Letter: Dead oaks
Eileen O'Brien
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 08/31/03
Editor: I was horrified, but not particularly surprised to read that our code enforcement board (what a joke) had dropped the $15,000 fine against Robert Graubard for destroying three massive oaks that were in his way.
The developers win again. They know that they can flaunt the laws with impunity by whispering "lawsuit." This is one of the few times the money for lawyers would have been well spent, to make an example of and a deterrent to future noncompliance.
I would ask Dave Chatterton and Jackie Leslie to go to that property in a year and count how many of those little saplings are still alive.
Without requiring irrigation or verifying maintenance I guarantee half will be just as dead as those 30 inch, beautiful oaks that man cut down.
Eileen O'Brien
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/083103/opi_kr005071.shtml
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Developers may raze structures, board says
Developers may raze structures, board says
By KATI BEXLEY
kati.bexley@staugustinerecord.com
Publication Date: 01/20/06
A developer is closer to building a 10,000-square-foot structure with condominiums and retail shops on Anastasia Boulevard after the approval Thursday to demolish an old gas station.
St. Augustine's Historic Architectural Review Board approved the request of Robert Graubard, one of a group of developers who recently bought the Conch House property, to demolish an old gas station at 600 Anastasia Blvd. He will replace it with a three-story, 10,000-square-foot structure with condominiums and retail shops.
The board also granted Graubard two more demolition permits for a multi-family house at 54 Comares St. and a single-family house as 406 Andreas St. Both will be replaced with single-family homes, Graubard said.
The board tabled Graubard's request for a fourth demolition permit at 48 Comares St. until Feb. 16 so he can bring more information to them. That house is now a multi-family house.
Seven people spoke at the meeting, with five speaking against the demolitions.
"Do not approve any of these demolitions unless specific plans for the replacements are given," said Jeanette Berk, president of the North Davis Shores Neighborhood Association, where the Conch House is located.
The board said it would have liked to have defined plans for what would replace the demolished buildings, but Graubard is not required to show them the plans. The board also said the buildings are not historically significant enough for them to be saved.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/012006/new_3588243.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
By KATI BEXLEY
kati.bexley@staugustinerecord.com
Publication Date: 01/20/06
A developer is closer to building a 10,000-square-foot structure with condominiums and retail shops on Anastasia Boulevard after the approval Thursday to demolish an old gas station.
St. Augustine's Historic Architectural Review Board approved the request of Robert Graubard, one of a group of developers who recently bought the Conch House property, to demolish an old gas station at 600 Anastasia Blvd. He will replace it with a three-story, 10,000-square-foot structure with condominiums and retail shops.
The board also granted Graubard two more demolition permits for a multi-family house at 54 Comares St. and a single-family house as 406 Andreas St. Both will be replaced with single-family homes, Graubard said.
The board tabled Graubard's request for a fourth demolition permit at 48 Comares St. until Feb. 16 so he can bring more information to them. That house is now a multi-family house.
Seven people spoke at the meeting, with five speaking against the demolitions.
"Do not approve any of these demolitions unless specific plans for the replacements are given," said Jeanette Berk, president of the North Davis Shores Neighborhood Association, where the Conch House is located.
The board said it would have liked to have defined plans for what would replace the demolished buildings, but Graubard is not required to show them the plans. The board also said the buildings are not historically significant enough for them to be saved.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/012006/new_3588243.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
City to Graubard: 'We won't appeal'
City to Graubard: 'We won't appeal'
By PETER GUINTA
Staff Writer
Publication Date: 03/13/01
Beaten both in circuit court and on appeal, the city will not further challenge the right of St. Augustine bed-and-breakfast owner Robert Graubard to enlarge his bayfront inn.
The city's defeat means the door may open to daily rentals of bed-and-breakfast rooms and possibly even motels in HP-1 zoning, the Historic Preservation Zoning District, one of the city's oldest and most restrictive areas.
City Attorney Jim Wilson said Graubard wanted to connect two adjacent properties on Avenida Menendez, his Villa de Marin, an apartment building with monthly rentals, and the Westcott House, a bed-and-breakfast with daily rentals, creating one newer and larger bed-and-breakfast.
His plan includes adding an enclosed porch, a connecting walkway and improved dining facilities.
The Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval, but the City Commission turned Graubard down. Neighborhood residents cited the potential for more traffic, the increased turnover of daily rentals, a lack of parking and increased commercial intrusion.
Graubard sued, saying he had met all the conditions of a planned unit development, and that denial of his application was arbitrary, discriminatory and unreasonable.
The judge said only minor changes would be made to the exterior of the properties and that further renovations could be restricted. It also said other non-conforming uses of property ''abounded'' in the area. He quashed the denial.
City officials voted to appeal, and did so. But in January, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal denied its petition. Its only options were to appeal to the Florida Supreme Court or approve Graubard's application if submitted.
Wilson said the court ruling does not impose an order on the city. In other words, Graubard does not automatically get his development. He must apply again.
''This is unlikely to be accepted for further appeal by the Supreme Court,'' Wilson said. ''This is the final disposition of the case.''
City Commissioner Susan Burk asked what would happen if the city refused to comply, and Wilson replied that the court had contempt powers. ''There's very little we can do to avoid compliance in this case,'' he added.
One resident of the HP-1 district and a spokeswoman for the community, Hildegard Pacetti, bemoaned the court's ruling and said there are 95 privately owned structures in that district.
''This sets a bad precedent, and is not in the best interests of the city,'' Pacetti said. ''The court's decision is full of errors. I don't think the judges considered the implications.''
She said the community may be down, but isn't out. Any further applications for daily rental usage in HP-1 will be opposed by the district's residents, she said.
''We will fight vigorously,'' she said.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/031301/new_0313010052.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
By PETER GUINTA
Staff Writer
Publication Date: 03/13/01
Beaten both in circuit court and on appeal, the city will not further challenge the right of St. Augustine bed-and-breakfast owner Robert Graubard to enlarge his bayfront inn.
The city's defeat means the door may open to daily rentals of bed-and-breakfast rooms and possibly even motels in HP-1 zoning, the Historic Preservation Zoning District, one of the city's oldest and most restrictive areas.
City Attorney Jim Wilson said Graubard wanted to connect two adjacent properties on Avenida Menendez, his Villa de Marin, an apartment building with monthly rentals, and the Westcott House, a bed-and-breakfast with daily rentals, creating one newer and larger bed-and-breakfast.
His plan includes adding an enclosed porch, a connecting walkway and improved dining facilities.
The Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval, but the City Commission turned Graubard down. Neighborhood residents cited the potential for more traffic, the increased turnover of daily rentals, a lack of parking and increased commercial intrusion.
Graubard sued, saying he had met all the conditions of a planned unit development, and that denial of his application was arbitrary, discriminatory and unreasonable.
The judge said only minor changes would be made to the exterior of the properties and that further renovations could be restricted. It also said other non-conforming uses of property ''abounded'' in the area. He quashed the denial.
City officials voted to appeal, and did so. But in January, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal denied its petition. Its only options were to appeal to the Florida Supreme Court or approve Graubard's application if submitted.
Wilson said the court ruling does not impose an order on the city. In other words, Graubard does not automatically get his development. He must apply again.
''This is unlikely to be accepted for further appeal by the Supreme Court,'' Wilson said. ''This is the final disposition of the case.''
City Commissioner Susan Burk asked what would happen if the city refused to comply, and Wilson replied that the court had contempt powers. ''There's very little we can do to avoid compliance in this case,'' he added.
One resident of the HP-1 district and a spokeswoman for the community, Hildegard Pacetti, bemoaned the court's ruling and said there are 95 privately owned structures in that district.
''This sets a bad precedent, and is not in the best interests of the city,'' Pacetti said. ''The court's decision is full of errors. I don't think the judges considered the implications.''
She said the community may be down, but isn't out. Any further applications for daily rental usage in HP-1 will be opposed by the district's residents, she said.
''We will fight vigorously,'' she said.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/031301/new_0313010052.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Board drops $15,000 fine for tree violation
Board drops $15,000 fine for tree violation
By PETER GUINTA
Senior Writer
Publication Date: 08/20/03
A $15,000 fine imposed against a developer for removing trees without a permit has been reversed by the St. Augustine Code Enforcement, Adjustments and Appeals Board.
The board first imposed the fine in May against developer Robert Graubard, who is now in the engineering and permitting stages of what will be the 34.2-acre, 85-home Old Sebastian Pointe subdivision off D.O.T. Road and Lewis Speedway.
The city's initial complaint said the site contractor, Bentley Development of Farmington, Conn., had cut down three oak trees with trunks larger than 30 inches in diameter, plus 29 loblolly and slash pines.
All the trees were removed without a permit during the clearing of a storm water pond. The contractor admitted to the Code Enforcement Board that he didn't know a permit was required. But as the owner, Graubard is responsible for what is done on his property.
He was ordered to replace those trees by planting 234 nursery grown live oak and Southern red cedars: 48 in the recreation area, 16 around the pond and two on each of the 85 lots.
Then, on a motion by board Vice Chair Vernon Davis, Graubard was also fined $15,000 -- $5,000 for each of three trees larger than 30 inches in diameter.
The board split 4 to 2 on this issue, with members John Valdes and David Chatterton opposing the fine.
On Aug. 12, Graubard and his attorney, George McClure, brought the case back to the board for mediation.
Board member Jackie Leslie said the board decided to accept a better tree replacement plan than go to court.
"I was happy with the mediation," she said. "The code is about keeping trees. The money is not as good as the trees."
The new plan offered 267 trees, all at least 5 feet tall and 1 inch thick. Two trees are still required for each lot, but 73 will be in the recreation area and 24 around the pond.
The new total is 33 more than the previous one. The board accepted that offer and removed the fine.
Chatterton said that if the board did not accept the new plan, a lawsuit would cost the taxpayers more money.
"Also, the fine would be rescinded and we might not get a guarantee to get that many trees," he said. "I was more interested in getting trees back into the ground. It was very acceptable."
He had never seen a fine comparable to that, he said.
"We're not in the business to collect fines," Chatterton said. "We just use fines to get these folks into compliance."
Graubard said Tuesday that he didn't speak at the hearing and left all the talking to McClure.
"The board made a just decision," he said.
But Vice Chairman Davis was unhappy with rescinding the fine.
"I felt that if (Graubard) had an objection, he could take it to circuit court," Davis said. "I don't believe that taking out trees and then asking for forgiveness is the proper way to do things. He's not a novice at construction projects. And I don't buy the story that the contractor didn't know he needed a permit."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/082003/new_1745328.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
By PETER GUINTA
Senior Writer
Publication Date: 08/20/03
A $15,000 fine imposed against a developer for removing trees without a permit has been reversed by the St. Augustine Code Enforcement, Adjustments and Appeals Board.
The board first imposed the fine in May against developer Robert Graubard, who is now in the engineering and permitting stages of what will be the 34.2-acre, 85-home Old Sebastian Pointe subdivision off D.O.T. Road and Lewis Speedway.
The city's initial complaint said the site contractor, Bentley Development of Farmington, Conn., had cut down three oak trees with trunks larger than 30 inches in diameter, plus 29 loblolly and slash pines.
All the trees were removed without a permit during the clearing of a storm water pond. The contractor admitted to the Code Enforcement Board that he didn't know a permit was required. But as the owner, Graubard is responsible for what is done on his property.
He was ordered to replace those trees by planting 234 nursery grown live oak and Southern red cedars: 48 in the recreation area, 16 around the pond and two on each of the 85 lots.
Then, on a motion by board Vice Chair Vernon Davis, Graubard was also fined $15,000 -- $5,000 for each of three trees larger than 30 inches in diameter.
The board split 4 to 2 on this issue, with members John Valdes and David Chatterton opposing the fine.
On Aug. 12, Graubard and his attorney, George McClure, brought the case back to the board for mediation.
Board member Jackie Leslie said the board decided to accept a better tree replacement plan than go to court.
"I was happy with the mediation," she said. "The code is about keeping trees. The money is not as good as the trees."
The new plan offered 267 trees, all at least 5 feet tall and 1 inch thick. Two trees are still required for each lot, but 73 will be in the recreation area and 24 around the pond.
The new total is 33 more than the previous one. The board accepted that offer and removed the fine.
Chatterton said that if the board did not accept the new plan, a lawsuit would cost the taxpayers more money.
"Also, the fine would be rescinded and we might not get a guarantee to get that many trees," he said. "I was more interested in getting trees back into the ground. It was very acceptable."
He had never seen a fine comparable to that, he said.
"We're not in the business to collect fines," Chatterton said. "We just use fines to get these folks into compliance."
Graubard said Tuesday that he didn't speak at the hearing and left all the talking to McClure.
"The board made a just decision," he said.
But Vice Chairman Davis was unhappy with rescinding the fine.
"I felt that if (Graubard) had an objection, he could take it to circuit court," Davis said. "I don't believe that taking out trees and then asking for forgiveness is the proper way to do things. He's not a novice at construction projects. And I don't buy the story that the contractor didn't know he needed a permit."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/082003/new_1745328.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Convicted developer pursued local deals
Convicted developer pursued local deals
Jacksonville Business Journal - June 29, 2007
by Christian ConteS
taff Writer
Special
Real estate broker Bob Knight said that Thomas E. Coghill Jr. tried to sell the land on which Crosswinds National intends to build the Downtown Jacksonville project shown in this rendering.
View Larger NORTHEAST FLORIDA --
Thomas E. Coghill Jr. is charming, say people who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in his various Northeast Florida real estate deals. That's why they believed their investments were secure even after learning Coghill was living and doing business in Florida while awaiting federal sentencing on fraud charges he pleaded guilty to in Virginia.
Now several fear they may not recoup all their money.
Public records and other documentation indicate that Coghill was involved in several real estate investments in Northeast Florida while he awaited sentencing. Investors said Coghill planned to develop at least three residential projects:
On Adams Street next to the Jacksonville Municipal Stadium in Downtown Jacksonville
At the Conch House Marina Resort in St. Augustine
On oceanfront property in Vilano Beach, just north of St. Augustine. Coghill, through a Federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman, declined to comment.
One Florida resident who did business with Coghill in Florida said he promised large returns on investments and is still making promises from his cell in Federal Prison Camp in Montgomery, Ala.
Coghill has served about 14 months of what was originally a 33-month sentence for one count of wire fraud and one count of bank fraud. He also owes more than $3 million in restitution to victims in Virginia. FPC Montgomery spokeswoman Chalon Moore said his projected release date is Jan. 27, 2008.
Curtis Fallgatter of Jacksonville-based Fallgatter, Farmand & Catlin PA represented Coghill in Virginia, but did not return phone calls. Robin Conner, an attorney at St. Augustine-based Bedsole and Conner Attorneys at Law, said he represented Coghill on real estate matters in Florida before he went to prison.
