voteheather2008.com Blog

At last week’s Key West Business Guild forum, a question was posed about support for a nude beach in the Keys to fill the void in the naturist market created by the closing of Atlantic Shores. All candidates agreed that a nude beach (like Haulover in Miami) wouldn’t be a bad thing, that it’s in keeping with the “wilder” side of the Keys character and would be particularly popular among European visitors. Given the strength of the Euro these days, anything we can do to attract foreign tourists will help bolster our economy.

With Key West’s “come as you are” reputation, it would make sense to locate a naturist beach in or very near the City. However, the only beach the County owns in Key West, Higgs Beach, sits close to a well-trafficked road, a popular restaurant, a playground, a dog park and two historic tourist attractions — not a secluded or private site by any means.

Both of my opponents suggested converting Wisteria Island in Key West Harbor into a nude beach. The Independent candidate also proposed adding telescopes to Mallory Square so people could peek at the nude sunbathers. That provoked some good-natured guffaws from the audience as well as the panel.

All fun aside, that’s where the agreement between myself and the other contenders for the District 3 seat ended. The problem with this scenario is not one of Puritanism, but one of property. Wisteria Island is privately owned and within the County’s jurisdiction, subject to tougher development regulations and density restrictions than it would be if under Key West’s jurisdiction.

My Republican opponent asserted that he’d already suggested converting the island into a naturist resort to the owners (whether he wants the County to purchase the island or just agreed in advance to support the owner in such a development wasn’t clear). This is at least the second time he’s publicly mentioned private conversations with developers. During a forum before the primary, he mentioned that he suggested to the developers of Safe Harbor on Stock Island that the harbor should be used for container ship traffic to Cuba.

The Wisteria Island discussion between the island’s owners and architect Rojas is another indication that his interests lie with developers, and not the people of Monroe County. If developers want to approach the county regarding land use issues, there is an open and public procedure available to them to do so. I don’t think the citizens of the Keys are looking for more secretive discussions between developers and Commissioners that result in surprise changes to our regulations.

This is the same kind of thinking that led to the Hickory House debacle. Some on the Commission determined that they could make better use of that piece of private property, and over $3 million taxpayer dollars have since been tied up in a parcel that cannot fulfill the vision that was promised when it was purchased.

I do not believe government should be in the real estate business. If a private property owner believes it makes good economic sense to develop a naturist resort, and such use conforms to zoning and development regulations, then such use should be permitted. If there is a market need, an enterprising entrepreneur will step in to fill it.

Government should focus its attention on public safety and health through providing a solid infrastructure, emergency support, protection and essential social services. Government should support business, but not direct it.

Our County reserves are depleted by half at least in part because the BOCC approved non-essential projects like the Hickory House and the Vandenberg. Let’s not add Wisteria Island to that list. Let’s get back to basics, rebuild our reserves, trim our budget, and leave the resort development business to the business people.

This past week, our newspapers were dominated by headlines about former aide Celeste Bruno’s lawsuit against the County for failing to provide a safe workplace in light of inappropriate behavior by outgoing Commissioner Sonny McCoy. This incident seems especially distasteful here, in a community where we claim we’re One Human Family.

The transcripts from the initial grand jury investigation into this, as well as reports from the trial itself, were disturbing. The reported behavior was clearly inappropriate and would have made most self-respecting professionals uncomfortable. The fact that the Commissioner did not understand that such behavior was offensive was perhaps more disturbing, and a clear indication that his actions grew out of experiences from a different generation. Further, the County seemed ineffective in complying with today’s workplace standards.

Indeed, I was stunned to learn that Commissioners are not subject to the County’s sexual harassment policies. Educating staff from the top to the bottom about harassment has been SOP in businesses, governments and organizations throughout this country for decades. I’d propose that immediately the County’s policy be reviewed, strengthened and applied to all County employees, including Commissioners.

