I am not in favor of the settlement agreement as it is written for several reasons including allowable building height (up to 145 feet), the fact that the site plan approvals do not require a public hearing or public input and based on the language related to the disposition of the western parcel (i.e. pine rockland preserve area). In 2016, the Village passed a resolution which required that the western parcel be deeded to the Village. This was apparently not done. The agreement does not require any action related to the western parcel until the certificate of occupancy is issued for the first building and it is not specific as to what will be done with the parcel. It is vague and allows for either a declaration of restrictions or a conservation easement "as long as the agreement is binding or until otherwise decided by the parties". This is not a binding commitment that ensures the preservation of the parcel or this important, globally imperiled habitat. Likewise, there is no requirement for the maintenance of the land or public access to the land. This parcel is already on the Environmentally Endangered Lands (EEL) Acquisition List and could be donated to the Miami-Dade County EEL Program to ensure preservation in perpetuity. If this settlement agreement is approved, the Village should ensure that specific language specifying donation of the land to the EEL Program be included.
I urge the TAX PAYING Councilmembers to act in the best interest of all residents of Palmetto Bay not just those in closest proximity. This vote isn’t about personal preferences or political posturing and it's exhausting watching the shenanigans'. it’s about responsible governance and protecting our Village from potentially catastrophic financial consequences. The proposed settlement offers a clear path to avoid prolonged litigation that could cost Palmetto Bay taxpayers millions of dollars. Refusing to settle gambles with taxpayers future. Voting for this would be a short-sighted and costly mistake. It sends the message that a small group of “Not In My Backyard” voices continue to override legal reality, fiscal prudence, and the broader interests of our community. History shows when we act on faith based Hail Mary's we don't win (Palmer Trinity, 87th Ave Bridge). It would be negligent to reject reasonable terms when the alternative is years of court battles, spiraling legal fees, and a potential judgment that dwarfs anything on the table today. I respectfully ask the tax payers on this Council to rise above local politics and do what you were elected to do: protect the Village, FISCALLY AND LEGALLY, by accepting the settlement. If you are on the council and haven't paid property taxes or don't because you don't own property here, perhaps consider recusing yourself since your vote doesn't really effect you anyway. You literally have nothing to lose while the rest of us do.
I have spent a lot of time and effort these past few days researching how we got to this point and the claims that we can now through public input simply turn back the clock and stop the development of the former Burger King headquarters. Reading the minutes from previous council meetings, our fate was sealed in 2016 when the council voted 3-2 (with then councilwoman Cunningham and Vice Mayor Dubois voting NO) to approve the building of 485 units at the BK site. Listening to the comments made during the June 2 meeting, I don't see how the Village can stop the development from moving forward. I believe the Village attorney, Mr. Dellagloria, specifically said during his presentation "Council cannot stop this development." So where does this leave us? Hopefully with the best deal the Village can negotiate on the residents behalf. Of course I'm not happy with the development and the additional traffic it will bring. However, I don't want to see this turn in to another long court battle like the Palmer Trinity case. The Vice Mayor made a comment at the June 2 meeting that the $15 million settlement is just a number and it's negotiable. Sure it can possibly be less or it could possibly be more. Can we afford to take that chance? The developer has been waiting 9 years to get this project off the ground. I don't want to see my tax dollars going towards lawsuits that could have been avoided. Let's stop the blame game and work with the hand we've been dealt, as unpleasant as it may be.
At the outset, let me be clear: the Village of Palmetto Bay lost this 9+ years-long, expensive court battle. It is OVER. Any further appellate litigation will cost the Village (all of us) tens of millions of dollars. Now, once again I very reluctantly find myself in the awkward position of having to fact-check third party misinformation campaigns which are being disseminated to us by organizations with friendly, neighborly sounding (“your best friend”) names. These so-called neighborly emails and newsletters are professionally prepared and, I think, underwritten by lobbyists, paid consultants and groups with agendas which may not be as mainstream as they portend to be.
We LOST the Palmetto Bay Village Center battle! The courts ruled! Let me quote Martin Dykeman, ( who retired in 2006 from the St. Petersburg Times, where he wrote about government and politics for 46 years) “It may not be one of the things to learn in kindergarten, but it’s supposed to be absorbed at some point in the education of a lawyer. Don’t disobey a judge. You can disagree and you can appeal a judge’s decision. But unless a higher court overturns it, you had better not flout it.”
The Council, with the best legal advice available to it, has but one choice: vote YES to accept the courts decision or face financial ruin.
