This page is devoted to guest editorials form our esteemed readers. You may send your editorial to the Shadow at:

Editorials should be no longer than 600 words (more or less; we are flexible when it is an important issue) and deal with a single subject. They should be original and have not been published anywhere else. Please include your name as you would like it shown with the editorial. If you care to discuss your article with the Shadow, please advise in your email how to contact you and the Shadow will call you. Your real name and all discussions will be held in the strictest of confidences.

Look forward to your thoughts....... The Shadow

The Shadow Knows... What evil lurks in the hearts of men.

email me

The Real Story on the Boat Ramp Fees- from NSB-911.org

The proposal for collecting boat ramp parking fees as presented by the City Manager and Ms. Yancy, Parks and Recreation Director, to the City Commission on Tues 2/22/1, is not accurate and not a very good example of staff preparation. This issue of collecting ramp fees or ramp parking fees has been brought up numerous times before and each time deep sixed as both unproductive and/or not in the best interest of the City taxpayer. And each time, the restrictions associated with taking FIND funding assistance has also raised. In fact, it was raised during one of the Citizen’s Budget Review Committee meetings when they suggested it be looked at as a possible revenue source. The City Manager claimed little knowledge of the restrictions at that meeting and said she would look into it.

Well apparently she looked into it if the cozy, self-ingratiating emails between her and FIND’s Executive Director are evidence of that effort. The problem is she has chosen to badly skew the statements made by FIND regarding who and how they must be charged, apparently for her own interests.  Specifically, the email states this:

“...(F.I.N.D) rules allow you to charge fees if 1) they are reasonable and, 2) if all District (F.I.N.D.) residents are charged at the lowest rate; i.e., no preferential treatment for city residents.”

The City Manager and her subordinate Ms. Yancy, have chosen to spin this for their own interests as follows from their submitted FAQ sheet to the City Commission:

“F.I.N.D paid for past repairs to this park (park or ramp, emphasis added), will not allow the City to charge only a specific group of users, as District resident (sic) from Nassau to Miami-Dade County contribute to the F.I.N.D fund.”
(Page 186 CC Meeting Agenda, 2/22/11)

Not exactly what the F.I.N.D. representative said.

The reality is this;

1.FIND is an activity that collects taxes from citizens in all of the East Coast counties of Florida, essentially                Nassau through Miami-Dade counties.
2.You can charge a reduced fee for parking, but must it must apply to all residents of these counties.
3.You can charge residents of other counties more than you charge the F.I.N.D. counties.

So you see, the proposed system is not only poorly developed, costed and designed, but is also non-responsive to taxpayers who have already paid for the ramp maintenance and recent repairs.  Since they suggest purchase of an automated kiosk vendor system, the possible solution is clear. That system can be easily programmed to associate the billing address of the credit or debit card to determine if it is in the F.I.N.D. area or not. It then can charge the appropriate fees based on the billing ZIPCODE. But more importantly it appears that the cost benefit analysis prepared by Ms. Yancy and staff, is flawed and overly optimistic. Mr. Hathaway’s comments were right on point when he said "If this is about controlling parking that is fine, but if this is about generating revenue for maintenance then you are smoking some wacky tobacco," (DBNJ, 2/23/11)

That begs the larger issue of exactly what are we charging for? If we read the project correctly, F.I.N.D. paid to fix the boat ramps not the parking lot. So one could argue how does F.I.N.D. even become an issue in the quest for charging a "parking fee" on property owned by the City? One could take it even farther and suggest that one could use the parking area for parking a trailer or a car and never use the boat ramp. Unless we missed something here, it does not appear that F.I.N.D. did anything with either of the parking areas under discussion. But then we are not attorneys and it seems that some research may be needed on this question. If we are right, then the City can charge whatever they want for parking and could, and should, exempt City taxpayers who have already paid for the work.

The City Manager and staff, according to their presentation, have spent an enormous amount of time calling other cities, checking out vendors and conducting surveys. This when they should be focused on reducing salaries, staffing and correcting the overly generous pensions of City employees. It is but another case of a City Commission refusing to address the more serious fiscal problems it faces with an effort that will again take money out of the pockets of the City taxpayer and especially the boater who may use the bounty of the sea to feed his or her family. Another bad decision by a City Commission that focuses on taxing itself out of every problem in order to keep the unions pouring in those political contributions so they can get elected again. And while they expend their efforts at making a questionable revenue producer, the unions are laughing all the way to the bank.

