Opinion: Happy Independence Day - but where is collaboration from Palmetto Bay?

This should be another outstanding Independence Day and long weekend. The United States was formed a country that was initially made up of the original 13 colonies - which eventually grew over the last 249 years to our current 50 States with five major U.S. territories consisting of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Together, the USA is what is termed a federal republic: the 50 states, a federal district and the territories.

Palmetto Bay is not an Island.  We are part of a chain of over overlapping governments.  Palmetto Bay exists with our Federal, State and County governments.  So why the history lesson? Well, because I think it is due as we appear to have a local government that is demonstrating poor taste in refusing to work with the County in celebrating our national Independence Day.

For back ground - please review my prior post of June 26, 2025, Palmetto Bay drops our community Independence Day celebration - so County Commissioner Danielle Cohen Higgins steps up. It is a relatively short read and includes information regarding a local event that we, Palmetto Bay, should be participating in - just across the street at the Palmetto Golf Course.

The question I am seeking answer to is why Palmetto Bay officials appear to refuse to partner with our County Commissioner on this Independence Day celebration?  That is just out of bounds in my opinion.  Palmetto Bay officials should show some leadership and provide some services to our residents this weekend. Here is what I suggest should be done:

1. Put the Palmetto Bay IBus in action - shuttle our residents from points within Palmetto Bay to the Palmetto Golf Course.  Palmetto Bay has done this with our own home grown event - an event that had limited parking - certainly this same shuttle service would be of great benefit to our residents!  Our residents are now the ones who are forced to try to make good on an event that will have limited parking (I was advised that there will be overflow parking at Coral Reef Senior High - not sure if there is a shuttle - but don't plan on shuttle service). The Ibus has been provided to the County for use at the Deering Seafood Festival - how is this County Independence Day event any less worthy?

2. Assist the County or create our own bike and golf cart route to the event.  I plan on attending via bike - taking the safer back streets up to the intersection of 89th at 152 Street. That is where travel will get complicated. It is my understanding that the Miami-Dade County Sheriff's office will have officers working at the US1/152 intersection to allow for crossing at this very dangerous intersection.  (By the way, if you bike - I know of no bike racks at the golf course - but there are some at the Coral Reef Library as well as the bike stations provided for the busway). Our Palmetto Bay Police Unit should be there - treat the Commissioner's event as a Palmetto Bay event - and promote safe travel (motor vehicle, pedestrian, golf cart and bicycle) for this event.

3. Palmetto Bay officials should be "all in" - promoting this event rather than relegating people to homegrown and therefore unsupervised fireworks.

Next - let's restore our tradition of Palmetto Bay's hometown Independence Day celebration for future years!

This event was much more than 20 minutes of fireworks. It was a nearly day long event where our residents gathered and enjoyed music, food and drink, face painting, child rides, contests - a true community event that was so much more than the aforementioned fireworks. Local businesses were present and we had sponsors. Why disappoint the families, the kids? It could have been done - it should have been put on without the fireworks for just this year as the loss of the Shores property has been expected for years.  This was simply poor planning for this eventuality - or worse - more scapegoating or excuse making to rid themselves of an event they just did not feel like hosting anymore. 

Perhaps our local officials became embarrassed by the Downtown Independence Day celebration as one of the purposes was to show off the positive downtown development - that once had vision - a vision for multi-use with local family friendly small shops and restaurants - an actual entertainment district.  That vision was stripped however and the downtown is little more than walk up apartments with little to know mixed use.

I could go on, but we are about to enter our annual Independence Day and I will celebrate it even if our village offices decide to drop our event and snub the County's event.  The current even sent our an email blast Thursday morning making no reference to the County event at Palmetto Golf Course - Its almost as if she either resents it or is hoping it fails. I suggest that fellow residents attend the event at the Palmetto Golf Course. 

Be safe this weekend.  Enjoy our Independence Day!

Opinion: Are we really getting to the end result of the development of the Palmetto Bay Village Center? Performative politics and the violation of Bert J Harris results in the MEGA PBVC.

The FACTS regarding the Palmetto Bay Village Center.