Conner said the matters differed from what Coghill was involved with in Virginia. "What he's doing down here has nothing to do with what went on up there."
Doing business in Florida
From the time he was indicted in November 2004 until he began his sentence in May 2006, six limited liability companies were started with Coghill listed as the manager or registered agent, Florida Department of State Division of Corporations records show.
"It's possible to have an entity and not conduct business in that entity," Rogers Towers PA attorney Kirby Chritton said. "Most people don't do that, but there are occasions when they do to hold a name."
In at least two cases -- involving the Conch House and a high-rise project at 1721 E. Adams St. in Jacksonville -- the listed agents of the limited liability company that bought the properties included individuals who were listed as agents in other LLCs with Coghill, state records show.
Coghill was not listed as an agent in the LLCs that bought those properties. Investors, a broker and a subcontractor said, though, that Coghill claimed to be at least a partial owner.
Riverfront Development Group II LLC bought the 22.8-acre site at 1721 E. Adams St. for $19.9 million Sept. 15, 2005, according to the Jacksonville Property Appraiser's Office. Coghill's name is not listed on the documentation. Addison Commercial Real Estate Inc. broker Bob Knight said the land is still for sale.
Knight last spoke with Coghill in April 2006, when Coghill was in Jacksonville to discuss the Adams Street site. Coghill told him then that he was a principal, Knight said. "The next time I tried to reach him, his cell phone was disconnected."
Crosswinds National LLC, based in Novi, Mich., said it is the site's majority owner. Crosswinds is a residential builder and developer with properties throughout the U.S., including five in Northeast Florida.
The company is proceeding with plans to transform the industrial land on Adams Street into a mixed-use project featuring three towers -- the tallest of which may be 30 stories -- and a marina, said Jock McCartney, Crosswinds vice president of planning and engineering. Construction could begin early next year.
McCartney said he did not know if Coghill was involved. Other Crosswinds executives did not return phone calls.
More Florida deals
A St. Augustine property described in court documents as E-19 and E-20, Conch House Marina, owned by Conch House Builders II LLC, was foreclosed on in March. Coghill was listed as a defendant on the foreclosure documents.
Intervest National Bank in May filed notice it plans to take legal action against Conch House Builders on 13 parcels listed as Davis Shores Ocean View Section.
St. Augustine resident and real estate investor Stephen Cobb met Coghill in 2005. While investing $250,000 in the oceanfront condo project in Vilano Beach, Cobb discovered Coghill had been charged with six counts of fraud relating to his homebuilding business in Virginia.
Cobb said Coghill assured him the charges would be dropped and that his investment would be sound. Coghill promised Cobb a 30 percent return on his investment, according to a memo Cobb provided to the Jacksonville Business Journal.
Cobb requested his money back because the project was not progressing. He also worried because he said it was unclear whether Coghill owned the property that the project was to be built on and that Coghill might be using his investment for other purposes.
Coghill made several payments to Cobb but one of the checks bounced. Cobb said he is still out $45,000 from the $250,000.
Coghill has continued to tell Cobb and other investors from prison that they will be made whole.
cconte@bizjournals.com | 265-2227
Jacksonville Business Journal - June 29, 2007
by Christian ConteS
taff Writer
Special
Real estate broker Bob Knight said that Thomas E. Coghill Jr. tried to sell the land on which Crosswinds National intends to build the Downtown Jacksonville project shown in this rendering.
View Larger NORTHEAST FLORIDA --
Thomas E. Coghill Jr. is charming, say people who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in his various Northeast Florida real estate deals. That's why they believed their investments were secure even after learning Coghill was living and doing business in Florida while awaiting federal sentencing on fraud charges he pleaded guilty to in Virginia.
Now several fear they may not recoup all their money.
Public records and other documentation indicate that Coghill was involved in several real estate investments in Northeast Florida while he awaited sentencing. Investors said Coghill planned to develop at least three residential projects:
On Adams Street next to the Jacksonville Municipal Stadium in Downtown Jacksonville
At the Conch House Marina Resort in St. Augustine
On oceanfront property in Vilano Beach, just north of St. Augustine. Coghill, through a Federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman, declined to comment.
One Florida resident who did business with Coghill in Florida said he promised large returns on investments and is still making promises from his cell in Federal Prison Camp in Montgomery, Ala.
Coghill has served about 14 months of what was originally a 33-month sentence for one count of wire fraud and one count of bank fraud. He also owes more than $3 million in restitution to victims in Virginia. FPC Montgomery spokeswoman Chalon Moore said his projected release date is Jan. 27, 2008.
Curtis Fallgatter of Jacksonville-based Fallgatter, Farmand & Catlin PA represented Coghill in Virginia, but did not return phone calls. Robin Conner, an attorney at St. Augustine-based Bedsole and Conner Attorneys at Law, said he represented Coghill on real estate matters in Florida before he went to prison.
Conner said the matters differed from what Coghill was involved with in Virginia. "What he's doing down here has nothing to do with what went on up there."
Doing business in Florida
From the time he was indicted in November 2004 until he began his sentence in May 2006, six limited liability companies were started with Coghill listed as the manager or registered agent, Florida Department of State Division of Corporations records show.
"It's possible to have an entity and not conduct business in that entity," Rogers Towers PA attorney Kirby Chritton said. "Most people don't do that, but there are occasions when they do to hold a name."
In at least two cases -- involving the Conch House and a high-rise project at 1721 E. Adams St. in Jacksonville -- the listed agents of the limited liability company that bought the properties included individuals who were listed as agents in other LLCs with Coghill, state records show.
Coghill was not listed as an agent in the LLCs that bought those properties. Investors, a broker and a subcontractor said, though, that Coghill claimed to be at least a partial owner.
Riverfront Development Group II LLC bought the 22.8-acre site at 1721 E. Adams St. for $19.9 million Sept. 15, 2005, according to the Jacksonville Property Appraiser's Office. Coghill's name is not listed on the documentation. Addison Commercial Real Estate Inc. broker Bob Knight said the land is still for sale.
Knight last spoke with Coghill in April 2006, when Coghill was in Jacksonville to discuss the Adams Street site. Coghill told him then that he was a principal, Knight said. "The next time I tried to reach him, his cell phone was disconnected."
Crosswinds National LLC, based in Novi, Mich., said it is the site's majority owner. Crosswinds is a residential builder and developer with properties throughout the U.S., including five in Northeast Florida.
The company is proceeding with plans to transform the industrial land on Adams Street into a mixed-use project featuring three towers -- the tallest of which may be 30 stories -- and a marina, said Jock McCartney, Crosswinds vice president of planning and engineering. Construction could begin early next year.
McCartney said he did not know if Coghill was involved. Other Crosswinds executives did not return phone calls.
More Florida deals
A St. Augustine property described in court documents as E-19 and E-20, Conch House Marina, owned by Conch House Builders II LLC, was foreclosed on in March. Coghill was listed as a defendant on the foreclosure documents.
Intervest National Bank in May filed notice it plans to take legal action against Conch House Builders on 13 parcels listed as Davis Shores Ocean View Section.
St. Augustine resident and real estate investor Stephen Cobb met Coghill in 2005. While investing $250,000 in the oceanfront condo project in Vilano Beach, Cobb discovered Coghill had been charged with six counts of fraud relating to his homebuilding business in Virginia.
Cobb said Coghill assured him the charges would be dropped and that his investment would be sound. Coghill promised Cobb a 30 percent return on his investment, according to a memo Cobb provided to the Jacksonville Business Journal.
Cobb requested his money back because the project was not progressing. He also worried because he said it was unclear whether Coghill owned the property that the project was to be built on and that Coghill might be using his investment for other purposes.
Coghill made several payments to Cobb but one of the checks bounced. Cobb said he is still out $45,000 from the $250,000.
Coghill has continued to tell Cobb and other investors from prison that they will be made whole.
cconte@bizjournals.com | 265-2227
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Why Were These Commmissioners and Mayor Smiling As They Voted to Forgive Tree-Killing FIne, Destroy Indian Village?
Photo of City Commissioners DONALD CRICHLOW, ERROL JONES, GEORGE GARDNER, SUSAN BURK and Mayor JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. in a dapper posed official picture in happier times, when speculator and accused fraudfeasor ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD and other "investors" ran the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA as landraping lords of all they saw.
With your help, we're going to clean up the City of St. Augustine, Florida.
It takes a village -- we still believe in a place called Hope!
Ed Slavin
DO St. Augustine, Florida City Commissioners, City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS and Speculators Resemble the Tweed Ring? (see below)
Do City Commissioners and City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS and real estate speculators resemble the Tweed Ring?
Will this small group of willful City-destroyers and visigoths kindly answer questions about illegal dumping of the entire contents of the old city dump into the Old City Reservoir, voting to destroyy a 3000-4000 year old Indian village at the behest of ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD, and other possible crimes, torts and sins?
Or will they stand in a circle and blame someone else, as usual?
Commissioner SUSAN BURK has said she no longer meets with citizens. Try calling her on the telephone. Her ex-boyfriend, ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD, has been sued by the Ponce family for a fraudulent scheme involving the Conch House Marina, a deal once described as "one sweet monkey."
GRAUBARD -- it rhymes with PETARD. We await candor from St. AUGUSTINE CITY COMMISSIONERS SUSAN BURK, GEORGE GARDNER, ERROL JONES, DONALD CRICHLOW, Mayor JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. and CITY MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS.
What do you reckon?
THE STRANGE ROMANCE BETWEEN ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA SPECULATOR ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD AND OUR COMMISSIONERS REQUIRES INVESTIGATION
THE STRANGE ROMANCE BETWEEN ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA SPECULATOR ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD AND OUR COMMISSIONERS REQUIRES INVESTIGATION
On June 11, 2007, during a recess in a St. Augustine City Commission meeting, in a nearly-empty City Commission room, ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD walked halfway across the room. City Commissioner SUSAN BURK walked across the room. He leaned over and kissed her. The two once dated. BURK has never recused herself from voting on GRAUBARD projects and investments.
No City Commmissioner ever answered my question at Commission meetings about any "agreements, understandings or relationships" with GRAUBARD.
St. AUGUSTINE COMMISSIONERS like SUSAN BURK, ERROL JONES AND GEORGE GARDNER, among others, have been close to GRAUBARD.
GRAUBARD contributed to GARDNER's campaign last year and has contributed to other campaigns..
CITY COMMISSIONERS forgave a $15,000 tree-killing fine against GRAUBARD without good reason and without allowing citizens to be heard.
Want to build condos and a strip mall on top of a 3000-4000 Indian village with raised mounds signifying what the University of Florida considers significant human history at RED HOUSE BLUFF on RED HOUSE BRANCH? No problem. ST. AUGUSTINE CITY COMMISSIONERS approved 3-2 a GRAUBARD project (his Planned Unit Development or PUD has thankfully expired).
Want to clear-cut trees in support of other speculative developments? No problem, Our incurious pror County Commissioners allowed it to happen.
Now it can be told -- reform County Commission Chair Ben Rich was right -- the speculators were worse than the worst carpetbagger. ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD is a landraping scalawag now caught in a web of his own lies.
GRAUBARD's kind of "g:overnment relations" require Federal Grand Jury subpoenas.
On June 11, 2007, during a recess in a St. Augustine City Commission meeting, in a nearly-empty City Commission room, ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD walked halfway across the room. City Commissioner SUSAN BURK walked across the room. He leaned over and kissed her. The two once dated. BURK has never recused herself from voting on GRAUBARD projects and investments.
No City Commmissioner ever answered my question at Commission meetings about any "agreements, understandings or relationships" with GRAUBARD.
St. AUGUSTINE COMMISSIONERS like SUSAN BURK, ERROL JONES AND GEORGE GARDNER, among others, have been close to GRAUBARD.
GRAUBARD contributed to GARDNER's campaign last year and has contributed to other campaigns..
CITY COMMISSIONERS forgave a $15,000 tree-killing fine against GRAUBARD without good reason and without allowing citizens to be heard.
Want to build condos and a strip mall on top of a 3000-4000 Indian village with raised mounds signifying what the University of Florida considers significant human history at RED HOUSE BLUFF on RED HOUSE BRANCH? No problem. ST. AUGUSTINE CITY COMMISSIONERS approved 3-2 a GRAUBARD project (his Planned Unit Development or PUD has thankfully expired).
Want to clear-cut trees in support of other speculative developments? No problem, Our incurious pror County Commissioners allowed it to happen.
Now it can be told -- reform County Commission Chair Ben Rich was right -- the speculators were worse than the worst carpetbagger. ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD is a landraping scalawag now caught in a web of his own lies.
GRAUBARD's kind of "g:overnment relations" require Federal Grand Jury subpoenas.
Conch House fights foreclosure -- SPECULATOR ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD SUED FOR FRAUDULENT SCHEME -- Case Pending Before Circuit Court
Conch House fights foreclosure
200-slip marina, restaurant, motel, homes, retail area part of dispute
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 07/28/07
The family of David M. Ponce Jr., which has owned Conch House Marina Resort at 57 Comares Ave. since 1946, is now fighting a lawsuit by a New York bank to foreclose on that property.
Circuit Court Judge J. Michael Traynor issued an order late Friday denying Ponce attorney Jason B. Burnett's motion to dismiss the case outright. The judge said Burnett, or Gray Robinson, Jacksonville, had failed to create a basis on which to dismiss.
The foreclosure lawsuit initially was filed by Intervest National Bank of New York, which in 2006 loaned five real estate investors -- four St. Johns County residents and a Virginia man -- $17 million for six months to buy the Conch House and adjacent property.
On the table are a 200-slip marina, 17-room motel, three single-family homes across Comares, a restaurant, dockside tiki bar, Salt Run Tavern on Anastasia Boulevard, the antiques store on Comares and Anastasia Boulevard and an empty lot on Comares.
Documents at St. Johns County Courthouse show that the total selling price was $27 million.
At the time, Ponce said 2005 had been good for business.
"Even with all the storms, it was the best year we ever had," he said. "But it's time to move on and enjoy myself. All I've ever done is work."
The five investors, doing business under the name Conch House Builders LLC, consisted of local businessmen Robert M. Graubard of St. Augustine, C. Kelly Smith of Vilano Beach, Jay Culberth of Interstate Hotels and Resorts, Paul Braugart whose address is unknown and Thomas E. Coghill Jr., convicted in federal court of bank and wire fraud in Virginia.
An August 2005 story in The Hook, a Charlottesville, Va., news magazine, said Coghill, now 47, faced 35 years in prison and a $1.25 million fine. He was charged with defrauding merchants, banks and mortgage companies of about $3 million. One of Coghill's victims called him "a silver-tongued devil."
The Ponce family's suit claimed that Robert Graubard, the managing partner of Conch House Builders, negotiated a $17 million loan to buy the property, but that the loan was closed without their knowledge and before the property was transferred to the consortium's control.
