CITY VOLUNTEERS GET SLAP IN FACE…AGAIN!
We’ve written in the past about how our City Council ignores its citizen input and advisory committees especially the Budget Review Committee and Charter Review Committee, (see GULFPORT, A HOUSE DIVIDED). At the November 17 City Council Meeting, just two days before the City put on a very nice thank you party for city volunteers, yet another example of the disdain in which the City Council really holds its volunteers showed its ugly head.
In this case, it involved the Planning and Zoning Advisory Board, one of the City’s more prestigious organizations. Many a person wishing to invest and build in our community has shaken in his/her boots before appearing before the venerable P & Z Board. Without a Site Plan Approval, almost nothing new can get built in Gulfport. Applicants spend many hours and dollars in preparing for their hearing before the Board. Staff spends many, many hours in formulating their recommendations and in preparing a full report to the Board The way its supposed to work is that the P & Z Board holds a formal, quasi-judicial hearing and renders an opinion based on the facts presented and then turns their findings over to the City Council for a final hearing and a first reading vote at the next City Council Meeting. A second reading vote at a subsequent meeting is required to allow the applicant to apply for a Building Permit, (six weeks at a minimum).
On November 17, there were four first readings for zoning ordinances on the two meeting agendas, three on the Regular City Council Meeting Agenda and one on the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Agenda. The first two passed without incident, even though both had been highly debated and received a split vote of the P & Z Advisory Committee. The third, regarding a revision to the site plan of the renovations of Boca Ciega High School, after much discussion between the Council and the seven “suits” sent by the School Department, was tabled. The P & Z had unanimously approved the revisions with a few added conditions. The main issue was that the Council had received a plan via e-mail from the School Department that day which was vastly different from the one being presented at the Meeting.
During the public portion of the discussion, I asked the Council if they were aware of what the vote of the P & Z Board was on any of the four zoning items before them. The response through the chair was that they were not since they don’t receive the minutes of the P & Z Meetings. What? How can that be? They also didn’t seem to be aware of information in the P & Z Board’s packet, since the right plan was in it.
That the deliberations and actions of the P & Z Board were unavailable to the Council and that they weren’t even aware of it was a double slap in the face to the members of the Board and the citizens who appeared before it. Both the staff and the Council should be ashamed of themselves for a total lack of respect for the Board and for bad governance by making decisions without all available information being considered.
The whole debacle is yet another example of the dysfunction of our city government. It is yet another example of the disdain in which the Council holds any opinion other than their own. Worse, it is an example of what happens when all the power in a government is held by one body or, if you believe Mayor Yakes runs Gulfport, in the hands of one man.
All decisions are made by the City Council. No other body in city government can make a decision without passing it through the City Council. If, you have lived in Gulfport a long time you might believe this is right and “normal.” In many communities there is a small amount of power sharing by having a charter that provides for an elected Planning and Zoning Board that has the ability to hold their hearings and create zoning ordinances. Only appeals go to the City Council. Many believe that this system takes a lot of the politics out of the zoning process, speeds up the approval process and frees the Council from a burdensome task for which they are ill suited.
Of course, the Council has designated itself as the City’s Community Redevelopment Agency. This too would better be served by a city wide elected P & Z Board, or even better, an independent Board elected by the people within the respective redevelopment areas.
In a city that is reluctant to make any changes in its inadequate charter, (other than spelling or usage corrections), and routinely ignores the input of Charter Review Committee after Charter Review Committee, don’t expect anything like the above to happen in any of our life times. De-politicizing zoning, speeding things up for citizens seeking to invest in Gulfport, improving the efficiency of the City Council and making our redevelopment areas more successful deserves careful thought by our so-called leaders. But then, their precious power and prerogatives might be threatened.
We can’t have our City Council’s power threatened, or can we?
Even better than minutes, the Council, IMO should watch the videos of the P&Z meetings.
The Council also voted contrary to the P&Z on the ordinance for bench advertising. Board members Hastings and Leopold made strong arguments for their position NOT to approve the ordinance. The ordinance was written specifically to accommodate the Lions Club’s request to put benches with advertising in the City. Hopefully the Council will reconsider this BEFORE they strew a bunch of ugly benches throughout the city. One only needs to go to Pinellas Park and see how distasteful they look. St.Pete, Pasadena nor any of the beach communities from Maderia south have bench advertising. Why does Gulfport need this? It may be ok on a 6 lane road in an industrial city like Pinellas Park but NOT in quant little Gulfport!! I hope that the Council respectfully declines the Lions’ offer for benches with advertising.
