Murmurs 

“Garish is a testimonial word.”

Would Tony Blair eat at Big Pink if he ventured into the alleyway behind it? Neighbors doubt it. Photo courtesy of Max Habermann

Hell Hath No Fury…

Last Tuesday, Feb. 6, marked the beginning of the corruption trial of former Monroe County attorney James Hendrick.

Hendrick is accused of conspiring in 1996 with then-Key West Mayor John “Jack” London to take $75,000 from Marvin Rappaport in exchange for approval of renovations he sought for his business property, a dive shop.   

A key figure in the case, expected to be called as a witness by the prosecution, is a man named Randall L. Hilliard, a former SunPost writer who is now a public relations consultant for the city of North Bay Village and a political consultant. Hilliard often refers to himself as “the prince of darkness.” 

According to the prosecution, Hilliard received the $75,000 through a business account months before the project was approved, and used $29,000 of the money to pay off a lien on London’s second home in Ireland.

This corruption case coincides with the Jan. 31, 2007 expiration of Hilliard’s contract as North Bay Village PR consultant, which began on Feb. 1, 2006.

“I don’t know [if my contract will be renewed]. It’s really up to the new city manager,  Jorge Forte. He’s reviewing everybody, I mean everybody, all city employees,” says Hilliard.

As does any great prince of darkness, Hilliard has a nemesis, 85-year-old Gabrielle Nash-Tessler, who is determined to see that this case is Hilliard’s downfall — or at least keeps his PR contract from being renewed.

“He’s a crook!” says Nash-Tessler, an activist who recently self-published her autobiography, Sex, Love and Politics Saved My Life and Made Me Rich.

Hilliard and Nash-Tessler first came into conflict during the latter’s 2000 North Bay Village Commission campaign. Nash-Tessler, who had run for commissioner several times before, was arrested for ripping down a campaign sign of her opponent, George Kane, a charge she fiercely denied and was eventually able to have thrown out of court. (She later sued North Bay Village for violating her civil rights. The city recently settled the case.) Kane endorsed the creation of black-and-white fliers of Nash-Tessler with bright red lipstick superimposed over her lips and her arrest report in the background. She would narrowly lose her election bid.

Later it was discovered that the fliers had been ordered by Hilliard, acting as campaign advisor to Kane. The Commission on Ethics and Public Health Trust subpoenaed Hilliard in 2002 during its investigation of Nash-Tessler.

Here are some highlights:

JOEL HIRSCHHORN (Nash-Tessler’s attorney): Mr. Hilliard, I’m an attorney. I represent Gabrielle Nash-Tessler. You see Miss Tessler, the woman here?

HILLIARD: Unfortunately.

HIRSCHHORN: Well, we will try to avoid personal comments. I presume the “unfortunately” because you’re referring to my being an attorney?

HILLIARD: No. I was referring to you calling her a woman.

Later…

HIRSCHHORN: And is it your testimony, sir, that you’re the person who put that, I don’t mean to put words in anyone’s mouth, but rather garish red lipstick on the mouth of Miss Tessler?

HILLIARD: If you want to characterize it as garish, but the woman is wearing that kind of lipstick right now. So if you want to call what she’s wearing garish, I’ll accept your —HIRSCHHORN: I’m not here to testify. What do you call that?

HILLIARD: Sounded to me like you were.

HIRSCHHORN: I’m not here to testify, Mr. Hilliard.

HILLIARD: Garish is a testimonial word.

HIRSCHHORN: Yes, I’m going to rephrase.

HILLIARD: That’s what your client is wearing right now, so —

HIRSCHHORN: That’s your observation?

HILLIARD: Yes.

HIRSCHHORN: Mr. Hilliard —

HILLIARD: So I feel it’s a fair and accurate portrayal.

———————————

“I hope when he goes to court, they take away his right to work, because he is a crook,” Nash-Tessler tells SunPost. “I’ve also talked to all the commissioners about him. I really don’t think he will be reappointed.”

“She’s Satan,” says Hilliard. “I hate to disappoint her but I haven’t been charged with or convicted of any crimes.”

Whether or not Hilliard will keep his job as PR director or be charged with any criminal misdeeds is unclear. What is clear is that he messed with a woman who knows how to manipulate the media at the right time. She even suggests a headline.

“I think the title should be ‘Randy Hilliard Calls Himself the Prince of Darkness.’ Yes, I think that will be a smashing title!” says Nash-Tessler.

