard that the manager ... View more
received good marks and had a good reputation in all of her other municipal jobs. What's been her problem here?
2. If removed we will have effectively gone through 2 managers in less than 12 months. What sort of signal will that send to any potential new managers down the road? Will they feel this is a stable place to work?
3. All our new employees and those in the pipeline will be without the proper support and structure without a manager and clerk who also retires this month. We have a serious turnover issue will this help or hurt that cause?
4. We are currently under an audit. Could the results of removing the manager affect the results? Would we continue to get that assistance we are currently receiving from other municipalities that the manager has brought in to assist? Will they continue to help without her?
5. What specific reasons exist for her removal? Are they legitimate or is this a personality conflict?
6. Do you feel confident with the new commission? Have they made any progress since being elected? Have they demonstrated proper judgment?
7. If I were in her shoes knowing what I know about this Village and the State in which I found it when I arrived, where would I be 5 months in? With things such as staff turnover, sloppiness, in the middle of a noncompliance audit etc.
8.Does she need more time and our support for a valid review?
 
Further, in reviewing the backup for Tuesday’s meeting, I read a series of emails between the Mayor and Manager. Here is the link to the entirety of Item 12b. 
http://www.biscayneparkfl.gov/vertical/sites/%7BD1E17BCD-1E01-4F7D-84CD-7CACF5F8DDEE%7D/uploads/Agenda_Item_12.b_Regular_Commission_Meeting_03_07_2017.pdf (if this link cannot be opened- please visit the Village website and read under March’s agenda item 12b.) The Manager’s responses will be highlighted in red.
Listed below is one full conversation between them and one excerpt from another. However, I suggest for you to view the emails in their entirety.
From: Tracy Truppman
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 3:06 PM
Subject: Florida State Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for 2014‐2015
Importance: High 
 