Our opinion is that the City should go back to the table and rethink this poorly developed project, determine F.I.N.D.'s actual investment and control,  and then balance its cost benefit against the ill will it will generate against the City. Once B.O.A.T. -US becomes aware of this proposal the bad publicity could travel nationwide. And that does not even consider the potential adverse economic impact of these boaters just taking their boats someplace else. Last time we checked, Edgewater does not charge for use of its ramps or for parking.

Boaters pay taxes and they should be recognized for that. In this case the City Commission apparently just sees them as suckers.

That's our opinion.

NSB-911.Org
*****************
NSB-911.Org's mission is to energize the discussion on how to fix the New Smyrna Beach government to make it more efficient, effective, and citizen focused. We strive to do that by collecting your views and suggestions on these issues and presenting them to the City Commission with a request they be reviewed, commented on, and that action be taken to correct identified deficiencies. As we build our website to do just this, we hope to see you and like minded participants in the democratic process join us in our non-partisan efforts.
An Editorial from our Friends at NSB-911.org
Good Evening Commissioners, Senior Staff, Ladies and Gentlemen

As a very senior citizen and resident for over 60 years, I rise tonight to chastise you for your undemocratic operation of City government. I am angry with you and your pusillanimous actions.

•My first point is that you have not responded to taxpayer's concerns about spending reduction in this time of economic distress. The budget for this fiscal year exceeds that of last year and is not a zero based increase budget. In my opinion, you were elected to reduce spending and you have not as other cities in Volusia County have.

•Secondly, you have stifled public discussion of issues by placing them on the consent agenda, limiting the public to three minutes, and terminating the public's right to be placed on the agenda to discuss issues of their concern. It is also my belief, but I cannot prove it, that you and the City manager engage in polling, which violates the Sunshine Law and at least Mr. Hathaway knows that is wrong..

•Thirdly, in my opinion, you have, and are, funding projects that will yield no return for the City, but favor those that take the City's money for their own benefit, such as the MDC and the CRA.

•Fourth, you will not address the excessive salaries and pensions of your department heads as other cities have done.

•Fifth, you have refused to invite FDLE into the City to investigate fraud, waste, and corruption.

•And finally, as some have said, you turned a blind eye toward violations of environmental protection laws for the Dunn Lumber property and the old  high school.

During the election, each of you professed your support for doing the right thing. But when it is time to vote, you seem to support private interests rather than the taxpayers that elected you. As we have seen, that support can and may change.

Where is the business sense and concern for the taxpayer?

Since I know that you will not respond to me, I don't expect an answer. However I will be pleased to discuss each of these items at your convenience.

Thank you for allowing me three minutes of your valuable time

Shadow Note: Ken Taylor was cut off before he finished by Mayor Barringer, who then allowed the following speaker more than 10 minutes to report on the Balloon Fest. As a senior citizen and long time resident, the Commission could have afforded Ken a minute or two to finish. 

Ken Taylor's Address to the City Commission on March 8, 2011



A Guest Editorial from one of our bloggers, NSBConcerned
The Calore Canal Scam from NSB Concerned

The Calore Canal dredging scam with F.I.N.D. (Florida Inland Navigation District) funding is but another example of poor management and special interest group paybacks by our Mayor and to some degree, certain members of the City Commission. In order to understand this latest attempt to give away your money, lets put a few facts on the table:

1. Despite claims by City employees, the City Manager, the Mayor and certain Commission members, F.I.N.D. did not fund the dredging of the Calore Canal in either 1999 or 2005. F.I.N.D. Executive Director, David Roach, refused the County's request stating that the canal is man-made and thus not eligible for funding. The last dredging was paid for by both an assessment (without consent of all the property owners; in fact one sued to get out of it) and money from the Ponce Inlet Port Authority ($140,000), which stated that it would be a onetime deal.

2. In each of the last two times the canal was dredged, it was done so for the benefit of a few property owners and silted back in a couple of years later.