I hope this is not emblematic of a larger problem with the County staff: that they sometimes resist raising any issues or giving any opinions that may be difficult for a Commissioner to hear or agree with for fear of losing their jobs. To me, that’s counter-productive and not in the best interests of the taxpayers. It can lead to decisions being made without all the facts being presented, or in a case like this, to a lawsuit. I would hope that, going forward, County staff will feel emboldened by this decision and more willing to share their expert opinions with Commissioners, even if they seem unpopular.

And now, there seems to be significant public support for reconsidering the naming of the new Terminal at Key West International Airport. As a policy, I would support not naming anything after anyone who has not been deceased for at least 10 years. First, that gives our communities enough time to determine if someone’s contributions in life rise to the level of a lasting legacy that should be honored.

Second, it’s very hard to opt for the linoleum over the marble when a living person is being honored with naming rights – and especially so when the honoree is on the Commission making decisions about the project. Keeping living folks out of decisions about spending taxpayer dollars to honor themselves would likely save us all a few shekels.

Commissioner McCoy will be remembered for his length of service, work on wastewater and other issues in Key West, and feats like water-skiing to Cuba. He has already been honored through the Sonny McCoy Indigenous Park, his bust on the golf course, and countless buildings he designed, including the Key West Post Office. There is no dearth of McCoy monuments in Key West.

The Terminal has been plagued with serious problems including major cost overruns, construction delays, a grand jury investigation, inadequate oversight, the tragic death of a worker, and now a sexual harassment trial with its namesake at the epicenter that found the county culpable.
A few county residents have suggested to me that it might be best for the community, in a gesture of healing and statesmanship, for Commissioner McCoy to request that his name be removed from the Terminal.

That may not be such a bad idea.

Perhaps the most contentious debate throughout the Keys is the one over development. Are we built out? Do we have room for more development? If we don’t continue growth, how will we continue to be able to afford to support our residents? To avoid any confusion regarding my position on this, I’d like to share a few thoughts.

I am a businessperson and a property owner. I understand that without some economic growth, a community stagnates and flounders. I also understand that we live in a region of limited land in a sensitive ecosystem. This is both a constraint on our growth and the reason our County is so coveted by tourists, investors, developers and those of us who live here full and part-time. It’s why our land values are so high — this combination of limited supply and high demand for a unique environment and unparalleled lifestyle.

Recognizing these factors, and with the understanding that the unique qualities of the Keys are what make the Keys so valuable, I support redevelopment that complements our character, respects our environment and is consistent with our existing Comp Plan and Land Development Regulations. That’s also why I support the Area of Critical State Concern, and believe in working with the state Department of Community Affairs to balance our needs of sustainable growth with our valuable resource and national treasure.

Recognizing also that times may change, it’s inevitable that folks will come before the Commission requesting variances, and these must be considered on a case by case basis. If exceptions or changes to our Comp Plan and our LDR’s would provide a demonstrable and compelling public benefit, we’d have to give them careful consideration. It seems that many of the proposals now at issue for new commercial developments (like airport hotels) that exceed height regulations have not demonstrated to the public’s satisfaction that they provide a compelling benefit.

In sum, I support sustainable growth and logical redevelopment, not unfettered expansion at the expense of those cultural and environmental factors that make us so unique, and will consider changes to our regulations in light of any potential public benefit.

For the second time in a year, a member of the public was escorted out of the BOCC meeting (though this time it was after the meeting adjourned). And as has frequently been the case, members of the public were spoken to with something well beyond disrespect. From the dais came rude and inappropriate remarks, the phrase “shut up,” and a tone of utter disdain.

It is incomprehensible to me that anyone in a leadership position could be so disrespectful of the individuals who elect them and who pay their salaries. Maybe it’s because I was raised by a teacher who was retired Navy, but I just cannot tolerate such rude antics, and I’m dismayed that the non-offending Commissioners are reluctant to speak out against it.

As my dad used to say (a quote attributed incorrectly, I think, to Voltaire), “I disapprove of what you say but I defend to the death your right to say it.” I believe it is the responsibility of elected officials to respectfully listen to input from constituents, even when they don’t like what they hear — or maybe especially when they don’t like what they hear. The kind of language and remarks that routinely emanate from some at the BOCC are undignified, outrageous, and, if they’d been made in my dad’s classroom, would have been grounds for detention or a “private talk” in the hallway.

