TO ERR IS HUMAN

To Keep Erring is Stupid

Tonight’s (Tuesday’s) meeting, if held for the purpose of which it was scheduled, will be an error to fix an error. If a re-vote is taken on the millage rate tonight at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Auditorium, the standard moment of silence at the start of the meeting might as well last until midnight.

If another commission vote to reset the millage rate for 2008-2009 happens tonight, it will be just as improper as the first one recorded on September 18th.

ASSERTION #1: There is no provision in Florida Statute (Chapter 200-Determination of Millage) for IRB to take it upon themselves to initiate a re-vote on the millage rate. The proper procedure for a re-hearing involves certifying the vote taken some weeks back with the Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) and waiting to receive authorization from them that a re-hearing is required. Once that notice from the state is received, IRB then has 15 days in which to advertise the new hearing following all other procedures for the notice. (more on this later!)

ASSERTION #2: Within 15 days of the meeting adopting the tentative budget, the taxing authority (IRB) is required to advertise its intent to adopt a millage rate and budget in a newspaper of general circulation, e.g. the St. Pete Times. If the tentative budget was adopted on 9/4/08, the LAST day to advertise a hearing on THIS particular tentative budget adopted was Thursday, 9/25. So, last Sunday’s (9/28) advertisement cannot be determined to be in conjunction with the tentative budget adopted since it falls outside the allotted 15-day notice per Florida Statute 200.65 (2)(4)(d).

ASSERTION #3: There is no provision for adopting a millage rate by ordinance or resolution and NOT certifying it within the required time period to the Dept. of Revenue. It appears that any vote, illegal or not, must be certified as outlined in Florida Statute 200.068. It is then up to the DOR to instruct the City to hold another meeting for the purpose of re-voting. There is no provision for the City to arbitrarily decide amongst themselves that a “re-do” is in order without the proper authorization from the State.

ASSERTION #4: The only provision for holding a re-hearing is one that is caused by receipt of a notification of noncompliance by the Department of Revenue. The DOR has 30 days of the deadline for certification of compliance by IRB to provide the notice. Then, the advertisement of the re-hearing must appear 15 days from IRB's receipt of the notice of noncompliance and is required to include the following verbiage: THE PREVIOUS NOTICE PLACED BY THE (name of taxing authority) HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, NECESSITATING THIS SECOND NOTICE. The new millage rate set may not exceed the one previously adopted.

Florida Statute also requires that a public hearing to finalize the budget and adopt a millage rate be held not less than 2 days nor more than 5 days after the day that the advertisement is first published. As citizen procedural watchdog Ed Piniero pointed out, even if the hearing were authorized by the DOR, the City has, once again, not met the minimum two-day notice requirement.

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure govern the calculation of notification time periods for all Florida Statutes, unless otherwise stated. Their calculation EXCLUDES Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from the time computation. Plus, the day of the “event,” which in this case is Tuesday, also doesn’t count. So, if Sunday doesn’t count and Tuesday doesn’t count, in essence IRB paid for a full-page ad in the Sunday St. Pete Times ($900?) which is an insufficient one-day notice, falling short of the minimum two-day notice requirement. (Not the first time we’ve paid for ads that were useless!)

An e-mail circulated by former Commissioner Jose Coppen yesterday hit the cyberwaves just as this blog information was being compiled. Coppen, too, agrees that the meeting is improper and cites a whole different roster of reasons why, some equally as valid as those outlined in this posting.

It looks like as long as re-hearing procedures are followed as outlined by Florida Statute Chapter 200, all will be forgiven. If the commission goes forward tonight —following their own hair-brained plan devoid of legal stability—will it bring the possible loss of our $100,000+ in state sales tax monies closer to fruition?

See you all tonight…I guess.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

OOPS AGAIN

Comedy of IRB Errors

From my third-grade kickball days, I vaguely remember a “do-over.” It was a chance, if you totally blew it, to redeem yourself.

Well, our City Commission is embarking on “the big do-over” at the abruptly announced Special City Commission Meeting on Tuesday, September 30th at 7 p.m. in the City Hall Auditorium.

This special meeting has been scheduled for the purpose of re-doing the SECOND AND FINAL READING of IRB’s budget for the next fiscal year, 2008-2009. Due to the high percentage of increase in our millage rate, ALL FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MUST AGREE UNANIMOUSLY ON THE MILLAGE RATE in accordance with Florida Statute. The 4-1 vote, taken on 9/18/08 and thought to be the final say, didn't fly.

Once again, IRB doesn’t seem to be as adept at math as it is at parks, libraries and sea oats. The rule is that a millage rate adopted in excess of 110% of the rolled-back rate based on the previous year's maximum millage rate adjusted for change in per capita Florida personal income requires a UANIMOUS (5-0) vote of the commission.

