READ The Letter to the Judge regarding lies and a FRAUD ON THE COURT by Cooper City Attorney and Mayor ('ambulance chaser'/defense attorney Greg Ross) regarding the MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION lawsuit that Mayor Greg Ross touted as "FRIVOLOUS"...another lie to the constituency (Yes, the 4th DCA approved the class) Now the citizens of #CooperCity will pay hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for the FRAUD and LIES by #JamesCurran, #GregRoss#, #LisaMallozzi, #JeffGreen...and #DavidWolpin
Showing posts with label city manager. Show all posts
Showing posts with label city manager. Show all posts
Monday, December 21, 2015
Cooper City Mayor Greg Ross Censures Commissioner for exposing Fraud & Corruption
READ The Letter to the Judge regarding lies and a FRAUD ON THE COURT by Cooper City Attorney and Mayor ('ambulance chaser'/defense attorney Greg Ross) regarding the MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION lawsuit that Mayor Greg Ross touted as "FRIVOLOUS"...another lie to the constituency (Yes, the 4th DCA approved the class) Now the citizens of #CooperCity will pay hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for the FRAUD and LIES by #JamesCurran, #GregRoss#, #LisaMallozzi, #JeffGreen...and #DavidWolpin
Friday, August 26, 2011
Cooper City, the 'Taxing Champions' of Broward
Please see THIS story which is a link to the Sun-Sentinel article . Part of the story is missing and some of the increases are not shown on your TRIM notice recently recieved by the Broard Property Appraiser. The city commission majority is going to raise taxes, but they are also raising other fees, the fire assessment fees (25+%) again, and EMS transport fees (89%) with the collections clause intact and BSO contract costs increasing another 5% (now at 65% of the budget). City Attorney fees have skyrocketed and continue to increase without even a second on my numerous motions to discuss the issue by any other commission member, not to mention the few recent lawsuits that now plague the city that will cost us millions, and with certainty, more to come…
With a country, state, county and city who’s unemployment is 11+%, foreclosures out of control, daily job loss at an all time high, the DOW down 15+% since July, taxes and fees at all levels of government increasing exponentially, seniors continuing to be starved on a fixed income, water rates that are skyrocketing, and no new solid or plausible proposals by the commission to decrease spending and costs outside of what I have proposed to decrease spending and taxes at the July 25th and July 26th budget meetings, we need another tax, fee and assessment increase like another major disaster. Cooper City has become known as the ‘Taxing Champions’ over the last few years under the Eisinger regime, and the non-essential services spending must stop NOW!
Please attend the ‘Special Meetings’ regarding the first and second public notice of the Budget, Special Assessments and increased Fees on September 14th and September 26th at 6 PM, City Hall, and object, no demand, and say NO to unnecessary ‘feel good’ program tax rate increases in Cooper City, who is already set to increase spending on non-essential services and who is set to implement continued increased spending on other unnecessary and discretionary costs. If you don’t show up and object, out-of control spending at Cooper City Hall will continue…at least until November 2012.
With a country, state, county and city who’s unemployment is 11+%, foreclosures out of control, daily job loss at an all time high, the DOW down 15+% since July, taxes and fees at all levels of government increasing exponentially, seniors continuing to be starved on a fixed income, water rates that are skyrocketing, and no new solid or plausible proposals by the commission to decrease spending and costs outside of what I have proposed to decrease spending and taxes at the July 25th and July 26th budget meetings, we need another tax, fee and assessment increase like another major disaster. Cooper City has become known as the ‘Taxing Champions’ over the last few years under the Eisinger regime, and the non-essential services spending must stop NOW!
Please attend the ‘Special Meetings’ regarding the first and second public notice of the Budget, Special Assessments and increased Fees on September 14th and September 26th at 6 PM, City Hall, and object, no demand, and say NO to unnecessary ‘feel good’ program tax rate increases in Cooper City, who is already set to increase spending on non-essential services and who is set to implement continued increased spending on other unnecessary and discretionary costs. If you don’t show up and object, out-of control spending at Cooper City Hall will continue…at least until November 2012.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Cooper City sued over fire fee
Cooper City sued over fire fee
Lawsuit claims city erred in using money to pay for rescue service
By Susannah Bryan, Sun Sentinel
4:19 PM EDT, July 8, 2011
COOPER CIT -- A lawsuit filed last week contends city officials broke state law by collecting a fire fee from property owners and using it to pay for emergency medical services from 2006 through 2010.
The lawsuit, which is seeking class-action status, says homeowners and business owners who paid the fire fee during those years deserve a refund.
City Attorney David Wolpin referred to the lawsuit as frivolous and unfounded.
As originally written, the city code said the "fire-rescue assessment" would help cover the cost of emergency medical services. Despite the wording, Wolpin said, the city used the fire fee to pay for the cost of fire protection only.
Cooper City will likely seek to have the case dismissed, Wolpin said.
Still, Commissioner John Sims said he was not surprised by the lawsuit.
"The city screwed up," said Sims, who has publicly objected to the way the fire fee was calculated. "They're taxing people illegally."
The three plaintiffs — residents Walter and Barbara Jolliff and Brenda Kezar — are demanding a jury trial. They claim more than $15,000 in damages and are seeking to recover attorneys fees and costs.
Walter Jolliff said he was not sure how much the refund might be. "It's not chump change, I can tell you that," he said.
Residents currently pay a fire fee of $122.50. Business owners pay a higher fee based on square footage.
David Frankel, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, said he needs more information from the city to calculate what the refund might be.
In 2002, the Florida Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional for local governments to charge property owners a fire fee for emergency medical services.
Cooper City also failed to perform a study required to properly calculate the appropriate fire fee rate, the lawsuit says.
City Manager Bruce Loucks declined to say whether the city ever conducted such a study. "I can't talk about that because of the lawsuit," he said.