How did Palmetto Bay get to the point where it is offering up so much new density on the 80 acre property? Well, in the past, Palmetto Bay residents and officials worked hard to find a palatable solution (see prior posts relating to the Burger King World Headquarters Charrette and the over 42 meetings).  But while some labored in good faith, other political opportunists saw the potential of his property as a political football -- and assumed that voters were too stupid to realize that the property owner had some rights and would be able to build something.  Unfortunately, they threw rocks, promised to "stop the development" but never - ever - came up with a plan to stop it.  Instead, their lack of vision. lack of leadership and most of all - their lack of knowledge as to when to stop digging resulted in this current MEGA plan never contemplated under the 2008, 2016, or any other plan considered previously.  The Palmetto Bay Village Center (PBVC) matter came off the rails on January 24, 2022 when the mayor at the time (the present mayor) and the council adopted Village Resolution No. 2022-05.  This was the resolution from which the courts determined that the Village (current Mayor) VIOLATED the property rights of the owners of the PBVC. And please, when reading, note the specifics as to what the owners of the PBVC sought in that application - 480 units (and I have documented how it should have been many fewer) , no hotel, no additional commercial over what is presently proposed for approval (code named the MEGA enchilada)!

Current council rock throwing over working to present their own plan!

The current plan is a settlement - not a zoning hearing - a settlement of a significant Bert J Harris claim that APPROVES much more development over the rights of the residents not because any prior officials took any action, but because the current mayor dug the holes that we, the residents, find ourselves in because she never took any appropriate action to work with the owners to formulate anything palatable - more on that later - but the village is about to see the unfortunate results when officials are elected who could only throw rocks at the efforts and plans of those who stood up to the issue. The current group never never attempt anything meaningful.  Of course, we now see that the current mayor can throw rocks at the ground - and still miss!

More on Bert J Harris - See my prior related post of January 17, 2020 - A medium length primer on Bert J. Harris Act claims. What we can expect (including a timeline). Link to Bert J Harris Act provided. 

What Could Have Been

The PBVC issue predates the incorporation of Palmetto Bay.  I was in negotiation prior to December 5, 2018.  At that time, the owners of Palmetto Bay Village Center had agreed to preserve the environmentally sensitive land at the front of the property and construct a number that would have been not "the 485,"but rather, a representative for the PBVC offered a compromise number of 450 - 470. I contend that this was their starting point in these negotiations and the unit numbers would have dropped lower (Again, it is important to note that the Bert J Harris Claim arose out of the property rights violations created by the mayor and council in place for Resolution No. 2022-05).  The representative for the PBVC also mentioned in 2018 that negotiations had been ongoing for 200 -- half of the units -- to be Senior housing units. That's a HUGE offer in regard to traffic reduction.

More prior relevant reads: Tuesday, October 16, 2018, About last night (Mon. 10/15/2018) - I continue to work for you to reduce development. The council votes best tell the story.

What Now?

Now, after years of expensive litigation, rock throwing and scapegoating, the Palmetto Bay Village Council appears ready to cave and give the owners of the Palmetto Bay Village Center the APPROVAL to construct a much larger MEGA project -- with commercial never anticipated, in addition to the absolute maximum number of residential units. The Village's refusal to negotiate (because, presumably, they wanted to be seen as taking a tough stance against development) has led to massive increases in development - not prior action.

Yes, it is clear that none of those rocks thrown at the ground (or the PBVC) ever hit the mark. Just cheap political grandstanding covering up a lack of understanding of the issues that will profoundly impact our community.

Just please Palmetto Bay officials - take some positive action - and admit your foibles - and what ever you do, avoid going to court!

Development by unsupportable political denials rarely works for election officials -and area residents suffer. As noted in prior opinion posts, Things have not gone well for the Village of Palmetto Bay before the Miami-Dade trial and Appellate Division of the 11th Circuit Court - and the Third District Court of Appeal.  They promised "no development" but their litigation stumbles more aptly reflects "hold my beer" on granting massive development rights.

Read up on the Appellate Division ruling against Palmetto Bay in a strongly worded 31 page opinion that reversed the denial of the PBVC zoning decision.

Palmetto Bay officials sought a rehearing of the opinion, but fared no better in a revised, but just as lengthy 31 page opinion released July 5, 2023.

See: my prior related opinion post of December 13, 2023 - Court slaps down Palmetto Bay's zoning appeal -- more units for Old Cutler Road DENIED.  The Third District Court of Appeals ruled against the Village of Palmetto Bay.  Having lost - badly - in the efforts on appeal (review via Petitions for Cert for those who want to be sticklers for technicalities) - the Village had no bargaining power left. Read the order cited in that post - "hold my beer" id far too kind. 

