URGENT: Weakening Citizens’ Challenge to Local Development Decisions

I bring this matter to your attention, and especially to those who are concerned about ensuring organized community development and protection of the environment.

Please Call the Members of the Senate Environment and Preservation Committee and Oppose SB 1122
April 1, 2011

Senate Bill 1122–Your calls are needed to oppose the damaging Senate Bill 1122. While this bill establishes Alternative State Review as the amendment process and keeps language more favorable for citizen challenges to inappropriate local development decisions it still has a number of damaging provisions. It eliminates Rule 9J-5, thus eliminating years of favorable legal rulings regarding citizens’ rights to challenge local development decisions, urban service boundaries and other critical issues. It removes local government authority to require supermajority votes on development decisions, and has numerous other provisions of concern. Click herefor technical comments on the bill. Please call the members of the Senate Environmental Preservation and Conservation Committee and tell them to oppose this damaging bill which undermines Florida’s growth management process.

Senate Environmental Preservation and Conservation Committee

To find out more about what’s happening this session, please visit 1000 Friends atwww.1000friendsofflorida.org.

 

Volsky on “Romeo and Juliet Best MCB’s Production Ever”

ROMEO AND JULIET BEST MCB’S PRODUCTION EVER

By George Volsky

Miami City Ballet’s Romeo and Juliet, the universal story of love at first sight, was the most  professional, convincing, and even for a jaded reviewer the most moving production in the company’s quarter century existence. And it was a triumph for Jennifer Carlynn Kronenberg who masterfully combined  multi-nuanced dancing  and  acting that the Juliet role requires.

Carlos Guerra, Kronenberg’s  partner in the ballet, as he is in real life,  was an excellent Romeo.  He portrayed with authority the role of a young, eye-roving aristocrat seized  by a sudden paroxysm of irresistible attraction for a girl, the instant he  sees her for the first time.

That seminal moment, when Romeo’s and Juliet’s eyes meet,  both are struck by the arrows of Eros which inexorably  seal their fate. The moment is only second-long, yet it marks the turning point in the ballet  which, within an tale of a long-standing and bloody family discord,  portrays a dramatic change, an instant growth of the two protagonists. That process of physical and mental growth necessitates from both, especially Juliet,  very considerable acting skills, interwoven into the whole gamut of balletic expertise.

Presiding over Romeo and Juliet, as it were, is the Sergei Prokofiev majestic music score written  in the middle of the 1930’s for Leningrad’s Kirov Theater. The ballet  was not produced for several years because the Soviet Moscow cultural censors wanted it to have a happy ending, theatrically not difficult to stage since it would involve Romeo arriving on the stage only a few seconds later, the moment Juliet awakes from the potion-induced death-like state. Finally the faithful Soviet  Shakespeare lovers prevailed and the 4-act ballet   by Eugeni Lavrovsky opened in Leningrad in 1940, with the legendary Galina Ulanova in the Juliet role.

Other versions of R&J followed, all with Prokofiev’s music and the Bard’s story. The one presented by the MCB was choreographed by  John Cranko and performed for the first time in 1962 by the Stuttgart Ballet of which he was director. Cranko’s  3-act ballet is regarded as the best of all R&J created so far. All of them are based on Shakespeare’s time-honored play in which virtually all of the most memorable sentences are pronounced by Juliet.

Kronenberg obviously could not declaim: “O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo;” or “What’s in the name? That which we call a rose/By any other name would smell as sweet;” or “Parting is such sweet sorrow/ That I shall say good night till it be morrow.”

Sill, through her dancing Kronenberg seemed to be expressing her new,  love-inspired wisdom which, as though influenced by Cupid she had developed shedding her initial almost child-like behavior.

At first, after greeting  Romeo shyly, Juliet does not want to be touched by him, or allows him to kiss her hand, as tough afraid of an emotional volcano such contacts would produce in her body and mind. But love and desire prevail. Totally smitten by Romeo, Juliet abandons  all conventions – social and religious – invites her inamorato to her bed, ties her destiny to him, and ends her life when instead of joining him and live happily ever after as she was told to expect she sees him dead.

