Noticing the Primary

or SOUNDING OFF

Prologue: I am sending this somewhat expecting not to be heard, because of the noise from the MetroRail. I have been railing against that racket, but my complaints - so far - have been met with silence.

REFERENDUM

The August 20th Primary election ballot has an item specific to

South Miami. It reads as follows:

I have had questions about the meaning and impact of this Referendum. I have looked at the Resolution that the Commission adopted on April 16. The language in the Appendix A, which is supposed to be the Charter* changes that are being requested, does not sound like the language in the above Referendum.

* the City of South Miami Charter is here

I sent some of my questions to various City officials and personnel.

(1)  What happens if the indebtedness were to exceed 5%?  

(2)  When would debt be subject to a voter referendum?   

(3) What debt would not be subject to a voter referendum?

(4) Where in the Charter is "debt subject to voter approval"

mentioned?

I have had no responses.

Then I received the large glossy flyer sent by the Mayor's PAC about the Referendum. (Or is it Referen-dumb?) This flyer is very like the flyer that was sent a while back urging voter support for extended leases on City property. (Except that one smiling face is missing. I did ask the Commissioner what reason(s) his face was not included. Much to my surprise the usually loquacious representative did not respond. Perhaps he did not, because the reasons the current flyer gives for voter support do not include that taxes will be lowered if it is passed. Or, because he will not be there to follow through on whatever action approval of this Referendum allows.) And these really superb, somewhat redundant, reasons are (a) better green spaces, (b) better parks, and (c) a more beautiful city.

You know, to call a Special Election (this Primary) is to anticipate a much smaller turn-out than a General Election. What is the rush? Why is the Mayor sooo supportive of this Referendum?

All sarcasm aside, the Referendum as written is very muddy. It does not match Appendix A, because the changes indicated in the Appendix do not change the number of commission votes needed.

What seems to make sense to me is that the three-vote requirement is all it would take to get a Referendum on the ballot for a General Election.

What Appendix A does do is eliminate the requirement for 5 votes to commit the City to indebtedness greater than 5% of the budget.

What does eliminating the required 5 Commission votes and the 5% ceiling mean when it comes to putting the City in debt? An easier time posting bonds? Less oversight? Less discussion of who will be paying the off the debts, and how they will do it?

By eliminating the 5% ceiling, the Commission could, it looks like to me, vote for any amount of indebtedness.  

I have no idea what will happen if this Referendum passes or doesn't pass. Therefore, I will not vote "yes."

CAN YOU HEAR ME

The MetroRail noise disrupts sleep, interferes with people chatting with each other on the street, and could be causing serious health problems. 

This article (click here)  is long, and you might say that it describes something a lot worse than the MetroRail racket.  However, there are studies that do suggest that the MetroRail din is damaging to health - physical and mental.

Some people want development along the MetroRail.   Sure, it might cut down on car pollution, but people are being expected to move into a toxic environment as long as the system generates so much noise. 

I have heard that:  A veterinarian who "has a veterinary clinic in the Gables right under the Metrorail ... complains about the noise.  He says the idea of the underline making a dog park is ridiculous - dogs will be constantly scared of the noise overhead."

I wonder how much people can enjoy Underline concerts and conversations given the din from above.

I was told by a staff member at South Miami Hospital that it is common for patients to ask to be moved to a room away from the MetroRail.  They are unable to rest and sleep in the rooms that front  the tracks.

I can't support extending the MetroRail until it is quiet enough for people to stay healthy.

AIR POLLUTION, TOO

I wonder, too, how much the noise would be dampened if solar panels were hung on the sound barriers, or were themselves the sound barriers.  I believe that the County would save a lot of money if it placed solar panels on top of every bus- and rail-station, every bus, and every train car.  Of course, there would be STRONG push back from FP&L, but, of course, for county officials the interests of the residents have priority, and no official

accepts donations from that utility.

It seems to me that if panels can be mounted on boat railings, they can be mounted on the MetroRail sound barriers or tracks.

REBRANDING the CITY of SOUTH MIAMI

Noting some of the changes that have gone on in South Miami in the recent past -

+ a future central food store [not full-service grocery] that only the well-to-do could patronize,

+ the current necessity of driving to an affordable grocery store,

+ escalating MetroRail uproar,

+ doubling after-school program fees for the families who can least afford the increases,

+ giving away an over-abundance of plastic toys when the bands, the DJ, and the fireworks were more than enough celebration, [I wondered, and asked, whether the expense of the hand-outs at the July 4th event was equal to or cost more than the collected increases in the after-school program fees. I do remember one of our Commissioners stating that the City was not a charitable institution, yet it gives away plastic toys.]

+ only one candidate when there could be three -

here are a couple of proposals for a new slogan for South Miami : City of Pleasantries City of Un-pleasantry

Thank you for reading my notice. I would apologize for sounding so disgruntled, but sounding content would be disingenuous.

Stay safe and keep healthy*!

*Use ear plugs if you are near the MetroRail.