They called it a "fraudulent scheme" by Graubard.
Graubard did not return phone calls about this lawsuit. Culbreath, Smith and Braugard could not be located.
Coghill broke his probation in 2006 by master-minding four new land deals in Florida, so he is now serving his 33 month sentence in prison, according to The Hook.
The Conch House Builders told the Ponces that they didn't have enough money to pay the entire $27 million, so they asked the family if they could help finance the acquisition by agreeing to become an investor themselves. For that, they would be paid $10 million in cash and be bought out over time.
The Ponces say that money was never paid. They also did not return phone calls.
Still unknown is who has the $17 million paid by Intervest National Bank.
Payments were made on the loan, bringing its principle down to $16.3 million.
But the last payment was made in February this year.
In their defense, the Ponces claim that the bank charged $3 million as collateral for the loan and charged high interest rates, and that the members of Conch House Builders and the bank "knew or should have known" of Coghill's felony record.
The suit also implied collusion, saying, "These individuals have business relationships in other real estate development projects."
They say the investors did not tell them there would be a third-party financing the deal. "The loan was not commercially reasonable," the Ponce's suit said.
The family is still running the Conch House for now.
In January 2006, when he announced the sale to the world, he said prophetically, "I'm sure it will be a shocker and one of the biggest land deals anyone has ever seen in St. Augustine."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072807/news_4740863.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
200-slip marina, restaurant, motel, homes, retail area part of dispute
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 07/28/07
The family of David M. Ponce Jr., which has owned Conch House Marina Resort at 57 Comares Ave. since 1946, is now fighting a lawsuit by a New York bank to foreclose on that property.
Circuit Court Judge J. Michael Traynor issued an order late Friday denying Ponce attorney Jason B. Burnett's motion to dismiss the case outright. The judge said Burnett, or Gray Robinson, Jacksonville, had failed to create a basis on which to dismiss.
The foreclosure lawsuit initially was filed by Intervest National Bank of New York, which in 2006 loaned five real estate investors -- four St. Johns County residents and a Virginia man -- $17 million for six months to buy the Conch House and adjacent property.
On the table are a 200-slip marina, 17-room motel, three single-family homes across Comares, a restaurant, dockside tiki bar, Salt Run Tavern on Anastasia Boulevard, the antiques store on Comares and Anastasia Boulevard and an empty lot on Comares.
Documents at St. Johns County Courthouse show that the total selling price was $27 million.
At the time, Ponce said 2005 had been good for business.
"Even with all the storms, it was the best year we ever had," he said. "But it's time to move on and enjoy myself. All I've ever done is work."
The five investors, doing business under the name Conch House Builders LLC, consisted of local businessmen Robert M. Graubard of St. Augustine, C. Kelly Smith of Vilano Beach, Jay Culberth of Interstate Hotels and Resorts, Paul Braugart whose address is unknown and Thomas E. Coghill Jr., convicted in federal court of bank and wire fraud in Virginia.
An August 2005 story in The Hook, a Charlottesville, Va., news magazine, said Coghill, now 47, faced 35 years in prison and a $1.25 million fine. He was charged with defrauding merchants, banks and mortgage companies of about $3 million. One of Coghill's victims called him "a silver-tongued devil."
The Ponce family's suit claimed that Robert Graubard, the managing partner of Conch House Builders, negotiated a $17 million loan to buy the property, but that the loan was closed without their knowledge and before the property was transferred to the consortium's control.
They called it a "fraudulent scheme" by Graubard.
Graubard did not return phone calls about this lawsuit. Culbreath, Smith and Braugard could not be located.
Coghill broke his probation in 2006 by master-minding four new land deals in Florida, so he is now serving his 33 month sentence in prison, according to The Hook.
The Conch House Builders told the Ponces that they didn't have enough money to pay the entire $27 million, so they asked the family if they could help finance the acquisition by agreeing to become an investor themselves. For that, they would be paid $10 million in cash and be bought out over time.
The Ponces say that money was never paid. They also did not return phone calls.
Still unknown is who has the $17 million paid by Intervest National Bank.
Payments were made on the loan, bringing its principle down to $16.3 million.
But the last payment was made in February this year.
In their defense, the Ponces claim that the bank charged $3 million as collateral for the loan and charged high interest rates, and that the members of Conch House Builders and the bank "knew or should have known" of Coghill's felony record.
The suit also implied collusion, saying, "These individuals have business relationships in other real estate development projects."
They say the investors did not tell them there would be a third-party financing the deal. "The loan was not commercially reasonable," the Ponce's suit said.
The family is still running the Conch House for now.
In January 2006, when he announced the sale to the world, he said prophetically, "I'm sure it will be a shocker and one of the biggest land deals anyone has ever seen in St. Augustine."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072807/news_4740863.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Friday, July 27, 2007
Videotaped Sunshine Violation Investigated -- Mosquito Control Chair BARBARA BOSANKO, Member LINDA WAMPLER and DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID (DWAK)
Photo above is from official videotape of the July 10, 2007 Sunshine Violation by Anastasia Mosquito Control District Chair BARBARA BOSANKO, Board Member LINDA WAMPLER and DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID attorney AUDIRE M. HARRIS (DWAK).
STate's Attorney and Florida Department of Law Enforcement are investigating.
See St. Augusitne Record, story, correction, corresondence and more, below.
Still Waiting on Response from Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & CUNDID Lawyers & AMCD to Records Request and 13 Questions
Here's a Daytona corporate lawyer's terse E-mail. Still waiting for a substantive response to the 13 Questions in the July 26, 2007 request to the Anastasia Mosquito Control District and its contract attorneys, Ms. AUDRIE HARRIS and Ms. CAROLYN ANSAY, name-partner in the the Daytona corporate law firm of DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID) re: Open Records Request and Sunshine Violations by DWAK's clients at AMCD.
See below
Ed Slavin
Subj: Re: Open Records Request; 13 Questions re: AMCD SUNSHINE VIOLATIONS
Date: 7/27/07 10:03:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: klavassaur@doranlaw.com
To: EASlavin@aol.com
CC: aharris@doranlaw.com, cansay@doranlaw.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Mr. Slavin, Ms. Ansay is on vacation this week. She will not be in the
office, or in a position to address your concerns, until next week.
>>>
Dear Ms. Ansay:
Still waiting on a response to my E-mail on this subject.
Thank you.
Ed Slavin
Editorial: Sunshine complaints against Mosquito board members need timely review
Editorial: Sunshine complaints against Mosquito board members need timely review
Publication Date: 07/27/07
Two Anastasia Mosquito Control District board members are on the hot seat for what may be a violation of Florida's Sunshine Law governing open meetings.
A video camera in the meeting room on July 10 had not been turned off at the end of the regular meeting. Its tape shows Board Chairman Barbara Bosanko and board member Linda Wampler talking together with the board's attorney, Audrie M. Harris. Bosanko told The Record no Sunshine violation occurred. Wampler said she talked separately to Harris. In a memo to board member John Sundeman, Harris said she only talked to Bosanko and that there was no Sunshine violation. She said Wampler was nearby packing up her belongings.
The Sunshine Law prohibits two or more members of the same board from talking to each other about the public's business without advance public notice of the meeting. It also requires minutes be taken.
From what we have seen of the videotape of the two board members talking after the July 10 meeting, we believe it is important for an outside agency to conduct an investigation to assess the complaints. In this case, two agencies are involved.
Complaints were filed by Robin Nadeau, a citizen, and Sundeman. Both viewed the video independently. Nadeau filed hers with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and Sundeman filed his with the Seventh Judicial Circuit State Attorney's office.
It's a shame this has happened. Florida's open meetings law is 40 years old. By now we would expect that public board members would understand the law's meaning.
Looking at the video, it is hard to overlook the fact that the three women are talking to each other. While some comments are hard to make out, they do not appear to be talking about the weather or picking up groceries. What can be clearly heard is Wampler's comment, "I'm not going to put up with this anymore." She added that she was going to call a Record editor.
In the regular meeting, board members were so upset with some members of the public and their conduct at the meeting that they called law enforcement. But no one was ejected or arrested and the meeting continued.
The kind of suspicion a Sunshine law complaint raises does not need to hang over Bosanko and Wampler and the board for a lengthy period and cause further distraction for them. We urge FDLE and the State Attorney's office to complete their investigations in a timely manner.
Too many black clouds hang over this taxing agency already for questionable million-dollar-plus purchases of a helicopter and land without an appraisal to now have complaints of an open meetings violation.
Asked about the situation, Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation, a watchdog group, said in Thursday's Record, "I always recommend that board members not discuss anything outside the sunshine. They have to be very careful. There is a reason for this law."
We agree. The public's business must always be done in publicly noticed meetings whether they last three hours or three minutes.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072707/opinions_4738897.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Publication Date: 07/27/07
Two Anastasia Mosquito Control District board members are on the hot seat for what may be a violation of Florida's Sunshine Law governing open meetings.
A video camera in the meeting room on July 10 had not been turned off at the end of the regular meeting. Its tape shows Board Chairman Barbara Bosanko and board member Linda Wampler talking together with the board's attorney, Audrie M. Harris. Bosanko told The Record no Sunshine violation occurred. Wampler said she talked separately to Harris. In a memo to board member John Sundeman, Harris said she only talked to Bosanko and that there was no Sunshine violation. She said Wampler was nearby packing up her belongings.
The Sunshine Law prohibits two or more members of the same board from talking to each other about the public's business without advance public notice of the meeting. It also requires minutes be taken.
From what we have seen of the videotape of the two board members talking after the July 10 meeting, we believe it is important for an outside agency to conduct an investigation to assess the complaints. In this case, two agencies are involved.
Complaints were filed by Robin Nadeau, a citizen, and Sundeman. Both viewed the video independently. Nadeau filed hers with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and Sundeman filed his with the Seventh Judicial Circuit State Attorney's office.
It's a shame this has happened. Florida's open meetings law is 40 years old. By now we would expect that public board members would understand the law's meaning.
Looking at the video, it is hard to overlook the fact that the three women are talking to each other. While some comments are hard to make out, they do not appear to be talking about the weather or picking up groceries. What can be clearly heard is Wampler's comment, "I'm not going to put up with this anymore." She added that she was going to call a Record editor.
In the regular meeting, board members were so upset with some members of the public and their conduct at the meeting that they called law enforcement. But no one was ejected or arrested and the meeting continued.
The kind of suspicion a Sunshine law complaint raises does not need to hang over Bosanko and Wampler and the board for a lengthy period and cause further distraction for them. We urge FDLE and the State Attorney's office to complete their investigations in a timely manner.
Too many black clouds hang over this taxing agency already for questionable million-dollar-plus purchases of a helicopter and land without an appraisal to now have complaints of an open meetings violation.
Asked about the situation, Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation, a watchdog group, said in Thursday's Record, "I always recommend that board members not discuss anything outside the sunshine. They have to be very careful. There is a reason for this law."
We agree. The public's business must always be done in publicly noticed meetings whether they last three hours or three minutes.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072707/opinions_4738897.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Waiting for response from DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID To This Open Records Request and 13 Questions re: Sunshine Violations by Mosquito Control Dist
July 26, 2007 (via E-mail)
My dear Ms. Ansay and Ms. Harris:
Ms. Ansay hung up the telephone abruptly last week after admitting the videotaped Sunshine violation involving Ms. Harris. Efforts to reach Ms. Harris today by telephone have been unavailging. Therefore, please answer the following 13 questions and provide the documents requested below by fax today:
1. Did Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS aid and abet Commissioners BOSANKO and WAMPLER in committing at least one crime (Sunshine violations)?
2. Did DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS violate Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct?
3. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman?
4. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the four citizens on whom BOSANKO called the Sheriff? (Former Assistant Chase Manhattan Bank Vice President; current Citibank Vice President; former Army Captain; and former Appalachian Observer Editor and Government Accountability Project Legal Counsel for Constitutional Rights)?
5. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the people of St. Johns County?
6. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY recuse themselves from giving further "legal advice" to AMCD pending criminal investigations by FDLE and the office of State's Attorney John Tanner
7. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY hire separate criminal defense lawyers from AMCD Commissioners BARBARA BOSANKO and LINDA WAMPLER?
8. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for their Sunshine violations?
9. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for criminal defense advice?
10. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY resign as AMCD lawyers, effective immediately?
11. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY refund the thousands of dollars they billed for travel and for advice to only one segment of the AMCD Board -- the faction that insists on insulting public questioners?
12. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY come clean about their putative legal advice to public officials engaging in lawbreaking?
13. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY ever answer the questions about the purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter asked by Commissioners John Sundeman and Jeanne Moeller?
Pursuant to the Open Records law, please fax me all documents regarding your communications with and advice to any Commissioners or AMCD staffer on any subject, and copies of all of your legal bills to AMCD.
I look forward to hearing from you by close of business today. I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
www.cleanupcityofstaugustine.blogspot.com
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
904-471-7023
904-471-9918 (fax)
My dear Ms. Ansay and Ms. Harris:
Ms. Ansay hung up the telephone abruptly last week after admitting the videotaped Sunshine violation involving Ms. Harris. Efforts to reach Ms. Harris today by telephone have been unavailging. Therefore, please answer the following 13 questions and provide the documents requested below by fax today:
1. Did Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS aid and abet Commissioners BOSANKO and WAMPLER in committing at least one crime (Sunshine violations)?
2. Did DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS violate Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct?
3. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman?
4. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the four citizens on whom BOSANKO called the Sheriff? (Former Assistant Chase Manhattan Bank Vice President; current Citibank Vice President; former Army Captain; and former Appalachian Observer Editor and Government Accountability Project Legal Counsel for Constitutional Rights)?
5. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the people of St. Johns County?
6. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY recuse themselves from giving further "legal advice" to AMCD pending criminal investigations by FDLE and the office of State's Attorney John Tanner
7. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY hire separate criminal defense lawyers from AMCD Commissioners BARBARA BOSANKO and LINDA WAMPLER?
8. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for their Sunshine violations?
9. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for criminal defense advice?
10. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY resign as AMCD lawyers, effective immediately?
11. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY refund the thousands of dollars they billed for travel and for advice to only one segment of the AMCD Board -- the faction that insists on insulting public questioners?
12. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY come clean about their putative legal advice to public officials engaging in lawbreaking?
13. Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY ever answer the questions about the purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter asked by Commissioners John Sundeman and Jeanne Moeller?
Pursuant to the Open Records law, please fax me all documents regarding your communications with and advice to any Commissioners or AMCD staffer on any subject, and copies of all of your legal bills to AMCD.
I look forward to hearing from you by close of business today. I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
www.cleanupcityofstaugustine.blogspot.com
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
904-471-7023
904-471-9918 (fax)
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Robin Nadeau: AMCD CHair BARBARA BOSANKO and Board Member LINDA WAMPLER Disrupted July 10th Meeting By Interrupting, Interrogating Speakers
Dear Mr. Ellis,
Concerning today's report in The St. Augustine Record, on the July 10th workshop of the Anastasia Mosquito Control Board.
