There was no evidence at the six months of legislative hearings that anyone would have their property values adversely affected. None.
There was an attack on competition, by competitors, who wanted to keep gourmet food trucks illegal, despite their providing needed nutrition at affordable prices in competition with McDonalds, Burger King and other fast food corporations.
There was prejudice against young people and startup businesses, by misguided, misled and selfish established businesses.
The five Commissioners - every single one a registered Republican -- on the St. Augustine Beach City Commission showed naked prejudice.
I hope the City of St. Augustine Beach is sued for violating food trucks' constitutional rights to equal protection and due process and for erecting anti-competitive barriers to free market competition in violation of antitrust laws. SAB has no antitrust immunity (a question asked but never answered by St. Augustine Beach's City Attorney works for developers (including 7-11 franchisee that is being pursed for May & San Marco in historic district of St. Augustine ).
St. Augustine Beach's unAmerican action were disrespectful, disdainful and disgraceful.
As Justice Hugo Black wrote for the United States Supreme Court in Chambers v. Florida:
"We are not impressed by the argument that law enforcement methods such as those under review are necessary to uphold our laws. The Constitution proscribes such lawless means irrespective of the end. And this argument flouts the basic principle that all people must stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court. Today, as in ages past, we are not without tragic proof that the exalted power of some governments to punish manufactured crime dictatorially is the handmaid of tyranny. Under our constitutional system, courts stand against any winds that blow as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered, or because they are nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement. Due process of law, preserved for all by our Constitution, commands that no such practice as that disclosed by this record shall send any accused to his death. No higher duty, no more solemn responsibility, rests upon this Court than that of translating into living law and maintaining this constitutional shield deliberately planned and inscribed for the benefit of every human being subject to our Constitution -- of whatever race, creed or persuasion. "
What are food truck owners and their families other than "nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement?"
Here's the Record editorial:
Editorial: How the Grinch stole food trucks
Posted: December 20, 2014 - 11:37pm
In this time of giving and good will, one recent issue caught in the craw, so to speak. We just had to get it off our chests in the spirit of the season.
If there were a “Grinch Award” to hand out as the year winds down, a good nominee would be the St. Augustine Beach City Commission.
Understand, the Beach is on a rocket ride of improvement and prosperity, and the commissioners can take some credit for that. But on some issues, such as a noise ordinance, it seems to be constantly chasing its own tail. On the food truck issue, it may have swallowed it.
The commission has studied the issue to death — literally, it seems — in the sense of the future of food trucks at the Beach.
The applicant, Brendan Schneck (Cindy Lou, for our editorial metaphor), asked nicely to sell locally-sourced, healthy food (not Roast Beast) from a moving restaurant, called a food truck.
■ On June 11 our first story ran. The commission was clearly hostile to the notion of traveling food. “In the story headlined “Local entrepreneur wants food truck park on the beach,” Commissioner Rich O’Brien set the tone: “Our brick and mortar businesses pay property taxes ... I think we should leave this one alone.”
Commissioner Brud Heloski (a brick and mortar restaurant owner himself) trumped him, suggesting that the city up its enforcement of all mobile vendors, especially on ice cream trucks. Really.
■ On July 8, Schneck, a Flagler College grad, was back, in a story titled “Food trucks still not on Beach’s menu.” The commission, somewhat predictably, tossed the issue at the Planning and Zoning Board to digest.
■ On July 16, the story was titled “Planning Board: Put food trucks on the menu at Beach.” The PZB returned the potato, but now it was a hot one. The PZB voted 6-1 suggesting the city adopt a temporary ordinance to allow a test run of the food truck on the beach. PZB chairman Al Guido said he saw a fit for food trucks there, and was disappointed that the city continued to stall. “The commission chose to dump this on us, he said. “This is pretty close to a game.”“Drat,” commissioners must have echoed to themselves from Mount Crumpit .
■ On Oct. 7 the headline read “Acceptance of food trucks at the beach slowed by more revisions.” If one were looking for an example of “death by statute,” the morass the Beach was concocting would be a humdinger. But, at the same time, commissioners agreed to assign a trial period for the food truck, pending another revision of the ordinance.
■ On Nov. 10, our headline read “St. Augustine Beach moves forward with food trucks.”
■ On Nov. 13, the headline was “Beach food truck trial period extended three months.” Revisions continued, including a stipulation that food trucks provide a handicapped parking space. Really.
■ On Nov. 30: “Beach Commission prepares for final reading of food truck ordinance.”
■ On Dec. 2, the dime dropped: “Beach votes down food trucks.” What about that trial? What about all the ordinance revisions? What about the PZB? What about giving a nationwide phenomenon a chance to succeed or fail under free enterprise?
And now, deja vu.
■ On Dec. 7, five days later, the headline read: “Food truck talk continues at Beach.” That may be the saddest one of all.
Now the onus is being passed to a voter referendum that will smother the pest for at least two more years, or flea-flickered to a “Vision” committee to chew on in the spring.
