voteheather2008.com Blog

Much of the morning in the last BOCC meeting was devoted to a discussion of how to proceed with the concept of allowing for hotel development at the Marathon and Key West Airports.

Where to begin . . .

Airport hotels seem to me to make sense around busy hub airports, airports in populated communities with a lot of business travel, or airports remotely located where the nearest hotel is a half hour or more away. That’s just not the case here. In Marathon, there’s no significant commercial air service at all. In Key West, you could roll your suitcase a couple hundred yards in either direction and find a Sheraton or a Best Western. Where’s the need?

The beauty of a vacation in the Keys is staying in accommodations that take advantage of our unique cultural and natural environment, whether it’s staying in a waterfront resort with direct access to fishing, diving, beaching, or in an historic guesthouse in Old Town Key West. It’s hard to imagine a chain hotel adjacent to an airport providing this experience. Where’s the need?

While Keys lodging proprietors experience occupancy rates above the national average, about the only times the County is sold out is between Christmas and New Year’s, and FantasyFest. (I know – I am the co-owner of a guesthouse and former chair of the Lodging Association, and I see monthly occupancy and ADR reports Keys-wide.) Certainly, the current economic climate is not encouraging for hoteliers: occupancy rates are down, room rates are being lowered, staff is not being hired, profits are softer than even after 9/11. Major hotel redevelopment projects have been postponed. Where’s the need for more hotel rooms?

An RFP for hotels (amazing that one was even requested) at both airports produced only one on-time proposal for Marathon, and a second received after the deadline (which was accepted by the BOCC in the interest of having “competition”). Perhaps the reason hotel developers have not been chomping at the bit to build a hotel at the Marathon airport is because the developers don’t think it’s a real smart business move. Where’s the market demand?

In Key West, the three submitted proposals don’t quite seem to take into account the Keys’ height or density regulations – including a 30-story, 192-foot high structure that would dwarf La Concha. The economics just wouldn’t make sense unless there can be a hundred or so hotel rooms. Where’s the recognition of our regulations?

The arguments in support of an airport hotel include the assertion it could provide jobs. That’s not really a problem in the Keys where our unemployment rate is traditionally below 3% — especially in Key West. Another is that folks who are flying to Cuba (when it opens up) could stay there – though why they wouldn’t want to fly on a much bigger plane out of Miami, or why they couldn’t stay at an existing hotel, I don’t understand. If they’re flying their own plane, they can likely afford to stay at Tranquility Bay or Hawk’s Cay in Marathon, or any number of nearby hotels in Key West. And how many of those folks are there? Where’s the logic?

Despite all this, the Mayor would like to proceed with having staff spend time and money to determine how to address the challenges associated with building hotels at our airports. He and some of his colleagues believe it would produce tax revenue; apparently, they believe that raising revenues is the role of County government. It doesn’t matter that doing so would increase the strain on our infrastructure, wouldn’t really make business sense, would compete with existing long-term businesses, would be inconsistent with the character of the Keys, and would produce revenue for the airport fund that could only impact ad valorem taxes through accounting wizardry. Where’s the common sense?

On Monday, I attended the BOCC’s second budget workshop. During the course of the meeting, nearly every cost-saving measure that was suggested by County Administrator Gastesi was challenged or withdrawn, increasing the likelihood that our taxes will be increased to make up for the $10 million shortfall in the County’s coffers. One particular issue, Trauma Star, highlighted for me the problems with the decision making on the current County Commission.

The first observation about the discussion is that we are having the discussion at all. If the Commission had been frugal and focused on the essential role of government – providing for the safety, health and welfare of its citizens – then the budget would not have been so depleted by expenditures on questionable real estate deals, grandiose edifices and special-interest projects that life-saving services are on the chopping block.

Medical evacuation is a service that is vital to the residents and visitors of the Keys. Boating, diving, a busy single-lane highway and an aging population create the need for fast transport to mainland facilities better suited to meet the needs of cardiac and trauma patients than our local hospitals. Several recent accidents on land and sea and the ensuing dramatic evacuations demonstrated this need.

The second thing that struck me was the inadequacy of information provided to determine whether or not the service provided by Trauma Star could in fact be cost-efficiently and effectively provided by a private vendor, LifeNet. How many trips does each helicopter make in a year? Do they both have the same on-board equipment? Do they have equivalent dedicated and trained staff based in the Keys? How many miles can each fly without re-fueling? What is the cost to the County, and to the patient, for transport on each helicopter? What guarantee would the County have from a private vendor that service would be provided as long as it’s necessary?

Thirdly, Sheriff Roth suggested that there could be additional revenue sources to cover a portion of the cost of Trauma Star. That’s great – but why wasn’t this included in the initial request to the County for funding? Is it guaranteed revenue?

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the debate was the solution proposed by the Commission: put the issue to a referendum to be decided by voters, and fund Trauma Star for six months until the result of the referendum can be acted upon.