If the millage increase is less than 110%, only a two-thirds vote is required. In keeping with the City Charter, a millage rate equal to or greater than 6 percent of the current year rollback rate requires four out of five affirmative votes or a supermajority, however, local law bows to State Law.

If this B minor-scale-playing music major did the math correctly (it is rather complex, I'll admit), the percentage of increase in our millage rate at 2.0 blew the doors off the 110% threshold requiring a unanimous vote. Thus the reason for Tuesday’s “rerun.”

Once again, here comes the single most often-asked question in IRB: HOW THE HELL DID THIS HAPPEN?

In talking with past mayors about how they approached major votes like this one, they did so by first researching the voting requirements themselves and then asking the City Attorney and staff to confirm their findings.

Whose job was it to make sure the correct vote was rendered? According to the City Charter, the City Manager is responsible for the budget and for knowing all the laws and requirements associated with such. (Taylor did his job as you'll see below!) The Mayor, if on his game, will ask questions of those in the know and then confirm compliance with procedural requirements since he is charged with ruling on any points of order. The Vice Mayor and other Commissioners are supposed to be watching the Mayor's and the citizens’ backs. (That’s especially true of the Vice Mayor.) The Treasurer and City Attorney are there to provide advice--when asked.

Did the commission, at one point, have the correct information regarding this vote? Meeting Notes from the July 22, 2008 City Commission Meeting (available on the City Web site) provide the answer to this question…and that answer is YES. The meeting notes reflect that the commission was duly informed by staff that a unanimous vote was required for any millage rate above 1.89. The following excerpt was copied and pasted directly from the notes:

Charter Section 8.2, Ad Valorem Taxes, states: Any and all ad valorem millage rate increase which is equal to or greater than 6 percent of the current year rollback rate shall require four out of five affirmative votes of the City Commission. Based on the rolled back rate of 1.6531, 6% over that equals 1.7523 mills.

In addition to the above requirements, local governments must conform to the maximum millage limitation requirements first imposed by the Legislature in 2007. The requirements in 2008 are in Section 200.185(5), Florida Statutes. These requirements were further amended by a bill passed in 2008.

For Indian Rocks Beach the following is applicable:

MAJORITY VOTE: Up to 1.6703. Trim rolled back rate adjusted for per capita personal income X percentage majority vote amended for Amendment One impact. [(1.6531 X 1.0415) X 97.01 = 1.6703]

TWO THIRDS VOTES: From 1.6703 to 1.8939. Majority vote rate without Amendment One X 10%] [1.7217 X 1.10 = 1.8939]

UNANIMOUS: From 1.8939 to 10.0000

Was this information, which was provided two months prior to the vote taken on 9/18, ignored or merely lost in the shuffle? Was it an accident or deliberate? That’s anyone’s guess.

Whatever the reason, the commission incorrectly rendered a supermajority vote. No one came to the rescue. Mayor never said anything. City Attorney (for a change!) remained silent. Staff didn’t disagree. Not a peep out of the Finance Director. No citizen chimed in. Ed Piniero, a “past Mayor-Commissioner turned citizen” is often criticized for speaking up and “saving this commission from themselves” on procedural issues. Ed, however, was on vacation and absent from the meeting.

Something else I found surprising--In my mind, the 1.89 millage rate that City Staff recommended was set as such because they determined the amount of revenue it would take to effectively run the City and calculated the 1.89 rate based on current property valuations and proposed expenses for next year. It might appear now that the millage rate staff proposed was driven more by the fear of not getting a unanimous vote than it was in the interest of fiscal efficiency. (1.89 would NOT have required a unanimous vote!)

Some officials, now seated on our commission, were cited and fined by the State for failure to follow the requirements for designing their campaign signs last March. Was this inability to read and interpret requirements a foreshadowing of things to come?

“Errors happen…”—that was the Mayor’s quote in the St. Pete Times on Sunday. No kidding…and in IRB they happen a lot.

Does anyone have anything to say to Commissioner Dan Torres who is firmly strapped into the millage rate hot seat with the countdown running…10…9…8…?

More on IRBeHEARD tomorrow.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

ERASE. ERASE.

Commission Gets Do-Over

Announcing:

SECOND & FINAL READING (ONCE MORE WITH FEELING!) OF THE IRB BUDGET: Tuesday, September 30th at 7 p.m., IRB City Hall Auditorium.

Due to a procedural error, the SECOND and FINAL reading of the IRB budget for FY 2008-2009 must be held AGAIN…would you believe?

On September 18th, just a couple weeks ago, the commission voted 4-to-1 to approve the budget. This approval set the millage rate, the formula by which our property taxes are calculated, at 2.0. The new millage rate your commission set was SO HIGH that it easily hit the percentage of increase requiring a UNANIMOUS (5-0) commission vote. No one caught it until it was damn near too late. The 4-to-1 vote previously rendered doesn’t cut the mustard, so it’s back to the drawing board, folks.