I would like to elaborate on the telephone message that I left on your answering mail-box, this morning.
The paragraph describing ".....as audience members stopped the proceedings by YELLING AND REFUSING TO KEEP ORDER." Later Linda Wampler is described as stating: "They were screaming and yelling about civil rights...."
These are complete misrepresentations of the facts (as I believe the taped record illustrates). There was no "yelling or screaming."
Chair Bosanko has repeatedly allowed her "expert" witnesses to take an unlimited amount of time to describe the merits of the purchase of the $ 1.8 million helicopter. However, Public Comment is restricted to three minutes.
On July 10, an expert who testified against the purchase of the $1.8 million helicopter, Don Girvan, a former Army captain, pilot, and, since retirement, a businessman, stated that a Sikorski helicopter, specifically designed for spraying against mosquitoes, sells for $351,000. As he continued his testimony, underlining the fact that this purchase had not been open for bids, as is required by law, etc., Mrs. Bosanko wielded her gavel, interrupting his delivery, stating that his three minutes had elapsed. Mrs. Bosanko liberally uses her gavel to quash any commentary that goes against her wishes.
At this point, Ed Slavin (who is a 'burr under the saddle' for several of our local officials. because he points out their legal transgressions) stated, in a well-modulated voice -- certainly not anywhere near "yelling and screaming" (again, I refer you to the taped video) -- that Mrs. Bosanko was infringing on Mr. Girvan's First Amendment Right to Free Speech.
Although Mrs. Bosanko is quoted a stating that "the whole issue is being blown out of proportion," she is the one who caused the whole issue to be 'blown out of proportion' by her unrestrained use of her gavel, and by calling the Sheriff's office to arrest members of the audience. When the first officer arrived, she directed him to arrest Ed Slavin, even though the person she was trying to stop from making his commentary was Mr. Girvan. However, she has been aggravated over the past many meetings of the Mosquito Control Board by Mr. Slavin pointing out the transgressions of the law by the actions and decisions of the Board. When confronted by the deputy, Mr. Slavin stated that Mrs. Bosanko was infringing on HIS right to free speech, and the officer backed off, and consulted with another deputy; they decided to leave. Later, when I discussd this matter with Sheriff Shoar, I stated, and he agreed, that this was a waste of time for his deputies who are already in short supply.
Again, concerning the transgression against Government In The Sunshine Law, I stated that "it was highly unlikely that, when Mrs. Bosanko, Mrs. Hummel and Mrs. Wampler charged out of the meeting room to call the Sheriff's office, that they didn't discuss the matter for which they were making the call."
Finally, Mr. Guinta put his own spin on the "first Amendment protected activity (environmentalists criticizing purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter without competitive bidding) and their desire to contact (the newspaper)" It is as TAX-PAYERS that we are criticizing the outrageous costs incurred by the actions of the Board. As Environmentalists, we are striving to stop the use of toxic pesticides on the citizens and wildlife of our region, in favor of biological constraints on the mosquitoes.
Sincerely,
Robin Nadeau,
26 Mickler Blvd.,
St. Augustine, FL 32080-5906
Tel: 471-3713
Concerning today's report in The St. Augustine Record, on the July 10th workshop of the Anastasia Mosquito Control Board.
I would like to elaborate on the telephone message that I left on your answering mail-box, this morning.
The paragraph describing ".....as audience members stopped the proceedings by YELLING AND REFUSING TO KEEP ORDER." Later Linda Wampler is described as stating: "They were screaming and yelling about civil rights...."
These are complete misrepresentations of the facts (as I believe the taped record illustrates). There was no "yelling or screaming."
Chair Bosanko has repeatedly allowed her "expert" witnesses to take an unlimited amount of time to describe the merits of the purchase of the $ 1.8 million helicopter. However, Public Comment is restricted to three minutes.
On July 10, an expert who testified against the purchase of the $1.8 million helicopter, Don Girvan, a former Army captain, pilot, and, since retirement, a businessman, stated that a Sikorski helicopter, specifically designed for spraying against mosquitoes, sells for $351,000. As he continued his testimony, underlining the fact that this purchase had not been open for bids, as is required by law, etc., Mrs. Bosanko wielded her gavel, interrupting his delivery, stating that his three minutes had elapsed. Mrs. Bosanko liberally uses her gavel to quash any commentary that goes against her wishes.
At this point, Ed Slavin (who is a 'burr under the saddle' for several of our local officials. because he points out their legal transgressions) stated, in a well-modulated voice -- certainly not anywhere near "yelling and screaming" (again, I refer you to the taped video) -- that Mrs. Bosanko was infringing on Mr. Girvan's First Amendment Right to Free Speech.
Although Mrs. Bosanko is quoted a stating that "the whole issue is being blown out of proportion," she is the one who caused the whole issue to be 'blown out of proportion' by her unrestrained use of her gavel, and by calling the Sheriff's office to arrest members of the audience. When the first officer arrived, she directed him to arrest Ed Slavin, even though the person she was trying to stop from making his commentary was Mr. Girvan. However, she has been aggravated over the past many meetings of the Mosquito Control Board by Mr. Slavin pointing out the transgressions of the law by the actions and decisions of the Board. When confronted by the deputy, Mr. Slavin stated that Mrs. Bosanko was infringing on HIS right to free speech, and the officer backed off, and consulted with another deputy; they decided to leave. Later, when I discussd this matter with Sheriff Shoar, I stated, and he agreed, that this was a waste of time for his deputies who are already in short supply.
Again, concerning the transgression against Government In The Sunshine Law, I stated that "it was highly unlikely that, when Mrs. Bosanko, Mrs. Hummel and Mrs. Wampler charged out of the meeting room to call the Sheriff's office, that they didn't discuss the matter for which they were making the call."
Finally, Mr. Guinta put his own spin on the "first Amendment protected activity (environmentalists criticizing purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter without competitive bidding) and their desire to contact (the newspaper)" It is as TAX-PAYERS that we are criticizing the outrageous costs incurred by the actions of the Board. As Environmentalists, we are striving to stop the use of toxic pesticides on the citizens and wildlife of our region, in favor of biological constraints on the mosquitoes.
Sincerely,
Robin Nadeau,
26 Mickler Blvd.,
St. Augustine, FL 32080-5906
Tel: 471-3713
COMMISSIONERS' SUNSHINE VIOLATIONS VIDEOTAPED -- Hicks' Tricks in Six Pix on Page One Today -- Criminal Investigations of Corporate Law Firm, Comm'rs
COMMISSIONERS' SUNSHINE VIOLATIONS VIDEOTAPED -- Hicks' Tricks in Six Pix on Page One Today: Daytona Corporate Lawyer's and Two Commissioners's Sunshine Violations Videotaped and Exposed -- Facing Criminal Investigations
Richard Nixon said it best: "It's the lie that gets you."
When DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS wrote AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman that she did not have any discussions with Commissioner LINDA WAMPLER, she told a lie. (See below).
When DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID Lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS wrote AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman that she and CHAIRMAN BOSANKO did not discuss business likely to come before AMCD, she lied. (See below).
The AMCD videotape (photo below and link on St. Augustine Record website) shows the conversation was with both AMCD Chairman BARBARA BOSANKO and Commissioner LINDA WAMPLER.
The subject matter was chilling public free speech rights to criticize AMCD, calling the Sheriff and calling St. Augustine Record Editorial Page Editor Margo Pope.
Did Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS aid and abet BOSANKO and WAMPLER in committing at least one crime (Sunshine violations)?
Did DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID Lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS violate Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the four citizens on whom BOSANKO called the Sheriff? (Former Assistant Chase Manhattan Bank Vice President; current Citibank Vice President; former Army Captain; and former Appalachian Observer Editor and Government Accountability Project Legal Counsel for Constitutional Rights)?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the people of St. Johns County?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY
recuse themselves from giving further "legal advice" to AMCD pending criminal investigations by FDLE and the office of State's Attorney John Tanner
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY hire separate criminal defense lawyers from AMCD Commissioners BARBARA BOSANKO and LINDA WAMPLER?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for their Sunshine violations?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for criminal defense advice?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY resign as AMCD lawyers, effective immediately?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY refund the thousands of dollars they billed for travel and for advice to only one segment of the AMCD Board -- the faction that insists on insulting public questioners?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY come clean about their putative legal advice
to public officials engaging in lawbreaking?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY ever answer the questions about the purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter asked by Commissioners John Sundeman and Jeanne Moeller?
DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS's and CAROL ANSAY's services -- such as they are -- may no longer be required.
We're waiting to hear back from DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY.
Watch this space. We're going to clean up the City of St. Augustine and other government agencies. We need your help and prayers.
Ed Slavin
Richard Nixon said it best: "It's the lie that gets you."
When DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS wrote AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman that she did not have any discussions with Commissioner LINDA WAMPLER, she told a lie. (See below).
When DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID Lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS wrote AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman that she and CHAIRMAN BOSANKO did not discuss business likely to come before AMCD, she lied. (See below).
The AMCD videotape (photo below and link on St. Augustine Record website) shows the conversation was with both AMCD Chairman BARBARA BOSANKO and Commissioner LINDA WAMPLER.
The subject matter was chilling public free speech rights to criticize AMCD, calling the Sheriff and calling St. Augustine Record Editorial Page Editor Margo Pope.
Did Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS aid and abet BOSANKO and WAMPLER in committing at least one crime (Sunshine violations)?
Did DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID Lawyer AUDRIE M. HARRIS violate Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to AMCD Commissioner John Sundeman?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the four citizens on whom BOSANKO called the Sheriff? (Former Assistant Chase Manhattan Bank Vice President; current Citibank Vice President; former Army Captain; and former Appalachian Observer Editor and Government Accountability Project Legal Counsel for Constitutional Rights)?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY apologize to the people of St. Johns County?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY
recuse themselves from giving further "legal advice" to AMCD pending criminal investigations by FDLE and the office of State's Attorney John Tanner
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY hire separate criminal defense lawyers from AMCD Commissioners BARBARA BOSANKO and LINDA WAMPLER?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for their Sunshine violations?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY bill for criminal defense advice?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY resign as AMCD lawyers, effective immediately?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY refund the thousands of dollars they billed for travel and for advice to only one segment of the AMCD Board -- the faction that insists on insulting public questioners?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY come clean about their putative legal advice
to public officials engaging in lawbreaking?
Will DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY ever answer the questions about the purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter asked by Commissioners John Sundeman and Jeanne Moeller?
DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS's and CAROL ANSAY's services -- such as they are -- may no longer be required.
We're waiting to hear back from DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID lawyers AUDRIE M. HARRIS and CAROL ANSAY.
Watch this space. We're going to clean up the City of St. Augustine and other government agencies. We need your help and prayers.
Ed Slavin
Uncandid DORAN, WOLFE, ANSAY & KUNDID LAWYER LIED TO COMMISSIONER -- Text of July 18th E-mail Falsely Claiming No Discussion With WAMPLER
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:02:28 -0400
From: aharris@doranlaw.com
To: xueamcd@bellsouth.net; sundeman@hotmail.com
CC: cansay@doranlaw.com; klavassaur@doranlaw.com
Subject: Sunshine Law question
Commissioner Sundeman:
Ms. Ansay shared with me one of your concerns regarding the July 10, 2007 meeting I attended at the District. The concern was presented as follows:
>
"After the meeting was adjourned, Commissioners Bosanko and Wampler and your associate attorney (I'm sorry, I forget her name) stayed at the table and met. I believe that when two commissioners have a meeting with the District's attorney after the regular meeting is adjourned, it is a violation of the FL Sunshine Law. Please advise."
>
In response, I did speak with Chairwoman Bosanko after the meeting regarding the activities of that evening, e.g., the call to the police for order during the meeting; however, my conversation did not include Ms. Wampler. I recall her being nearby, packing up her belongings before leaving the meeting, but my conversation was purely limited to Chairwoman Bosanko. >
Even so, please also note that the Sunshine Law applies to a gathering of two or more board members to discuss some matter on which forseeable action will be taken by the board. Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 Fla. 3d DCA 1973); City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971); Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969); Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).
In other words, the simple fact that two or more board members meet does not automatically mean a Sunshine Law violation has occurred. A violation only occurs when the board members discuss a matter which may foreseeably come before the board for action. No such matters were discussed with Chairwoman Bosanko.
>
Accordingly, to answer your question, due to the above, there was no violation of the Sunshine Law. If I can be of any further assistance,please do not hesitate to contact me.
>
Audrie
>
Audrie M. Harris, Esq.
Doran, Wolfe, Ansay & Kundid
444 Seabreeze Boulevard
Suite 800
Daytona Beach, Florida 32115
T-(386)253-1111
F-(386)253-4260
Email: aharris@doranlaw.com
******This electronic communication transmission contains information belonging to Doran, Wolfe, Rost, Ansay & Kundid which may be privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. if you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or other use of the cntents of this electronic communication information is strictly prohibited. If you received this electronic communication in error, please notify me immediately by e-mail reply. Thank you.
Sunshine complaints sting mosquito board
Sunshine complaints sting mosquito board --
Board member, citizen upset over discussion, file complaints
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 07/26/07
ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH -- Two members of Anastasia Mosquito Control District's board of directors may have violated the Sunshine Law when they were videotaped talking with their board attorney after a workshop July 10.
Chairman Barbara Bosanko and board member Linda Wampler on Wednesday both denied discussing board business out of the sunshine.
But the State Attorney and Florida Department of Law Enforcement are investigating complaints against them.
Barbara Petersen, of the Tallahassee-based First Amendment Foundation, said the Sunshine Law warns that two or more members of a public board should not discuss business without the public present.
"This will be up to a judge. How do we know (these issues) are not going to come before (the board)?" Petersen said. "I always recommend that board members not discuss anything outside the sunshine. They have to be very careful. There is a reason for this law."
At the July 10 meeting, the board members became stressed during a budget review as audience members stopped the proceedings by yelling and refusing to keep order.
Bosanko, Wampler and board member Emily Hummel left the district's meeting room to call St. Johns County Sheriff's Office deputies and St. Augustine Beach police.
Lawmen arrived, but no one was ejected or arrested and the meeting continued.
However, after the meeting adjourned, the board's video camera remained running and recorded Bosanko and Wampler standing up behind their desks and holding a conversation with board attorney Audrie M. Harris of Doran, Wolfe, Ansay & Kundid, Daytona Beach.
Wampler can be heard saying, "I'm not going to put up with this any more."