The most moving part of the ballet is the almost ten minute long pas de deux, at the end of the first act. The two lovers, mostly by embraces, lifts and intimate gestures, develop without inhibitions their emotional and carnal love – Juliet is actually a bit more sexually aggressive than Romeo –  and determine to be united for ever come what it may.

(Of course, the philosophical question can be posed whether the total but shot marital ecstasy is worth more than what it could follow: possible prolonged, bitter disappointments  and years of gnawing unhappiness.)

But Romeo and Juliet is not only about the two lovers. It is a narrative about generation-long enmity between two extended aristocratic clans in Renaissance’s Verona, the House of Capulet of which Romeo is the crown prince, and the House of Montague, whose female crown jewel is Juliet.  Members of the clans perforce meet in Verona’s streets and central plaza and often clash.

Sword fights take place despite stern, pacifying admonishments by the ruling Duke of Verona. Tybald, the menacingly dressed and coifed Isanusi Garcia-Rodriguez, who oozes hatred of the Capulet clan and  looks like the Montague enforcer, duels and kills Mercutio, a Capulet and a friend of Romeo, who soon takes revenge and swords Tybald through.  The two cadavers make the clans’ enmity irreconcilable, while at the same time the love between Romeo and Juliet deepens.  (Shakespeare, after the lovers’ death, reconciles the two houses; not so Cranko and the other choreographers; Prokofiev’s music ends on a grave tone as well.)

Still, the ballet has many delightful and joyous moments not related to love – after all life is fun in Verona too. For example, Romeo, before being fletched by Juliet, was a fun-seeking young blade, anything but a chaste, brooding Hamlet. There is a lively and male pas de trios – Guerra, Rabello and Renan Cardeiro – the last two are certainly up and coming MCG dancers – and very well rehearsed and physically dangerous sword plays. (Unlike theater actors, dancers are not usually taught to fence.)

And there is the incomparable dancing by the amazing MCB core de ballet which, it gives me pleasure to repeat, is the backbone of the company.  These amazing very young women and men provide the necessary supporting context for all MCB productions, certainly for this one. Everybody was helped by the splendid costumes and scenery, courtesy of The National Ballet of Canada, and the public enthusiastically applauded both.

Romeo and Juliet represents a very important addition to the MCB’s repertoire, and another shining milestone in the long  career of its Artistic Director, Edward Villella.  Thanking  the person who deserves it, one has to mention that last weekend’s presentation probably would not take place except for the perseverance of Mike Eidson, former MCB chairman, who   for years had been promoting  Cranko’s R&J version and had worked assiduously to secure funding for it.

Romeo and Juliet ended, regally one might say, the MCB’s 25th consecutive season. The season was appropriately dedicated to the company’s founding chair, Toby Lerner Ansin.  And, as the saying goes, after the first quarter century the best is yet to come.

Urgent!: Danger of Damaging Florida’s Urban Growth Managment

As a member of 1000 Friends of Florida, I am publishing this for your urgent consideration.
Thank you.
Stephen McGaughey
CoralGablesWatch.com

 

Protect Citizens’ Rights!
Please Call Now to Oppose HB 7129

Your calls are needed to oppose the damaging HB 7129, which was released by the House a few days ago. This bill undermines Florida’s landmark growth management system, essentially returning this state to the “anything goes” era of the 1960s and 1970s. Among other things, this damaging legislation undercuts the rights of citizens to appeal inappropriate local government planning decisions, weakens the ability of local governments to charge developers for the costs of new roads and schools meaning that taxpayers will further subsidize new development, allows large-scale development without any certainty that conservation lands will be preserved, and seriously curtails state review of local plan amendments.

1000 Friends of Florida and the Sierra Club do not support this bill, and The Nature Conservancy has strong concerns. Please contact your Representative now! Tell him/her that growth management is essential to protect the state’s drinking water and quality of life. Ask them to stand up for Florida’s citizens and oppose HB 7129.