Addendum to previous….please understand that I think the Lions club does great work!! My concern is not with the organization but the general notion of the bench advertising.
tober
Who benefits from this bench arrangement? Is there any money in it for the influential politician? How about the Lion’s club? Follow the money and favor trail.
Where is the need for benches? Saving money to fulfill a inflated need at the cost of esthetic value is just a give away. Specifically where will these benches go? How many do we need? How much will be saved?
If the benches are inevitable, minimize the damage with regulation.
Restrict the ads to nonprofits.
Do not allow the benches to advertise their empty space.
Create a theme and color pallet.
Contain the size of the signs and length of contract.
Choose a Bench Czar to oversee the regulation.
Require a penalty structure.
Require each bench to have it’s own plan and be processed through the P&Z board.
If there is no regulation required and stipulated by the Council then the City will have little regulatory control. Is this bench resolution just a favor is disguise?
The Council cannot be trusted, suspicions are warranted.
Artificial Flowers cannot die for the life within them is illusion.
Geeze Big Dog,
If we are to believe your writings, this is the most dysfunctional city on the planet, and of course we know that is not true. But never the less, while public works seems to be making progress on infrastructure improvements, its sounds like the building department is doing a heck of a lot of work for nothing. Leisure services even without a department head seems to be functioning well with all the activities that the city has had and is planning in the future.
Can it be that the city is so small that the council knows about the projects that come before them for approval? Should possibly the building department spend more time on special projects and not on preparing stuff for Planning and Zoning Board meetings?
Well I just don’t know.
@DogFish—RE: your….”Can it be that the city is so small that the council knows about the projects that come before them for approval? Should possibly the building department spend more time on special projects and not on preparing stuff for Planning and Zoning Board meetings?”
No doubt in my mind that the Council is well briefed prior to the meeting and probably also has significant input prior the project work even being started. IMO that was the case with the bench advertising, if you read between the lines of Metcalf’s comments at the P&Z.
@2iview….I think the Lions club is well intentioned. If they get any money out of this, I am sure it will go towards their charitable work.
There is an unknown “bench company” involved and it was represented by Rick Kriseman at the last meeting. I have contacted him for info on his involvement. So far all he has said is that he has no financial interest in the bench company and he believes in the project.
Is there a favor trail? IMO there sure is. The ordinance is written for one specific organization..The Lions. A member of the dais is aso a member of The Lions. That same member also appears to be quite close to Mr. Kriseman. How they all got intertwined is not clear. One thing that is clear to me is that when Mr. Kriseman comes calling, the City Staff Management seems to fall alll over itself to accommodate him.
All the above aside, my primary issue is with the notion of bench advertising. I’ve already elaborated on my reasons for my opinion. Do we need more benches? Who knows? The PSTA has a formula for placing their benches–based on ridership. Does the City have a formula? Highly unlikely–that would require strategic planning.:-)
Mr. Big Dog,
While I see your point about power sharing I’m leery about the authority that would be placed in the hands of the P&Z board. From my experience the P&Z board members have little experience or knowledge in the areas needed to make determinations on Plans or Zones.
On the two occasions in 23 years I have found myself attending the P&Z meetings, both applicants were sponsored by community leaders. Both applicants made absurd claims and promises that were never adhered too, and both sponsors were unreasonably influential to the process.
You may be qualified to make P&Z determinations but there are members of the Board that are not. There are members that are using the P&Z board for a Bullpen in waiting for a seat on the Council. The position gives them public exposure and the ability to perform favors for friends and friends of the City. A sponsorship by an ex-councilman or a president of the Chamber of Commerce is sure to be a shoe-in and help with an election.
I could accept the power shift if the P&Z board members had some skin in the game, if they had professional license on the line or were able to be held accountable for their absurd positions, but they are not. There has to be some personal accountability for crony acts and absurd judgments otherwise the P&Z board is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the Staff and their cronyism, incompetence and negligence and nothing changes.
With just two visits to the P&Z board I can point out two ridicules plans. One of which was already corrected after 8 years, the other will be corrected soon or by court order.
Since the Council is the final arbiter, the P&Z board is not held responsible. The Council takes the fall for every act of incompetence by their Staff and Gate Keeping Board, and that may be the safest position for volunteers to be.
2iview-I’ll match the qualifications of the present P & Z Board with the City Council to deal with planning and zoning issues any time. If the Board were elected, as I suggest, the people would decide who was competent in judging their proposals and. hopefully, even more qualified people would be on the Board.