Square one is an embarrassing place to be at this point for the Beach Commission. Especially if that was the endgame all along.
7 comments:
The people of SAB won Ed. I know how hard it is for you to see what the majority of the citizens want. The people who live at the beach elected folks to make smart choices. The City Commision did that. You and your minority crew will have to live with it. Nothing stoping you and the minority from putting it on the ballot. Just get ready to hear the word
LOOOOOOOOOOOOSERRRRRRRRRRRRR........
Hey but Thanks for all the other good stories in your Blog !
Tom Reynolds
Pot calls kettle black!
Diversionary fluff from asswipe hypocrites!
Majority? We didn't have elections on human rights issues. We have courts. You want a government run for the benefit of business, Tom Reynolds, one that violates equal protection and due process rights? You sound Republican and in an event are very wrong. Loser? How emetic, emotional and jejune. We've won over 30 public interest victories here since 2005. Not every victory is won the first time around, or without going to court. I foresee the food trucks winning in court, and am hopeful that a national public interest group takes on their cause, and wins a civil rights judgment against a mismanaged government, one that is captive of the bloated egos of the burghers of St. Augustine Beach.
No Ed, do not Party with either self serving gang. Democrappers and Repukeagains have all but completely taken the USA down. The Roach Coaches can stay over in your City. Why do you always try to push your one sided agenda on others? The Majority of City of St Augustine Beach residents DON'T want the value of their property to go down in value. This beautiful beach city is not like any other. Ed, Kathy Nelson is a CLUELESS newspaper person. In SJC there is at least 10 different important issues going on and she writes an editorial on food trucks? You ought to apply for the lead writers job there. You and Kathy have a lot in common when it comes to important issues. The both of you couldn't see an important issue if it was handed to you.
Sore winner? Who put the fox in your bosom? Who put the salsa in your shorts? Who put the fog in your logic. I almost did not print your ranting cant. It is abusive and scatological. Keep it clean. Avoid the mean. Merry Christmas. By the way, Jim Sutton writes the Record's editorials, and he is a journalist. And ad hominem attacks on Kathy Nelson, or me, are ungracious, ungraceful, unkind, uncouth and uncalled for -- the food trucks have a right to make a living. It is a worker rights issues. Snobs have Boca Raton. Let St. Augustine Beach resolve the issue without the meanness. This is not a place for bullies. Thank you.
The "BULLY CARD" ! When failure is at your door steps, use the "BULLY CARD" !
Are you and Sutton aware of what is really going on in this County ?
Gerrymandering, John Thrasher screwing the folks in this county out of a State Senator, the Veterans being cheated out of 300 million dollars by Allied Veterans here in SJc, Wire tapping by the SJC Sherrif office, Criminal Defense Attotney being asualted at the SJC Sherrif office, an ederaly man being gunned down in his own home, criminal conduct on every elected level of this county ????????????
Sutton and you are writing about Roach Coaches ?
Ed you are one the BEST writers I have ever come across in my 50 years of reading newspapers. So on that note, report all the facts and both sides. Or end up being like the rest of the one sided, selected, and unprofessional want to be writers in this County !
There was no evidence at the six months of legislative hearings that anyone would have their property values adversely affected. None.
There was an attack on competition, by competitors, who wanted to keep gourmet food trucks illegal, despite their providing needed nutrition at affordable prices in competition with McDonalds, Burger King and other fast food corporations.
There was prejudice against young people and startup businesses, by misguided, misled and selfish established businesses.
The five Commissioners - every single one a registered Republican -- on the St. Augustine Beach City Commission showed naked prejudice.
I hope the City of St. Augustine Beach is sued for violating food trucks' constitutional rights to equal protection and due process and for erecting anti-competitive barriers to free market competition in violation of antitrust laws. SAB has no antitrust immunity (a question asked but never answered by St. Augustine Beach's City Attorney works for developers (including 7-11 franchisee that is being pursed for May & San Marco in historic district of St. Augustine ).
St. Augustine Beach's unAmerican action were disrespectful, disdainful and disgraceful.
As Justice Hugo Black wrote for the United States Supreme Court in Chambers v. Florida:
"We are not impressed by the argument that law enforcement methods such as those under review are necessary to uphold our laws. The Constitution proscribes such lawless means irrespective of the end. And this argument flouts the basic principle that all people must stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court. Today, as in ages past, we are not without tragic proof that the exalted power of some governments to punish manufactured crime dictatorially is the handmaid of tyranny. Under our constitutional system, courts stand against any winds that blow as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered, or because they are nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement. Due process of law, preserved for all by our Constitution, commands that no such practice as that disclosed by this record shall send any accused to his death. No higher duty, no more solemn responsibility, rests upon this Court than that of translating into living law and maintaining this constitutional shield deliberately planned and inscribed for the benefit of every human being subject to our Constitution -- of whatever race, creed or persuasion. "
What are food truck owners and their families other than "nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement?"
Post a Comment