Five points on the fix to the drainage problem of Key Biscayne.

1.We should all appreciate the efforts of our Village Council in exploring the storm water flooding problem and the various solutions to ameliorate the situation. This effort has taken time, and we are thankful for their thoroughness and hard work.

I write partially in response to Vice Mayor Oscar Sardiñas’ piece in Islander News advocating for the decision to be made by a 7-member Village Council that will bind us “for decades” based on totally undefined goals all bundled under the umbrella of “sound engineering and thoughtful analysis.” A referendum brought by a small group of people is not good because the will of the people is somehow divisive, and the issue is better decided by 7-council members.

I think NOT.

2. Who should decide on the way forward? Probably not I. I always think of what are the opportunity costs involved with any choice, and when I think about a billion-dollar expenditure, I always ask what have we gained from what we have given up?

When I think of 15,000 people borrowing $1 billion, I’m thinking what else could we do with this money? Nightly free steak dinners on the Village Green in perpetuity. Sounds good. Should I have the filet tonight or go for the sirloin? Maybe a double baked potato, a side of creamed spinach and some carrot cake? I’ll have a full doggy bag for tomorrow’s lunch. I certainly should not be the deciding vote on such a question, because I keep thinking about what else we could do with our money.

Finally, the estimates outlined never mention the yearly maintenance costs going forward, as well as the depreciation fund that will need to be replenished because the proposed system has a life of at most 30 years.

3. The next question is whether Fernando A. Vasquez, a Council member, should vote on this issue? I say he should not.

Remember, Fernando A. Vasquez was one of the three AD HOC council members who had the greatest input about this question, and the question is how he got appointed to the panel if the following is true.

The first question is whether Council Member Mr. Fernando A. Vasquez is the same Fernando A. Vasquez who previously worked for AECOM on the Big Dig engineering. If he is one in the same, then he should recuse himself.

If you search the Village’s website, under contracts, you will find Fernando A. Vasquez, as a Vice President of AECOM who was the very person who signed the contract on AECOM’s behalf on May 6, 2022, for the engineering work on the Big Dig. You cannot make this stuff up. If you are being tried for murder, do you think your twin brother would withstand voir dire and make it on the jury. No way. I wonder why? Are there two Fernando A. Vasquez or is there just one. If there is only one, he should not vote.

4. We have a Village Manager form of government. What does the Village Manager do in this form of government?

In this form of government, political power is concentrated in the governing body. The mayor and council share legislative functions. Policy making resides with elected officials, while oversight of the day-to-day operations of the community resides with the manager.

As I have followed these discussions on the storm water discussions in Islander News, it has appeared to me the Manager has had the finger on the scale pushing the Big Dig and AECOM solution rather than exploring alternatives. This observation appears in conflict with the idea that policy making resides with the elected officials. The Village Manager appears to be pushing one solution.

5. A referendum is the best option in deciding the question of what path to follow. The choice is not what is best, but what is the best cost benefit solution. Is the Big Dig really the best use of our money in an uncertain future or should we go with GIT Consulting’s proposal? What are the unknown environmental costs discharging water into Biscayne Bay may bring in the future and that we cannot control. What are the opportunity costs we forgo?

A vote of our residents is by far the best solution and the solution that leaves the least animosity and bad feelings when all is done. Mr. Sardiñas believes that a referendum is the most divisive solution, but I would strongly disagree. After a referendum, we all leave friends because we put it to the vote.

A referendum will produce a far better outcome than a few leaders pointing us westward to the Donner Pass that at the time looked like the shortest fastest route to the Pacific. Fatal mistake.

Let’s vote.

Bill Stiles