Resulting complaints
Nine days later, audience member Robin Nadeau filed the first complaint with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement alleging Sunshine Law violations by Bosanko and Wampler. She said the two "discussed their false police report to the (Sheriff's Office), their desire to have the (deputy) return, their intolerance for First Amendment protected activity (environmentalists criticizing purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter without competitive bidding) and their desire to contact (the newspaper)."
On Wednesday, Nadeau said she's been "passionate about government in the sunshine since its inception."
She didn't witness the alleged violation herself but watched it later on video.
"I find it a little dubious that they were discussing things out of earshot of the public," she said.
Ten days after the meeting, board member John Sundeman filed his complaint with the Fifth District State Attorney's Office.
His filing said he asked Harris about that conversation and was told she had only spoken to Bosanko. But he saw on the video that "you can hear Bosanko and Wampler talking to Harris about issues related to items forthcoming to the board."
Sundeman said, "That made my blood boil. That attorney lied to me. I don't think Ms. Harris realized the tape was running. I believed what she said. I don't know if this is a violation of the Sunshine Law or not. I do know the attorney lied to me."
The accused speak
The July 18 memo Harris sent to Sundeman admitted she spoke to Bosanko after the meeting.
"However, my conversation did not include Mrs. Wampler.," Harris added. "I remember her being nearby, packing up her belonging before leaving the meeting, but my conversation was purely limited to Chairwoman Bosanko. There was no violation of the Sunshine Law."
Bosanko said Wednesday that the whole issue is being blown out of proportion.
"It was no violation. There was no business discussed, none whatsoever," she said.
"I'm not worried. Rumors are always going to fly faster than the truth and anybody can file what they want. But the validity is not there."
She admits being distressed at the lack of order and respect for others in that meeting.
"People will see what they want to see," she said.
Wampler said the complaints were filed because the police were called.
"That was a very upsetting meeting. They were screaming and yelling about civil rights," Wampler said, declaring she spoke to Harris about what the board could legally do about the disruptions.
"We each called the police on two different phones," she said. "We (separately) talked to the attorney."
Linda Pruitt, a spokesman for State Attorney John Tanner's office in Daytona Beach, said Sunshine Law complaints will be investigated the same as any other suspected crime.
"We will review it," Pruitt said. "It's currently an active investigation. After (the findings) are reviewed, we will make a decision about what will happen."
Bosanko said she's frustrated by the direction the Mosquito Control Board has taken.
"We should come together and solve problems," she said. "That is not occurring."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072607/news_4736003.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Board member, citizen upset over discussion, file complaints
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 07/26/07
ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH -- Two members of Anastasia Mosquito Control District's board of directors may have violated the Sunshine Law when they were videotaped talking with their board attorney after a workshop July 10.
Chairman Barbara Bosanko and board member Linda Wampler on Wednesday both denied discussing board business out of the sunshine.
But the State Attorney and Florida Department of Law Enforcement are investigating complaints against them.
Barbara Petersen, of the Tallahassee-based First Amendment Foundation, said the Sunshine Law warns that two or more members of a public board should not discuss business without the public present.
"This will be up to a judge. How do we know (these issues) are not going to come before (the board)?" Petersen said. "I always recommend that board members not discuss anything outside the sunshine. They have to be very careful. There is a reason for this law."
At the July 10 meeting, the board members became stressed during a budget review as audience members stopped the proceedings by yelling and refusing to keep order.
Bosanko, Wampler and board member Emily Hummel left the district's meeting room to call St. Johns County Sheriff's Office deputies and St. Augustine Beach police.
Lawmen arrived, but no one was ejected or arrested and the meeting continued.
However, after the meeting adjourned, the board's video camera remained running and recorded Bosanko and Wampler standing up behind their desks and holding a conversation with board attorney Audrie M. Harris of Doran, Wolfe, Ansay & Kundid, Daytona Beach.
Wampler can be heard saying, "I'm not going to put up with this any more."
Resulting complaints
Nine days later, audience member Robin Nadeau filed the first complaint with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement alleging Sunshine Law violations by Bosanko and Wampler. She said the two "discussed their false police report to the (Sheriff's Office), their desire to have the (deputy) return, their intolerance for First Amendment protected activity (environmentalists criticizing purchase of a $1.8 million helicopter without competitive bidding) and their desire to contact (the newspaper)."
On Wednesday, Nadeau said she's been "passionate about government in the sunshine since its inception."
She didn't witness the alleged violation herself but watched it later on video.
"I find it a little dubious that they were discussing things out of earshot of the public," she said.
Ten days after the meeting, board member John Sundeman filed his complaint with the Fifth District State Attorney's Office.
His filing said he asked Harris about that conversation and was told she had only spoken to Bosanko. But he saw on the video that "you can hear Bosanko and Wampler talking to Harris about issues related to items forthcoming to the board."
Sundeman said, "That made my blood boil. That attorney lied to me. I don't think Ms. Harris realized the tape was running. I believed what she said. I don't know if this is a violation of the Sunshine Law or not. I do know the attorney lied to me."
The accused speak
The July 18 memo Harris sent to Sundeman admitted she spoke to Bosanko after the meeting.
"However, my conversation did not include Mrs. Wampler.," Harris added. "I remember her being nearby, packing up her belonging before leaving the meeting, but my conversation was purely limited to Chairwoman Bosanko. There was no violation of the Sunshine Law."
Bosanko said Wednesday that the whole issue is being blown out of proportion.
"It was no violation. There was no business discussed, none whatsoever," she said.
"I'm not worried. Rumors are always going to fly faster than the truth and anybody can file what they want. But the validity is not there."
She admits being distressed at the lack of order and respect for others in that meeting.
"People will see what they want to see," she said.
Wampler said the complaints were filed because the police were called.
"That was a very upsetting meeting. They were screaming and yelling about civil rights," Wampler said, declaring she spoke to Harris about what the board could legally do about the disruptions.
"We each called the police on two different phones," she said. "We (separately) talked to the attorney."
Linda Pruitt, a spokesman for State Attorney John Tanner's office in Daytona Beach, said Sunshine Law complaints will be investigated the same as any other suspected crime.
"We will review it," Pruitt said. "It's currently an active investigation. After (the findings) are reviewed, we will make a decision about what will happen."
Bosanko said she's frustrated by the direction the Mosquito Control Board has taken.
"We should come together and solve problems," she said. "That is not occurring."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/072607/news_4736003.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Florida 'sunshine law' violations 1977-2004 at a glance
Florida 'sunshine law' violations since 1977 at a glance
By The Associated Press
Violations of Florida's "sunshine" law that resulted in criminal or civil penalties:
1977
• Two Glades County commissioners and a former chairman fined and given suspended 60-day jail sentences after a judge convicts them of conspiring to meet without public notice.
1978
• Former Indian Harbor Beach Mayor Jerry James fined $500 and placed on probation after pleading no contest.
1979
• Five present and former Redding Shores city commissioners fined a total of $1,150 for holding a secret meeting and interfering with an election.
1980
• Two Waldo City Council members fined $10 each after a jury convicted them of illegally meeting.
1984
• Former Bradenton City Clerk Wallie Eyeman sentenced to three months probation after pleading no contest to destroying public records.
1987
• Ten members of Auburndale's Police Pension Retirement Board fined $25 to $125 each after pleading no contest to meeting without public notice.
1988
• Former St. Augustine City Commissioner Mary Stallings placed on probation for six months after pleading no contest to discussing city business with now-former Commissioner Valerie Kroll, who was fined $500 and costs after pleading no contest to civil sunshine violations.
1989
• Former Longwood Mayor David Gunter fined $500 after pleading no contest to attending a secret meeting with former Deputy Mayor Lynnett Dennis and City Commissioner Rick Bullington, each fined $500, placed on probation for 60 days and ordered to perform 25 hours of community service after being convicted by separate juries.
1990
• Three Hernando County Planning and Zoning Board members fined $50 each and costs after pleading no contest to meeting privately to discuss hazardous waste burning.
• Four Minneola city officials ordered to pay costs and fined $400, suspended to $25 under the condition they study the sunshine law, after pleading no contest to civil charges of meeting in private.
• Ten Mount Dora city officials and employees ordered to pay costs and read the Government-in-the Sunshine Manual and given the choice of paying a $25 fine or doing 25 hours of community service after pleading no contest to sunshine violations while selecting contractors. Six volunteer committee members were ordered to study the manual and perform community service to get their charges dropped.
1991
• Seven Highlands County officials, including four commissioners and a former commissioner, ordered to pay $25 each in costs for secretly hiring and raising the salary of a county attorney.
1992
• Hernando County School Board member Diane Rowden fined $322 and ordered to pay costs and read the sunshine manual after pleading no contest to open meeting violations while the other four members agree to study the sunshine law after pleading no contest.
1995
• Kenneth City Mayor Harold Paxton fined $400 in costs after pleading no contest to closed or unadvertised meetings.
• Miami-Dade County Commissioners Bruce Kaplan and Maurice Ferre pay $500 and $250 to settle civil complaints of meeting secretly with their chairman, Arthur Teele Jr.
1996
• Teele Jr. pays $250 to settle a civil complaint of secret meetings.
1997
• City of Opa-Locka pays a $500 fine and $108 in court costs and donates $500 to United Way after former City Manager Earnie Neal pleaded guilty to ignoring record requests.
• Former Estero Fire Commissioner Vernon Conly fined $500 after a jury convicted him of meeting secretly with three other commissioners fined $250 each after they pleaded no contest.
1999
• Escambia County School Board member Vanette Webb served seven days of a 30-day jail term before a new judge overturned her conviction of withholding records. The judge later ordered a new trial after an appellate court reinstated the conviction, but prosecutors then dropped the charge.
2000
• Two former Indian River County Hospital District Board members pay $500 to settle civil charges of discussing public business privately.
• Martin County commissioners ordered to release written transcripts of closed-door meetings and pay a newspaper's legal fees in a civil suit.
2001
• Golden Beach pays $500 in fines and $7,000 in legal fees to settle a civil suit against Councilman Adalberto Paruas, who ordered a citizen removed from a committee meeting.
• A judge voids a sewer contract discussed in secret and orders Monroe County to pay $26,285 to a citizens group that sued.
2002
• Escambia County Commissioner Terry Smith ordered to pay fines and costs totaling $4,987 and do 250 hours of community service after a jury convicted him of discussing redistricting and landfill issues in private with Commissioner W.D. Childers.
• Escambia County Commissioner Mike Bass ordered to pay fines and costs totaling $4,000 after pleading no contest to discussing building projects and land use issues in private with other commissioners.
• Escambia County Commissioner Willie Junior pleaded no contest to open meeting violations and other crimes, including bribery and extortion, but he committed suicide before he could be sentenced.
2003
• Childers sentenced to 60 days in jail after a jury convicted him of discussing redistricting privately with Smith and he pleads no contest to secretly talking about building issues with two other commissioners.
• Two Kissimmee city commissioners faced $50 fines and costs after pleading guilty to civil violations of failing to notify the public of meetings.
• Welaka Mayor Gordon Sands pays a $500 fine after pleading no contest to a civil charge of privately discussing the selection of a town council president with a council member.
• Former Welaka town official Steve Richardson ordered to pay a $250 fine after being found guilty of refusing to let two citizens inspect a recreation equipment sign-out sheet.
2004
• Oak Hill City Commissioner Bob Jackson fined $250 and ordered to take a sunshine law class after pleading no contest to discussing city business with a now-former commissioner.
• Florida Turnpike Enterprise ordered to pay legal expenses of two citizens who sued over secret meetings held by an advisory committee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information, University of Florida.
By The Associated Press
Violations of Florida's "sunshine" law that resulted in criminal or civil penalties:
1977
• Two Glades County commissioners and a former chairman fined and given suspended 60-day jail sentences after a judge convicts them of conspiring to meet without public notice.
1978
• Former Indian Harbor Beach Mayor Jerry James fined $500 and placed on probation after pleading no contest.
1979
• Five present and former Redding Shores city commissioners fined a total of $1,150 for holding a secret meeting and interfering with an election.
1980
• Two Waldo City Council members fined $10 each after a jury convicted them of illegally meeting.
1984
• Former Bradenton City Clerk Wallie Eyeman sentenced to three months probation after pleading no contest to destroying public records.
1987
• Ten members of Auburndale's Police Pension Retirement Board fined $25 to $125 each after pleading no contest to meeting without public notice.
1988
• Former St. Augustine City Commissioner Mary Stallings placed on probation for six months after pleading no contest to discussing city business with now-former Commissioner Valerie Kroll, who was fined $500 and costs after pleading no contest to civil sunshine violations.
1989
• Former Longwood Mayor David Gunter fined $500 after pleading no contest to attending a secret meeting with former Deputy Mayor Lynnett Dennis and City Commissioner Rick Bullington, each fined $500, placed on probation for 60 days and ordered to perform 25 hours of community service after being convicted by separate juries.
1990
• Three Hernando County Planning and Zoning Board members fined $50 each and costs after pleading no contest to meeting privately to discuss hazardous waste burning.
• Four Minneola city officials ordered to pay costs and fined $400, suspended to $25 under the condition they study the sunshine law, after pleading no contest to civil charges of meeting in private.
• Ten Mount Dora city officials and employees ordered to pay costs and read the Government-in-the Sunshine Manual and given the choice of paying a $25 fine or doing 25 hours of community service after pleading no contest to sunshine violations while selecting contractors. Six volunteer committee members were ordered to study the manual and perform community service to get their charges dropped.
1991
• Seven Highlands County officials, including four commissioners and a former commissioner, ordered to pay $25 each in costs for secretly hiring and raising the salary of a county attorney.
1992
• Hernando County School Board member Diane Rowden fined $322 and ordered to pay costs and read the sunshine manual after pleading no contest to open meeting violations while the other four members agree to study the sunshine law after pleading no contest.
1995
• Kenneth City Mayor Harold Paxton fined $400 in costs after pleading no contest to closed or unadvertised meetings.
• Miami-Dade County Commissioners Bruce Kaplan and Maurice Ferre pay $500 and $250 to settle civil complaints of meeting secretly with their chairman, Arthur Teele Jr.
1996
• Teele Jr. pays $250 to settle a civil complaint of secret meetings.
1997
• City of Opa-Locka pays a $500 fine and $108 in court costs and donates $500 to United Way after former City Manager Earnie Neal pleaded guilty to ignoring record requests.
• Former Estero Fire Commissioner Vernon Conly fined $500 after a jury convicted him of meeting secretly with three other commissioners fined $250 each after they pleaded no contest.
1999
• Escambia County School Board member Vanette Webb served seven days of a 30-day jail term before a new judge overturned her conviction of withholding records. The judge later ordered a new trial after an appellate court reinstated the conviction, but prosecutors then dropped the charge.
2000
• Two former Indian River County Hospital District Board members pay $500 to settle civil charges of discussing public business privately.
• Martin County commissioners ordered to release written transcripts of closed-door meetings and pay a newspaper's legal fees in a civil suit.