In July 2010, commissioners amended the code and deleted all references to the fire fee paying for rescue service.
Wolpin described the change as a "cleanup" amendment.
"What matters is not what you say but what you do," he said. "The wording ... does not really matter, because the money was only collected and spent on fire protection."
sbryan@tribune.com or 954-356-4554
Lawsuit claims city erred in using money to pay for rescue service
By Susannah Bryan, Sun Sentinel
4:19 PM EDT, July 8, 2011
COOPER CIT -- A lawsuit filed last week contends city officials broke state law by collecting a fire fee from property owners and using it to pay for emergency medical services from 2006 through 2010.
The lawsuit, which is seeking class-action status, says homeowners and business owners who paid the fire fee during those years deserve a refund.
City Attorney David Wolpin referred to the lawsuit as frivolous and unfounded.
As originally written, the city code said the "fire-rescue assessment" would help cover the cost of emergency medical services. Despite the wording, Wolpin said, the city used the fire fee to pay for the cost of fire protection only.
Cooper City will likely seek to have the case dismissed, Wolpin said.
Still, Commissioner John Sims said he was not surprised by the lawsuit.
"The city screwed up," said Sims, who has publicly objected to the way the fire fee was calculated. "They're taxing people illegally."
The three plaintiffs — residents Walter and Barbara Jolliff and Brenda Kezar — are demanding a jury trial. They claim more than $15,000 in damages and are seeking to recover attorneys fees and costs.
Walter Jolliff said he was not sure how much the refund might be. "It's not chump change, I can tell you that," he said.
Residents currently pay a fire fee of $122.50. Business owners pay a higher fee based on square footage.
David Frankel, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, said he needs more information from the city to calculate what the refund might be.
In 2002, the Florida Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional for local governments to charge property owners a fire fee for emergency medical services.
Cooper City also failed to perform a study required to properly calculate the appropriate fire fee rate, the lawsuit says.
City Manager Bruce Loucks declined to say whether the city ever conducted such a study. "I can't talk about that because of the lawsuit," he said.
In July 2010, commissioners amended the code and deleted all references to the fire fee paying for rescue service.
Wolpin described the change as a "cleanup" amendment.
"What matters is not what you say but what you do," he said. "The wording ... does not really matter, because the money was only collected and spent on fire protection."
sbryan@tribune.com or 954-356-4554
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
2011-12 Broward School Boundaries (Concurrency Service Areas) in Cooper City
February 24, 2011
This correspondence is transmitted to you within the 45 days required under section 8.9 (b) of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning.
Yesterday on February 23, 2011 the School Board of Broward County finalized all school boundary attendance zones (AKA Concurrency Service Areas) for the upcoming 2011-2012 school year reflecting no changes for next year.
The 2011-2012 school boundary attendance zones can be directly accessed from the Web links below:
Elementary
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112Elementary.shtml
Middle
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112Middle.shtml
High
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112High.shtml
For further information related to Broward County School Concurrency please contact Chris Akagbosu, Director, Growth Management at (754) 321-2160.
For questions concerning Broward County Public School attendance zones, please contact myself or School Boundaries Department staff.
Jill Young, Director
School Boundaries Department
Broward County Public Schools
(754) 321-2480
This correspondence is transmitted to you within the 45 days required under section 8.9 (b) of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning.
Yesterday on February 23, 2011 the School Board of Broward County finalized all school boundary attendance zones (AKA Concurrency Service Areas) for the upcoming 2011-2012 school year reflecting no changes for next year.
The 2011-2012 school boundary attendance zones can be directly accessed from the Web links below:
Elementary
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112Elementary.shtml
Middle
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112Middle.shtml
High
http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/schoolboundaries/Maps/SchoolMaps1112/1112High.shtml
For further information related to Broward County School Concurrency please contact Chris Akagbosu, Director, Growth Management at (754) 321-2160.
For questions concerning Broward County Public School attendance zones, please contact myself or School Boundaries Department staff.
Jill Young, Director
School Boundaries Department
Broward County Public Schools
(754) 321-2480
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Cooper City Planning and Zoning Board Appointment
I would like to proudly announce my appointment of Mrs. Marianne McCoy to the Cooper City Planning and Zoning Board. Please welcome her, as she is an invaluable resource, a wealth of knowledge, and a great person!
Mrs. McCoy has many years of experience in public service as a servant of The People of Cooper City on the Planing and Zoning Board, and will indeed continue to do the right thing for the residents and business owners of Cooper City. She will also continue to be a great asset to the management, operations and recommendations to the City Commission of the P&Z Board.
Welcome back Marianne!
Mrs. McCoy has many years of experience in public service as a servant of The People of Cooper City on the Planing and Zoning Board, and will indeed continue to do the right thing for the residents and business owners of Cooper City. She will also continue to be a great asset to the management, operations and recommendations to the City Commission of the P&Z Board.
Welcome back Marianne!
Monday, April 13, 2009
Cooper City's new Judge, Jury and Executioner
Cooper City Commissioners want to implement a Magistrate system in our city at tonight's commission meeting, apparently to “ensure compliance” per the direct quote of the City Manager. Funny…The Ordinance says it is to be “a more efficient, effective and inexpensive method”. Hogwash! They can do that now without a judge, jury and executioner deceitfully named a Magistrate. Take out the Code Enforcement provision and you’re pouring money into a black hole. This needs to be BID OUT. The law firm’s agenda is to be profitable. There is no reason to rush to implement this. Per experts, including the Clerk of Courts, this will cost the city more money and be paid out to the city attorney and the Magistrate and is not necessary in the time of a budget crisis.