While having the public decide is an admirable, democratic alternative, it begs several questions. Why stop there – shouldn’t the voters decide on other budget line items? Why does the Commission believe that the public does not trust them to make the right decision now? And if the voters decide to keep Trauma Star, where is the County going to get the money to pay for the next six months? The County Administrator recommended the cut because it could save $1.8 million. Now where is the $900,000 for six months (or $1.8 million for twelve months) going to come from?

I believe that providing for the safety of our residents and visitors is the first priority of government. Whether that is best done through Trauma Star – a stellar service, by all accounts – or by a private vendor could not be definitively determined based on the information provided to the Commission thus far. Not requiring this information, and passing the buck to the ballot, seems like an abdication of the responsibility of the Commission. Monday’s debate certainly was not a logical, reasoned, deliberative discussion about this vital charge of government.

Last week, FIRM received a letter out of the blue from former Represenative Ken Sorensen, criticizing FIRM for “taking credit” for work we’ve done on windstorm insurance. As any review of FIRM’s press releases from spring 2006 will confirm, we have acknowledged the contribution former Rep. Sorensen made in this fight in his last months in office. In fact, I referenced him in the caption to a photo on my website’s home page. So it came as a shock to our board members to receive such a negative letter from someone who we thought was working with us.

It’s been surmised that this was all a political ploy because Dr. Sorensen is a very good friend of the incumbent, Commissioner Sonny McCoy. Certainly, the motive is suspicious, and counter-productive for the folks of Monroe County. FIRM’s work is far from over (we’re meeting with the team that developed the Florida Public Hurricane Model this week, for instance), and one would think that anyone who had the best interest of property owners and residents in the Keys long-term would support a group that has worked so hard to address this issue.

We’ll shortly be posting on this website an audio clip from the Morning News program that includes remarks by Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty about the impact FIRM has had in the insurance arena. A review of the press releases on FIRM’s website (www.FIRMkeys.org) will suggest that Dr. Sorensen’s recollection is incomplete. For those interested, the e-mail string between Dr. Sorensen and FIRM regarding this issue (some of which was quoted in The Citizen last week) appears below. Let me know what you think.

______________________________________________
Dear Dr. Sorensen,

Nice to hear from you after so much time.

We must say that we are puzzled by your invective against this grassroots organization of over 5,000 members that worked with your office in addressing the windstorm insurance crisis. I recall the first meeting your office arranged on March 30, 2006 with Consumer Advocate Steve Burgess, Actuary Steve Alexander, members of the insurance industry, representatives from Citizens Property Insurance, Rep. Ross and Keys officials including the late Commissioner Murray Nelson and schools superintendent Randy Acevedo, among others. I recall cooperation in the following months between FIRM and your assistant, Holly Merrill, and the press conference we attended at your invitation to announce the Pilot Project.

The Pilot Project did in fact grant Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty the authority to set actuarially sound rates in Monroe County without the “top 20” restriction, and your sponsorship of that legislation was key. I strongly believe, however, and the Commissioner concurs below, that it was FIRM’s production of data to support a rate reduction that led to the rollback we’re now enjoying. Further, FIRM reached every single member of the House and Senate in Tallahassee, as well as the Florida delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives, to convince legislators that it was time to address the insurance crisis.

Those of us who volunteered countless hours of unpaid time to convince your fellow legislators to support pro-consumer legislation, to gather data, to analyze weather patterns and claims information, and to travel frequently to Tallahassee well after the end of your term have been gratified at a process that brought individuals from varying political perspectives together to address an issue of such importance to people in the Keys. We welcomed your support and that of your successor, Rep. Saunders. We stand by the work of all the members of FIRM, and look forward to continued cooperation with our representatives in Tallahassee.

Best,
Heather

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Heather Carruthers
President
Fair Insurance Rates in Monroe
www.FIRMkeys.org

——————————————————————————–

From: Kevin McCarty [mailto:Kevin.McCarty@floir.com]
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 3:04 PM
To: Heather
Subject: RE: FIRM Member Question

Dear Heather,

I can tell you what I know from personal experience. There is no question that FIRM has played a roll in recent public policy both on a state [level] but more specifically and directly for Monroe County. FIRM was instrumental in establishing the pilot program that lowered Citizens rates in Monroe County. Firm provided the office with the necessary data for the office to differentiate Monroe in certain rate filings. I hope this is helpful.

Kevin

——————————————————————————–

From: CAPTDRKEN@aol.com [mailto:CAPTDRKEN@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:10 PM
To: robbiekw@bellsouth.net
Subject: Re: FIRM Member Question

July 14, 2008 [sic]

Mr Hopcraft,

I believe the earlier statement speaks for itself. The functions of splitting windstorm and flood insurance at consumer discretion,the involvement of the state consumer advocate, freezing of rates, the requirement of justifying insurance rates thru an actuary at public meetings in the keys were required” by law” under my watch and sponsored by my office NOT FIRM. In fact , I almost never saw FIRM people in my office except once while serving as our state representative even though they were invited.