2001
• Golden Beach pays $500 in fines and $7,000 in legal fees to settle a civil suit against Councilman Adalberto Paruas, who ordered a citizen removed from a committee meeting.
• A judge voids a sewer contract discussed in secret and orders Monroe County to pay $26,285 to a citizens group that sued.
2002
• Escambia County Commissioner Terry Smith ordered to pay fines and costs totaling $4,987 and do 250 hours of community service after a jury convicted him of discussing redistricting and landfill issues in private with Commissioner W.D. Childers.
• Escambia County Commissioner Mike Bass ordered to pay fines and costs totaling $4,000 after pleading no contest to discussing building projects and land use issues in private with other commissioners.
• Escambia County Commissioner Willie Junior pleaded no contest to open meeting violations and other crimes, including bribery and extortion, but he committed suicide before he could be sentenced.
2003
• Childers sentenced to 60 days in jail after a jury convicted him of discussing redistricting privately with Smith and he pleads no contest to secretly talking about building issues with two other commissioners.
• Two Kissimmee city commissioners faced $50 fines and costs after pleading guilty to civil violations of failing to notify the public of meetings.
• Welaka Mayor Gordon Sands pays a $500 fine after pleading no contest to a civil charge of privately discussing the selection of a town council president with a council member.
• Former Welaka town official Steve Richardson ordered to pay a $250 fine after being found guilty of refusing to let two citizens inspect a recreation equipment sign-out sheet.
2004
• Oak Hill City Commissioner Bob Jackson fined $250 and ordered to take a sunshine law class after pleading no contest to discussing city business with a now-former commissioner.
• Florida Turnpike Enterprise ordered to pay legal expenses of two citizens who sued over secret meetings held by an advisory committee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information, University of Florida.
Sunshine Violations Can Lead to Incarceration
DECEMBER 2004: After losing his appeal of a Sunshine Law violation, Escambia County Commissioner W.D. Childers returned to jail to serve the remaining 22 days of his 60-day jail sentence for discussing public business in secret with a fellow commissioner. Childers was released early for good behavior and ended up serving 49 days in jail for the Open Meetings Law offense. He was set free on bond while appealing his 3 ½-year sentence on bribery charges. Childers was the first public official to serve jail time for violating the Sunshine Law. Also this month, Escambia commissioner Willie Junior, a key witness against Childers, was found dead, an apparent suicide. The Dec. 9 discovery came a month after Junior disappeared the day before he was scheduled to be sentenced on charges of bribery, theft and a Sunshine Law violation. In exchange for his testimony against Childers, Junior was to spend no more than 18 months in prison. Junior could have faced 125 years in prison if convicted on all 11 criminal charges he faced. (See also June 2002, August 2002, September 2002, June 2003, October 2004)
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
FDEP Coverup of Illegal Dumping Unravelling -- Nation's Oldest City Skated From Criminal Investigation in 2006
Efforts to coverup dumping of 30 million pounds (20,000 cubic yards) of contaminants into the Old City Reservoir are unravelling.
As former Reagan Chief of Staff and United States Senator Howard Henry Baker (R-Tennessee) once said, "coverups never work."
Failure to interview City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS and City Commissioners are under scrutiny.
Who eucrhed FDEP into its coverup? Who obstructed justice?
See below. We're going to clean up our City of St. Augustine, with your help.
As former Reagan Chief of Staff and United States Senator Howard Henry Baker (R-Tennessee) once said, "coverups never work."
Failure to interview City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS and City Commissioners are under scrutiny.
Who eucrhed FDEP into its coverup? Who obstructed justice?
See below. We're going to clean up our City of St. Augustine, with your help.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
FDEP Records Reveal Flawed, Incurious "Investigation" of City's Illegal Dumping
FDEP Records Reveal Flawed, Incurious "Investigation" of City's Illegal Dumping
Thanks to Governor Charlie Crist's Office of Open Government, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Division of Law Enforcement (DLE), Bureau of Environmental Investigations (BEI) sent us the requested records without being paid for them.
Based on FDEP's documents, I have requested that FDEP reopen its file because it missed so much, as documented below.
The FDEP City of St. Augustine illegal dumping documents were requested in October 2006, when Captain Stewart Romack promised they'd be sent). FDEP had since January 2007 nastily demanded over $80 for records on a criminal investigation that resulted from my call to the National Response Center on February 16, 2006. I refused to pay FDEP for documents. As the great American diplomat Charles Cotesworth Pinckney said, "not one cent for tribute."
When a citizen reports a crime to federal and state authorities, they should not be charged for copies of the file.
What do the documents reveal?
1. Chief Operating Officer JOHN REGAN, P.E., admitted that the location in question is the "OLD CITY RESERVOIR," after city officials quibbled about the name (and "anonymice" postings on St. Augustine Record's "Talk of the Town" website denied it was the OLD CITY RESERVOIR.
2. Then-Public Works Director WILLIAM LEETCH and other city employees told EPA and DEP criminal investigators that there was only clean materials dumped at the site (just as then-MAYOR GEORGE GARDNER told me on February 24, 2006). No investigation of perjury or false statement or obstruction of justice was conducted.
3. FDEP says it will consider the current investigation and its resolution should additional investigations of the City be necessary due to further violations of a similar nature."
4. FDEP did not interview City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who was left unperturbed. HARRISS wrote an apple-polishing letter to the FDEP after FDEP refused to prosecute.
5. FDEP did not interview then-Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, or Commissioners ERROL JONES, DONALD CRICHLOW, SUSAN BURK or JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. (now Mayor).
6. FDEP did not issue any search warrants for city records.
7. FDEP apparently trusted City of St. Augustine officials to provide records and information, taking their word for it.
8. FDEP did not interview former City Attorney JAMES PATRICK WILSON, who had advised CITY MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS that he needed a permit.
9. FDEP did not obtain key witnesses' testimony under oath.
10. FDEP did not take accurate notes or write up accurate statements.
11. FDEP did not present the case to a Grand Jury.
12. FDEP did not present the case to a State's Attorney.
13. FDEP did not present the case to the State Attorney General.
14. FDEP did not prosecute, even though there was no excuse for dumping the entire contents of the old city dump into the Old City Reservoir.
15. FDEP investigator write-ups don't note key facts, including the fact that:
a. City and county officials at first denied there was an Old City Reservoir;
b. HARRIS' city employees were illegally dumping in the Old City Reservoir two days after criminal investigators first appeared.
s
16. FDEP investigator write-ups often facts wrong, omitting the name of the person who accompanied me in meeting with its investigators at the Old City Reservoir. Unctuous, ungrateful FDEP claims it "seized" a DVD from me, when I gave it to DEP and EPA investigators with the notation that they could keep it.
17. There is nothing in the file reflecting any communications with former City Attorney Jim Wilson, who resigned effective October 13, 2006. It appears that he did nothing to mislead FDEP or continue the coverup. On the other hand, St. Augustine city officials made false statements to FDEP that FDEP has not investigated or charged. There is nothing in the file reflecting FDEP ever interviewed Mr. Wilson. There is no attorney-client privilege for government attorneys, who work for us. Failure to interview Mr. Wilson, or City Manager WILLIAMB B. HARRISS, or Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, or any of the Commissionsers, shows that the FDEP investigation breaches the standard of care for environmental crimes investigations. This coverup will not stand.
18. In a gigantic leap of faith, here's what FDEP wrote in a case where elevated arsenic and other contaminant levels are still in our Old City Reservoir, followed by the truth: FDEP says its Bureau of Environmental Investigations (BEI) "investigation" concluded:
a. "the city's violation does not appear to be deliberate." Wrong. The city started dumping before it applied for a st. Johns river water management district (SJRWMD) permit, continued dumping after sjrwmd said not to dump, in person and by certified mail, and continued dumping after EPA and FDEP criminal investigators arrived.
b. "[N]o non-compliant trends or attitudes exist." Again, FDEP is wrong. The city apparently dumped in and around the old city reservoir in the past -- there was no investigation of past dumping. The city had no environmental regulatory compliance person. The city refused to answer over 90 questions that were asked commencing February 24, 2006.
c. "No economic or specific motive for permit violations could be identified." Once again, FDEP is wrong. The City saved money by disposing of the contents of its old illegal city dump in the old city reservoir, while helping hasten a trouble-prone $70 million public- private partnership (Sebastian Inland Harbor).
d. "The City of St. Augustine has taken steps to educate staff regarding environmental permitting compliance issues and have (sic) taken steps in the form of counseling and environmental training of City personnel within management positions." What? This is not a valid basis for refusing to subpoena city manager William B. Harriss & Co. to a grand jury. No proof is provided. There is no mention of any training for employees that includes their right to blow the whistle and not to be ordered to sort through contaminated trash without training or employee protection. The "training" assertion does not justify refusal to take the case to a grand jury.
Efforts to obtain comment from Captain STEWART ROMACK and City of St. Augustine Commissioners were unavailing. In fact, I called Captain Romack 13 days ago to afford him an opportunity to review the file on the coverup. We've not heard back from Captain Romack. I also asked at the July 9, 2007 meeting why former Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, Commissioners ERROL JONES, DONALD CRICHLOW, SUSAN BURK or JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. (now Mayor).City Commissioners about the fact they and HARRISS were not interviewed -- there was no response.
CONCLUSIONS:
A. FDEP is suffering from delusions of adequacy. As David Thundershield Queen says, DEP stands for "Don't expect protection." FDEP is currently up for consideration for abolition under "Sunset" legislation. Its Watergate-style coverup of dumping 30,000,000 pounds of contaminants into the Old City Reservoir requires strong consideration to "sunsetting" FDEP. As our Founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence, when governments are unresponsive, we must consider whether to "alter or abolish" them.
B. When FDEP completes its negotiations with the City of St. Augustine, the documents in quo may be used in an administrative hearing challenging FDEP's refusal to enforce the law as wrutten against the Nation's Oldest (European-founded) City. "Justice must not be done in a corner, nor in any covert manner." State ex rel Herald Mail Co. v. Hamilton, 267 S.E.2d 544,548 (W.Va. 1980), citing 1676 Charter of Fundamental Laws of West New Jersey, Ch. XXIII. Concealment is contrary to our country’s fundamental ideas of due process and fairness. See, e.g., Daniel Patrick Moynihan, SECRECY (1998). As Senator Moynihan put it best, Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. NY Times, April 1, 2003, Letter, Moynihan’s Apt Words, by Ira Sohn.
C. Our City's political machine has enough connections to shut down an investiation of illegal dumping, based upon absurd pretexts.
D. FDEP's arrogant refusal to discusss its coverup and its refusal to disclose its investigative documents from October to June is an instance of secret
law: 'Secret law" is condemned as undesirable for many reasons, :
Secret law, or law imperfectly known and developed, is undesirable for many reasons but is especially injurious to the policy of getting controversies settled without adjudication. The clearer and better known the law is, the fewer disputes over it that will arise and the more readily they will be disposed of.
Joseph & Gilbert, "Breaking the Settlement Ice: The Use of Settlement Judges in Admin. Law," Report to the Administrative Conference at 33-34 (May 20, 1988).
See President Clinton’s 1993 speech on Earth Day, in which he stated, It is time that the U.S. government begin to live under the laws it makes for other people. 19 EPA Journal (April-June 1993) at 3. President Clinton has written that
Workers who come forward with reports of violations of the law should be protected. .... The worker needs to have an assurance that somewhere in the federal government is an office that will act effectively to protect the worker. Swift action ... to ensure that reprisals will not be tolerated will send a clear message on this issue..... I will send a very clear message to senior officials throughout the federal government.... employees must feel comfortable in sharing their concerns with their own [employer]. We must view these internal criticisms as something to learn from and to gain from, not as attacks that must be quashed..... Whether it concerns the safety of drugs or food, the dangers of hazardous waste at a certain site, or which particular projects most deserve[] federal funds, we are better served as a nation if dissenting views are given a full and fair hearing. Credible positions by scientists should be able to withstand dissenting views of other scientists.
March 18, 1992 letter from Bill Clinton to Messrs. Louis Clark and Jeff DeBonis re:"Protecting Integrity and Ethics" Conference and protection of federal employee whistleblowers, quoted in Paul Sloca , "Whistleblowers should have attentive ear in White House," The Oak Ridger , December 2, 1992 at 1.
E. Worldwide, environmental pollution is often accompanied by corruption, as here in St. Augustine, Florida. See generally, Al Gore, Earth in the Balance (1992). It's time to clean up the city of St. Augustine, starting now. The example of the prosecution of PIERRE THOMPSON for cutting down a bald eagle nest tree (after six years)(see below) inspires us to say, like any good diplomat, "Don't take no for an answer."
Thanks to Governor Charlie Crist's Office of Open Government, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Division of Law Enforcement (DLE), Bureau of Environmental Investigations (BEI) sent us the requested records without being paid for them.
Based on FDEP's documents, I have requested that FDEP reopen its file because it missed so much, as documented below.
The FDEP City of St. Augustine illegal dumping documents were requested in October 2006, when Captain Stewart Romack promised they'd be sent). FDEP had since January 2007 nastily demanded over $80 for records on a criminal investigation that resulted from my call to the National Response Center on February 16, 2006. I refused to pay FDEP for documents. As the great American diplomat Charles Cotesworth Pinckney said, "not one cent for tribute."
When a citizen reports a crime to federal and state authorities, they should not be charged for copies of the file.
What do the documents reveal?
1. Chief Operating Officer JOHN REGAN, P.E., admitted that the location in question is the "OLD CITY RESERVOIR," after city officials quibbled about the name (and "anonymice" postings on St. Augustine Record's "Talk of the Town" website denied it was the OLD CITY RESERVOIR.
2. Then-Public Works Director WILLIAM LEETCH and other city employees told EPA and DEP criminal investigators that there was only clean materials dumped at the site (just as then-MAYOR GEORGE GARDNER told me on February 24, 2006). No investigation of perjury or false statement or obstruction of justice was conducted.
3. FDEP says it will consider the current investigation and its resolution should additional investigations of the City be necessary due to further violations of a similar nature."
4. FDEP did not interview City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who was left unperturbed. HARRISS wrote an apple-polishing letter to the FDEP after FDEP refused to prosecute.
5. FDEP did not interview then-Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, or Commissioners ERROL JONES, DONALD CRICHLOW, SUSAN BURK or JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. (now Mayor).
6. FDEP did not issue any search warrants for city records.
7. FDEP apparently trusted City of St. Augustine officials to provide records and information, taking their word for it.
8. FDEP did not interview former City Attorney JAMES PATRICK WILSON, who had advised CITY MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS that he needed a permit.
9. FDEP did not obtain key witnesses' testimony under oath.
10. FDEP did not take accurate notes or write up accurate statements.
11. FDEP did not present the case to a Grand Jury.
12. FDEP did not present the case to a State's Attorney.
13. FDEP did not present the case to the State Attorney General.
14. FDEP did not prosecute, even though there was no excuse for dumping the entire contents of the old city dump into the Old City Reservoir.