The present P & Z Board is made up of: a health professional/entrepreneur; a C.P.A./entrepreneur; a former community development executive/entrepreneur and two long-time members with years of community involvement. As far as I know, none of these people have political ambitions. Given the fact that their work is totally ignored, I’d have to say the current Board is way overqualified as I would have to say that the present Council is way underqualified.
I’ll give you some qualifications are applicable to the duties on the P&Z board, but I’ve witnessed your chairperson recognize an ex councilman and sponsor of a reckless, incomplete Site Plan as a reason to vote for the plan. I doubt very much that a nurse would be recognized as a qualifier to oversee an engineering plan. Nor do I suspect that just being a long time resident is a qualifier in any real overview P&Z board.
Now that you’re a P&Z board member review the Smokehouse Site Plan for yourself and tell me how it could pass? Legalizing the Smoker legalized what went-in and what came-out… so no violations could be written against it.
The responsibility of the City was…
1- to regulate the stove/smoker and require that it met some measure of standards. EPA Certification is the standard. There was no Smoker Inspection report in the P&Z packet.
2- to regulate the fuel/wood/cow-pies/trash to be burnt.
There was no fuel stipulation in the P&Z packet or established in the board meeting.
3- to regulate the emissions
There was no emission control or remedy if the 12-foot stacks were inefficient in the P&Z packet.
None of the responsibilities were outlined in the P&Z conclusion, nor were there any questions asked about the condition or qualification of the smoker or the fuel.
When the question was asked by me what was the remedy if the 12-foot stacks didn’t work, the answer from Mike Taylor was “the plan is incomplete”
4 residents were attending to find out what measures were being taken to deal with the emissions, because Mike Taylor couldn’t answer the question before the meeting, and he couldn’t answer it afterwards nor was it important to the P&Z board.
The City pays in excess of a half million dollars to Fred Metcalf’s Department and City Planners and the Site Plan that they presented to the P&Z board could have been written by a 12 year old. Three Planners on the City payroll and the best they could do is present a sloppy, reckless and incomplete Site Plan that went right through the P&Z board like Exlax through a Pig with the help of your Chairperson and an ex councilmember.
If there is a qualified person on that P&Z board now, they certainly weren’t in the room that evening.
Mtober,
Good causes are everywhere and so are facilitators, trading public property and desirable esthetics for cash so one Club can obtain funds to redistribute is not a determination that the Council should make without input from the voting population.
The referendum should ask, “”Do you want to decorate your City with advertising on benches located on public land, location to be determined by Michele King and Rick Kriseman?”"
Big Dog: I just wanted to update this post and make a correction.
You do see now, that in fact, there is a P&Z Board member that is running for sElection?
When I stated that Jeri Reed recognized Larry Cooper as a trusted reference as a condition of voting for site plan 2008 S08-05 I should have said Marge Milford. Jeri Reed was appointed to the P&Z by Larry Cooper.
Too bad…You were on vacation that evening.
Dave Hastings said as a justification for his vote-
“”We have no evidence presented here that the smoker is going to produce smoke. The applicant said he was going to keep the baffles closed and the smoker must not be a nuisance as part of their conditions, so it gives the city an out.”"
He obviously didn’t know what he was talking about. The City does not have an out; the vote broke the Nuisance Ordinances so no citation could be written. Anyone that truly believes that a smoker is not going to produces smoke needs to have their head examined, and to think that a baffle is going to stop smoke didn’t watch cartoons when Indians sent smoke signals baffling the fire with a blanket. Even a 5 year old could figure that one out.
After the applicant claimed for the third time that the State, County and or Health Department certified the Smoker I stood up and Jeri Reed allowed me to speak once more. I told them that I had called the State, and the County and they explicitly stated that they do not certify smokers or stoves. The claim was false, a claim that everyone on that board was counting on. Jeri Reed came back with a quick retort. “”You can call the state and get different answers from different people and the County is the same way.”" She went on to use one of her phone call experiences to attempt to devalue the fact.
Someone named Delasondro (sp) asked pertinent questions and seemed to get it, but in the end went along with the program. If this board meeting is any indication of how the Planning and Zoning Board of Gulfport Florida conducts business I have to disagree with your assessment, that it is any more qualified to govern than the members of the Council. The applicant ran the room that evening, spending as much time facing the audience as he did facing the dais. Watch the DVD yourself.