Many have said to me that they believe the Ordinance was developed to funnel the new city attorney and his law firm more money in exchange for campaign donations and other ‘favors’. Their nickname apparently has now become 'Rainmaker', and the way the Ordinance was written, the contractor-magistrate will be held accountable to absolutely NO ONE! Not even the Commission. The city attorney will also be the Magistrate’s "legal advisor" along with having the title of 'city prosecutor'. Also, the way the Ordinance is written, any violations will be adjudicated by a city contractor-vendor who will be paid directly from the proceeds of his or her fines and assessment adjudications. Can you say “conflict of interest”?
The Special Magistrate is an attorney and member of the Florida Bar who is appointed by the majority of the City Council to preside over Code Enforcement matters. The Special Magistrate has the jurisdiction and authority to hear and decide alleged violations and exercise the powers of a Code Enforcement Board as provided in chapter 162, Florida Statutes.
The Special Magistrate also has the authority to subpoena people and records, hear cases involving suspected violations, order rulings on violations, assess fines and order liens to be placed upon property. There would be less of an appearance of impropriety with a Code Enforcement Board than a Special Magistrate. Accountability is so important to this city, and all of us campaigned on the issue, yet none of the other commission members have been accountable in their actions on this particular issue, more particularly accountable toward the residents.
Why do they think we need this? Cooper City used to have this system in place, and it was deemed to be bad for the city. Cooper City doesn't seem the type of city that is in need of such a hastily prepared legal ‘set up’, after all, that's why we all live here. We're basically a bedroom community with minor crime and code problems. Unfortunately, the rest of the commission supports this debacle with no solid facts or data to justify it, no valid or substantial cost-benefit analysis, no offered justifiable facts or data for reasons other than stated in the Ordinance and no set of valid figures on which to base a future review other than a 'best guess'.
We don't need this ordinance, and we don’t want it! Why potentially spend more money on more lawyers, and fix something that currently isn't broken? If it is broken, why hasn't it been delineated in black and white by the City Manager? If it costs less, then show me the cold hard cash. If it’s better, show me why, not just take the word of the City Attorney on the matter, with all due respect. If the County Court Judge’s aren’t doing their job as alluded to, why aren’t they being held accountable? Apparently, the “inform, warn and cite” practice that this city has supported for so long, will no longer be available to its shareholders upon passing of this hastily initiated Ordinance. This is another non-issue that's bad for the city, bad for our image, and bad for you...if you agree, show up Tuesday at the Commission meeting and voice your objections.
Many have said to me that they believe the Ordinance was developed to funnel the new city attorney and his law firm more money in exchange for campaign donations and other ‘favors’. Their nickname apparently has now become 'Rainmaker', and the way the Ordinance was written, the contractor-magistrate will be held accountable to absolutely NO ONE! Not even the Commission. The city attorney will also be the Magistrate’s "legal advisor" along with having the title of 'city prosecutor'. Also, the way the Ordinance is written, any violations will be adjudicated by a city contractor-vendor who will be paid directly from the proceeds of his or her fines and assessment adjudications. Can you say “conflict of interest”?
The Special Magistrate is an attorney and member of the Florida Bar who is appointed by the majority of the City Council to preside over Code Enforcement matters. The Special Magistrate has the jurisdiction and authority to hear and decide alleged violations and exercise the powers of a Code Enforcement Board as provided in chapter 162, Florida Statutes.
The Special Magistrate also has the authority to subpoena people and records, hear cases involving suspected violations, order rulings on violations, assess fines and order liens to be placed upon property. There would be less of an appearance of impropriety with a Code Enforcement Board than a Special Magistrate. Accountability is so important to this city, and all of us campaigned on the issue, yet none of the other commission members have been accountable in their actions on this particular issue, more particularly accountable toward the residents.
Why do they think we need this? Cooper City used to have this system in place, and it was deemed to be bad for the city. Cooper City doesn't seem the type of city that is in need of such a hastily prepared legal ‘set up’, after all, that's why we all live here. We're basically a bedroom community with minor crime and code problems. Unfortunately, the rest of the commission supports this debacle with no solid facts or data to justify it, no valid or substantial cost-benefit analysis, no offered justifiable facts or data for reasons other than stated in the Ordinance and no set of valid figures on which to base a future review other than a 'best guess'.
We don't need this ordinance, and we don’t want it! Why potentially spend more money on more lawyers, and fix something that currently isn't broken? If it is broken, why hasn't it been delineated in black and white by the City Manager? If it costs less, then show me the cold hard cash. If it’s better, show me why, not just take the word of the City Attorney on the matter, with all due respect. If the County Court Judge’s aren’t doing their job as alluded to, why aren’t they being held accountable? Apparently, the “inform, warn and cite” practice that this city has supported for so long, will no longer be available to its shareholders upon passing of this hastily initiated Ordinance. This is another non-issue that's bad for the city, bad for our image, and bad for you...if you agree, show up Tuesday at the Commission meeting and voice your objections.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Saving Water in Cooper City, and lowering your bill!
Understanding where and how much water your Cooper City household consumes is the first step in beginning to conserve one of our most precious resources and lowering your water bill. This simple home water usage calculator will allow you to track your household water consumption for both indoor and outdoor use.
After calculating your estimated water usage, you can start to conserve in ways that work best with your lifestyle and in ways that will help you save money on your water bill and help Cooper City conserve our most precious resource.
Thank you for taking the time to learn about your estimated usage of household water. With this knowledge, you will be able to start conserving water in your home in ways you never thought about.
CLICK HERE FOR THE NEW TIERED WATER RATES TO PROMOTE CONSERVATION
If you have any questions on the new tiered rates please contact the Cooper City Customer Service Office at 954-434-4300.
HELP SAVE WATER COOPER CITY!
DISCLAIMER: For estimate usage purposes only! Not to be used to calculate your previous, current or future water bill!
After calculating your estimated water usage, you can start to conserve in ways that work best with your lifestyle and in ways that will help you save money on your water bill and help Cooper City conserve our most precious resource.
Thank you for taking the time to learn about your estimated usage of household water. With this knowledge, you will be able to start conserving water in your home in ways you never thought about.