Sharon,
 
Since December 2016, I have been asking you about the status of the Florida State Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for 20142015. Each time I asked, you assured me that the audit was almost complete and you received no indication from the auditor that there were any issues. In fact, in our January one on one meeting, you indicated that you requested that I call a special commission meeting in mid-February 2017, to present the completed audit and that you were in the process of asking the other commissioners for their dates of availability. [Sharon] During 1:1 with commissioners, I’ve provided each of you with an update. The auditor and I maintain as much contact as necessary during the process. Additionally, I requested the availability from each commissioner on February 18th and February 21st, including the auditor, because there were a couple of commissioners who were available on those dates. There was no reason for me to believe at that time there would be further delays. As stated in the auditor’s email, the CAFR is almost complete. Furthermore, each commissioner was informed about my meeting with the auditor on January 31st, 2017, which included a professional colleague of mine from another city, and provided with the highlights of the said discussion. I shared some of the main issues that we are facing, along with next steps and the contingency plan.  
I was shocked to hear from you at almost the end of the February 8, 2017 commission meeting, that you had missed a filing deadline in November 2016. Moreover, I was shocked to learn that the Village had received a letter from the Florida State Joint Legislative Auditing Committee stating that the Village has “not complied with the reporting requirements,” and that the State “will be withholding funds.” You attempted to minimize your failure by suggesting you might be able to get another extension. You have no sense of the urgency with regards to this matter or the consequences despite the March 9, 2017 sanction date provided in the letter. [Sharon] As I stated at the Commission meeting, I had no prior knowledge of a November 2016 deadline. A public records request would affirm this statement, as well as our auditor. If such a letter had been received, I would have taken the very same actions that were exercised the night of the February 8th, 2017 commission meeting. There is no lack of urgency – I’ve stated that our books needed cleaning up. At the meeting I also stated that I was unaware of any extension. Sorry you see this as failure. I see it as an opportunity to engage with the State auditing committee to demonstrate we’ve been doing all we can to complete the audit. As mentioned in my email message last week, our request along with others will be submitted to the Chair and Vice Chair. The committee seeks to work with municipalities and not punish them.  
The extent of the financial damage from your inaction is unknown. [Sharon] Your Village staff and I, in conjunction with the auditing team, have been working diligently on completing the CAFR. There is no benefit to either party to delay it. Due to changes in administration, changes in personnel in the finance department, and changes in methodology to book entries, there was no quick fix to complete the CAFR. 
I am disturbed that you stated at the February 8, 2017 commission meeting that you did not know anything about the November 2016 letter. As Village Manager, you are and have been responsible for knowing the deadlines. You, as Village Manger, oversee all administrative employee work, including that of the Finance Manager, as well as all contract oversight, including that of the auditor. One of the emails highlighting a lack of responsiveness from the Village was from Ms. Herrera (the auditor) to our Finance Manager, Mr. Charles, requesting information back in November 17, 2016, which apparently the State still does not have. [Sharon] I reiterate I had no knowledge of a November 2016 letter; if that had been the case I am confident this information would have been disclosed to the elected body. As stated during 1:1 meetings, I’ve met with the auditor on various occasions and received no indication that there is anything detrimental to the Village’s finances (e.g. see bank balances). 
You have told me verbally and suggested in emails that, by requesting information, I am interfering. Your most recent and egregious false accusation that I am interfering occurred Friday, February 10, 2017, when you said that my speaking to the auditor for a few minutes was slowing down the process, and you sent an email to all the commissioners to that effect.
[Sharon] In my email to the elected body, I did not disclose any names. We are a small Village with limited staffing, limited resources, limited budget, and limited capabilities. When a person is working on one task, they are not working on another. I’ll take this opportunity to mention that (a) in other cities, any inquiries about the CAFR is handled through the Finance Manager and not the auditor directly, and (b) it is unknown if the Village incurs additional costs when the auditor’s office is responding to elected officials. 
I have since learned that the letter from the State’s Joint Legislative Auditing Committee, dated February 6, 2017, which you only first mentioned during the February 8, 2017 commission meeting, states that sanctions are to be imposed on the Village. During the commission meeting, you stated that you had received the letter on Wednesday February 8, 2017. The letter indicates that a copy was sent to me, as Mayor. However, you made no effort either to provide me with the letter or inform me that it had arrived. Moreover, it was never placed in my mailbox. You brought me other items, but failed to bring me this critical letter. [Sharon] This is a fast paced environment. There are countless times staff is engrossed in one task and then has to switch gears to take action on a pressing issue. The letter and envelope are on my desk. I decided to provide it to you personally and with an explanation rather than air it in public that the envelope was accidentally opened by the mail handler and given to me. Additionally, I mentioned to the contact person at the State level that a staff person, Village Manager or Finance Manager, should have received a copy of the letter to avoid delays in responding to correspondence of a critical nature, and she agreed. I acted on the information rather than deferred it. 
Please schedule a meeting for Wednesday February 15, 2017, at 4 pm, with Mr. Charles, to review what items are outstanding, per the auditor’s email. Be prepared to identify the timeline for production of each item to the auditor that must be submitted immediately. [Sharon] I understand your frustration with the prolonged process, and how worrisome it is to you. Please clarify. Are you requesting a meeting with the Finance Manager and me?
I am appreciative of the amazing opportunity afforded me to work for the Biscayne Park community. I am aware that I will be scrutinized much more harshly than previous Village Managers for various reasons that I am not here to defend; however I look to you to comprehend the environment that was presented to me and I have made every effort to move the organization progressively forward. I also accepted that I would seek the appointment for this position knowing that the constitution of the commission would change at the next election, and those new commissioners would not be involved with hiring me. It’s a risk I was willing to take to demonstrate that I am here to give and not to take from the Village, provide stability instead of flux, and administer governance not politics. All I ask is to work with me, and not against me. I came here with an untarnished name and credibility, and I intend to keep my professional brand intact. I’ve consulted with various professionals in different areas of government to attain insight, guidance, and resources. I’ve been transparent in my communication to each of you – met with you while campaigning, scheduled the weekly 1:1, improved reporting of financial and organizational information, maintained accessibility, among others.
I extend to you an olive branch and hope we can move forward cohesively, cooperatively, and
purposefully.
 
From: Tracy Truppman
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Log Cabin ‐ Fire Alarm Control Panel
 
Dear Sharon,
In reference to my email earlier today regarding the safety of the log cabin, I asked you very serious questions regarding the urgent matter of the Fire Control Alarm Panel. In the meantime, please take all steps to ensure the safety of the log cabin. Furthermore, have a certified FCAP electrical inspector determine whether the log cabin is safe for occupancy.  I expect a written response to all of the questions asked in earlier email today and copy all of the commissioners by Thursday morning. Please govern yourself accordingly.
 
Mayor Truppman
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alrighty then... I’m interested in your thoughts regarding the attitude displayed and if you feel that the spirit of cooperation was present between an Elected Official and Village Manager?
In closing, please remember, as the Manager is accountable to the Commission… the Commission is accountable to the People.