3. The headlands of the canal are not generally traversed by any commercial traffic and are not in the ICW channel, thus presenting no real sandbar problem except to the few rich people who live on Quay Assisi (many of whom donated to both Adam and Judy's 2009 campaign) and, you guessed it, the Marine Discovery Center and whoever owns the former Island Town Center.

4. F.I.N.D. web site states that they will finance no more than 75% if it affects ICW traffic and no more than 50% if it is some other type project.

5. Based on the publicly available agenda package the Calore Canal application that the Mayor was given authority to sign, was blank. Yet the other two grant applications were completed. City now claims that the Commissioners were given the completed grant at the meeting, but there is no confirmed record of this.

6. The Phase I application contained money from F.I.N.D.($15,000) was to study the dredging need, yet it included an area at the west end of the canal which is not part of F.I.N.D.'s mandate. Yet the F.I.N.D. Executive Director has approved it despite his 2005 findings of incompatibility with the District's purpose and authority.

So the questions are raised:

1. Who is putting pressure on F.I.N.D. and our local representative, Nancy J. Freeman? Odds are both the land owners with deep draft boats on Quay Assisi and the Wildlife Foundation of Florida, acting as a surrogate for the Marine Discovery Center?

2. Why did the City not publish the completed grant application? Certainly there was no reason that it could not have waited until the material was available.  Probably the taxpayer will not find out the true funding impacts on the City reserves. For you see they plan on an assessment, but have provided no details of where the upfront money will come from and the amortization schedule for the loan.

3. When will the Adam and Judy show stop taking care of their friends? When we get together and end their brief foray into politics by replacing them with people who represent  ALL of the taxpayers and not just special interest groups.

NSBConcerned


The entire recent scenario of Commissioner Reiker running errands for City Manager Pam at the last Volusia Tax Reform meeting is symptomatic of the root problem we have in NSB. None of the Commissioners have either the intestinal fortitude or knowledge to say no to Pam and thus the City employees and the Unions remain in charge. The only solution to this continuing problem appears to be a mass effort by citizens who have had their full of the tax and spend mentality of these Commission members and replace these people as soon as possible. Followed immediately by sending Pam back to Broward County on the next bus out of Daytona Beach.

For you see, even with the current recession, the City Commission continues to spend your money on projects that have no relationship to essential services; the recent fiasco over the Calore Canal is but another example of this lack of fiscal responsibility by all of then, including Hathaway, who talks a fiscal talk, but rarely follows though. Volusia Tax Reform can provide the venue for such an effort, regardless of whether we ultimately decide to change the charter or not to a strong mayor form  of government. We just need these non-taxpayer friendly Commissioners and especially the Mayor who can't pay his own taxes, gone.

So get on board with Volusia Tax Reform and let your voice be heard over the career politicians.

An Editorial from our Friends at NSB-911.org
An Editorial from Green Guy, one of our bloggers, on the MDC Dinner Cruises
MDC Dinner Cruises

It would appear that the Marine Discovery Center is again mooching off the City and is entering into the retail, profit making, dinner boat cruise business. I hope that Captain George of the Pastime Princess takes note of this new attack on his livelihood. And, in addition, where is the SEV Chamber of Commerce on the MDC's latest assault on the city businessman? Remember the sweet deal for the people who run the City Golf Course Grill; not a sound from them there either. Apparently the Chamber remains very quiet because we have heard nothing from their Executive Director ( I refrain from calling her a Sock-Puppet as others do).

This is but another assault on the City's limited business climate and has little or nothing to do with eco-tourism, the reason for their 501(c) status with the IRS. It also flies in the face of any stimulus to the real retail in the city, and thus fails to do anything for the economic growth of the City. The advertised "Dinner Cruises" depart for three different restaurants, none of which are the City of New Smyrna Beach (Inlet Harbor, Down the Hatch, and JB's). To add insult to injury, they are paying no rent for use of the City Dock, similar to the situation when a certain, well healed MDC supporter docks his super long yacht there for free; city claims they know nothing bout any such dockage. More free give away's, while the City charges you $30.00 to call a tow truck. Funny how it happens that the charge for the 4 hour or so boat ride and dinner is exactly the same as the two minute phone call for the tow truck.