Department of Tree Killing

“In light of the recent disclosures and comments at the 1/31 [Jan. 31] FDOT Public Hearing, this is not only absolute outrage, it is an absolute disregard, on FDOT’s part, of Commissioner [Marc] Sarnoff’s and State Representative [Ron] Brise’s concerns and statements on this issue. How is this possible?”

So stated the opening paragraph of a Tuesday e-mail sent to virtually everyone by Sean-Paul Melito, also known as www.SavePalms.com,  an activist dedicated to preserving palm trees along a newly re-created Biscayne Boulevard in Miami’s Upper Eastside. He was referring to a recent workshop on landscaping. What inspired Melito’s e-mail rage? “As of 8 a.m. this morning, the last 12 of the Upper Eastside boulevard palms are being removed at NE 38th Street,” he wrote. To offer a visual representation, he included a link to a map at http://www.savepalms.com/palmsplot.html.  The red dots that dart the boulevard from 38th to 65th Street depict the dozens of trees that have been removed during the course of the project. The blue dots, clustered between 38th and 39th streets, denote the trees that, as of Tuesday, will be removed.

“We are not able to stop them,” Sarnoff blurted to Murmurs, meaning that Biscayne Boulevard, a state road, is basically under the jurisdiction of the state agency. However, Sarnoff and other city officials are meeting with FDOT’s representatives on Thursday. Sarnoff’s main intent: to persuade FDOT to bring back some tree canopy to Biscayne Boulevard. Armed with an old Dec. 2003 resolution from the Upper Eastside Council that desired shaded oak trees along the Boulevard, FDOT officials have been uprooting the palms — a stance still backed by longtime Upper Eastsiders such as Bob Flanders. Melito and other palm tree defenders like Brent Cutler think the palm tree has historical significance in Miami and should be protected. Sarnoff, on the other hand, has pushed for a compromise: a mixture of shade trees and palms along the Boulevard.

Right now, though, Sarnoff said he is more concerned with bringing the tree canopy back to its former levels. Since the Biscayne Boulevard project began, there has been a net loss of 83 trees along the thoroughfare within Miami’s city limits. And the few trees that have replaced those removed and left to die on a city-owned island are mere “saplings,” Sarnoff said. Problem is, FDOT engineers now consider Biscayne Boulevard a new road and thus beholden to their “angle” policy. According to Sarnoff, that means the new vegetation cannot obscure the views of drivers pulling in and out of the Boulevard. It’s a safety thing. But Sarnoff is trying to find a way to convince FDOT to get trees that the agency feels won’t hinder drivers’ views. And if that means bring back narrow palm trees, he said, then so be it.

Food Fight, Part II: Big Stink

South Pointe residents are not content with criticizing the food disposal practices of Prime 112 (as reported by the SunPost in the Jan. 18 article “Food Fight”). Now they are taking aim at one of Myles Chefetz’s sister operations, Big Pink. Max Habermann and Brad Stevens have been e-mailing photographs and messages about Big Pink’s Dumpsters overflowing with garbage — to the point that they attract the attention of scavenging sea birds. (In fairness, it should be pointed out that the Dumpsters were photographed the day after Super Bowl weekend.) Frank Del Vecchio, in turn, has forwarded the e-mails to the media and the state’s Department of Professional Regulation. “No trash garage, no paved floors, trash on the ground, birds all over the place, THIS IS A JOKE! ... Jose Alberto (Code Enforcement) relayed a message to me that this is LEGAL… I want to see proof,” Habermann wrote. Stevens’ comments were even more biting: “I’m happy that deserving public servants are able to get a discount at these eateries but not at the expense of the health and safety of our neighborhood.” Ouch.

Such statements weren’t appreciated by Code Compliance Administrator Jose Alberto. “Unfortunately due to Mr. Delvecchio [sic] forwarding your email to the whole city, or at least it looks that way, because every city department is calling me to ask me if I said that the garbage in that photo is legal, I have been ordered not to respond …,” Alberto e-mailed to Habermann. But he does anyway: “Your e-mail stating: Jose Alberto (Code Enforcement) relayed a message to me that this is LEGAL. ... Has been misinterpreted as if the garbage on the floor is legal. By the way the charges [to Big Pink] for yesterday’s violation [Feb. 5]… are a $200 fine and $1,345.00 work order fees.”

Del Vecchio felt the need to clarify things in an e-mail more than 500 words long. Suffice it to say that Del Vecchio tells Alberto his “code enforcement efforts have been much appreciated in the residential community.”

Chefetz did not return a Wednesday phone call from the SunPost by deadline.

Got Murmurs? E-mail editorial@miamisunpost.com.  Comments? E-mail letters@miamisunpost.com.