15. FDEP investigator write-ups don't note key facts, including the fact that:
a. City and county officials at first denied there was an Old City Reservoir;
b. HARRIS' city employees were illegally dumping in the Old City Reservoir two days after criminal investigators first appeared.
s
16. FDEP investigator write-ups often facts wrong, omitting the name of the person who accompanied me in meeting with its investigators at the Old City Reservoir. Unctuous, ungrateful FDEP claims it "seized" a DVD from me, when I gave it to DEP and EPA investigators with the notation that they could keep it.
17. There is nothing in the file reflecting any communications with former City Attorney Jim Wilson, who resigned effective October 13, 2006. It appears that he did nothing to mislead FDEP or continue the coverup. On the other hand, St. Augustine city officials made false statements to FDEP that FDEP has not investigated or charged. There is nothing in the file reflecting FDEP ever interviewed Mr. Wilson. There is no attorney-client privilege for government attorneys, who work for us. Failure to interview Mr. Wilson, or City Manager WILLIAMB B. HARRISS, or Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, or any of the Commissionsers, shows that the FDEP investigation breaches the standard of care for environmental crimes investigations. This coverup will not stand.
18. In a gigantic leap of faith, here's what FDEP wrote in a case where elevated arsenic and other contaminant levels are still in our Old City Reservoir, followed by the truth: FDEP says its Bureau of Environmental Investigations (BEI) "investigation" concluded:
a. "the city's violation does not appear to be deliberate." Wrong. The city started dumping before it applied for a st. Johns river water management district (SJRWMD) permit, continued dumping after sjrwmd said not to dump, in person and by certified mail, and continued dumping after EPA and FDEP criminal investigators arrived.
b. "[N]o non-compliant trends or attitudes exist." Again, FDEP is wrong. The city apparently dumped in and around the old city reservoir in the past -- there was no investigation of past dumping. The city had no environmental regulatory compliance person. The city refused to answer over 90 questions that were asked commencing February 24, 2006.
c. "No economic or specific motive for permit violations could be identified." Once again, FDEP is wrong. The City saved money by disposing of the contents of its old illegal city dump in the old city reservoir, while helping hasten a trouble-prone $70 million public- private partnership (Sebastian Inland Harbor).
d. "The City of St. Augustine has taken steps to educate staff regarding environmental permitting compliance issues and have (sic) taken steps in the form of counseling and environmental training of City personnel within management positions." What? This is not a valid basis for refusing to subpoena city manager William B. Harriss & Co. to a grand jury. No proof is provided. There is no mention of any training for employees that includes their right to blow the whistle and not to be ordered to sort through contaminated trash without training or employee protection. The "training" assertion does not justify refusal to take the case to a grand jury.
Efforts to obtain comment from Captain STEWART ROMACK and City of St. Augustine Commissioners were unavailing. In fact, I called Captain Romack 13 days ago to afford him an opportunity to review the file on the coverup. We've not heard back from Captain Romack. I also asked at the July 9, 2007 meeting why former Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, Commissioners ERROL JONES, DONALD CRICHLOW, SUSAN BURK or JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. (now Mayor).City Commissioners about the fact they and HARRISS were not interviewed -- there was no response.
CONCLUSIONS:
A. FDEP is suffering from delusions of adequacy. As David Thundershield Queen says, DEP stands for "Don't expect protection." FDEP is currently up for consideration for abolition under "Sunset" legislation. Its Watergate-style coverup of dumping 30,000,000 pounds of contaminants into the Old City Reservoir requires strong consideration to "sunsetting" FDEP. As our Founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence, when governments are unresponsive, we must consider whether to "alter or abolish" them.
B. When FDEP completes its negotiations with the City of St. Augustine, the documents in quo may be used in an administrative hearing challenging FDEP's refusal to enforce the law as wrutten against the Nation's Oldest (European-founded) City. "Justice must not be done in a corner, nor in any covert manner." State ex rel Herald Mail Co. v. Hamilton, 267 S.E.2d 544,548 (W.Va. 1980), citing 1676 Charter of Fundamental Laws of West New Jersey, Ch. XXIII. Concealment is contrary to our country’s fundamental ideas of due process and fairness. See, e.g., Daniel Patrick Moynihan, SECRECY (1998). As Senator Moynihan put it best, Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. NY Times, April 1, 2003, Letter, Moynihan’s Apt Words, by Ira Sohn.
C. Our City's political machine has enough connections to shut down an investiation of illegal dumping, based upon absurd pretexts.
D. FDEP's arrogant refusal to discusss its coverup and its refusal to disclose its investigative documents from October to June is an instance of secret
law: 'Secret law" is condemned as undesirable for many reasons, :
Secret law, or law imperfectly known and developed, is undesirable for many reasons but is especially injurious to the policy of getting controversies settled without adjudication. The clearer and better known the law is, the fewer disputes over it that will arise and the more readily they will be disposed of.
Joseph & Gilbert, "Breaking the Settlement Ice: The Use of Settlement Judges in Admin. Law," Report to the Administrative Conference at 33-34 (May 20, 1988).
See President Clinton’s 1993 speech on Earth Day, in which he stated, It is time that the U.S. government begin to live under the laws it makes for other people. 19 EPA Journal (April-June 1993) at 3. President Clinton has written that
Workers who come forward with reports of violations of the law should be protected. .... The worker needs to have an assurance that somewhere in the federal government is an office that will act effectively to protect the worker. Swift action ... to ensure that reprisals will not be tolerated will send a clear message on this issue..... I will send a very clear message to senior officials throughout the federal government.... employees must feel comfortable in sharing their concerns with their own [employer]. We must view these internal criticisms as something to learn from and to gain from, not as attacks that must be quashed..... Whether it concerns the safety of drugs or food, the dangers of hazardous waste at a certain site, or which particular projects most deserve[] federal funds, we are better served as a nation if dissenting views are given a full and fair hearing. Credible positions by scientists should be able to withstand dissenting views of other scientists.
March 18, 1992 letter from Bill Clinton to Messrs. Louis Clark and Jeff DeBonis re:"Protecting Integrity and Ethics" Conference and protection of federal employee whistleblowers, quoted in Paul Sloca , "Whistleblowers should have attentive ear in White House," The Oak Ridger , December 2, 1992 at 1.
E. Worldwide, environmental pollution is often accompanied by corruption, as here in St. Augustine, Florida. See generally, Al Gore, Earth in the Balance (1992). It's time to clean up the city of St. Augustine, starting now. The example of the prosecution of PIERRE THOMPSON for cutting down a bald eagle nest tree (after six years)(see below) inspires us to say, like any good diplomat, "Don't take no for an answer."
Six years later, company gets charged with eagle violation
Six years later, company gets charged with eagle violation
DEIRDRE CONNER
The Times-Union
Publication Date: 07/19/07
ST. AUGUSTINE -- Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa has charged his company with the offense.
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry a fine of $100,000 or more.
It began in 2001 when avid-bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the S.R. 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year.
Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "We wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said -- perhaps less than one a year in the state -- because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development in a plea agreement paid a $356,000 fine for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/071907/news_4722513.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DEIRDRE CONNER
The Times-Union
Publication Date: 07/19/07
ST. AUGUSTINE -- Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa has charged his company with the offense.
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry a fine of $100,000 or more.
It began in 2001 when avid-bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the S.R. 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year.
Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "We wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said -- perhaps less than one a year in the state -- because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development in a plea agreement paid a $356,000 fine for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/071907/news_4722513.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Eagle Nest Tree Cutter Pierree Thompson's Company Prosecuted
Environmental destroyers in St. Augustine and St. Johns County please take note: you can be prosecuted criminally for felonies. See below (St. Augustine Record and Times -Union articles today on criminal prosecution of PIERRE THOMPSON's company for molesting a bald eagle, to wit, cutting down an eagle nest tree on October 8, 2001.
We broke the story of the Justice Department's long delays in deciding whether or not to prosecute PIERRE THOMPSON for cutting down an eagle nest tree in 2005.
Longtime local residents told me the feds would not prosecute THOMPSON because he was a rich developer and grandson of the founder of the St. Augustine Record. In a sense, the locals were right because THOMPSON wasn't charged. But felony charges have been filed against his company, and a plea bargain is expected, hopefully one in which THOMPSON turns over land to the federal government for a St. Augustine National Historical Park, National Seashore and National Scenic Highway (see below).
Our city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are worth saving. Like any good diplomats, we won't take "no" for an answer. We're going to clean up St. Augustine and St. Johns County, with your help.
We broke the story of the Justice Department's long delays in deciding whether or not to prosecute PIERRE THOMPSON for cutting down an eagle nest tree in 2005.
Longtime local residents told me the feds would not prosecute THOMPSON because he was a rich developer and grandson of the founder of the St. Augustine Record. In a sense, the locals were right because THOMPSON wasn't charged. But felony charges have been filed against his company, and a plea bargain is expected, hopefully one in which THOMPSON turns over land to the federal government for a St. Augustine National Historical Park, National Seashore and National Scenic Highway (see below).
Our city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are worth saving. Like any good diplomats, we won't take "no" for an answer. We're going to clean up St. Augustine and St. Johns County, with your help.
Page One in St. Augustine Record: Six years later, company gets charged with eagle violation
Six years later, company gets charged with eagle violation
DEIRDRE CONNER
The Times-Union
Publication Date: 07/19/07
ST. AUGUSTINE -- Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa has charged his company with the offense.
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry a fine of $100,000 or more.
It began in 2001 when avid-bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the S.R. 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year.
Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "We wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said -- perhaps less than one a year in the state -- because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development in a plea agreement paid a $356,000 fine for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/071907/news_4722513.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DEIRDRE CONNER
The Times-Union
Publication Date: 07/19/07
ST. AUGUSTINE -- Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa has charged his company with the offense.
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry a fine of $100,000 or more.
It began in 2001 when avid-bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the S.R. 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year.
Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "We wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said -- perhaps less than one a year in the state -- because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development in a plea agreement paid a $356,000 fine for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/071907/news_4722513.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Bald eagle violation served 6 years later
The Florida Times-Union
July 19, 2007
Bald eagle violation served 6 years later
By DEIRDRE CONNER,
The Times-Union
ST. AUGUSTINE - Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office has charged his company with the offense.
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry $100,000 or more in fines.
It began when avid bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the Florida 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree, they told the Times-Union in 2001. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year. Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "we wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, who is the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said - perhaps less than one a year in the state - because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development paid a $356,000 fine, in a plea agreement, for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
deirdre.conner@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4504
More crime and public safety coverage Homicide 360: A Times-Union special reportcms_sidebox()
This story can be found on Jacksonville.com at http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/071907/met_185437810.shtml.
July 19, 2007
Bald eagle violation served 6 years later
By DEIRDRE CONNER,
The Times-Union
ST. AUGUSTINE - Six years after a St. Johns County man was accused of chopping down a tree housing an American bald eagle nest, the U.S. Attorney's Office has charged his company with the offense.
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
St. Augustine-based Thompson Bros. Realty faces one count of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A first offense is a misdemeanor and can carry $100,000 or more in fines.
It began when avid bird watchers in the Harbour Isle Apartment Homes kept a close eye on then-vacant land southeast of the Florida 312 bridge, where a pair of bald eagles nested in a tree, they told the Times-Union in 2001. They blamed the landowner, Pierre Thompson, for having the tree cut down in October of that year. Thompson is listed as the only officer of Thompson Bros. Realty in the annual report submitted to the Florida Department of State.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigated and forwarded its findings to the U.S. Attorney's Office in late 2001.
Steve Cole, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said it took nearly six years to bring the charges because "we wanted to be thorough."
"It did take a number of years of very thorough work to come to the conclusion that charges were warranted," he said.
Cole wouldn't comment further on the case.
A receptionist answering the phone at Thompson-Bailey-Baker Realty said Pierre Thompson was on vacation and was unavailable. The firm's attorney, David Barksdale, declined to comment because the case is pending.
The bald eagle, the country's national symbol, has rebounded from near-extinction under strong federal protections. Last month, it was taken off the federal threatened species list. But protections for the bird remain under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Lynda White, who is the EagleWatch coordinator for Audubon of Florida, said she had never heard of a prosecution taking so long.
"Typically this does take a while, but six years, that's a new one," she said.
Prosecutions are relatively rare, White said - perhaps less than one a year in the state - because proving violations can be difficult and painstaking.
Over the past few years, there have been three convictions, all on the southwest coast of Florida.
Last year, a Fort Myers development supervisor who ordered a bald eagle's nest torn down to make room for construction was fined $2,000 and ordered to perform community service. In 2005, Stock Development paid a $356,000 fine, in a plea agreement, for cutting down an eagle's nest on property south of Naples so it could build houses there. Also in 2005, two men were fined a total of $100,000 for cutting down an eagle's nest in Venice.
deirdre.conner@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4504
More crime and public safety coverage Homicide 360: A Times-Union special reportcms_sidebox()
This story can be found on Jacksonville.com at http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/071907/met_185437810.shtml.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Let's get tough on environmental crimes!
Time to get tough on environmental crimes.
The long delay and apparent undercharging of the September 8, 2001 eagle nest tree cutting in St. Augustine has consequences.
Why wasn't PIERRE THOMPSON named personally?
Why did it take so long for the U.S. Attorney to do anything?
Why wasn't the U.S. Fish and & Wildlife Agency's recommendation for proscution followed years ago?
The answer requires an investigation by Congress. See below.
The long delay and apparent undercharging of the September 8, 2001 eagle nest tree cutting in St. Augustine has consequences.
Why wasn't PIERRE THOMPSON named personally?
Why did it take so long for the U.S. Attorney to do anything?
Why wasn't the U.S. Fish and & Wildlife Agency's recommendation for proscution followed years ago?
The answer requires an investigation by Congress. See below.
Feds Charge Thompson Bros. Realty "Molested" Bald Eagle
Feds Charge Thompson Bros. Realty "Molested" Bald Eagle
By Ed Slavin
Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. is charged with a felony violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: "molesting" a bald eagle (cutting down a bald eagle nest tree in St. Augustine).
Federal criminal charges were filed against Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. by United States Attorney Paul Perez on March 30, 2007 for the alleged October 8, 2001 eagle-molesting. Perez' signed "criminal information" charges Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. with "acting through its employees and agents" and "knowingly and with wanton disregard for the consequences of its actions take, molest and disturb a bald eagle, without being permitted to do so by law," in violation of 16 U.S.C. 668(a) & 50 C.F.R. 22.3.
Those convicted of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act can be fined, imprisoned (and denied federal grazing permits). But U.S. Attorney Perez has apparently not yet charged any living, breathing individuals, only Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc., a corporation.
Efforts to contact the Thompsons were unavailing.
Efforts to learn more will continue.