And where did our illustrious Mayor learn this form of economics? Apparently form the mail-order Internet courses he took for the PhD. he claims sets him apart from everyone else. Or maybe he learned it while he was just busy at the Angler's Club with his buddies laughing at us and plotting how he can fake his way into Hulkill's seat......
A Shared Letter to the City Commissioners, edited by the Shadow with some help from Lamont Cranston
The Shadow has obtained a copy of a letter addressed to the City of New Smyrna Beach as to why our water rates are sky high. It screams out for oversight of the Utilities Commission which refuses to provide the City or its citizens with any underlying material concerning its operations. The Shadow may be in error here since possibly the Utilities Commission has been cooperative for a change, but we doubt it. Look, we are being ripped off and the City has not reigned them in. If we understand correctly, the City Commission is one vote short of voting to make them accountable.

We hope that least the answers to the questions raised by this memorandum was sent to the Utilities Commission with a demand for answers. The Mayor does not need three votes to send the letter. Those opposing accountability need three votes to stop him! The memorandum slightly edited, is as follows:

Please ask the water experts at the UC the following questions:

1. Do we currently have an adequate water supply to serve the existing population in the city?

2. What is there projected growth of the population of the city and since nearly 20% of the homes are vacant when do they expect the area to start growing again?

3. What is the total amount of potable water needed and how much potable water flows out of the Tomoka River into the Atlantic Ocean every day?

4. What is the incremental cost of producing an extra kg of water?
I believe the answer is $1.00 or less. That means they are selling a product at a 400% markup. It’s windfall money because they make it when it doesn't’t rain. Find out what happens to the windfall money.

5. Ask them how much money they have in the rate stabilization fund?

In order to see the magnitude of the excessive charges, let us pick a City with an expensive reservoir system as a comparison. Baltimore, Maryland, where the Publisher of the Shadow grew up, like most major cities has a reservoir. It’s called Lock Raven. If Baltimore let all of its potable water flow from its streams and rivers into the Chesapeake Bay and out into the Ocean it wouldn't’t have any water. So it maintains a large reservoir for the purpose of potable water distribution.


Baltimore gets 42” a year in rain. We get 50” a year in rain. If you compare the populations densities the absurdity of the representations are obvious. It not saying you will not have problems if you do not properly manage the resources. What it is saying is that the “water” people in local governments in Florida are either so incompetent managers of resources or that they are subsidizing other commodities, that they could not find enough wheat in Kansas to bake a loaf of bread.

Historically, the politics of water started off as the politics of waste water. The politics of waste water was not producing the desired results and the battle ground moved from we do not have enough sewage treatment plants to we do not have enough potable water. This happened in the mid-1980’s. It was exactly the same people.

For some comparison for 38 KG of irrigation water for the lawn.

UC charges for a 5/8" meter - $15.15 - base facility charge

It then adds on incremental gallonage charges –

1-2 KG @ $1.92 = $3.84

3-5 KG @ $2.56 = $7.68

6-15 KG @ $4.03 = $40.30

16-38 KG @ $4.80 = $110.40

$15.15 base charge plus $162.22 for 38 KG consumption charges = $177.37 Total


Same Charges in the Baltimore/Washington Area

Summer KG @ $1.52
Winter KG @ $1.37

10.33 base charge plus $52.06 = $62.39 (Winter)
10.33 base charge plus $57.76 = $68.09 (Summer)


The UC’s charges 184.29% more than the Baltimore area. We pump it out of the ground and they have to maintain a huge reservoir."

Shadow Comments:

DO NOT HOLD YOUR BREATH WAITING FOR AN ANSWER AS TO WHY YOU ARE PAYING THROUGH THE NOSE FOR WATER. IT IS JUST MORE OF THE SMOKE AND MIRRORS FROM THE UC; THE SAME PEOPLE WHO CAN’T PRODUCE A COMPUTER RUN REPORT OF THEIR WAGES AND BENEFITS (W2s) FOR 2010.

FROM ED CONNOR of VOLUSIA TAX REFORM -

TAXATION

It is an irony that we spend so much of our lives in the workforce,  raising families, paying the bills with little regard for how and why our tax money is generated or spent by the political class. This is entirely natural because we have more important things to do in our daily lives.
 