It is often difficult for private citizens to take the time and make the drive to attend every meeting. Perhaps the BOCC should consider allowing folks who attend a particular meeting to speak on the agenda item that brought them there, even if the item is then tabled. Their remarks could be cited the next time the item is discussed, or better yet, replayed from a recording. That way, the public is heard and their time is not wasted. And perhaps they should be treated with respect.

Once again, I sat through the County Commission’s latest budget workshop. And once again, they chipped away at any savings originally proposed by County Administrator Gastesi, and offered no alternatives for additional cuts that could be realized in the next budget. Here are a few observations:

The County Commission is proposing a 9.95% increase in the millage rate, just shy of the margin they’d need for unanimous approval. This increase doesn’t replenish our reserves, and doesn’t account for potential additional expenses should voters choose to maintain Trauma Star for another six months. The Commission passed this decision to the voters and, if approved, there is no provision to pay for it.

Mr. Gastesi suggested that he will “find” more money in the budget, and I hope he does — but why doesn’t the Commission enter the budget process with full discovery - with full knowledge of a potential and accurate budget? Granted the Commission will have another opportunity to oppose increasing the millage rate — but why start at the highest target rather than what is the ultimate goal? I believe if you start out asking for more than you know you can afford, you never realize significant savings.

The County reserve fund has been depleted over the past two years to about half of what is fiscally prudent and capable of sustaining us for three months in the event of a catastrophe or hiccup in cash flow. Rather than work to restore it, the Commission voted unanimously to take out a $10 million line of credit. Now, this may have been the only option given our current state of affairs. However, County Mayor Mario Di Gennaro suggested that maybe the Commission should double that amount to $20 million and if they did, maybe the county wouldn’t need to worry about retaining reserves. I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel comfortable relying on credit to provide essential services. I don’t believe taxpayers should have to pay interest on money that’s been misspent, especially in this difficult financial climate. I consider going from a $20 million reserve to a $20 million deficit in a few short years - a $40 million swing - simply fiscally irresponsible.

As a way to raise revenue, the Mayor also proposed selling off some of the County’s assets — specifically the Gato Building and/or the Marathon Government Center. I believe it is a good idea to complete a review of the properties held by the County, and determine if any of those 90 or so parcels is expendable. But as is often the case with the current Commission, this suggestion blindsided most of its members, and was made without any comparisons, any plan or cost implications for relocating the staff and services that currently use these two buildings, any acknowledgement that we’re selling on the one hand and building and buying on the other. It did come without serious debate, and without any direction to staff on how to proceed to examine the upside and the downside of such a proposal. There was no real leadership, just the usual grandstanding.

Additionally, I believe the County doesn’t effectively utilize revenue sources. For example, I’ve mentioned the vending contracts that Mr. Gastesi brought to light in the past. Apparently vending machine contracts enable venders to utilize space on county property for profit - while the county doesn’t receive rent for this space. I’m thinking now about the Tourist Development Council (TDC), which as been much-maligned by this Commission. The Art in Public Places ordinance carved out 1% of construction cost for public artwork, and $211,000 was already committed in the budget for artwork at the new McCoy Airport. From discussions with some folks who know and from my reading of the state statues governing use of TDC funds for capital expenditures, I’m fairly confident that artwork in highly trafficked tourist spaces (like an airport) could legally be covered with TDC capital funds. The TDC District Advisory Council (DAC) 1 left $465,000 in its capital budget this year because they simply did not have enough applications for funding. What’s disappointing is that the County Commission didn’t even explore this option. Perhaps they could have saved the art at the Big Pine Fire Station, and maybe a much-needed staff position or two, if they had.

Observing this budgetary process has strengthened my resolve and commitment that , if elected, I will be fiscally responsible and watch every taxpayer dollar to make sure you receive maximum benefit from your hard earned money.