CLICK HERE FOR THE NEW TIERED WATER RATES TO PROMOTE CONSERVATION
If you have any questions on the new tiered rates please contact the Cooper City Customer Service Office at 954-434-4300.
HELP SAVE WATER COOPER CITY!
DISCLAIMER: For estimate usage purposes only! Not to be used to calculate your previous, current or future water bill!
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Cooper City FY '09 Budget Synopsis
While we all are a bit down on free markets this week, and as we hear local governments complain about tight budgets, the case for lower taxes and limits on new government programs still makes sense for all levels of government, particularly at the local level. Officials close parks because it's easier than fighting fraud, unable to say no to unsustainable pension plans for their employee/supporters or choosing to fire their overpaid friends, thinking it will provoke a backlash of folks screaming for higher taxes....yes, that is how out of touch our 'leaders' are these days.
It really is simple. The taxpayers must make them hold the line on spending as next year’s budget deficit will be much larger, and make no mistake about it, we will have to look at real cuts right here in Cooper City. The problem is exemplified when only 4 of our constituents showed up at the final budget hearing and only three objected to the excessive and unnecessary planned spending. Yikes!
Has any critical review determined that a park, teen egg hunt, mommy-son/daddy-daughter day or any of the other 'fun' programs, paid for by your hard earned tax dollars, constitutes a "valid municipal purpose," one that promotes the health, safety and welfare of the city? It’s not a question of how much it costs (it really is very minimal) or why Cooper City' s 'fun programs' exist, or why they may make Cooper City “Someplace Special” or why we intend to keep it that way. I believe it is a flawed opinion by a misguided commissioner and a department director that state that these types of services are for a 'valid municipal purpose'.
It truly makes me question the priorities of this Commission and staff, that our previous city manager strenuously reminded each of us about. And, it is most definitely a question of priorities. Is there is any doubt that these programs do not promote the health and welfare of the city, are not directly related to a valid municipal purpose and that there is no doubt the provisions of those programs are not in any way related to a municipal purpose? Are they rationally related to the health, morals, protection and the financial welfare of this municipality?
Maybe a certain commissioner along with some employees should stick to other ways of justifying the haphazard utilization of very hard earned tax dollars, not utilizing flawed arguments and ad hominem attacks to justify their fundamental lack of knowledge of the ‘how and why' government exists.
I was also somewhat dismayed at the waste of valuable time and taxpayer’s money at the budget hearings, particularly the excessive time spent to entice a department director to facilitate an opinion and to join in a fallacious attack on me (subsequently along with a prominent resident) which had nothing to do with the logical merits of my arguments or assertions that directly related to our next budget. Yet, that director can't seem to get a handle on sub-par performance by a contractor.
I suppose he was too busy supporting the attack and justifying a flawed position rather than finding out how to correct poor performance or how to terminate the 'contract' for nonfeasance. Any future contract with the city should have a cancellation provision or two for non-performance and/or poor performance of contracted work. Yet, it should be clear to all that the purpose of the characterization offered was to discredit my offering of logical arguments, and specifically, to invite others to gang up and discount my arguments regarding the prioritization of how we must begin to implement new ways in which we spend the taxpayers' dollars.
I believe that it is irresponsible fiscal management to pursue such 'fun' things and new programs until we can assess our financial state in more comprehensive terms. There may be a questionable degree of integrity here, and I believe there still may be a hidden agenda. This is why I believe that my motion to order a forensic audit (at a very miniscule cost) should have been supported in order that we would all know exactly where we stand at this point. No second was even offered yet the rumor was that others on the dais wanted the same opportunity.
This is the first time that this city commission has faced a deficit and has chosen to tap into reserve funds in a very, very long time. The current commission and manager didn’t create the problem but were compelled to address it. I am not yet convinced or quite sure that increased tax dollars spent on landscaping, new park equipment, grand parties for founder’s day, increased mowing and tree trimming and all of the ‘fun’ stuff, along with new programs, are the answer to our future financial stability and success.
My priorities for this budget year were the big ticket items; abolition of the 'records building' at the cost of a quarter-million dollars, a three-hundred thousand plus dollar water conservation program, at least four automatic contract renewals to the tune of multi-millions of dollars and a 'code re-write' at the potential cost of up to one-half million dollars, among others.
A preliminary search & review of the minutes of the P&Z since January 2007 reveal the following: Since Jan of 2007 P&Z has only had to address 10 variances. How many came before the Commission are unknown because that information is for some reason not readily available. Most of the variances that came before the P&Z are minor in terms of the magnitude of the requested change. The amounts of variances have been trivial except for the Chevron station.
It sounds as though $350k + (more like $500K before it’s all over and done with as stated previously) to rewrite the many ordinances involving zoning or other minor issues, including any barber pole colors or design, seems totally unjustified. What I would like to know is, why didn’t staff do an analysis and a complete justification on this matter before recently asking us to approve this matter and place it on the budget agenda? How many of the ten items for a variance were brought before the Commission?
I would also like to know why P&Z cannot handle this issue, particularly when it consists of land use attorneys, litigation attorneys, ex-commissioners and others, including seasoned staff, who are fully capable of addressing this particular issue on an as needed basis, along with one of the biggest law firms in the county, if not the state, Weiss-Serota now working for us! They even state that they have 'decades of collective experience' in the constantly evolving area of land use and zoning law.
They further espouse that 'As counsel to local government entities, [their] attorneys possess knowledge of the local government planning and zoning process. Their work includes the drafting and preparation of state mandated comprehensive land use plans and land development regulations, as well as the representation of boards and commissions considering development decisions within a wide variety of local government environments.'