This development did not materialize overnight - it took a massive amount of misdirected passive aggressive inaction from January 2019 to date to reach this point. 

Simply stated - don't blame the VUM or any amending ordinances. Blame the council for violating Bert J Harris - and that is a very tough thing to do!. They dug this deep hole and this MEGA development is the result stems from performative politics and lack of vision. The plan is a settlement of transgressions of those who let the village down when Resolution No. 2022-05 was enacted.

More facts - documented facts - speaking loudly regarding the Palmetto Bay Village Center. The real hoax is being perpetuated by keyboard warriors who incite fear through misinformation. Back to my opinion on how did this council get to a recommendation in favor of the 480. Did you know? There once was a procedure to ‘undo’ the 480, but the present mayor dropped that effort, allowing staff to recommend 480.

Facts are facts. Just to be clear, as I no longer hold office, I can only offer my opinions as to the ongoing issues relating to the Palmetto Bay Village Center (PBVC). I have always fought to preserve those 22 acres, not see them developed. Twice I asked the council to join me in participating in the purchase through the County Environmentally Endangered Lands Program (EELs).  Property owners have rights, despite what the local fire starters want to mislead you to believe. (actually, one of those fire starters championed an effort to actually develop in the 22 acres/visual barrier, but that's for a different post).

THE SHORT BITE: Current mayor Karyn Cunningham had the tools, the vote and the clear opportunity to repeal the 2016 ordinance relating to the PBVC. 

Former interim Village Attorney John Herin, Esq. was hired at village expense to advise the council on how to repeal this 2016 ordinance. The repeal ordinance was prepared and passed 3-2 on first reading which was held way back on April 3, 2017. This was a special council meeting that was called (requested by the vice mayor) for Independence Day weekend, 2017, (yes, a Saturday, July 1, 2017) – Soon after - and inexplicably, the second reading was deferred by a 5-0 vote. (CLICK HERE to view relevant documents placed in the "2017 VMU Repeal of 2016 ordinance materials" folder).

THE OBVIOUS FACT: Mayor Cunningham had the votes to “undo” the 2016 ordinance, beginning on December 5, 2018. That is if this is really what she desired.  Actions (or inactions) so often speak louder than words. She never did so. It is so much easier for her to point fingers than to actually take action.

FAIR QUESTION: Why? Why was the proposed ordinance never brought forward for enactment? 

In a complete 180, and without any explanation, the Staff operating under Mayor Cunningham recommended approval of 480 units during the zoning proceedings held in mid 2020 (this is the proceeding that lead to the litigation chaos and present offer to settle for the MEGA PBVC.

It did not have to come to this - had the repeal ordinance been properly and fully pursued. 

Promises not kept?

THE IRONY:    The 2016 ordinance is really not used in the proposed settlement agreement - the traffic controls, reduction in commercial use among the lost provisions. The 2016 ordinance is "blamed" but project currently being recommended would not exist under the 2016 ordinance. 

Palmetto Bay campaign - getting physical and out of bounds. Well, I see this uncivil behavior at the polls as a reflection of the uncivil behavior from the current Palmetto Bay Council

Did anyone imagine this type of behavior here in Palmetto Bay?  I am shocked and dismayed.  As reported by the Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance in an email of Sunday, November 3, 2024 - supporters of the current council members continue to sink lower in their brutal campaign tactics.  Now the police have been required to get involved. This hurts.  My Palmetto Bay is much better than this. 

Where are the candidates to whom these campaign workers are responsible to either explain or reject this incident?

See below:

PBNA Mission Statement Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance is an organization of Palmetto Bay Residents who are actively involved in our community. Their objectives are: Maintaining and improving the quality of life in Palmetto Bay; Keeping the community informed on important issues; and Encouraging residents’ active involvement in their government. Police Stepped In! Dear Neighbors, Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance is reporting a disturbing incident that occurred during early voting yesterday at the Palmetto Bay Branch Library during one of the busiest times for our community to cast their ballots. Campaign surrogates working for Leanne Tellam and Steve Cody initiated a physical confrontation by repeatedly shoving another campaign's volunteer. Is this who we want to be? The situation became so severe that multiple police cars had to respond to our library. This sight greeted dozens of our neighbors simply trying to exercise their fundamental right to vote. For nearly an hour, voters had to navigate past law enforcement vehicles and witness police interviews just to access the polling site. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. Multiple campaign workers from different campaigns have reported to us concerning interactions with these specific surrogates who have established a reputation for prior confrontational behavior. The police ultimately had to establish a three-foot separation rule between campaigns, which is a sad commentary on what our local politics has become. Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance believes Palmetto Bay can do better. We should be a community where expressing your opinion should never require police intervention. This incident begs the question: do campaigns really need police intervention to prevent assault? Our village is a peaceful place, a bedroom community where families live, children play, and neighbors greet each other with a smile. We are not a village where intimidation and aggression should ever be the norm. When campaigns resort to physical actions, it sends a chilling message to people that they might face hostility if they speak up or get involved. The campaign tactics of Leanne Tellam and Steve Cody and the conduct of their surrogates is an embarrassment to our community. Candidates are responsible for promoting respect and civility among their workers. We all have a role in making Palmetto Bay a reality without violence and intimidation in our politics. Let's choose politicians who heal, not hurt. Let's act in ways that bring us together instead of promoting those who push us apart. If you have concerns or experiences you'd like to share, please feel free to reach out. Your voice matters, and together, we can foster a community we're all proud to call home. This email reflects the opinion of the Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance. Sincerely, Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance Palmetto Bay Council may be contacted at the following email addresses below: Entire Council council@palmettobay-fl.gov Mayor Karyn Cunningham, kcunningham@palmettobay-fl.gov Vice Mayor Leanne Tellam, ltellam@palmettobay-fl.gov Council District 1 Patrick Fiore, pfiore@palmettobay-fl.gov Council District 2 Steve Cody, scody@palmettobay-fl.gov Council District 3 Marsha Matson, mmatson@palmettobay-fl.gov Village Manager Nick Marano nmarano@palmettobay-fl.gov Village Clerk Missy Arocha, marocha@palmettobay-fl.gov We recognize that not everyone may want to receive this information, and therefore, you can simply click the "unsubscribe" at the end of the communication and we will remove your name from distribution. PALMETTO BAY NEIGHBORS ALLIANCE palmettobayneighborsalliance@pbneighborsalliance.com The opinions expressed are those of Palmetto Bay Neighbors Alliance based on information we believe to be accurate. Questions or your feedback may be sent to the email above.

Palmetto Bay News - Op-Ed: Rudeness and bullying should not be the norm in Palmetto Bay By Marsha Matson, Village of Palmetto Bay Councilmember, District 3 -May 8, 2024

Palmetto Bay is definitely not a "Bully Free Zone".   

Council Member Marsha Matson is working hard - on her own - to involve the public - and it is sad that she has to go the route of an op ed piece. She can't do it alone at a meeting as she is but 1/5 of the votes of the council and cannot muster a majority for simple things like holding a town hall meetings for our fellow residents.  

Shameful. This is truly the never ending story.  This is your mayor and council, Palmetto Bay - and all those feel good proclamations and certificates are really just cringeworthy attempts to hide the toxic state of Palmetto Bay politics. Elections matter.

Here is opinion, her update, published online by the Community Newspapers on May 8, 2024:

Op-Ed: Rudeness and bullying should not be the norm in Palmetto Bay
By Marsha Matson, Village of Palmetto Bay Councilmember, District 3

I am a grandmother, who will turn 80 years old this year.  I decided to spend my retirement years serving Palmetto Bay, my community.   I helped found the Village as a municipality in the 1990s and early 2000s and I hold a deep affection for the Village and its residents.

So  I ran for Village Council in 2018 and won.  I liked making laws to help residents like reducing density in our downtown and regulating short-term rentals that disrupted quiet neighborhoods.  I enjoyed it so much that I ran for re-election in 2022 and won with over 60% of the vote, the highest of any village candidate.

In 2022, the Village Council added two new Councilmembers, Vice Mayor Leanne Tellam and Councilmember Steve Cody, who formed a solid majority block with Mayor Karyn Cunningham.  They set about running the village their way.  I did not have a problem with that because in our country, the majority rules while the minority is respected and has a say.   I sometimes disagreed with them and gave my opinion.  Over time, instead of listening to differences of opinion and working together to resolve problems, the majority block became more and more intolerant of dissent.  As I did not always agree with them, I became their target on Council to stamp out any hint of criticism of their policies.