Just when we thought it was safe…our cops are, once again, IN DANGER OF BEING CUT. If you attended the now-defunct September 18th meeting, please be there again THIS TUESDAY NIGHT to support your police all over again. The attendance at the last meeting was impressive enough to result in only a minor reduction in police protection in IRB. We’re anticipating even more butts in the seats for Tuesday night’s “Déjàvufest” as many citizens were out of town or on vacation for what residents only thought was the final reading of next year's budget.

Erase. Erase. This community has another shot of convincing our City Commission not to make ANY REDUCTION WHATSOEVER in our police.

Attend Tuesday night’s meeting and…

…SEE IF your commissioners address why they feel the need to jack the millage rate up so high, well above the staff-recommended rate, in view of current reported bank balances of nearly $1.6 million.

…SEE IF Commissioner Torres sticks to his guns, insisting the millage rate be lower than 2.0, or if he caves to the Mayor’s characterization of "his balls" as “holding the commission hostage.” (The lone Torres NO vote didn’t count last time; this time it’s the key to providing tax relief for many strapped IRB taxpayers. No pressure though, Dan.)

…SEE IF IRB resident David Pearson’s can of black spray paint gets put into use. He graciously donated it at the September 18th meeting for the purpose of masking out the “The World’s Safest Beach” slogan from the City seal, in the event police services were compromised.

…SEE IF IRBeHEARD’s “20 Questions” get answered. (An upcoming posting will include a recap of the questions we posed, which you can print out, add a few queries of your own and use for a handy reference at Tuesday night’s meeting.)

If the dress rehearsal was any indication, Tuesday night’s “show” should definitely be worth the price of admission. It’s your opportunity to, once again, let your elected officials know that cutting essential services in IRB, while using our tax monies to further pet projects and pay for non-essentials during financially difficult times, is not something this community plans to take sitting down.

Be sure to check back on IRBeHEARD over the next couple days for additional postings on this latest comedy of IRB errors.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

IRB WITHOUT THE INDIANS

Mucking It Up

Wow. Those who haven’t read former Mayor Jim Driscoll’s recent editorial in the Belleair Bee, it’s powerful stuff and definitely worth reading. Click on this link…but strap yourselves in first:

http://www.tbnweekly.com/editorial/readers_poll/content_articles/092408_pol-01.txt

There is a bit of irony here--that this name-calling editorial accuses those who dare to show up at commission meetings, ask questions and express opinions of “leveling insults and slurs in lieu of factual presentations”?

Jackasses, agitators, disgusting, inactive gripers and muckers? What happened to “skunk”? Wasn’t that in the live version of this “script” at the last commission meeting?

I have to admit that “mucker” was a new one. For the rest of you illiterates like me, it’s a vulgar, ill-bred person who often says the wrong thing…a bungler…one who removes muck.

Since when is serving the City, on the commission or in any other capacity, a prerequisite to having in a say in local government? What…no credit for “time served” at four-hour commission meetings? Guess not.

I wonder if this community realizes when they cast their vote giving citizens the opportunity of serving the community they are granting them an automatic future pass to demean others simply because they don’t agree.

IRBeHEARD strives to be as factual as possible. Sometimes we crack a funny or two just to keep things interesting—but, by and large, if there’s no document, meeting notes, audio tapes, or something else of equal weight to substantiate a piece of info, it doesn’t get posted—PERIOD.

Not in our control, however, are the comments that citizens blog in with. We have chosen not to screen or censor these comments since censorship, at least in our way of thinking, sort of defeats the purpose of a blog. The comments by bloggers on the previous posting were so well done...some great writing...even though the opinions were not all the same. (Scott Shapiro's kind words about former Mayor Driscoll were especially warranted and noteworthy!)

On IRBeHEARD, everyone is entitled to their say—no matter who they are, what they have to say or if they’ve ever served on the City Commission.

Besides, everyone can’t be a chief, can they? Doesn’t Indian Rocks Beach need Indians, too?

Suggested disclaimer for upcoming commission meeting agendas: “Unless you agree 100% with the City Commission, can’t work a calculator and have personally served on the commission, please stay home.”

That might save all of us a few hours of “community service” every month.

Nancy Obarski
Indian Rocks Beach

LIMO 2 LARGO LIBRARY

Taken for a Ride in IRB

At last week’s final reading of next year’s budget (or so we thought!), a good number of citizens expressed displeasure over keeping a full-time librarian and reducing our police protection.

IRB resident Scott Shapiro unraveled an out-of-the-box idea. He approached the microphone and suggested it might be more economical for IRB to provide limo service to anyone in town who wants to go to the library, instead of footing the bill to operate one of our own.

He went so far as to recommend that IRB make a deal with a limo company whereby they would transport our “readers” over the bridge to the bigger and better Largo Library, wait for them outside and then deliver them back to their respective doorsteps in IRB. Former Mayor Jim Driscoll, a longtime supporter of the IRB library, wasn’t amused; Shapiro’s suggestion did get a good laugh from the crowd nonetheless. (It’s “entertainment value” like this that will hopefully put more butts in the City Hall Auditorium seats for commission meetings!)