I am not in favor of the settlement agreement as it is written for several reasons including allowable building height (up to 145 feet), the fact that the site plan approvals do not require a public hearing or public input and based on the language related to the disposition of the western parcel (i.e. pine rockland preserve area). In 2016, the Village passed a resolution which required that the western parcel be deeded to the Village. This was apparently not done. The agreement does not require any action related to the western parcel until the certificate of occupancy is issued for the first building and it is not specific as to what will be done with the parcel. It is vague and allows for either a declaration of restrictions or a conservation easement "as long as the agreement is binding or until otherwise decided by the parties". This is not a binding commitment that ensures the preservation of the parcel or this important, globally imperiled habitat. Likewise, there is no requirement for the maintenance of the land or public access to the land. This parcel is already on the Environmentally Endangered Lands (EEL) Acquisition List and could be donated to the Miami-Dade County EEL Program to ensure preservation in perpetuity. If this settlement agreement is approved, the Village should ensure that specific language specifying donation of the land to the EEL Program be included.
I urge the TAX PAYING Councilmembers to act in the best interest of all residents of Palmetto Bay not just those in closest proximity. This vote isn’t about personal preferences or political posturing and it's exhausting watching the shenanigans'. it’s about responsible governance and protecting our Village from potentially catastrophic financial consequences. The proposed settlement offers a clear path to avoid prolonged litigation that could cost Palmetto Bay taxpayers millions of dollars. Refusing to settle gambles with taxpayers future. Voting for this would be a short-sighted and costly mistake. It sends the message that a small group of “Not In My Backyard” voices continue to override legal reality, fiscal prudence, and the broader interests of our community. History shows when we act on faith based Hail Mary's we don't win (Palmer Trinity, 87th Ave Bridge). It would be negligent to reject reasonable terms when the alternative is years of court battles, spiraling legal fees, and a potential judgment that dwarfs anything on the table today. I respectfully ask the tax payers on this Council to rise above local politics and do what you were elected to do: protect the Village, FISCALLY AND LEGALLY, by accepting the settlement. If you are on the council and haven't paid property taxes or don't because you don't own property here, perhaps consider recusing yourself since your vote doesn't really effect you anyway. You literally have nothing to lose while the rest of us do.
I have spent a lot of time and effort these past few days researching how we got to this point and the claims that we can now through public input simply turn back the clock and stop the development of the former Burger King headquarters. Reading the minutes from previous council meetings, our fate was sealed in 2016 when the council voted 3-2 (with then councilwoman Cunningham and Vice Mayor Dubois voting NO) to approve the building of 485 units at the BK site. Listening to the comments made during the June 2 meeting, I don't see how the Village can stop the development from moving forward. I believe the Village attorney, Mr. Dellagloria, specifically said during his presentation "Council cannot stop this development." So where does this leave us? Hopefully with the best deal the Village can negotiate on the residents behalf. Of course I'm not happy with the development and the additional traffic it will bring. However, I don't want to see this turn in to another long court battle like the Palmer Trinity case. The Vice Mayor made a comment at the June 2 meeting that the $15 million settlement is just a number and it's negotiable. Sure it can possibly be less or it could possibly be more. Can we afford to take that chance? The developer has been waiting 9 years to get this project off the ground. I don't want to see my tax dollars going towards lawsuits that could have been avoided. Let's stop the blame game and work with the hand we've been dealt, as unpleasant as it may be.
At the outset, let me be clear: the Village of Palmetto Bay lost this 9+ years-long, expensive court battle. It is OVER. Any further appellate litigation will cost the Village (all of us) tens of millions of dollars. Now, once again I very reluctantly find myself in the awkward position of having to fact-check third party misinformation campaigns which are being disseminated to us by organizations with friendly, neighborly sounding (“your best friend”) names. These so-called neighborly emails and newsletters are professionally prepared and, I think, underwritten by lobbyists, paid consultants and groups with agendas which may not be as mainstream as they portend to be.
We LOST the Palmetto Bay Village Center battle! The courts ruled! Let me quote Martin Dykeman, ( who retired in 2006 from the St. Petersburg Times, where he wrote about government and politics for 46 years) “It may not be one of the things to learn in kindergarten, but it’s supposed to be absorbed at some point in the education of a lawyer. Don’t disobey a judge. You can disagree and you can appeal a judge’s decision. But unless a higher court overturns it, you had better not flout it.”
The Council, with the best legal advice available to it, has but one choice: vote YES to accept the courts decision or face financial ruin.