The “FIRM” leaders avoided my office and wandered around the capitol with commissioners Neugent and Rice and a county lobbyist who had years before worked for the Ins. commissioner. It seemed as if they thought the lobbyist made laws and not the legislators.

In spite of this attitude of arrogance and without any visits by “firm” I had been working on fixes to our Ins problem for months. Working with chairmen Dennis Ross and Brown ( INS) I wrote into law the relief we so badly needed. These are the same reforms certain leaders of firm take credit for when in fact they had nothing to do with them or the law making that made them a reality! The legislation created then has been kept over the past few years and the reason is not “firm” even though some aspiring politicians claim false credit for it. While your early officers wandered the halls led by Commissioner Nuegent they really had zero impact on any real legislation that brought relief to Monroe county residents. After the efforts of my office became the governing law of the land they rode them claiming political credit for something they were never a part of !

I hope that clears up your concerns. My Tallahassee office will always be available to honest brokers for public good.

sincerely ,
Dr. Ken Sorensen

In a message dated 7/7/2008 11:00:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, robbiekw@bellsouth.net writes:

Ken, I have forwarded your email to the other FIRM board members and I’m sure you will be getting comments from several.

we would appreciate it if you could be more specific in your comments to us. you haven’t really told us anything you disagree with.

we could also use your help in guiding us on our trips to Tallahassee to make state our cause for the florida keys

Robbie Hopcraft
FIRM Board Member

——————————————————————————–

From: CAPTDRKEN@aol.com [mailto:CAPTDRKEN@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 1:09 PM
To: robbiekw@bellsouth.net
Subject: FIRM Member Question

YOUR WEBSITE INFORMATION ON THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS THAT TOOK PLACE IS TERRIBLY SKEWED , INACCURATE AND MISLEADING.

DR. KEN SORENSEN, FORMER LEGISLATOR

DISTRICT #120

7/05/08

——————————————————————————–

Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.

Last week, I attended the BOCC budget workshop in Marathon. I was surprised to see only one other challenging candidate in the audience. The decisions made over the budget in the next few weeks could impact the County well beyond the next budget year.

The projection was that the County’s deficit will be about $11 million. Roman Gastesi, the new County Administrator, with considerable help from Debbie Frederick and Tina Boan, presented a budget that essentially made up half the deficit through cuts in expenses and half through an increase in the millage rate.

Mayor DiGennaro began the meeting by diffusing any tension surrounding potential library closings with the promise, confirmed by Mr. Gastesi, that libraries would not be closed. Was this a red herring, something that was never really intended for the chopping block and could be “saved” by sitting Commissioners? How are we going to “save” our other essential County services, like public safety and health, in light of this deficit?

What is most troubling about the meeting is that we find ourselves in this position at all. The sitting Commission oversaw several years of free-spending, of drawing down our reserves for non-essential expenditures during times of relative prosperity when those reserves should have been expanding. Reserves are for emergencies, for circumstances that cannot be controlled. The overspending of the past few years could have been controlled with just a little discipline and the understanding that the money in the reserves belongs to the taxpayers, not to the Commission.

Construction projects have been mismanaged and costs have escalated tremendously. Not many businesses in the private sector could, for instance, absorb a quadrupling in construction costs for any project, yet the County did. They’ve spent money on sinking ships and buying property that doesn’t serve a real public purpose.

There was actually speculation from the dais that by buying Hickory House and now selling it, the County may realize greater tax revenue. Really? What about the lost tax revenue of the years when the County owned it? Is this how we want to spend taxpayer dollars, taking property off the private market, holding it until its value increases (if it does), and then selling it just to possibly increase tax revenue in some government-sponsored real estate speculation scheme? Does this Commission really believe that the purpose of government is simply to raise taxes?

Apparently so, because one of the only options left is to increase our millage rates to bridge this deficit they’ve created. How does this relate to the state mandated tax reduction? Increased millage forces out the folks who are just hanging on and hurts businesses, cutting social service support hurts the most vulnerable among us, and cutting salaries for essential public safety personnel hurts everybody.

Many private citizens spoke at the meeting, sharing concerns about service cuts, tax increases and the decisions that have brought us here. At the end of the day, after input from two dozen speakers, the direction given to the County Administrator from the Commission didn’t really reflect the concerns about deputy salaries or social services that the taxpayers who spoke had raised.

The folks who attend BOCC meetings are not paid to be there. Their time should be respected by starting meetings promptly, by keeping 10-minute breaks to 10 minutes, and by acknowledging the concerns they raise. If private citizens felt confident that their representatives were representing them, they would not feel the need to attend the meetings. But when they do, their input should be carefully considered, and their time should be respected.

Heather