Tequesta Notes
a citizens' initiative
please share with friends
Post Election Update Note
The referendum results accorded with most of our recommendations here below and the one item that was different (granting appointment power to the Council to fill vacant Council seats) was a close result. Importantly, residents rejected the $10 million blank check. Our thanks to the residents of the village for studying the questions and for voting.
Monday, February 6, 2023
$10 Million Bond Referendum
Residents Decide
14 March 2023
Residents of Tequesta vote 14 March 2023 on several important items including a $10 million bond issue. Please vote against the proposed $10 million bond issue as we will discuss here below. We will also discuss five other items on the ballot proposing amendments to the village Charter.
Vote Recommendations · Overview
Addendum: see results in parentheses
NO to the proposed $10 million bond issue (✅ Vote result on the bond.)
NO to the proposed increase in term years for Council members (✅ Vote result question 1.)
YES for the Council member residency requirement (✅ Vote result question 2.)
NO to the proposed Council elections run-off amendment (✅ Vote result question 3.)
NO on giving to the Council an appointment power to fill vacant Council seats (❌ Vote result question 4.)
YES on the referendum requirement prior to a Council decision that would dissolve the Tequesta police or fire rescue services (✅ Vote result question 5.)
Addendum. You can find details on the election results at enr.electionsfl.org/PAL/Summary/3368. The last item (question 6 on the Tequesta ballot) simply concerned approving minor edits to the village Charter and we had not commented on that item. It was approved by voters.
Vote Recommendations · Details
Vote: No on the bond issue question. The reason to vote against the bond issue is that the proposed language is far too vague. No specific purpose is identified. And the amount of the bond issue, $10 million, is not rationally based in any specific purpose. The language on the ballot provides that the proposed debt would:
"finance acquisition of environmentally sensitive, waterfront, or recreation lands, or lands for open spaces, archeological or historic preservation, or traffic mitigation, and recreational capital improvements."
Notice, in particular, the terms traffic mitigation and recreational capital improvements. This vague language would amount effectively to a blank check.
Residents of the village should require much more careful stewardship of taxpayer funds. This is especially true in a time when basic infrastructure is aging and due for replacement. This is not a time for improvident municipal debt.
There is no downside to opposing the bond issue here. The Council can simply try again with a better proposal if they see a clear need for the village to incur debt. Please oppose the bond issue.
Vote "NO" on three year terms for Council members. This ballot question proposes an amendment to the village Charter extending the term for Council members from two years to three years. This is a terrible proposal. Indeed, the decisive factor on this question is our need to limit the harm that can be caused by Council leadership who are not serving the interests of residents. For this purpose, the two year term is much better than a three year term. Please vote NO on the ballot question proposing three year terms.
Vote "YES" on the question proposing a one year residency requirement prior to service on the Council. This is a reasonable requirement to try to ensure that candidates to the Council might serve well local interests rather than remote financial or development interests. It is better than nothing.
Vote "NO" on the ballot question that would amend the Charter to provide for "drawing of lots" instead of a run-off election to resolve tied elections. A NO vote here prioritizes democratic process. The justification for this ballot item was the desire to save the cost of a run-off election. This is a reasonable concern. But in the context of how the village spends money and in view of the small likelihood of a run-off but also the fact that when there is a run-off it means the election is important—in these circumstances, preserving the election right for the residents should prevail in deciding this question.
Vote "NO" on the ballot question that would amend the Charter to replace the current special election process with an appointment by Council to fill a Council vacancy. A NO vote here also prioritizes the democratic process.
Vote "YES" on the ballot question that would amend the Charter to require a referendum prior to a Council decision to dissolve the police or fire rescue services. A YES vote here protects our local police and fire rescue services. This is a good protection to implement.
On the question concerning "non-substantive text edits" recommended last year by the Charter Review Committee, we are not currently taking a position.
You can see a sample ballot published recently in the VOT News here: Sample Ballot 3 February 2023.
If you have any questions, please send us a note at hello@TequestaNotes.org.
This website is dedicated to topics important to residents of the Village of Tequesta. If you have information concerning important issues for Tequesta or its government (or corrections or suggestions for anything on this website), please email hello@TequestaNotes.org.
TequestaNotes.org