In the last two years, they have intensified their efforts to stop me from asking questions and offering my opinion. You can see them in action by watching the most recent May 6 Council meeting on the Palmetto Bay Village website under public meetings:  https://palmettobay.granicus.com/player/clip/1943

I know it is disturbing to witness the rough tactics the Mayor and Councilmembers use on me.  Of course, it is extremely distressful for me.  What they do goes far beyond politics as usual.  When they perceive that I am going to say something they do not want to hear, they cut me off while speaking, talk over me until I stop, shout  “out of order” to have the attorney demand I quit talking, adjourn before I can speak, ridicule me, prevent me from finishing my sentence, and call me names.  They create a vivid picture of schoolyard bullies, except that they are public officials who, while knowing they are being recorded on video, verbally stomp on me.  In every instance, they succeed in preventing me from talking.

I am not the only person bearing the brunt of their distaste for dissent.  Mayor Cunningham, Vice Mayor Tellam, and Councilmember Cody banned the reading of resident’s emails out loud during Council meetings.  Emails were the most popular way for residents to be involved in village government.  When emails became more critical of them, they silenced them.  They abolished the Neighborhood Protection Committee, a committee that worked to protect residents’ quality of life.

I taught government at the University of Miami for over two decades.  I have a doctorate in political science.   I have a good idea of how democracy is supposed to work.   One of the most treasured principles of our democracy is the right of people to express their views of government leaders, especially when they disagree with what the leaders are doing.  This most sacred right, enshrined in our First Amendment, is under attack in Palmetto Bay.  If you find it hard to believe, I invite you to watch the May 6 Council meeting and witness the successful tactics Mayor Cunningham, Vice Mayor Tellam, and Councilmember Cody use to stop me from saying what they do not want anyone to hear.  This letter is my opinion.

Wait! Who wants to make a bet?

The village Public Relations team (whether you call it PR, Publicity or PIO) pushes out media featuring Mayor Cunningham.  Does anyone have any odds on whether the public information office will be fair and even handed by pushing out this council member's comments to the public?

As they say, "and that my friends, is the rest of the story."

PRIOR RELATED POST

Back to my opinion: It is unfortunate that this is far from an isolated event. This toxic bullying  has been going on for far too long. Please see a prior related post of October 11, 2021, Opinion: "Nevertheless, she persisted". Did this lead to a “Code Red” being called on Marsha? Cringe-worthy is the only way to describe the beat down administered on Dr. Matson at the October regular council meeting. Was this all because Dr. Matson wanted to restore just a scintilla of transparency into Palmetto Bay government?

Save, don’t pave the 22 acres! Residents, the original village council and I agree with the representatives of the Palmetto Bay Village Center – we all want the 22 acres to be permanently preserved. Protection needs to be by covenant, for 50 years plus, not a mere development order. An important read for anyone concerned with protecting the environment.

Why a covenant? Because a development order could be modified by a simple majority vote of this or any future mayor and council.  We need real environmental protection of 22 acres at the Palmetto Bay Village Center (PBVC).

This is one time when the applicant is right and the current Palmetto Bay Mayor and Council are WRONG.

Please take the time to review the concerns outlined by Sara Barli Herald, Esq., Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod, LLP. In the 4 page letter of September 16, 2020: 

This goal is entirely consistent with the actions of the Village Counsel and opinions voiced at public hearings in 2016. We believe, therefore, that the Declaration as drafted and approved by our client (a copy of which is attached) is necessary to protect and conserve this land for the benefit of future generations.

The attorney for the PBVC went on to state that they take issue with Palmetto Bay officials, who, through their Village Attorney:

… eliminated the majority of the environmental protections included in the draft Declaration that we had submitted to you. Instead, you placed on the agenda a stripped down version that completely disregards the environmentally sensitive aspects of the site. The following very important recitals, restrictions and provisions were stricken by you:

·       County Resolution R-469-08 adding the property to the Environmentally Endangered Lands ("EEL") Program Priority B Acquisition List

·       Village Resolutions 09-11 and 2017-53 affirming and reaffirming support for EEL decision and acquisition of site

·       Excerpt from County Home Rule Charter Section 7.01 pertaining to properties acquired for preservation and acknowledgment of requirements of Charter

·       Definition of "Passive Park"

·       Provision that restrictions shall be perpetual

·       Restriction limiting passive trails to pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles

·       Provision that a structure shall be ancillary to the passive park and limited in size

·       Provisions containing parking areas to designated locations

·       Prohibition against commercial signage

·       Designating residents and property owners of the Village as beneficiaries of the Declaration with rights of enforcement

 As a result, you have created a document with no teeth. Although you retained statements that environmental assets and natural landscape shall be preserved, those statements are aspirational only. With no designated beneficiaries and no enforcement mechanism, the Village will be at liberty to build with impunity whatever structures, roads or parking lots it may desire on environmentally sensitive land.