While Shapiro was bordering on sarcasm, do the math. Figure the average cost of a limo ride to Largo at $100. That buys nearly 1,000 limo rides per year with the monies currently earmarked to run our little library, which includes the price tag of a full-time librarian.

And, since most of these “reading runs” would be during the day when limos tend to sit idle, some transportation company might love this gig enough to even do better on the per-trip rate used in the calculation above.

Shapiro's tongue-in-cheek suggestion aside, I, for one, have learned to appreciate the people who are so passionate about “their” library here in IRB. It’s a group of good solid citizens…whose organization has been ruined by the “our-s#*t-doesn’t-stink” attitude of a few.

I hope these nice people realize that it’s not the library per se that sets so many IRBers ablaze; it’s more what the library REPRESENTS that raises hackles. The library has come to be a tangible example of city priorities driven by politics and personal desires rather than the needs of our community.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

BOOKS VS. BADGES

The Duke Out

Introducing…in the blue corner…the IRB librarian--the single most-talked-about IRB city employee.

In the red corner, the IRB Pinellas County Sheriff, a little ragged and worn from battling to keep his job.

Ding. Ding. Ding. Go to your corners and come out swinging.

Euphemistically speaking, that was the scene at the final reading of the IRB 2008-2009 budget last Thursday, September 18th. Some will argue that it wasn’t a case of “either/or” at all when it came to deciding between keeping our police intact and/or keeping the full-time librarian. Maybe not, but that’s certainly how the community saw it. Perception usually is reality.

Last Thursday night's spectators saw firsthand what happens when piss-poor spending priorities and politics collide. The librarian survives another day…with only a modest reduction in her hours and only a small loss in her $20,000 books/supply budget.

All of you who showed up at the meeting to support the police managed to sway one vote--just enough to approve only a modest reduction in our protection. This was preferable to the more drastic cut approved at the first reading. Most citizens felt that NO REDUCTION whatsoever was warranted, but accepted the loss of a cop on the two weekdays of lesser police activity as a quasi-victory. (I could publish the “light police days” here, but prefer to let criminals-in-the-making guess!)

By contrast to the nearly packed house supporting the police, there was little public support for the librarian. Commissioner Valery pointed out the lack of grant money procured by the librarian thus far—allegedly the raison d’etre for her hiring in the first place.

One rather surprising development—several of longtime Friends of the Library (really lovely people, by the way) confided off-the-record that they feel the librarian is not an asset and has actually ruined “their” library. So, other than an allegiance to those who elected them, what could possibly be the reason that NOT ONE COMMISSIONER suggested giving the librarian the heave-ho? Even those this commission "pledges allegiance to" don't support her.

Check back on IRBeHEARD tomorrow for IRB citizen Scott Shapiro's proposed "Library Limo" plan. Most amusing.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

QUESTIONS TOO TOUGH - Part II

Another 10 Questions NOT Being Asked

Yesterday’s posting listed the first ten questions we were HOPING our commission would ask before approving next year’s operating budget. This posting contains another ten questions those we elected failed to ask:

Q. The General Fund "Balance Brought Forward" from this year is $1,275,803 according to the advertised budget. The General Fund "Fund Balances/Reserves/

Net" is $1,696,516…or an increase in the City’s reserves of $420,713? Doesn’t this mean our reserves actually increased? If so, why are you painting such a grim picture of our reserve funds, gouging us on the millage rate and increasing our sewer/garbage rates under the guise of declining reserves?

Q. Has any commissioner ever reviewed IRB’s property insurance policies to determine what is covered and what isn’t before deciding how much the City’s reserves should be?

Q. Is it true that the City pays a substantial amount in property insurance premiums and that EVEN THE PLANTS IN IRB ARE INSURED?

Q. Why would the Mayor vote YES on the budget with a reduction in the police that he didn’t support? (Commissioner Dan Torres held his ground and initially voted NO on the budget, only changing his NO vote to YES when the cops were reinstated.)

Q. What happened to the interest on the $100,000 Sewer Fund emergency reserve since 1993? Were all those monies spent, too? (Section 10.5 of the City Charter says: “Interest on the reserve account shall compound and accrue to this specified reserve fund,” yet no interest accrued!)

Q. Why didn’t any commissioner suggest completely eliminating the librarian—especially after pointing out that her hiring was based on securing grants--and not a single one has materialized?

Q. Why doesn’t any of the info presented jive with the current bank balances?

Q. How can a Finance Director and five commissioners attend a budget meeting without knowing the balance in the bank…to the penny?

