Garbage

I am trying really hard to get this right as the outsourcing of our garbage pickup is a complicated issue and I have more questions than answers.

On September 28, 2010, the commission voted 4-1 to outsource the twice weekly trash pickup to Waste Management Services, a nationwide Fortune 200 company. This will eliminate side yard pickup and mean that residents will have to take the garbage to the curb for collection. It will also mean five employee layoffs.

It is touted as saving $500,000 per year with minimal disruption to North Bay Village.

First about the layoffs. As I understand it, the five current employees will be laid off from their positions. The two most senior employees will have the option of returning to the city maintenance crew, which would result in two layoffs there. The three remaining will be hired by Waste Management Systems and most likely work in North Bay Village. So in terms of city jobs saved, the number will net to five.

About the curbside pickups. We will get 94 gallon cans similar to the recycling bins and will bring them to the curb for pickup twice a week at the single family homes. Those who are not able to do so owing to physical limitations will let the city know and the city will arrange side yard pickup for them.

Where I am stuck is the $500,000 savings. I don't see a linear summary of the savings. We will be paying Waste Management Systems for the service, and while we are eliminating the cost of running our own garbage pickup, it is not clear to me how this nets out.

I intend to get a more specific answer on this and will post it.

As regards the discussion from the dais on Tuesday, it was disappointing that there was so much discussion but so little clarity. I would have expected the commissioners and the mayor to get very specific on where the savings are, how they are realized and the effects of selling our capital equipment (two garbage trucks) on the planned savings.

Commissioners Kane, Trujillo or Vogel do not discuss any issues in public. The deals are made long before the resolution reaches the floor and they vote in lockstep, but Alfonso's support is confusing. The mayor spent a good deal of time moderating and facilitating the discussion but never brought in the key questions of exactly how much, from where and how reliable is the $500,000 estimate. Then he voted in favor of the contract.

Something's not right here.

Kevin Vericker
October 1, 2010

The Mayor's House

There's been a lot of negative coverage, particularly from Francisco Alvarado of the Miami New Times, about the problems Oscar Alfonso has faced in the rebuilding of his house. For an example of the coverage, follow the link: Miami New Times on Oscar Alfonso.

Alfonso had until March 19 to submit, or rather resubmit, his building plans so the final code inspections could be done and this long simmering issue put to bed. He did so, at considerable personal expense.

Before we go a lot further, the story of his house with its erratic code history has a few more elements than the media have covered. Alfonso has for some time stated that he filed the correct building plans back in 2000. The city has been unable to locate them. As a solution, Alfonso has had to refile these in order to get the job finished.

I found that story a little too convenient at first glance, but then two people individually have contacted me to tell me very clearly that they were working in the city offices and very specifically remember the filing, mostly because prior to accepting the plans, Alfonso had to clear some other code issues which he did. (One of those is in the comments section of a previous post.)

I didn't see the plans of course, there was no reason why I would have, but I tend believe people who are not necessarily “Friends of Oscar” when they come forward to say they witnessed it.

In the last decade, North Bay Village had to abandon the old City Hall owing to water damage and mold and Alfonso's plans were not the only ones lost. I understand a fair number were lost or destroyed during that time. Even the county ethics commission found there was a problem with the records across the board (which they seemed to want to pin on Yvonne Hamilton, a woman who loses nothing, like she controls the weather.)

It looks like this part of the mayor's tough times is coming to an end and I'm glad. It's a trivial distraction.

In the same article from the Miami New Times, there are references to financial issues. I've said it before and I'll repeat it, the financial stuff is none of my business or yours insofar as it does not affect the performance of the office of the mayor. Now, whether it is a matter for the electorate in November is another question and a valid one. That's the right time to decide who you want in that seat.

Reminder on comments: if you don't sign it, it doesn't get published.

Kevin Vericker