The entire excerpt above was taken from page 3 (of the 4 page letter).  CLICK HERE to view the correspondence of Sara Barli Herald, Esq., Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod, LLP., of September 16, 2020

You really must read this entire letter.

Opinion - How did this council get to a recommendation in favor of the 480? There once was a procedure to ‘undo’ the 480, but the present mayor and vice mayor appear to have dropped that effort, allowing staff to recommend 480.

As I no longer hold office, I can only offer my opinions as to the ongoing issues relating to the Palmetto Bay Village Center (PBVC). I have always fought to preserve those 22 acres, not see them developed. Twice I asked the council to join me in participating in the purchase through the County Environmentally Endangered Lands Program (EELs).

THE SHORT BITE:

The Vice mayor had the opportunity to repeal the 2016 ordinance relating to the PBVC. Former interim Village Attorney John Herin, Esq. was hired at village expense to advise the council on how to repeal this 2016 ordinance. The repeal ordinance was prepared and passed 3-2 on first reading which was held way back on April 3, 2017.  This was a special council meeting that was called (requested by the vice mayor) for Independence Day weekend, 2017, (yes, a Saturday, July 1, 2017) – Soon after - and inexplicably, the second reading was deferred by a 5-0 vote. (CLICK HERE to view the ordinance folder  

The Vice Mayor had the votes to “undo” the 2016 ordinance, beginning on December 5, 2018, if this is really what he desired however the ordinance was never brought forward for enactment. In a complete 180,  the Staff operating under Mayor Cunningham and Vice Mayor is now recommending approval of the 480.

Failure to follow through has led to the PBVC seeking the present zoning on the 2016 & 2018 ordinances. It did not have to come to this had the repeal ordinance been properly and fully pursued. 

Promises not kept?

Also see PRIOR RELATED POST relating to the library parking: June 1, 2020

Correcting the record. The parking easement lasts for as long as a library, community room and Park operate as provided for in Resolution 2008-20. This was approved by the (then) Village Council on February 25th, 2008. Why would they lie, is it intentional or do they honestly don’t know the facts?

Parking is locked in for as long as this library and the park operate. 

THE FULL STORY PROVIDING A BRIEF INTRO & BACKGROUND/CONTEXT

Their fingers are pointing at others in deflection, but this is just another clear example where the buck stops at Mayor Cunningham and Vice Mayor John DuBois. The Vice Mayor spent village tax dollars to obtain a written legal opinion from John Herin, Esq, former interim village attorney as far back as March 2017. The result was  a 14 page treatise stating that the 2016 ordinance can be undone and providing the road map on how to do it.  The vice mayor felt strong enough that significant village funds were spent to obtain this legal opinion as an effort to undo the 2016 ordinance. Yet it moved forward and passed on first reading and then it stopped after a single deferral. This ordinance would have rescinded, undoing the 2016 ordinance.

The 2016 ordinance:

Then Mayor Shelley Stanczyk had sponsored an ordinance in July of 2014 that would have permitted the immediate development of 40 units in the 22 acres as well as a fire station. A little noticed fact was the July 2014 ordinance would have placed these 22 acres into the VMU, which would have vested the PBVC with 10 units per acre for a potential total build out of  220 units on those 22 acres. See: May 5, 2016, The facts regarding council action of Mon, 5/2/16. Protecting endangered land, managing vest rights inherited from Miami-Dade County.

The 2016 ordinance was passed not to create more units, but merely to transfer the developmental rights (known as TDRs) from the 22 acres to the back area of the Palmetto Bay Village Center (PBVC). This area was created as what is known as the Village Mixed Use, or VMU district. No one (except apparently Mayor Stanczyk) has ever wanted to see those 22 acres developed. 