Q. How much of our tax money did you (and are you!) paying Rob Garner to sell us a bill of goods?

Q. Is there enough Wesson Oil money in the budget for more Garner "cooking classes"?

BOTTOM LINE: If (big IF) the current bank balances are correct, there’s over a million dollars sitting in the bank—leftover from last year. That's another third as much as the entire expenditures for next year!!

Jacking the millage rate up in challenging economic times--ABOVE the rate staff AND our Finance Board recommended--without knowing (or acknowledging!) the true financial picture, was totally irresponsible.

It’s anyone guess as to how the “hushed up” million will be spent. More sea oats signs? Dune walkovers that obstruct our views? Library expansion? More “plant” insurance? Another gaggle of consultants whose “stories” don’t all match? Another $100K in playground equipment over and above the $100K already allocated? Most of us feel like we’ve been on a merry-go-round anyway…so why not!

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

QUESTIONS TOO TOUGH? - Part I

The First TEN Questions NOT Being Asked

Here are the first 10 of the 20 questions we, as IRB citizens, HOPED our commissioners would ask at last Thursday’s night’s meeting…but didn’t:

Q. How can the City do a budget without ever seeing the “actuals” for the prior year to gauge how the City performed against previous projections?

Q. Why isn’t the budget published (by law) in the Sunday, September 13th St. Petersburg Times the same budget presented at the final reading last Thursday?

Q. Why doesn’t the money IRB has in the bank—money carried forward from the prior year--factor into the amount of the tax increase needed?

Q. Why has this commission never voted to approve the so-called loans in the first place--per Section 10.5 of the City Charter--when they’ve known of their existence since March of this year?

Q. Citizens were told that the reason for the loans in the first place was the County’s rate increase. How can that be if the first loan/transfer was made shortly after the County’s increase went into effect—long before the $1.1 million fund balance in the Sewer Fund from the prior year could be expended?

Q. How was this commission able to approve a loan repayment plan for loans our commission has NEVER authorized?

Q. When was it decided that the outstanding loans would DEFINITELY be repaid to the General Fund? (As far as most of us know, that issue was still on the table for discussion, since the commission discovered that there is NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT for repayment--as many citizens pointed out from the beginning.)

Q. If the loan is going to be repaid, it’s a receivable. A receivable, in turn, is an asset. So, why isn’t this receivable “asset” showing on the opposite side of the ledger on this year’s budget?

Q. Does not showing the debt as a receivable “set the stage” for it to be written off at some time in future, even though we are being asked to cough up the money to repay it?

Q. How many commissioners brought a calculator to the meeting?

Check back on IRBeHEARD tomorrow for the rest of the 20 questions that remain unanswered. Meanwhile blog in and ask your own questions...I'm sure you have a few!

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

TWENTY QUESTIONS

Why Our Commission Refuses to Play?

Thursday night’s commission meeting (September 18th) was a barnburner. Dean Scharmen unstacked more chairs at the back of the City Hall Auditorium to accommodate the larger-than-usual number of our residents who have become increasingly concerned. Comment cards became scarce. It was tough to ignore the headcount.

Some were there for the purpose of lobbying to save our cops. Some were there for yet another (BAM!) “cooking class” by financial consultant Rob Garner, who kicked it up notch with a downright deceiving Excel chart. Some were there just because they’d heard rumblings that “things are screwed up” and wanted to see for themselves firsthand. They got more than the price of admission.

Most of us left City Hall that night wondering why our elected representatives, the City Commissioners we gave the nod to, aren’t asking toothy follow-up questions when issues arise. Citizens seem to be asking the bulk of the tough questions; however, with the constraints of a three-minute limit, there’s no way the residents in attendance can carry the ball entirely. As a citizen, I sometimes feel like a straight man playing to five mute sidekicks.

And, once public comment is closed by the chair, you’re just S.O.L. If something else pops up afterwards that requires an answer, your only hope of getting those answers is for some commissioner--any commissioner--to pick up the ball and take it the rest of the way down the field. It doesn't happen. Important issues are allowed to drop to the floor like our bank balances without pursuing the subject further.

So why is the commission NOT asking more questions? Are they afraid of the answers? Do they fear appearing incompetent? Do they perhaps ask the questions behind the scenes and feel the citizens don’t have a need or a right to know?

Here’s a specific example from last Thursday’s meeting. It was pointed out that the balance in the bank as of July 30th totaled $1.7 million, yet those monies were not factored into the next year’s budget. That figure, as verified by our City Finance Director, is the June statement balance (money in the bank!) forecasted to the end of July, and it wasn’t shown in the budget for the next fiscal year anywhere! NOT ONE COMMISSIONER asked any additional questions like “Is that true?” or “How can that be?” “What’s up with that?” or "What happens to that money?"

Instead Commissioner Wollin alluded to the possibility that if citizens were correct and all this money "drops from the sky," we’ll be better off financially than we think we are. The money is not falling from the sky, lady; it’s sitting in the City’s bank account...and shame on you for asking already-strapped citizens for more money without knowing what that amount is TO THE DAMN PENNY.