Hope to see you all on Tuesday!
Standing Watch,
Milton Hunter
The Biscayne Parker


Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Village Managers Community Update

Village Managers Community Update
 
OPEN- SINCERE- REFLECTIVE
 
Last night our Village Manager, Sharon Ragoonan, engaged “her neighbors” in her first of many (according to the response/request from the audience) Community Forums. We had a good turnout of about 47 residents and most seemed to appreciate her professionalism and manner in how she separated rumor from fact and educated us all on current Village issues.
 
Please find the video links below:
 
 
Standing Watch,
 
Milton Hunter
The Biscayne Parker
 
P.S. The subject of attempting to create a master email list for all residents was discussed in an effort for better Village wide communication. If you can assist in this endeavor, please leave your ideas in the comments section below or contact me via my personal email- miltonhunter@gmail.com
Thanks-

 

 
 
 
 
 
 


Thursday, February 9, 2017

2016 BP Crime Statistics

 2016 Annual Crime Statistics 

My sincere thanks to Interim Chief Nick Wollschlager for his prompt response in providing the 2016 Annual BP Crime Statistics for review. This report is “hot off the press” and as such does not include several elements that will be factored in by the State at a later time, i.e. Population, Index Change, % Cleared, etc. I will provide an update with these numbers once the webpage has been updated.
FULL         YEAR
FULL YEAR
2015
2016
Population
3,147
3,147*
Crime Index
65
108
Index Change
80.6
n/a
Calculated by State
Murder
0
0
Rape
0
0
Robbery
3
2
Simple Assault
0
8
Burglary
19
37
Larceny
42
54
Motor Vehicle Theft
1
7**
Crime Rate
2,065.50
3,431.18
% rate Change
+80.2%
+66.1%
% Cleared
1.5
n/a
Calculated by State
Total=                                                  65                                                108
[*Population is an assumption from last year. Actual numbers were not provided]
[**Under motor vehicle theft- 5 cars + 2 motorcycles= 7 total] 
Here are a couple of points I found interesting:
1) Residential Burglary:
Night= 7
Day= 18
Unknown time= 12 / 37 Total
2) Larceny:
Motor vehicle= 41
Motor Vehicle parts= 1
Bicycles= 4
All others= 8 / 54 Total
For any specific questions, I would suggest to contact our police department directly. For more general questions and or discussion, please feel free to use the comment section below.


