The proposed Cooper City Charter Amendments….

Many have asked the question, what are these changes all about?

Well the answer might be. 

First and foremost one must recognize that the charter is liken to the constitution of that of our country in that it sets up the basic structure of the city government. In the case of Cooper City it says that the manner which the city will operate is by an elected commission specifying all the rules associated with that process and  providing  policies and ordinances by which the city manager will operate the city. As one would assume this involves many activities and much of the charter deals with many but not all of these rules. The key here is that these guidelines or rules are treated as the primary laws for the operation of the city. They range from election procedures to many of the other activities necessary for the process of the function of the city needs to perform its’ obligations.   

Do the proposed changes add or take away from the existing charter?

In most cases the proposed changes do materially alter the fundamental structure that has been in place for the last 35 years or so and has been only previously changed in very minor ways. Keep in mind that these types of changes can only occur every four years and absolutely require the voters to approve them. An examination of the proposed changes does raise several questions. The primary one is we the voter are neither familiar with city procedures nor do we wish to become lost in the weeds of this type of detail.  

Rather than provide a lengthy microscopic view a summary will provide a better guide. The changes start with the suggested need for an absentee rules for members of the commission. Seems somewhat childish as most of the commission members are of a character that such a stringent law is  hardly a necessity. Then there are several rather administrative type changes that seem totally out of place in the charter as opposed to simply directives to be given to the city manager as to how the commission wants the city to perform. The reason for a commission is to have them decide what is essential for the process of the city functions and to direct the city manager to implement them. 

Two major concerns arises upon viewing the requested changes.

(1) Is there an hidden agenda underlying the changes?

(2) Do we want to have the commissioners to become immersed in the details of the  running of the functions of the city ?

(3) Why has the current status of the city manager, highly skilled in the process of the city governance and well paid for his/her skill level now being reduced to one of simply a clerk following the direction of members of the commission, who in most cases have had very little if any substantial training or education in governmental management?

 Thus, it is fair to conclude that why are all of these seemingly minor (one could also call them trivial) changes be placed before the voters as being needed to be changed when that is what the city commissioners are elected to do when necessary after through and thoughtful debate? Several persons with whom I have spoken, knowledgeable in the workings of city governance,  have reached the pretty much the same conclusion which is, why is it necessary that these be put before the voters?

Rather than delve into what could require many pages of discussion, they have all agreed to the following statement, an old adage my father often said to me,
“If It Is Not Broken, Then Don’t Attempt to Fix It”.

Therefore it is urged that the residents of Cooper City cast a straight down the line the ballot, NO, to all of the proposed these changes, thereby putting the task of the commissioners to make the necessary changes when a need is required.

Be informed when you vote in November!

Everyone who votes this November should clearly know what your City Commissioner, Jamie Curran, is up to and how he misrepresents his constituents in Cooper City. Below are excerpts taken from Mr. Curran's statements under oath  which clearly indicate that Jamie does not perform any or very little “due diligence” to inform himself on city issues before he casts a vote.

If you are a concerned voter, attached is Mr. Curran’s deposition where in you can see for YOURSELF that he has, under oath, admitted that he does not often do any research, read or study the resolutions that he votes on.  He simply relies on staff to fill his head with information of their choosing rather than do his own research.

Contrary to his campaign slogan "Curran Works", Mr. Curran does NOT work for the resident/taxpayers, rather he lets others do the work that we assume he should be doing himself. Mr. Curran skates by on the shoulders of the city staff. While that might appear to be ok for some people, Commissioner Curran lets others do the work that he has been elected to do. Over the recent years it has been obvious Mr. Curran by his testimony shows that he does NOT have a basic working knowledge of the city budget!

I hope that you will take a few minutes to read the following lines from Mr. Curran's deposition. It is a real eye opener.  
 Your vote can and will have an impact the future of our Cooper City!!!

********

Excerpts from the  Deposition of James C. Curran, Commissioner Cooper City Dist.4

THE WITNESS:  I wouldn't know how to answer that question only for one reason.

BY MR. FRANKEL:

Q.    What is that?

A. I rely heavily on staff, Horacio and the City manager for their advice on this. I'm not an expert in it.

Q. As a commissioner, do you think you have a responsibility to become fully informed or are you entitled to just rely on what your City staff says?

A.    I rely on my staff.

Q.    Do you do any kind of research yourself? Do you read the resolutions?

A. Some.                                                                            

Q.    There are times when you may be voting on something that you haven't read fully?

 A.    On some resolutions.

Q.    How about on the resolutions for 2008 and 2009 which you voted on?   

 A.    I wouldn't remember.  I can't recall.

Q. If you have a concern that maybe the information you are getting from one source isn't completely accurate, would you go to any place else to get better information?

 A.    No.

 Q.    You wouldn't?     

A.    I would not leave this office over the City manager for anything.        

Q.    So you're completely reliant upon --       

A.    Completely.       

Q.    When you say City manager, do you mean the entire staff?       

A.    Yes    

Q.    That includes Mr. Montes de Oca?       

A.    Yes.       

Q.    And the City's attorneys?       

A.    Yes.

Q. When you voted for the resolution in the year 2008, other than what you have told us, did you go back to inform yourself about what the resolution was based on?

A.    Once again, I relied on the City manager, the finance manager and the staff.  

A.    I relied on the staff for all my information when I met with staff.

BY MR. FRANKEL(attorney for the Plaintiff) Q.    All right.  But by voting for this, do you agree that you agreed that the resolution constitutes the Final Assessment Resolution as defined in Ordinance No. 99-7-1?

MR. MANDEL:  Object to form.

THE WITNESS:  No.

BY MR. FRANKEL:  

Q.    You don't agree with that?      

 A.    No.      

 Q.    Even though it's in here, you don't agree with that?

 A.    Just leave it at no.Q. Can I ask you honestly, if you had known any of what was discussed here in the last few minutes at the time, would you have still voted for it?           

 MR. MANDEL:  Object to form.           

 THE WITNESS:  Yes.

Q.    Would it be a fair statement to say that you really don't understand the intricacies of the City's budget?

A.    Sure.       

Q.    That's a fair statement?       

A.    Yes

[No further excerpts are shown.]
*******

Attention Seniors

As the political season is now reaching a more visible point much can be said and many are vocal quite about it. As to Cooper City there are really just a few  but very important issues to consider.

They range from the election of a commissioner from the 4^th district to changes of some significance to the city charter to the Florida ballot of Amendments. I will be writing on all of these issues.

There is a very important one, Amendment 5. Is says “an amendment to the State Constitution to revise the homestead tax exemption that may be granted by counties or municipalities for property with just value less than $250,000 owned by certain senior, low-income, long-term residents to specify that just value is determined in the first tax year the owner applies and is eligible for the exemption. The amendment takes effect January 1, 2017, and applies retroactively to exemptions granted before January 1, 2017.”

Cooper City currently offers that exemption as previous enacted by law. What is really the important points are two fold, one the exemption automatically applies to those who currently are exempted and secondly, the dollar exemption (value of the property) is set such that it remains in place regardless of any future increases.

What this means to many seniors is that they will be protected and able to enjoy their homes for many, many years to come without the fear of the raising property taxes that all of us know will surely happen.

I wrote this as I received an email from Amy Rosen with the request that I present it to all of the many readers of the Cooper City Blog. I encourage all to vote for this important issue to the ever growing segment of the citizens of Cooper City.