Check back on IRBeHEARD for questions that our residents could only hope the commission will ask.

Nancy Obarski

Beach Trail/IRB

POKER RUN RUNDOWN

IRB Homeowners Association Event Saturday

Saturday, September 20th, is a chance for all of us to put our political differences aside and just enjoy being neighbors. The IRB Homeowners Association’s first IRB Poker Run already has 150 registered! If you're not one them, YOU CAN STILL DO SO between 2 and 3 on Saturday, the day of the event, at Cuso’s--$10 per person.

Initially, I thought it was some sort of poker tournament. That’s not the case at all. There are ten participating bars and restaurants involved. And, if I’m understanding this correctly…you go to a minimum of five of them between 3 and 8 p.m. (You can go to more if you want!) Buy a drink and/or something to munch on and you will be given a playing card. Five bars…five cards…thus your poker hand.

Participating bars & restaurants are:

Cuso’s Cantina

Guppy’s

Red Lion

Coaster’s

P.J.’s Oyster Bar

Marlin Time

Jimmy Guana’s

My Place

The Loading Dock

J.D.’s Restaurant

The goal is to end up in a big tent at Crabby Bill’s Loading Dock by 8 p.m. with the best (or worst!) poker hand to win cash prizes, gift certificates, t-shirts and more. And, if you can’t do “the run,” just show up for the party afterwards. Sounds like a good one!

The Indian Rocks Beach Homeowners Association does incredible things for our community. Every event they sponsor is well planned, well executed and well attended. They have no agenda…they simply want their events to be fun and in some way beneficial to IRB. The Poker Run is not only a chance for us to get together as a community for the purpose of laughing a little, but is also a great way to give a little boost to our local businesses—who deserve our support. Hope to see everyone between 2 and 3 p.m. on Saturday at Cuso's to pick up your registration packet. You can’t play without it!

Visit http://www.irbhome.com/ for more information.

Nancy Obarski

Beach Trail/IRB

OUR POLICE HELP US EVERY DAY

Now Our Cops Need Our Help

[The second and FINAL reading of the 2008-2009 operating budget for Indian Rocks Beach is scheduled for Thursday, September 18th at 7 p.m. in the City Hall Auditorium. YOUR ATTENDANCE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IF THERE IS ANY HOPE OF KEEPING OUR POLICE FORCE INTACT IN IRB!!]

Above is a photo of the Pinellas County Sheriffs who lay their lives on the line every day to make IRB “The World’s Safest Beach.” This photo was taken by former IRB Commissioner Jeremiah Carmody after a recent City Commission meeting. At that meeting, each officer assigned to IRB was personally introduced along with their very impressive roster of police experience. We should be proud to have this caliber of protection in our small beach community. Instead, the plan is to cut one of the officers pictured above. So, which one will it be?

No one would disagree that next year proves to be one of the most financially challenging one in the history of IRB. In view of the grim national picture, one would be skeptical if that were NOT the case. And when you add downright mismanagement of our tax monies, secrecy to the point of cover-up, and terribly misguided budgeting priorities to an already crippled economic climate, you have a recipe for certain fiscal disaster in IRB.

All of us recognize that cuts must be made. But where are the priorities for these cuts? Who in their right mind would opt to keep a full-time librarian and plan to expand the library facility at the risk of possibly compromising the safety of our residents? I say “possibly” because we don’t know what effect this all-but-certain police reduction will have. Will we see a difference in the level of service with one less officer? Maybe…and maybe not. Is it worth the risk to find out?

The commission considered three police staffing options…keeping it the same, making a modest reduction or opting for a more drastic reduction plan. Please take special note of the following come election time:

NO COMMISSIONER voted to keep the status quo in terms of police.

Two commissioners, JOHNSON AND TORRES, opted for a modest reduction.

WOLLIN, KENNEDY and VALERY (the deciders!) chose the most severe cut.

On the flip side, NO COMMISSIONER dared to touch the subject of eliminating the library or foregoing a planned library expansion. Commissioner Wollin did make a rather fleeting comment about reducing the librarian’s hours. None of her fellow commissioners expressed any interest whatsoever in discussing the subject further.

Let’s just get it out in the open….those associated with the library were instrumental in getting this commission elected so they will support the library till the cows come home. Will they give it up if a citizen or a police officer is hurt…or worse yet killed…as a result of their misguided priorities?

Commissioner Kennedy indicated that the moment the police reduction isn’t working, she’ll insist on a return to the status quo. Our taxes and water/sewer rates have been jacked to the stratosphere. We’ve been told the town is on the verge of bust and that next year’s budget is supposedly lean and mean. So, where in the hell is $100M coming from to put the eliminated cop back into the budget after this “experiment” with people’s lives doesn’t work?