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, 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

“As a candidate for public office in Monroe County, I believe political issues can be freely debated without appealing to prejudices. Positive campaigning promotes citizen involvement.”

Thus begins the “Statement of Ethical Campaign Practices” I signed to complete the paperwork for qualification this week. (I had submitted over 600 petitions two weeks after I declared.) I was thoroughly surprised, pleased and honored to read and sign the document. It is a pledge from the candidate to focus on facts and issues, to comply with campaign finance rules, to “tell the truth” and to not condone any unethical activity. I’ve posted a link to the document on the Issues page of my website.

I was surprised by the document simply because we’ve seen some prior campaigns in the Keys that, while perhaps legal, have not always walked the ethical path, and because such a document should not be necessary, that folks should without question seek to do what’s ethical, what’s right. I was pleased because, if candidates and their supporters truly abide by it, the result will be issues- and qualifications-focused discourse that can produce the best for the people of Monroe. I was honored to sign it because I take the responsibility of public service very seriously.

I have a patriotic strain that runs deep in my family. My dad spent 22 years in the Navy, and both of my parents had siblings who made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom. Though I have not always agreed with decisions made by our leaders, I have always strongly believed in the fundamental principles of democracy on which this nation was founded, in our representative form of government, in the separation of powers, and in the opportunity that democracy provides to give individuals real power and a voice through the elective process.

That’s why I got choked up when I had the privilege of speaking before the Florida Cabinet and then-Governor Bush two years ago. Being able to respectfully and responsibly be part of the political process is at once humbling and invigorating, and a reminder of the greatness on which our government and nation stand.

So I was honored to sign this “Statement of Ethical Campaign Practices.” I am eager to follow its guidelines, and hopeful for a fair, honest and honorable campaign season ahead. I hope you are too.

We were all a little perplexed at Mayor McCoy’s announcement at the last BOCC meeting that he wanted to “step down” from being the County Mayor. There was no real indication of why he’s unable to perform the Mayor’s duties. But on a subsequent interview with Bill Becker on US1 Radio, he stated that he had spoken to then Vice Mayor Di Gennaro about passing the gavel. Di Gennaro has friends in Tallahassee, travels there frequently and holds fundraisers at his home for the Governor, so Mayor McCoy thought Di Gennaro would make a good Mayor (he’s held the position in the past). McCoy asked Vice Mayor Di Gennaro if he would accept the appointment, and he agreed.

Now-Mayor Di Gennaro disputes Commissioner McCoy’s recollection, and insists that the two never discussed the issue. No finding of Sunshine violations has been found.

To me, there are several problems with this incident, and here are three. First, there’s the casual way in which the leadership position was passed off through a proclamation from Mr. McCoy, as though one individual alone has the authority to determine the leadership for the entire County. It was simply presented at the end of the BOCC meeting (when at least one Commissioner was out of the room), without a full vetting or questioning by anyone on the dais, and when most in the audience had gone home after a very long day.

Second, it seems quite clear from a reading of the administrative statute that such a passing of the gavel can only take place for the duration of the meeting in which the request is made. If a Mayor is unable to perform Mayoral duties for longer than the length of that meeting, then a new election for a Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem is required. Mr. McCoy wants to step down until November 4, 2008. The BOCC meeting was adjourned before this could even be addressed. That seems like a violation of the very laws that govern our government.

Third, the possibility that this was discussed out of the Sunshine speaks to the lack of trust citizens have in their Commission. If deals are made — or even if the public perceives that deals are made — outside of the sunshine, behind closed doors, between “friends,” then how can the public ever feel confident that democracy is being practiced, that their views are being represented?

Transparency, to me, is essential to democracy. The government exists to serve the citizens and taxpayers who fund it. They should be aware of the factors that go into decisions that are made in their behalf — whether we’re talking about setting insurance rates in a quasi-governmental agency or determining appropriate land use or selecting our leaders. Improving transparency in our County government is one of the reasons I am running for the Commission.

Heather