If P&Z cannot handle this germane and seemingly trivial and non-invasive issue as far as workload goes, this commission needs to immediately and seriously look at re-appointing members of the P&Z board who can indeed handle the issues. I would like to have kept the money in reserves and direct the Manager to do his homework and come back to us with full and complete justification for spending upwards of up to a half million dollars if not more. Now I tend to really wonder why they were hired, being touted as the best available and how much research was (claimed to have been) done, and here we are not taking full advantage of a fully capable in-house counsellor/contractor on this subject matter. Again, priorities are not apparently a concern, and there are definitely personal agendas involved here.
One question posed by me was 'Is the proposed budget consistent with the Commission's recent goals and objectives?' I think not...yet I am happy that the manager chose to support my contention that all contracts should be send out for bid under an RFP process. Not only are we more likely to get the best mix of quality and price, but the residents can have more faith that the commission and administration are conducting city business and spending our money efficiently and honestly. The process will also better enable Cooper City residents and businesses a full opportunity to bid.
I also believe that we have businesses in Cooper City that can provide these services. If they are competitive, I would feel much better about our own residents and business owners getting the work that is paid for by Cooper City taxes. There has been a lot of rhetoric at commission meetings about supporting Cooper City businesses, entrepreneurs and working folks. It is time to put our money where our mouth is. There is no guarantee, of course, that businesses in town would win the bids on price and/or quality evaluations. However, providing a 120 day bid period would provide for sufficient notice and time for local people to compete.
Cooper City, its commission, employees and residents need to be ahead of the curve regarding the current economic situation and how it directly affects our great city. We should be way ahead of the situation, not lagging behind and spending every dime we have, and then some. There should exist very clear objectives and checkpoints, every 90 days or so, in order to be apprised of the real time costs, and we must take action where and if appropriate.
Governments should seek ways to cross-train employees, or seek other efficiencies to compensate for the loss of revenues instead of raising fees and taxes. In any event, local governments have few other options, and they should be doing everything possible to cut expenses.
In closing, I fully agree with a comment at the 8-14-08 P&Z meeting which stated, "Everybody is feeling the crunch and you [the current commission] are spending our money like it is yours and not ours, it’s ours." My feeling is that it's too bad that this person didn't attend the budget hearings, or contact me in order to voice his concerns...
It really is simple. The taxpayers must make them hold the line on spending as next year’s budget deficit will be much larger, and make no mistake about it, we will have to look at real cuts right here in Cooper City. The problem is exemplified when only 4 of our constituents showed up at the final budget hearing and only three objected to the excessive and unnecessary planned spending. Yikes!
Has any critical review determined that a park, teen egg hunt, mommy-son/daddy-daughter day or any of the other 'fun' programs, paid for by your hard earned tax dollars, constitutes a "valid municipal purpose," one that promotes the health, safety and welfare of the city? It’s not a question of how much it costs (it really is very minimal) or why Cooper City' s 'fun programs' exist, or why they may make Cooper City “Someplace Special” or why we intend to keep it that way. I believe it is a flawed opinion by a misguided commissioner and a department director that state that these types of services are for a 'valid municipal purpose'.
It truly makes me question the priorities of this Commission and staff, that our previous city manager strenuously reminded each of us about. And, it is most definitely a question of priorities. Is there is any doubt that these programs do not promote the health and welfare of the city, are not directly related to a valid municipal purpose and that there is no doubt the provisions of those programs are not in any way related to a municipal purpose? Are they rationally related to the health, morals, protection and the financial welfare of this municipality?
Maybe a certain commissioner along with some employees should stick to other ways of justifying the haphazard utilization of very hard earned tax dollars, not utilizing flawed arguments and ad hominem attacks to justify their fundamental lack of knowledge of the ‘how and why' government exists.
I was also somewhat dismayed at the waste of valuable time and taxpayer’s money at the budget hearings, particularly the excessive time spent to entice a department director to facilitate an opinion and to join in a fallacious attack on me (subsequently along with a prominent resident) which had nothing to do with the logical merits of my arguments or assertions that directly related to our next budget. Yet, that director can't seem to get a handle on sub-par performance by a contractor.
I suppose he was too busy supporting the attack and justifying a flawed position rather than finding out how to correct poor performance or how to terminate the 'contract' for nonfeasance. Any future contract with the city should have a cancellation provision or two for non-performance and/or poor performance of contracted work. Yet, it should be clear to all that the purpose of the characterization offered was to discredit my offering of logical arguments, and specifically, to invite others to gang up and discount my arguments regarding the prioritization of how we must begin to implement new ways in which we spend the taxpayers' dollars.
I believe that it is irresponsible fiscal management to pursue such 'fun' things and new programs until we can assess our financial state in more comprehensive terms. There may be a questionable degree of integrity here, and I believe there still may be a hidden agenda. This is why I believe that my motion to order a forensic audit (at a very miniscule cost) should have been supported in order that we would all know exactly where we stand at this point. No second was even offered yet the rumor was that others on the dais wanted the same opportunity.
This is the first time that this city commission has faced a deficit and has chosen to tap into reserve funds in a very, very long time. The current commission and manager didn’t create the problem but were compelled to address it. I am not yet convinced or quite sure that increased tax dollars spent on landscaping, new park equipment, grand parties for founder’s day, increased mowing and tree trimming and all of the ‘fun’ stuff, along with new programs, are the answer to our future financial stability and success.
My priorities for this budget year were the big ticket items; abolition of the 'records building' at the cost of a quarter-million dollars, a three-hundred thousand plus dollar water conservation program, at least four automatic contract renewals to the tune of multi-millions of dollars and a 'code re-write' at the potential cost of up to one-half million dollars, among others.
A preliminary search & review of the minutes of the P&Z since January 2007 reveal the following: Since Jan of 2007 P&Z has only had to address 10 variances. How many came before the Commission are unknown because that information is for some reason not readily available. Most of the variances that came before the P&Z are minor in terms of the magnitude of the requested change. The amounts of variances have been trivial except for the Chevron station.