The professionalism the Sheriff’s Office displayed during this entire negotiation process is to be admired. By contrast, our commission persisted in asking what some considered asinine questions like…what a typical day consists of for an IRB cop. Let’s see…there’s a robbery at 9 a.m., domestic run promptly at 11:15 a.m. and a vagrant on the beach at noon (he slept in!). Ironically, these questions were posed by the commissioner with “quite a history” of run-ins with the police.

Why Sheriff Coats didn’t “walk” from the deal after Commissioner Kennedy proposed replacing his officers with the Indian Shores Police…I don’t know. Be glad he didn't. What options would there be if he had walked? Pulling some ill-conceived power play while negotiating from a position of relative weakness was dangerous and irresponsible—especially with stakes this large.

Those of us referred to as “the same old people saying the same old things” will be there Thursday evening to support our police. Unfortunately, because we do not lavish praise on the "current regime," our comments are largely dismissed without so much as a second thought. We urge you to grab your neighbors, grab your friends (even your enemies will do if they live in IRB!) and attend Thursday’s meeting to stand up for the men and women who protect us and our properties every day in IRB. Even if our commission persists with this irresponsible budget cut, which unfortunately is a real possibility, our officers will know that WE, the citizens, support them 100%.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

P.S. It’s also time to start thinking about the upcoming March election! Who can we urge in our community—strong leaders with good judgment and solid financial credentials—to run for two seats on the commission? We need commissioners who will stop all the secrecy, listen to citizens no matter who they are, where they live or who they supported at election time…people who will fight for US instead of pet projects and politically-based causes. There are so many talented people in this town, surely someone will step forward?? Any nominations from the cyber floor?

WHITEHURST: THE SAGA - Part I

Another Coppen-based Lawsuit

It’s entirely possible that former City Commissioner Jose Coppen has info about the Whitehurst lawsuit that the rest of us aren’t privy to. After all, he was its chief instigator and has continued to "bird dog" it long after his term ended. But, to even intimate for one moment that a judicial decision is imminent here is to ignore that the online court docket shows no pending motions. The matter has not, as yet, even been set for trial. Legal fees continue to tax an already anemic city bottom line with over $30,000 incurred so far.

Explaining the complexities of this land dispute involving the true location of IRB’s southern boundary is no easy task. Truthfully, it’s an eye-crosser…but here goes anyway.

Parker & Rosemary Willis own the first 50’ lot in Indian Shores just to the south of the Whitehurst Beach Access. Willis also holds title to an adjoining 7.3’ to the north of his lot—that 7.3’ is the crux of the lawsuit. For decades, Willis has paid (and still pays) taxes to the Town of Indian Shores on the entire 57.3’ to which he had title. How did Willis get his title to the 7.3’ strip? The Town of Indian Shores sold it to Willis predecessor in title in 1985 for $20,000 as part of Indian Shores “half” of the 60’ right-of-way. Money changed hands. A deed was recorded. IRB did not object to the sale. A year later in 1986, Willis purchased both the 50’ lot AND the 7.3’ and has lived on the land ever since with nary a cautionary word by Indian Rocks Beach or Indian Shores.

Roll the clock forward. A commissioner’s own personal view is threatened and IRB claims ownership of the entire 60’ ROW…asserting that Indian Shores had no right to sell the 7.3’ portion of “their half” in the first place…because it wasn’t theirs to sell.

So, why the hell didn’t someone speak up 20 years ago instead of watching an adjacent town sell what we believed to be ours? Instead, IRB did what IRB always does—sit back and wait until innocent people get caught up by their mistakes. IRB was fully aware of the sale of the 7.3’ at the time—watched while money changed hands and a deed was recorded and SAID NOTHING—DID NOTHING—and took no issue with the transaction. Now IRB claims the 7.3’ is ours…and always was. How a court will decide this matter is anyone’s guess. There are definitely two sides.

Some evidence to consider:

1. A City of IRB document referencing a “boundary agreement with Indian Shores” which no one at City Hall can seem to locate—go figure.

2. A memo from a former IRB City Manager acknowledging the center line of Whitehurst as the recognized boundary between the two towns.

3. Police reports through the years showing Indian Shores’ police responding to calls on the south half; Indian Rocks Beach police handled calls on the north half.

4. Nearly every IRB map, even the City maps, shows the dividing line between IRB and Indian Shores in the center of Whitehurst—not the southern edge as IRB now claims.

5. The seawall, rebuilt after Elena, does not include all the land IRB now claims it owns.

6. The most recent charter review mentions a problem with our town’s southern boundary which was referred back to the DiNicola commission—the problem, once again, was totally ignored (until former Commission Coppen raised a stink!).

7. Even the “inventory” of our public lands in our comprehensive plan lists only 30’ of Whitehurst as being ours—yet the City claims ownership of the entire 60’.

Something a little less significant, but noticeable nonetheless, is the location of the IRB City Limits sign when driving south on Gulf Boulevard. “Welcome to Indian Rocks Beach” is placed dead center of the beach access—NOT where IRB claims the property line to be.