That is no longer the case. Because we've allowed the ruling class from both parties to tamper with tax codes nationwide as well as locally, we have a confusing mess of overlapping and contradictory regulations and rules that consume over $300 billion of our time each year just to prepare and submit tax returns to the IRS.  The Federal Income Tax Code is over 72,000 pages long. It has been amended twice a week on average since Pres. Reagan made the last major attempt to simplify it in 1986.  The amendments have been predominantly drafted by lobbyists interested , not in lower rates, but favored exemptions for their industries.

The three unbreakable rules for any sustainable system of taxation are 1) Fairness; 2) transparency; and 3) Simplicity.

It doesn't require any deep thinking to see how far we've strayed from these principles in our Federal Income Tax Code, our local Property tax Codes and even our Sales and Special District Taxes that comprise a hefty part of our local tax burden here in Volusia County.

Hospital Tax which adds, on average, 12% extra burden to property tax here in Volusia distorts the cost of health care, misdirects incentives and permits unfair advantages  that do nothing to improve the quality of health care locally. If they did, then 90% of the hospitals in Florida that got rid of their taxing districts years ago would be re-instituting them by now.

Private hospitals like Florida Hospital , which receive no property tax subsidy perform all the same functions as taxpayer supported hospitals like S/E Volusia and Halifax.

Public School Districts , which play the victim as they relentlessly pursue more tax revenue to support bloated bureaucracies do little for children, but much for the unions and adults that inhabit the administration.  Fifty years ago non-teaching personnel comprised 25% of the total staff  of the average schooled District in America. Today that number is over 40%.  There are over 20,000 employees of the Dept of Education that inhabit Washington,DC but do not teach. What they do is lobby relentlessly for more funding and to keep private charter school competition at bay.
  
This is the price we all must now pay for our lax oversight.

The difficulty is there are now so many drawing from the public purse , we get riots whenever suggestions are made toward fiscal restraint. Wisconsin is the most visible recent example, but Greece like displays are on their way to a city near you as budgets continue to tighten.
 
Let us all rise to the occasion to return to the constitutional principles of limited government, sound currency and private property rights lest future generations forget the meaning of those terms.

Ed Connor
Volusia Tax Reform
Ormond Beach, FL
Jan, 2012
FROM ED CONNOW, VOLUSIA TAX REFORM, 01/09/12
Received from Ed Connor, Volusia Tax Reform, on the Governor’s State Hospital Taxing Districts Report

Hospital Taxing Districts

Last Wednesday, News-Journal reporter Andrew Gant published the latest update on the Governor's Commission to review the Independent Hospital Taxing Districts in Florida. Volusia County has been highlighted as having the largest number of these districts and the least uniformity in their creation and administration with some Districts having elected boards, others appointed by the Governor and some boards separate from the Hospital while others are combined.

The Commission did recommend correcting these obvious inequities by having all tax Boards elected and separate from the Hospital Board. They also recommended reviewing these Districts more often to see if taxpayers considered them viable.

Unfortunately, the hoped for remedy of privatizing all taxpayer supported hospitals was not one of the recommendations. This is even more puzzling considering the Commission essentially made the case for privatization by the following statement:" The Commission could not establish that there is a pattern of higher or lower quality health care based on ownership".  So if there is no definitive difference then why punish property owners and depress the economy with higher than average property taxes for no tangible benefit? In addition there is a matter of competitiveness with the private sector hospitals like Florida Hospital that receive no property tax subsidy , yet are required to provide the same level of services and must pay higher insurance rates because they do not have sovereign immunity.

The halfway measures recommended by the Commission still leave us with the system of three districts with unique dysfunctions. One too big to avoid depressing property values, One too small to survive without exceeding its maximum allowable millage, and one owned by a private company that still draws property tax money for support.

For over thirty years the pattern of privatization has continued throughout the US and here in Florida. Nearly 90% of all acute care hospitals in Florida are privately owned and do not burden their citizens with onerous property taxes.

We at Volusia Tax Reform believe this is more evidence that lobbyists are firmly in control of the disbursement of tax dollars.  In the fourteen hearings over ten months just one person, Margie Patchett, our Executive Director, was not associated with a lobbying group. Every other witness was from an interest group receiving some benefit from the flow of tax dollars.

We commend the Governor for creating this initiative. If nothing else, it revealed the depth of the problem.

Ed Connor
Volusia Tax Reform
Ormond Beach, FL
386/441-0681
econnor@cfl.rr.com
01/23/2012