Find your Florida Representative. Once you’re on that page, click on the “Find your Representative” icon and enter your address.

Please also share this alert with your friends and associates. We need as many calls as possible!



Among other things, this problematic legislation:

Curtails citizen rights to participate in the local planning process–It includes a number of provisions making citizen legal challenges of inappropriate local plan amendments virtually impossible. It applies the very difficult “fairly debatable” legal test to all citizen challenges, making successful appeals unlikely. It repeals Rule 9J-5 and the associated years of legal challenges that have bolstered the rights and ability of citizens to file successful legal challenges. It prohibits DCA from intervening in any third party challenges to plan amendments, and restricts appeals of detailed special area plans (DSAPS) associated with sector plans to court challenges only. It also requires DCA to review all of its pending judicial proceedings within 60 days to justify either their continuation under the changes made in this bill or have them dismissed. Finally, it prohibits local governments from adopting any process similar to the recent Amendment 4/Hometown Democracy amendment.

Will result in citizens subsidizing new development, even that which is unneeded and financially infeasible—The proposed legislation eliminates the requirement that plans and plan amendments be “financially feasible,” and weakens the requirement that developers show the “need” for new development to justify making amendments to the local comprehensive plan. This is particularly egregious in an era when irresponsible overbuilding has had devastating results for so many Floridians. It weakens concurrency requirements that new development pay for associated roads, schools and other costs, which will result in citizens underwriting many of the costs of new development.

Undermines state review of plan amendments—Early growth management efforts in Florida failed because there was no oversight of local government planning decisions. The 1985 Growth Management Act established state review over local comprehensive plans, but this legislation undermines state review. Among other things, this legislation inserts a nearly impossible to overcome “balancing” provision that says that any plan amendment that “on balance” promotes parts of Chapter 163 and/or local comprehensive plan policies can be approved even when adverse impacts are documented to state resources. It adopts an “alternative state review” (ASR) process for all plan amendments, which means that DCA will not comment on most plan amendments, and will have only 30 days to present comments on those it chooses to review. It also limits the ability of DCA and other state agencies to comment on amendments to local comprehensive plans. DCA comments will only be required for amendments within areas of critical state concern, sector plans, new plans for newly incorporated areas, EAR based amendments, and rural land stewardship areas.

Allows large-scale development without any certainty that conservation lands will be protected — The legislation revises large scale sector and rural land stewardship plans without any certainty as to when conservation easements will be recorded

Has devastating results for Florida — The effect of these changes is to minimize state review and comment, emphasize and give deference to local decisions, and make it practically impossible for citizens and third parties to successfully challenge plan amendments. This is a return to the 1970s when development interests were unchecked, public resources were being exploited, and growth controls were minimal. We have seen the results of that approach, and we continue to pay for the many mistakes made with that system. 1000 Friends fears that we are about to repeat this sad part of our great state’s history.

 

Plan for Charter Reform Needs Real Mayor (“Braman for Mayor”)

If you haven’t seen this in today’s Miami Herald, “vale la pena” read this letter on plans to improve the charter, a plan that is not a radical change, but a step toward modernization of a failed political system in Miami-Dade.

A few weeks ago, Norman Braman and I prepared and released a proposed “Covenant with the People of Miami-Dade County” that outlined eight specific ideas for charter reform. The notion of calling it a “covenant” was to signal that we believe the people are tired of political “promises” made by candidates for office — which are seldom kept after they are elected. Almost every candidate to replace Alvarez has expressed a general commitment to “charter reform,” but this “people’s revolution” should not be placated by generic political rhetoric. The voters of Miami-Dade need to insist on specific commitments to specific reforms and to do so in a manner that ensures accountability. We need any candidate who aspires to be our next strong mayor to covenant with the people for meaningful charter reform.

via Next, reform Miami-Dade County charter – Letters to the Editor – MiamiHerald.com.