Saving the 22 acres through transferring the developmental rights (TDR) is one way, but obviously not the way that the Vice Mayor felt appropriate.  In fact, at one time the ordinance was proceeding through the 2016-18 village council – the ordinance passed 3-2 on first reading held April 3, 2017. A special council meeting was called (requested by the vice mayor) for Independence Day weekend, 2017, (yes, a Saturday, July 1, 2017) – where, inexplicably, the second reading was deferred by a 5-0 vote. (CLICK HERE to view the ordinance folder  

More importantly – the Vice Mayor had the votes to “undo” the 2016 ordinance, beginning on December 5, 2018, if this is really what he desired however  Du Bois did not change back the 2016 ordinance. In a complete 180,  the Staff operating under Mayor Cunningham and Vice Mayor DuBois is now recommending approval of the 480.

The inexplicable in-action runs in stark contrast to what we heard from them in both the 2016 or 2018 elections.

Perhaps it is really the current Mayor and Vice Mayor who have turned their backs on Palmetto Bay!

There once was plenty of time for Mayor Cunningham/Vice Mayor DuBois administration to follow the March 2017 repeal manual provided by John Herin, Esq. There have been 78 meetings with the new council (and we all know there is nothing that prevents this current mayor and council from calling yet another special council meeting) – and yet this council never discussed it or let out a peep during any of them. Yes, though it made for great campaign fodder, the Mayor Cunningham/Vice Mayor DuBois administration never got around to doing anything to ‘fix’ this 480.

Results - there was no action to keep promises to 'undo' the "485"! 

So here we are – the Mayor Cunningham/Vice Mayor administration is recommended 480! Village paid traffic and zoning experts provide evidence in support of the Palmetto Bay Village Center. Instead of having done their jobs, the backs of these two were turned. Fingers pointing. I am waiting for their voices to blast through their proxy psudeo concerned group in their best ventriloquism act through email. And not only are they taking the 22 acres that I fought for and he argued against, but they are buying up the 18 acres we all agree are undevelopable (and not useable for park). 

Does this show laziness on his part or is this an admission that I have been right all along?

Why do I opine that the Vice Mayor never wanted the 22 acres? From his own comment in an e-mail wherein he specifically stating that it would be very unlikely to ever be any foot traffic through what he describes as a “mosquito infested park”. The Vice Mayor characterizes the entire “40 acre village park” as follows:

a. The 22 acres is discussed above, the other area is 18 acres of wetlands that will never be developed for anything nor will there likely be foot traffic through there as a mosquito infested park.

b. The 22 acres in question has had poor maintenance over the years and will require a tremendous amount of taxpayer money to bring it up the standards of a Palmetto Bay park property and then maintain it. IMHO, the current developer should be fined for neglect or be forced to bring it up to reasonable standards (at a bare minimum, trim back all 3000 foot frontage on Old Cutler road away from the bike trail). Is it $20K/year or $200K/year of village taxpayer money that will support it. Look at Thalatta Park, we were sold at $40K/year to maintain it, the village spent under two million dollars over the first 8 years for maintenance and to make needed improvements to it.

There you have it – 78 meetings where it was the Vice Mayor who firmly turned his back on Palmetto Bay. One has to wonder if the Zoning hearing of 6/2 was really unable to go forward or if the Mayor Cunningham/Vice Mayor DuBois administration finally woke up once they started receiving complaints and needed time to regroup and revise (or reverse)  the staff recommendations of their handpicked interim staffers.

The wagons are circled and their campers are gearing up for their volley of blame, smear and innuendo, but the facts remain. Its more than the numbers – 480 is the unit number. 78 is for the number of meetings where they could of, but failed to act, 40 (or 38) is the number for acres of land that the Vice Mayor has never wanted to take, but is there for the transfer.

Gamesmanship. Thankfully even in politics, the facts and truth sometimes rise to the top. They could delay it, but the realities of the Mayor Cunningham/Vice Mayor DuBois administration should now be obvious to those keeping a close eye on this village and the internal politics of shame.

In other words, either a sincere apology is due or someone has some serious explaining to do! The ball has been in their court. Action is long overdue. As I stated, an explanation is in order as to why village money was spend on legal opinion and assistance in reversing the 2016 ordinance, yet it was never completed, despite having the legal assistance as well as the votes to do so.  Their (lack of action) speaks so much louder than their words –or the shallow arguments of their puppet masters who continue to deny that they sat silent when Mayor Stanczyk sponsored the process to actually develop those 22 acres in 2014.