If IRB’s ownership of the entire 60’ of beach access is and was so clear, why wasn’t this beach access beautified like all the others? More on this subject (my favorite according to Jose!) later…so stay tuned.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

GRIESHABER GRUDGEFEST

Getting Even Gets Expensive

[Many residents received a recent e-mail from former Commissioner Jose Coppen concerning IRBeHEARD’s criticism of our city’s spending on lawsuits. An offer to post Jose’s e-mail on the IRBeHEARD blog was declined; however, our rebuttal to Coppen’s comments, specifically about the Grieshaber matter, is below.]

Anyone who ever met Jose Coppen knows his brilliance. He has done good things for IRB. I like him and I respect him immensely. I must, however, disagree with the former commissioner’s insistence that the City’s investment in lawsuits is prudent.

Anyone who’s ever been through the legal process knows that the financial aspect of every lawsuit must be part of any decision to move forward. This is especially true in view of IRB’s newly discovered financial problems. Only our five sitting commissioners can decide if “getting” Grieshaber is important enough to lose one of our police officers. It’s all about trade-offs.

Without passing judgment on whether or not our former City Manager “blew town” with more than his fair share, Al Grieshaber has been trashed publicly in mass distributed e-mails, in print and even from the dais…all captured on tape and a matter of public record. His current employer was even directly contacted at one point. What potential exposure does the City have for these scurrilous statements if the court exonerates Al?

Let’s really go crazy and say the court decides in our favor; we still cannot recoup enough of our legal fees to get whole—putting IRB even farther behind the financial 8-ball. Grieshaber won’t do jail time. The suit filed, at Jose’s insistence, is civil in nature; getting a civil judgment and COLLECTING a civil judgment are mutually exclusive. When the City pursued criminal charges against former City Manager Grieshaber, law enforcement officials concluded that no criminal act had occurred. Rumor has it they felt that it was actually the City who breached the contract by cutting Grieshaber the “now infamous” check in the first place.

IRB made recent overtures toward settling this dispute; Grieshaber’s answer was to beef up his counterclaims. So, the meter continues to spin like a porch ceiling fan in Hurricane Ike on a lawsuit that never should have been launched in the first place.

How much is budgeted for this lawsuit next year and what current services or community events will be scrapped from the IRB roster to afford keeping the Grieshaber lawsuit alive? Again, it’s all about trade-offs and how our taxpayers want to see their money spent during these financially troubling times. From this writer's perspective, grudges aren’t something that should be taxpayer subsidized—even in boom times.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

RISING COST OF PLAYING BEACH POKER

Upping the Ante in IRB

There were 84,000 American jobs lost in August. Unemployment rose to 6.1%--the highest in a handful of years. This is worse than even doomsaying economists predicted. The cost of nearly everything has risen including the privilege of living in Indian Rocks Beach:

EMERGENCY SERVICES
Pinellas Suncoast Fire & Rescue District increase from $190 to $260.

UTILITIES
Progress Energy has last week announced a proposed 31 percent increase for it Florida customers. This takes the average monthly bill from $144.86 per month to $110.59 beginning right after the new year. (Whose average monthly bill is that? Certainly not mine…which is THREE TIMES that amount.)

UTILITY TAXES
When utilities go up, so do the accompanying taxes on those services.

SEWER/SOLID WASTE RATES
Garbage collection and sanitary sewer up 60%.

PROPERTY TAXES
The proposed 2.15 millage rate represents a substantial increase over last year.

PERMIT FEES
IRB increased its local building fees, inspection fees, and a whole roster of other fees over the last year. Even the cost of a wedding on the beach has gone through the roof, negatively impacting one of IRB’s largest employers—Holiday Inn Harbourside.

FLOOD INSURANCE
The loss of the 10% Community Rating System Premium Discount will increase our individual insurance rates in the near future. (Here’s a link to the City’s Web site for more info about this increase: http://www.indian-rocks-beach.com/documents/FEMADiscountPolicy.htm

FUEL
The rising cost at the pump has increased the price of everything—most noticeably in the weekly grocery tab.

When all the increases in taxes and fees are tallied, you’ll be paying substantially MORE for LESS; essential services like police protection are being cut to the nubbies.

One thing that hasn’t gone up is our property values. As expected, homesteaded properties enjoying the "Save Our Homes" cap saw a tax increase anyway. For many IRB homeowners, their home is their largest asset. I read somewhere recently that we’re supposed to be celebrating because our property values haven’t gone down as much as those in some other beach communities. The truth is that there have been fewer real estate sales in our community as compared to some others, so that info is actually based on a fewer number of sales and could be statistically anemic and significantly flawed.

In poker, it’s either ante up or fold. Which will your family do? Which half of us are going to the poor house and which half is on its way to the expanded IRB Library?

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/Indian Rocks Beach