Ed: You read my letter regarding the policy of the Sheriff regarding beach closure that was published in the St. Augustine Record, uneffectionately referred to as the St. Augustine Mullet Wrapper or St. Augustine Parrot Cage Liner. It is uncommon for any paper to make editorial comments regarding a letter that THEY choose to publish and even more uncommon for any reputable publication to allow letters to be published regarding opinions of special interest responders referencing by name the writer of another letter. This is what has happened at the Mullet Wrapper. I do not read or subscribe to the MW but my one of my neighbors does and she brought me the response letter today. She also brought me a copy of the one I wrote when it was printed. I responded to the Opinion Editor with the email below. Now the paper has decided to wrachet up the heat on me personally so maybe it is time to do the same to them and the special interests they represent.
The people of St. Johns County do not realize how close they are to losing beach access and have grown complacent regarding their God given right to visit THEIR Atlantic Ocean. If the special interests, waterfront home owners, developers and their ilk have their way, there will not be any vehicle access to the ocean within St. Johns County within 4 to 6 years. The Sheriff will still patrol the beach with his vehicles, garbage trucks will still drive on the beach, heavy equipment will still be operated day and night, but cars will be forbidden. Once access is gone, government will make sure that it stays gone.
The email below was sent to the MW within two days of my letter. Maybe you should do what you can to make our citizens aware of what their elected officials have planned for their future. Ben sends
[Witness B],
Just got the paper today as I am not a subscriber and my neighbor brought me a copy. In reference to your “Opinion Editor's Note”, you started your comments with, “We suspect, Mr. Rich....”. Who is “We”? This letter was sent to YOU so I can only conclude that these are your comments in the “Opinion Editor's Note”.
I was limited to 300 words in my letter. Had I been able to explain more, the letter would have included the results of my telephone calls made that day to our elected and appointed officials regarding the closure of the beach. Some of those FACTS that you failed to research before making your speculative opinions are:
First, the authority for the Sheriff to control the beach comes from a designation that the beach is now a “Florida State Road”, a concession that was part of the agreement with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service in negotiations regarding the control and protection of the turtle nesting areas (this information and some other information was supplied by SJC Staff). According to SJC, A1A and the beach are considered the same legally with regard to the Sheriff's authority. By proximity, if one is unsafe due to fog, so is the other. Proceed with caution is usually the rule of the day on a state highway (it was on A1A this day), not access denial. If one is unsafe, so is the other. Using the logic of your comments, the Sheriff was derelict in not closing A1A on the date in question. In fact, A1A actually crosses the beach and goes over the ocean at Matanzas Inlet! People fish, park to load/unload their vehicles, and walk across that roadway, children and all, day and night, in 50 MPH traffic, fog or no fog, lightning, wind, rain, with no police interference! No safety issue there I guess.
Second, I inquired about the “safety” issue that you raised regarding “sand castles” and “beach balls”. Like you, the Sheriff obviously believes that children crossing A1A in 45 to 60 MPH traffic carrying those same balls, sand pails, fishing rods, towels, coolers, chairs, cell phones, a partridge in a pear tree, along with all of the stuff that they were going to drive down onto the beach, can do so much more safely than driving it there. Those children are in the same fog (or in this case, lack thereof) and are in no danger. Is that your implication? You describe the scene as “...during a socked in fog...”. I was there pal. I drove my car there and arrived at 11:38 according to a satellite controlled watch. You do not know what you are writing about. “Socked in”? Bullshit! By the way; your remark regarding balls in the road was just sloppy considering that there is a park and playground for children just north of the Crescent Beach entrance which is on the west side of A1A. Soccer is played their routinely. It has no fences, curbs, or restrictions to entering the high speed highway. Gee Jim; do you think that children ever take balls to a park? This was almost noon, as in lunch/picnic time. Oh, that's right, I read it so it must be true: they only take their balls to the beach! Ball on A1A, no problem; ball on the beach, dead kid. WTF!
There was a time when this sort of conduct was looked into by our independent press. What is the long term plan of SJC and the Sheriff regarding beach access? Why is the 10 MPH State Road being treated differently than the other State Road(s)? Why is there such concern over vehicle safety at an ocean, where you swim in the feces of every sea creature, all of which eat the same seafood we do, along with animals that can and will eat you? About 40,000 people are killed with hundreds of thousands if not millions more maimed in traffic accidents each year in the U.S. Alone. How many are killed and maimed in traffic accidents on beaches each year? Is the justification for closure sound or is it in conflict with common sense? Is there an indication of a political agenda for special interests where everything from mice to safety of children (YOUR fog claim not mine), from high water or dirty water, to lightning storms and other excuses can be used to restrict Atlantic Ocean access to the public? Why don't we force evacuate residents along the beach when some of these potentially “dangerous” problems arise but we force evacuate visitors who have, unlike the residents, paid to enjoy their ocean? What sort of pressure is applied by the owners of the multimillion dollar homes/condos along the beachfront to choke off public access to what I have had them describe to me as “their beach”? What are the political contributions to our elected officials from these individuals and associated PAC connections that would indicate another agenda? Why has the general public been referring for years to the law enforcement officers on the beach as “Beach Nazi's”? If strong arm enforcement has been used to deserve that label, what was the purpose of those tactics and who directed that they be employed?
As you ended your comment, I will end mine regarding YOUR sarcastic and condescending remarks. “[Witness B] is a former St. Augustine Record journalist.” Cheap shot [Witness B]. You of all people should know that respect is based on trust.
No comments:
Post a Comment