It sounds as though $350k + (more like $500K before it’s all over and done with as stated previously) to rewrite the many ordinances involving zoning or other minor issues, including any barber pole colors or design, seems totally unjustified. What I would like to know is, why didn’t staff do an analysis and a complete justification on this matter before recently asking us to approve this matter and place it on the budget agenda? How many of the ten items for a variance were brought before the Commission?
I would also like to know why P&Z cannot handle this issue, particularly when it consists of land use attorneys, litigation attorneys, ex-commissioners and others, including seasoned staff, who are fully capable of addressing this particular issue on an as needed basis, along with one of the biggest law firms in the county, if not the state, Weiss-Serota now working for us! They even state that they have 'decades of collective experience' in the constantly evolving area of land use and zoning law.
They further espouse that 'As counsel to local government entities, [their] attorneys possess knowledge of the local government planning and zoning process. Their work includes the drafting and preparation of state mandated comprehensive land use plans and land development regulations, as well as the representation of boards and commissions considering development decisions within a wide variety of local government environments.'
If P&Z cannot handle this germane and seemingly trivial and non-invasive issue as far as workload goes, this commission needs to immediately and seriously look at re-appointing members of the P&Z board who can indeed handle the issues. I would like to have kept the money in reserves and direct the Manager to do his homework and come back to us with full and complete justification for spending upwards of up to a half million dollars if not more. Now I tend to really wonder why they were hired, being touted as the best available and how much research was (claimed to have been) done, and here we are not taking full advantage of a fully capable in-house counsellor/contractor on this subject matter. Again, priorities are not apparently a concern, and there are definitely personal agendas involved here.
One question posed by me was 'Is the proposed budget consistent with the Commission's recent goals and objectives?' I think not...yet I am happy that the manager chose to support my contention that all contracts should be send out for bid under an RFP process. Not only are we more likely to get the best mix of quality and price, but the residents can have more faith that the commission and administration are conducting city business and spending our money efficiently and honestly. The process will also better enable Cooper City residents and businesses a full opportunity to bid.
I also believe that we have businesses in Cooper City that can provide these services. If they are competitive, I would feel much better about our own residents and business owners getting the work that is paid for by Cooper City taxes. There has been a lot of rhetoric at commission meetings about supporting Cooper City businesses, entrepreneurs and working folks. It is time to put our money where our mouth is. There is no guarantee, of course, that businesses in town would win the bids on price and/or quality evaluations. However, providing a 120 day bid period would provide for sufficient notice and time for local people to compete.
Cooper City, its commission, employees and residents need to be ahead of the curve regarding the current economic situation and how it directly affects our great city. We should be way ahead of the situation, not lagging behind and spending every dime we have, and then some. There should exist very clear objectives and checkpoints, every 90 days or so, in order to be apprised of the real time costs, and we must take action where and if appropriate.
Governments should seek ways to cross-train employees, or seek other efficiencies to compensate for the loss of revenues instead of raising fees and taxes. In any event, local governments have few other options, and they should be doing everything possible to cut expenses.
In closing, I fully agree with a comment at the 8-14-08 P&Z meeting which stated, "Everybody is feeling the crunch and you [the current commission] are spending our money like it is yours and not ours, it’s ours." My feeling is that it's too bad that this person didn't attend the budget hearings, or contact me in order to voice his concerns...
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Cooper City Strategic Issues and Project Goals for 2008-09
Cooper City Strategic Issues and Project Goals for FY 2008-2009
The Cooper City Commission met on July 24th in a 'goal setting workshop' to discuss strategic issues in regards to the future of the city and its Strategic Plan. These are long term issues for which either a discussion opportunity for the Commission will be scheduled or which staff will prepare a recommendation for Commission consideration or possible future action.
The full Commission, senior staff and directors participated in the workshop and agreed on the following priority issues for Commission discussion:
1. Community safety
2. Ensuring that the distinctive features of the City are retained
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following issues approved for Commission discussion:
1. A strategy for Monterra
2. Support and expansion of the business community
3. Promotion and support of the community schools
4. Balancing efficiency and effectiveness to ensure quality services are provided at reasonable cost.
5. Management and measurement systems such as Management by Objectives, Workload Measures, etc?
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following issues to be assigned to staff for initial planning:
1. Community and public engagement
2. Measures to assess our progress and impact
3. Redevelopment
4. Common transportation (public or privately operated)
5. Maintaining and developing infrastructure
6. Naming rights for public facilities
7. Bike paths/greenways
8. Internal communications
9. Employee outsourcing
The Commission, senior staff and directors participated in the workshop and agreed on the following priority goals:
1. Establish Cooper City Marketing Committee
2. Establish cameras as red light
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following endorsed goals:
1. Update Hurricane preparedness plan
2. Review needs for city equipment
3. Improve web-cast capacity
4. Report to community on status of school facility plans
5. Hold meetings with HOA directors
6. Review car take-home policy
7. Examine increase in user fees for recreation
8. Revise citizen survey
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following discussions to be scheduled at a city public presentation, workshop or meeting:
1. Senior Advisory Group
2. Utility Advisory Council
3. Outsourcing options for internal services
If there are any ideas and comments that you may have in regards to these issues, feel free to contact me and convey them so that I, along with the rest of the Commission, can formulate a successful plan to implement these goals and objectives.
The Cooper City Commission met on July 24th in a 'goal setting workshop' to discuss strategic issues in regards to the future of the city and its Strategic Plan. These are long term issues for which either a discussion opportunity for the Commission will be scheduled or which staff will prepare a recommendation for Commission consideration or possible future action.