Standing Watch, 

Milton Hunter
The Biscayne Parker


Tuesday, November 15, 2016

The "F" Word


Yes… the “F” word. But, probably not the one you’re thinking of… but then again, it indeed may be. However, in this case, the “F” stands for alleged “flooding.”
After several delays we finally heard the explanation of the storm water master plan from the engineering firm of Craig A. Smith & Associates. Resident turnout was meager, which pretty much matched the number of residents that bothered to complete and return the storm water survey….about 20ish for each. There was a repeated battle cry issued from the president of Craig A. Smith to “keep the survey alive.” I’ll assume that his thinking was that additional surveys would somehow change the results from those already obtained. At least that’s my best guess. A more logical conclusion would simply be the lack of interest shown towards this project from our residents.
Of the 20ish surveys that were completed, only four residents claimed to have had any water intrusion. And based on the data found within the master plan, those appear to have been in lower elevation level garages. It is also of interest to note that some of those four properties claiming water damage may have been due to improper land elevation or grading on their personal property. Something that this master plan wouldn’t fix or address. As stated from the engineers themselves, “these retro-fit drainage systems are not a cure all, end all.” Further, we also discovered that these four claims weren’t even verified by those preparing the survey. Nope, it was based only on trust. But in truth it is irrelevant if the four cases were legitimate or not. Meaning, we’re now having a $13M conversation over four alleged properties claiming water intrusion. This speaks volumes as to the entire hypothesis.
In researching this topic since inception, I have had questions and concerns regarding the very premise of this action. And these question and concerns are vital ones. For all of us.
Please see below the video links from the meeting:
Please go to video 1 (6:30 time mark) to see the before and after pictures of the areas where water pooling/puddles in our Village were observed after heavy rains. The time frames for these photos are 2 hours, 4 hours, and 6.5 hours apart. Based on this photographic evidence, clogged drains and all, natural percolation and evaporation effectively clears the water from our streets in less than 7 hours.
I found it telling that most everyone in attendance tap danced around the “F” word. And this is due to the fact that we have provided photographic evidence that proves otherwise. This is not in dispute; it is a matter of record. A fact… and facts have no moral judgement. They merely state what is. Not what we feel… they just are.
Only the facts matter. 
We have received 50+ comments from various residents and none have been supportive of this master plan survey for storm water flooding. So, who then is pushing this? As we’ll now discuss, this was really never about the “F” word in the first place.
What this was however, was a poorly conceived effort of misdirection, attempting to create a problem (where there is none) to further another “want” from a small group of people. Namely, a Hail Mary end around play for new streets. Here is how the story went…
Our previous Village Manager pitched that there is some supposed “pot of gold” of money sitting in the States storm water fund and that we could (somehow) access that money for street replacement. And how do I know this? Because, I was pitched this very concept from her directly. After listening my first question was, “ok, so please explain how we can get money from the storm water department for street replacement when we don’t have the need (or could prove a need) for any large scale storm water drainage system?” And the answer I got back was…wait for it…crickets.
Below are several news clippings regarding the cutbacks in State storm water funding over the past two years:
6/2015: While cutting a record $461 million from the state’s $78.7 billion budget, Scott axed millions of dollars for storm water projects to include $750,000 budgeted for Miami Beach’s storm water drainage plan to safeguard the city from sea-level rise. According to Scott’s veto message, the project “does not provide a clear statewide return for the investment.”
3/2016: The budget included almost 200 local water projects and Scott is proposing cutting 60 of these — a sharp contrast from last year, when nearly all of these projects were wiped off the budget. Many South Florida storm water improvements are being cut.
So the “pot of gold” theory doesn’t seem to hold much water in reality. And none of the bids recently awarded were close to the money we would need based on the master plans cost estimate.  
BP Storm Water Concept Time Line
Date of the application submittal was February 15, 2015.
Notice of 1st Public Hearing on special assessment was May 5, 2015 [assessment failed]
Date of 1st Community Storm Water Workshop was September 19, 2015
Date of letter to Village Manager citing Exaggerated Language in Resolution #2015-51 was November 8, 2015 [Excerpt]
“I would caution you regarding the exaggerated wording found in paragraph three of Resolution No. 2015-51. It reads as follows: "Whereas, with no positive outfall, the Village relies on percolation and evaporation and, as a result, much of the Village experiences flooding after even minor storm events."
There is absolutely no factual evidence to support this claim.
SECTION 8: DEFAULT/ TERMINATION/ Force Majeure
[Excerpt] The Department may terminate this Agreement at any time if warranty or representation made by the Grantee in this Agreement or in its application for funding shall at any time be false or misleading in any respect.
The representation of "much of the Village experiences flooding after even minor storm events" is both false AND misleading.
November 9, 2015:  Village Attorney verification that the application language was “taken from the description provided by our engineers, Craig A. Smith & Associates (CAS). CAS was hired to review the condition of the Village's storm water and provided that information to the state.” [ASIDE] the fact that an “interested party” (i.e. one with a potential financial gain) provided the language used in the application could be considered a Conflict of Interest. Also and more to the point, this language was submitted for funding nearly one full year before their survey started [END ASIDE]
So, my question remains, how did Craig A. Smith come to the conclusion of “much of the Village experiences flooding after even minor storm events" before they had collected any information or even started their survey? Think about that for a minute…
Odds and Ends
On video 2 (38:53 time mark) Gene (CAS) states (and he’s said this before) that if we proceed with any of this work “you’ll get new roads.” He was immediately corrected by one of his staff explaining that this is not true, and that only a street “patch” is offered for the price. 
On video 3 (40:27 time mark) there was a discussion about if this drainage system would possibly reduce flood insurance premiums, insinuating that the savings in flood insurance would be substantial vs. the special tax assessment needed to pay for it. This is also factually incorrect. Flood insurance premiums are based on individual property ground elevations- not the water table. The suggestion that by improving drainage flood insurance premiums would be reduced is inaccurate. Improving drainage does not change the properties elevation. Biscayne Park would still remain in a Government flood zone. 
So, to recap we’ve seen a possible Conflict of Interest in having an interested party provide language in the grant application to the State. Language that could be considered to be in violation of the applications Section 8 Default guidelines. A last minute “sneak attack” (opinion from one angry resident) attempt of a special tax assessment to fund the $200,000 master plans sought (an end run around our existing millage). Possible violations of our Citizens’ Bill of Rights (Part 1 section 2) of knowingly misleading the public by city officials and/or employees on the unsubstantiated realities of our purported street flooding. As previously mentioned, this was never really about street flooding. Exaggerated and misleading statements found within the master plan report itself. And who knows how much time and tax dollars spent towards this matter to date.
Neighbors, we all need to open our eyes and ears and pay attention to what is happening around us. If not, we have only ourselves to blame. 

Standing Watch,

Milton Hunter
The Biscayne Parker