-----Original Message-----
From: easlavin
To: pastor
Cc: ilopez
Sent: Wed, Oct 29, 2014 1:44 pm
Subject: Re: echo house appeal
Please call to discuss civility and ground rules. Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: easlavin
To: ilopez
Cc: pastor
Sent: Wed, Oct 29, 2014 11:55 am
Subject: Re: echo house appeal
Thank you. Audience was outrageous 6/19 and since. Weeks and Boles said not a word. We shall overcome!
-----Original Message-----
From: Isabelle Lopez
To: easlavin
Cc: pastor
Sent: Wed, Oct 29, 2014 11:20 am
Subject: RE: echo house appeal
Mr. Slavin,
As you know, the clock does not stop at oral argument, so yes, do not count on restarting the clock. It is what it is.
The standing issue has been ruled on, therefore it will not come up again. Please focus on an appellate argument, which does not include objections but simply legal argument on what is in the record of the hearing below. Again, I ask both of you to stick to the one issue, which is consistency with the comp plan, the HARB order rendered and what evidence was in the record at the HARB hearing on that one issue. That is it. It would behoove everyone to keep this simple and not ‘overlawyer’ this. You will have your say, Rev. Rawls will have his, and then a decision to uphold the HARB order or not will be rendered.
From: easlavin@aol.com [mailto:easlavin@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:05 AM
To: Isabelle Lopez
Cc: pastor@saintpaulfamily.com; flournoy@law.ufl.edu; hamann@law.ufl.edu; ankersen@law.ufl.edu; John Regan; David Birchim; Jennifer Wolfe; Paul Williamson; Tim Burchfield; Jim Piggott; Mark Litzinger; Martha Graham; judgelitt10@gmail.com
Subject: Re: echo house appeal
Dear Isabelle:
1. Will the clock stop for questions, or will they be included in our 20 minutes as customary in appellate courts?
2. The archived City Commission video of Rev. Rawls' arguments on standing from 10/27 is incomplete. Please ask our city contractor to remedy.
3. At the 12/8 appeal argument, may you or I object and ask for a ruling by the Commission to any:
a. extralegal arguments?
b. factual statements not contained in the record on appeal?
c. threats to move the church out of the City?
d. appeals to the Almighty?
e. photos of school children presented to City on live tv in violation of their FERPA and other privacy rights?
f. claims to have been divinely inspired in seeking to demolish a 1926 Spanish Mediterranean Revival Building?
g. unsworn assertions of "hardship" in wanting to raze Echo House to build a parking lot?
h. pejorative aesthetic opinions that the legally protected historic building is "old and ugly?"
i. hooting, hollering, catcalls, assaults and opprobrium from people in the audience, as on 6/19?
j. false, defamatory Lashon hara imputations of racism directed against our City's sworn administrative-judicial hearing decisionmakers, as at 6/19 and later HARB hearings, e.g., that "this is all about race" or that Commissioners are somehow "racist" if demolition permit is not granted hesto presto?
k. other examples of sophistry, casuistry, flummery and non sequiturs?
4. Rev. Rawls is invited to meet with me to discuss procedure and civility before the appeal argument.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ed
904-377-4998
-----Original Message-----
From: Isabelle Lopez
To: easlavin
Sent: Wed, Oct 29, 2014 9:41 am
Subject: echo house appeal
Mr. Slavin, Rev. Rawls;
The city commission hearing on Dec. 8 will be handled like an appeal on the record in an appellate court. It is limited to an appeal on the record of what was raised at HARB and legal argument by the parties. It is the responsibility of the party appealing the order to provide a complete record of the hearing or hearings below for the City Commission’s review. Typically, we encourage the parties to handle the procedures of the hearing in the same way that they would oral argument at an appellate court. The parties typically each have 20 minutes each. Again, typically the appellant can ask to reserve some of their time for rebuttal (for instance 10min for their presentation, reserve the remainder to rebut the other side). As this is quasi-judicial and not strictly speaking judicial, the city commission does try to be somewhat flexible. The key is to keep it brief and to the point based on the only issue allowed to proceed (the consistency with the comp plan), and not to try to bring in new evidence or new testimony that was not part of the record of the HARB hearings. Sometimes the commissioners will interrupt to ask questions for clarification, so do not be surprised if that occurs. Again, this happens at oral argument in court as well. Although we are required to allow public comment, unless it is to remind the city commission of something in the existing record of the HARB hearings or to make a legal argument, it really serves no purpose as no new evidence is allowed in for an appeal to the City Commission of a HARB order.
I hope that this brief clarification is helpful to your both and assists all of us in having a clear and concise hearing. Many thanks.
Isabelle C. Lopez
City Attorney
City of St. Augustine
Description: Description: Description: Coat of Arms
75 King St.
P.O. Box 210
St. Augustine, FL 32085
(904) 825-1052 (office)
(904) 825-1096 (facsimile)
ilopez@citystaug.com
Board Certified in City, County & Local Government Law
Florida Supreme Court Qualified Arbitrator and Certified County & Circuit Civil Mediator
Rated AV Preeminent® by Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review
Please Note: Florida has a very broad Public Records Law. Unless specifically exempt by state law, written communications to city officials or staff regarding official city business are public records available to the public and media upon request. If your email communication is related to official government business, it may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
No comments:
Post a Comment