The full Commission, senior staff and directors participated in the workshop and agreed on the following priority issues for Commission discussion:
1. Community safety
2. Ensuring that the distinctive features of the City are retained
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following issues approved for Commission discussion:
1. A strategy for Monterra
2. Support and expansion of the business community
3. Promotion and support of the community schools
4. Balancing efficiency and effectiveness to ensure quality services are provided at reasonable cost.
5. Management and measurement systems such as Management by Objectives, Workload Measures, etc?
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following issues to be assigned to staff for initial planning:
1. Community and public engagement
2. Measures to assess our progress and impact
3. Redevelopment
4. Common transportation (public or privately operated)
5. Maintaining and developing infrastructure
6. Naming rights for public facilities
7. Bike paths/greenways
8. Internal communications
9. Employee outsourcing
The Commission, senior staff and directors participated in the workshop and agreed on the following priority goals:
1. Establish Cooper City Marketing Committee
2. Establish cameras as red light
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following endorsed goals:
1. Update Hurricane preparedness plan
2. Review needs for city equipment
3. Improve web-cast capacity
4. Report to community on status of school facility plans
5. Hold meetings with HOA directors
6. Review car take-home policy
7. Examine increase in user fees for recreation
8. Revise citizen survey
The Commission, senior staff and directors agreed on the following discussions to be scheduled at a city public presentation, workshop or meeting:
1. Senior Advisory Group
2. Utility Advisory Council
3. Outsourcing options for internal services
If there are any ideas and comments that you may have in regards to these issues, feel free to contact me and convey them so that I, along with the rest of the Commission, can formulate a successful plan to implement these goals and objectives.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Effort to Recall Cooper City Commissioner Falls Flat
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Effort to Recall Cooper City Commissioner Falls Flat
Cooper City, Florida – The effort to recall a popular commissioner in Cooper City has been abandoned. The petition to recall Commissioner John Sims stemmed from a blog that Sims allegedly owned. At issue was a picture posted on the blog of the Mayor of Cooper City, Debby Eisinger, with a superimposed Hitler moustache on her upper lip. Sims denies any involvement or wrongdoing.
The Broward Sheriff’s office initiated a hate crime investigation into Sims involvement with the blog but suspended it when there wasn’t sufficient evidence to proceed. The recall effort was started by former Cooper City Commissioner Elliot Kleiman and the former campaign manager for Mayor Debby Eisinger, Lori Green. According to Kleiman’s website, the group obtained the necessary signatures to fulfill the first requirement but said the continued effort would be too costly and that “In these times of economic hardship it was felt that requiring Cooper City to spend approximately $110,000 at this time was not prudent and, therefore, it was decided not to pursue the petition drive beyond the current stage”.
However, inside sources to the recall effort said that the required number of signatures was never obtained. “I’m not sure why they started the petition in the first place other than to make a political statement. Had the governor chose to remove Commissioner Sims, we wouldn’t have a choice. We would have to pay for a special election anyway” said Renee Delotta, community activist and consultant on several local campaigns. Delotta said the die was cast right after Sims was swept into office just over a year and a half ago. “There is a group of people in this city that despise Commissioner Sims and would do almost anything to see him out of office”, Delotta continued.
When asked how he felt about the failed recall bid Sims responded, “It didn’t really bother me one way or the other. It was a politically motivated move by several sore losers who simply wanted me out of office and used spurious, misinformation to try to accomplish their purpose.” Long time Cooper City resident Victoria Bikos agrees. “Commissioner Sims is edgy, forthright and has strong convictions. Because of that he has challenged the status quo. He has endured orchestrated and relentless attacks but still keeps on going. He’s the only one on the Commission dais that regularly votes his conscious.”
Sims said he’s glad the matter has been put to rest. “Now we can get back to the business of our great city. It’s time to put all of this behind us and move on.” When asked if he would run for reelection at the conclusion of his first term he responded, “The verdict is still out. Let’s just say I am weighing my options.” Commissioner Sims can be contacted via phone at (954) 439-5612 or email at johnsims@bellsouth.net.
Effort to Recall Cooper City Commissioner Falls Flat
Cooper City, Florida – The effort to recall a popular commissioner in Cooper City has been abandoned. The petition to recall Commissioner John Sims stemmed from a blog that Sims allegedly owned. At issue was a picture posted on the blog of the Mayor of Cooper City, Debby Eisinger, with a superimposed Hitler moustache on her upper lip. Sims denies any involvement or wrongdoing.
The Broward Sheriff’s office initiated a hate crime investigation into Sims involvement with the blog but suspended it when there wasn’t sufficient evidence to proceed. The recall effort was started by former Cooper City Commissioner Elliot Kleiman and the former campaign manager for Mayor Debby Eisinger, Lori Green. According to Kleiman’s website, the group obtained the necessary signatures to fulfill the first requirement but said the continued effort would be too costly and that “In these times of economic hardship it was felt that requiring Cooper City to spend approximately $110,000 at this time was not prudent and, therefore, it was decided not to pursue the petition drive beyond the current stage”.
However, inside sources to the recall effort said that the required number of signatures was never obtained. “I’m not sure why they started the petition in the first place other than to make a political statement. Had the governor chose to remove Commissioner Sims, we wouldn’t have a choice. We would have to pay for a special election anyway” said Renee Delotta, community activist and consultant on several local campaigns. Delotta said the die was cast right after Sims was swept into office just over a year and a half ago. “There is a group of people in this city that despise Commissioner Sims and would do almost anything to see him out of office”, Delotta continued.
When asked how he felt about the failed recall bid Sims responded, “It didn’t really bother me one way or the other. It was a politically motivated move by several sore losers who simply wanted me out of office and used spurious, misinformation to try to accomplish their purpose.” Long time Cooper City resident Victoria Bikos agrees. “Commissioner Sims is edgy, forthright and has strong convictions. Because of that he has challenged the status quo. He has endured orchestrated and relentless attacks but still keeps on going. He’s the only one on the Commission dais that regularly votes his conscious.”
Sims said he’s glad the matter has been put to rest. “Now we can get back to the business of our great city. It’s time to put all of this behind us and move on.” When asked if he would run for reelection at the conclusion of his first term he responded, “The verdict is still out. Let’s just say I am weighing my options.” Commissioner Sims can be contacted via phone at (954) 439-5612 or email at johnsims@bellsouth.net.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
I am your Commissioner
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am YOUR Commissioner.
I was duly elected by YOUR votes.
I stand on the merits of my record.
I am the lone commissioner who supported the CHABAD NOVA, attempted to resolve the issue and still attempt to do so to this day.
I proposed the Hate Crime Resolution for this City, and have taken my own initiative in meeting with Rabbi Pinney to clarify any misconceptions.
The anti-Semitic comments and illustrations were not registered, sponsored nor authored by me, and I vehemently condemn any such act or participation in any such act, which depicts an affront to any member, or, any part of our civilized society.
I am, and will remain, fully committed to the position that the people of this great city have elected me to serve in.
Thank you.
I am YOUR Commissioner.
I was duly elected by YOUR votes.
I stand on the merits of my record.
I am the lone commissioner who supported the CHABAD NOVA, attempted to resolve the issue and still attempt to do so to this day.
I proposed the Hate Crime Resolution for this City, and have taken my own initiative in meeting with Rabbi Pinney to clarify any misconceptions.
The anti-Semitic comments and illustrations were not registered, sponsored nor authored by me, and I vehemently condemn any such act or participation in any such act, which depicts an affront to any member, or, any part of our civilized society.
I am, and will remain, fully committed to the position that the people of this great city have elected me to serve in.
Thank you.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Cooper City Manager Replacement Proposal
The purpose of this communication is to provide the City Commission with my thoughts and a typical general overview of the correct process for selecting and hiring a new municipal City Manager along with standard options regarding the process of hiring the new City Manager, an estimated budget, minimal requirements, and a tentative time frame among others. Because the future success and growth of our community depends on having a great Manager, filling the shoes of our departing Manager can indeed be extremely stressful, not only for Staff but for the community at large. The following is a summary of my expectations followed by a somewhat detailed dissertation and analysis of the required process.
Due to the complexity of hiring a City Manager, many municipalities utilize the services of an Executive Search Firm (ESF) to assist Commissioners with this important process. Conversely, some municipalities have continued to utilize their in-house Human Resources staff. Utilizing in-house Human Resources staff is not recommended for Cooper City due to their relative inexperience and lack of short-range planning regarding this most important matter.
Staff should provide a short list of executive search firms who have extensive public sector experience for our reference and review. The purpose of engaging the services of a ‘Public Sector Executive Search Firm’ is to seek out and recruit experienced candidates and to assist the City in selecting only the highly qualified individuals who meet the profiles and needs of the City of Cooper City and who might not otherwise apply. Prior to the 1990s, cities, counties, and states governments approached their work with a more localized focus rather than regionally or even nationally.
Today, the climate and needs of our city, Broward County, and the State has changed to encompass a more collaborative approach with our neighboring communities and beyond. Public Sector Executive Search Firms can greatly assist the City of Cooper City in reaching the best qualified candidates for the position no matter their current location.
Public Sector Executive Search Firms specialize in searching, recruiting and placing the best qualified candidates for a specific position. The long-term and short-term needs of the city and its residents are considered as well as the culture and dynamics of the organization. Public Sector Executive Search Firms who work with clients in the public sector spend most of their time networking with city managers, assistant city managers and others who have vast expertise in the public sector and know who might be looking for a new position.
Indeed ,what Cooper City does next to replace Chris Farrell could be the second or third most important decision we have ever faced. This is no time for politics. It is a time for clear mindedness and a definite plan. Let's ensure that it happens as it needs to happen. Positive feedback is welcomed...
View the standard proposal HERE (Word.doc, 152Kb) or HERE (Adobe.pdf, 92Kb). (For the benefit of those falsely and maliciously accusing me of plagiarism, portions of this document were used with permission by the Colorado Municipal League, and its legal counsel, as it is deemed Public Domain, available for use by all and for any purpose)
Due to the complexity of hiring a City Manager, many municipalities utilize the services of an Executive Search Firm (ESF) to assist Commissioners with this important process. Conversely, some municipalities have continued to utilize their in-house Human Resources staff. Utilizing in-house Human Resources staff is not recommended for Cooper City due to their relative inexperience and lack of short-range planning regarding this most important matter.
Staff should provide a short list of executive search firms who have extensive public sector experience for our reference and review. The purpose of engaging the services of a ‘Public Sector Executive Search Firm’ is to seek out and recruit experienced candidates and to assist the City in selecting only the highly qualified individuals who meet the profiles and needs of the City of Cooper City and who might not otherwise apply. Prior to the 1990s, cities, counties, and states governments approached their work with a more localized focus rather than regionally or even nationally.
Today, the climate and needs of our city, Broward County, and the State has changed to encompass a more collaborative approach with our neighboring communities and beyond. Public Sector Executive Search Firms can greatly assist the City of Cooper City in reaching the best qualified candidates for the position no matter their current location.
Public Sector Executive Search Firms specialize in searching, recruiting and placing the best qualified candidates for a specific position. The long-term and short-term needs of the city and its residents are considered as well as the culture and dynamics of the organization. Public Sector Executive Search Firms who work with clients in the public sector spend most of their time networking with city managers, assistant city managers and others who have vast expertise in the public sector and know who might be looking for a new position.
Indeed ,what Cooper City does next to replace Chris Farrell could be the second or third most important decision we have ever faced. This is no time for politics. It is a time for clear mindedness and a definite plan. Let's ensure that it happens as it needs to happen. Positive feedback is welcomed...
View the standard proposal HERE (Word.doc, 152Kb) or HERE (Adobe.pdf, 92Kb). (For the benefit of those falsely and maliciously accusing me of plagiarism, portions of this document were used with permission by the Colorado Municipal League, and its legal counsel, as it is deemed Public Domain, available for use by all and for any purpose)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)