It happened in America on October 8, 2001, inside St. Augustine city limits by the SR312 bridge. A bald eagle nest tree was ordered cut down by local businessman Pierre Thompson (land developer/speculator and grandson of the founder of the St. Augustine Record).
The St. Augustine Record's 2001 articles extensively detailed Thompson's actions. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service built a strong case, with neighbors Chris Gilman, her partner, a neighbor and government employees taking photos and providing testimony establishing that Pierre Thompson knew (but denied) there were nesting bald eagles. For four years months, nothing happened. The Collective Press reported in October 2005 that after four years, United States Attorney Paul Perez still hadn't decided whether to charge anyone with any of three federal environmental crimes. CP also reported the five-year statute of limitations would expire in October 2006. Extended by agreement of prosecutors and defense lawyers, the statute of limitations was "no longer a problem," Perez's spokesman Steve Cole told us in December 2006.
Local residents may be heard on sentencing of Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc., which may be asked to provide evidence on other violations and violators as a condition of a guilty plea and sentencing. The Jacksonville U.S. District Court case number is 3:07cr-67-V-32TEM. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Morris. For up-to-date information on scheduling and opportunities for public comment on sentencing, concerned citizens may contact Steve Cole, U.S. Attorney's office in Tampa, 813-274-6136 or Honorable Sheryl L. Loesch, U.S. District Court Clerk, 300 North Hogan Street, Suite 9-150, Jacksonville, Florida 32202, tel: 904-549-1900.
The U.S. District Court clerk's website bears a handsome bald eagle on the left; the address is http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/
Environmental crimes investigations and prosecutions have been rare as hen's teeth here in St. Johns County, Florida. Speculator/developers/landrapers (among other polluters) long held sway here, even bulldozing the home to a nesting pair of bald eagles, our national symbol (less than one month after the attacks of 9/11).
For more background on Thompson Bros. Realty's October 8, 2001 eagle nest tree cutting, see Ed Slavin, "Bald Eagle Coverup -- Four Years Later, No Decision on Prosecution," The Collective Press, (Issue 9, October 2005), online at http://www.collectivepress.org/archive/09_1.html.
By Ed Slavin
Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. is charged with a felony violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: "molesting" a bald eagle (cutting down a bald eagle nest tree in St. Augustine).
Federal criminal charges were filed against Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. by United States Attorney Paul Perez on March 30, 2007 for the alleged October 8, 2001 eagle-molesting. Perez' signed "criminal information" charges Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc. with "acting through its employees and agents" and "knowingly and with wanton disregard for the consequences of its actions take, molest and disturb a bald eagle, without being permitted to do so by law," in violation of 16 U.S.C. 668(a) & 50 C.F.R. 22.3.
Those convicted of violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act can be fined, imprisoned (and denied federal grazing permits). But U.S. Attorney Perez has apparently not yet charged any living, breathing individuals, only Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc., a corporation.
Efforts to contact the Thompsons were unavailing.
Efforts to learn more will continue.
It happened in America on October 8, 2001, inside St. Augustine city limits by the SR312 bridge. A bald eagle nest tree was ordered cut down by local businessman Pierre Thompson (land developer/speculator and grandson of the founder of the St. Augustine Record).
The St. Augustine Record's 2001 articles extensively detailed Thompson's actions. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service built a strong case, with neighbors Chris Gilman, her partner, a neighbor and government employees taking photos and providing testimony establishing that Pierre Thompson knew (but denied) there were nesting bald eagles. For four years months, nothing happened. The Collective Press reported in October 2005 that after four years, United States Attorney Paul Perez still hadn't decided whether to charge anyone with any of three federal environmental crimes. CP also reported the five-year statute of limitations would expire in October 2006. Extended by agreement of prosecutors and defense lawyers, the statute of limitations was "no longer a problem," Perez's spokesman Steve Cole told us in December 2006.
Local residents may be heard on sentencing of Thompson Bros. Realty, Inc., which may be asked to provide evidence on other violations and violators as a condition of a guilty plea and sentencing. The Jacksonville U.S. District Court case number is 3:07cr-67-V-32TEM. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Morris. For up-to-date information on scheduling and opportunities for public comment on sentencing, concerned citizens may contact Steve Cole, U.S. Attorney's office in Tampa, 813-274-6136 or Honorable Sheryl L. Loesch, U.S. District Court Clerk, 300 North Hogan Street, Suite 9-150, Jacksonville, Florida 32202, tel: 904-549-1900.
The U.S. District Court clerk's website bears a handsome bald eagle on the left; the address is http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/
Environmental crimes investigations and prosecutions have been rare as hen's teeth here in St. Johns County, Florida. Speculator/developers/landrapers (among other polluters) long held sway here, even bulldozing the home to a nesting pair of bald eagles, our national symbol (less than one month after the attacks of 9/11).
For more background on Thompson Bros. Realty's October 8, 2001 eagle nest tree cutting, see Ed Slavin, "Bald Eagle Coverup -- Four Years Later, No Decision on Prosecution," The Collective Press, (Issue 9, October 2005), online at http://www.collectivepress.org/archive/09_1.html.
City responds unreasonably to critics
In response to Peter Romano's column (below), ex-Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, City Commissioner, hotly denounced the "letter-writer" (sic) at the June 11, 2007 city Commission meeting, stating that the St. Augustine Police Department indicated that the "letter-writer" (sic) had not called to report any crimes since June 2006.
Was GARDNER's remark an invasion of a reasonable expectation of privacy?
Does criticizing local governments give officials the right to research you, on taxpayer-funded time? Nope. It's Watergate-style abuse of power.
GARDNER's remark was a non sequitur, but typical "spin" on the part of City officials.
GARDNER once asked me "do you have lint in your pockets?" while I was questioning City officials about illegal dumping at a City Commission meeting last year.
Was Peter Romano obliged to report crimes that are open and notorious?
Do citizens have a right to discuss law enforcement lapses without being attacked? What's next, pepper-spray and handcuffs for civic leaders?
BTW, reporting environmental crimes in these parts often results in selective enforcement (see above regarding PIERRE THOMPSON and eagle nest tree cutting.
Interesting fact: when City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS became City Manager in 1998, he and City Planning and Zoning Director MARK KNIGHT were present at the creation of a new zoning district, for one person -- Mr. THOMPSON, to allow them to build a dock some day.
Was GARDNER's remark an invasion of a reasonable expectation of privacy?
Does criticizing local governments give officials the right to research you, on taxpayer-funded time? Nope. It's Watergate-style abuse of power.
GARDNER's remark was a non sequitur, but typical "spin" on the part of City officials.
GARDNER once asked me "do you have lint in your pockets?" while I was questioning City officials about illegal dumping at a City Commission meeting last year.
Was Peter Romano obliged to report crimes that are open and notorious?
Do citizens have a right to discuss law enforcement lapses without being attacked? What's next, pepper-spray and handcuffs for civic leaders?
BTW, reporting environmental crimes in these parts often results in selective enforcement (see above regarding PIERRE THOMPSON and eagle nest tree cutting.
Interesting fact: when City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS became City Manager in 1998, he and City Planning and Zoning Director MARK KNIGHT were present at the creation of a new zoning district, for one person -- Mr. THOMPSON, to allow them to build a dock some day.
Guest Column: Neighborhood Bill of Rights' rejection wrong
Guest Column: Neighborhood Bill of Rights' rejection wrong PETER ROMANOSt. Augustine Publication Date: 06/10/07
Without much fanfare, but with diligent effort, the Neighborhood Council in March proposed an ordinance called the "Neighborhood Bill of Rights." All that we had asked was that the St. Augustine City Commission discuss the measure which is almost identical to the St. Johns County ordinance passed in 2006, and similar to an existing Jacksonville ordinance.
What became of this measure to extend a basic list of rights to the everyday citizen who is taking responsibility for their community? First, it was referred to the city staff for comments. Then it received an all-out attack by the city attorney, who inferred that the "everyday" citizen could exercise these at any time.
And of course the commissioners and the mayor voted it down, saying in effect, let's not accept accountability or responsibility to our citizens.
Here's what we asked for (abridged version):
A. Prompt . responses to all reasonable city business questions, document requests, and meeting requests submitted to the city manager or his/her staff
B. A timely personal response of its commissioner or designee questions directed to the City Commission office.
C. Advance notification and a reasonable opportunity to provide input to the city of any substantial city initiated or permitted public works or utility projects.
D. Notification of the submission of any application or pre-application for city approval of a special use, temporary use, variance, vesting, rezoning, Development of Regional Impact, PUD, PRD, Comprehensive Plan change, other significant land use change application, or change or amendment thereof.
E. To allow members of one or more neighborhood associations to ask questions ., concerns, or suggestions regarding said application. .
F. Final version(s) of all land use change application documents must be provided to the city no later than 15 days prior to any public hearing on the matter . notifying affected parties (including neighborhood associations) in writing.
G. Representatives of each neighborhood association representing property within 300 feet of the subject property shall be accorded an opportunity to share. ... time to address and present evidence to any city board, ... so be accorded the right to reasonably cross-examine the applicant's witnesses on the issues which such witness testifies.
H. Misrepresentation, as reasonably determined by the city, provided by an association in materials or testimony provided cause such association to lose its registration status for one year from the hearing date.
I. Opportunity for formal input into the annual budget process, including the opportunity to express preferred city government priorities, suggested capital improvement projects.
J. The opportunity to provide input into the design of publicly-funded projects within or adjacent to the neighborhood ...
So how does this affect us? One of the founding members of the Neighborhood Council, the governing body of St. Augustine's Neighborhood Associations, finds one of its members floundering.
Up until the last meeting in May, and a threat to dissolve, the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association hadn't had a quorum in six months. As a result, we haven't had elections for 2007, too few people have shown up to kick me out.
Meanwhile, the neighborhood's troubles mount; trash, littering, deteriorated streets, graffiti, wandering homeless, hookers on parade, continuing drug deals and murder. I receive complaints about these conditions, from people who mostly won't participate in the association to try to make a change.
The city, while ignoring these problems (with the exception of some much-needed police attention to the corner of Bridge Street and M.L. King Avenue) instead imposes its own will on the neighborhood. Through the Planning and Zoning Board, it strong-arms rezoning by exception, "taking away residentially/historically zoned property to make it a parking lot for the National Guard. It sets an ordinance on density without considering how it affects an already "urban" neighborhood.
One of my colleagues in the Neighborhood Council put it succinctly. "Since the associations (neighborhoods) do not have any authority or power there can not be any liability to the city for their actions"
Or, inactions, I would add.
On Thursday, we will try for a Lincolnville resurrection. On June 24, all neighborhood associations are invited to "pot luck" at the annual Neighborhood Council Picnic. For the sake of Lincolnville be there Thursday. For the sake of all neighborhoods come June 24.
Peter Romano is president of the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association.Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/061007/opinions_4643639.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Without much fanfare, but with diligent effort, the Neighborhood Council in March proposed an ordinance called the "Neighborhood Bill of Rights." All that we had asked was that the St. Augustine City Commission discuss the measure which is almost identical to the St. Johns County ordinance passed in 2006, and similar to an existing Jacksonville ordinance.
What became of this measure to extend a basic list of rights to the everyday citizen who is taking responsibility for their community? First, it was referred to the city staff for comments. Then it received an all-out attack by the city attorney, who inferred that the "everyday" citizen could exercise these at any time.
And of course the commissioners and the mayor voted it down, saying in effect, let's not accept accountability or responsibility to our citizens.
Here's what we asked for (abridged version):
A. Prompt . responses to all reasonable city business questions, document requests, and meeting requests submitted to the city manager or his/her staff
B. A timely personal response of its commissioner or designee questions directed to the City Commission office.
C. Advance notification and a reasonable opportunity to provide input to the city of any substantial city initiated or permitted public works or utility projects.
D. Notification of the submission of any application or pre-application for city approval of a special use, temporary use, variance, vesting, rezoning, Development of Regional Impact, PUD, PRD, Comprehensive Plan change, other significant land use change application, or change or amendment thereof.
E. To allow members of one or more neighborhood associations to ask questions ., concerns, or suggestions regarding said application. .
F. Final version(s) of all land use change application documents must be provided to the city no later than 15 days prior to any public hearing on the matter . notifying affected parties (including neighborhood associations) in writing.
G. Representatives of each neighborhood association representing property within 300 feet of the subject property shall be accorded an opportunity to share. ... time to address and present evidence to any city board, ... so be accorded the right to reasonably cross-examine the applicant's witnesses on the issues which such witness testifies.
H. Misrepresentation, as reasonably determined by the city, provided by an association in materials or testimony provided cause such association to lose its registration status for one year from the hearing date.
I. Opportunity for formal input into the annual budget process, including the opportunity to express preferred city government priorities, suggested capital improvement projects.
J. The opportunity to provide input into the design of publicly-funded projects within or adjacent to the neighborhood ...
So how does this affect us? One of the founding members of the Neighborhood Council, the governing body of St. Augustine's Neighborhood Associations, finds one of its members floundering.
Up until the last meeting in May, and a threat to dissolve, the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association hadn't had a quorum in six months. As a result, we haven't had elections for 2007, too few people have shown up to kick me out.
Meanwhile, the neighborhood's troubles mount; trash, littering, deteriorated streets, graffiti, wandering homeless, hookers on parade, continuing drug deals and murder. I receive complaints about these conditions, from people who mostly won't participate in the association to try to make a change.
The city, while ignoring these problems (with the exception of some much-needed police attention to the corner of Bridge Street and M.L. King Avenue) instead imposes its own will on the neighborhood. Through the Planning and Zoning Board, it strong-arms rezoning by exception, "taking away residentially/historically zoned property to make it a parking lot for the National Guard. It sets an ordinance on density without considering how it affects an already "urban" neighborhood.
One of my colleagues in the Neighborhood Council put it succinctly. "Since the associations (neighborhoods) do not have any authority or power there can not be any liability to the city for their actions"
Or, inactions, I would add.
On Thursday, we will try for a Lincolnville resurrection. On June 24, all neighborhood associations are invited to "pot luck" at the annual Neighborhood Council Picnic. For the sake of Lincolnville be there Thursday. For the sake of all neighborhoods come June 24.
Peter Romano is president of the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association.Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/061007/opinions_4643639.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Letter: Community at large fails the homeless
Letter: Community at large fails the homeless
Sumner Gray
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 06/27/07
Editor: A man lies down on the railroad tracks, another is killed by gunshot along State Road A1A, another found dead under a bridge, the latest one drowns in a retention pond, and three others are known dead this year. These are residents of our community. Their fate is our failure.
All of us.
Contrary to what many uneducated residents think, these people do not choose to be homeless (anymore than a woman chooses to stay in an abusive relationship or an alcoholic chooses a beer at 9 a.m.).
Nothing is as simple as it seems.
St. Augustine City Commissioners -- Commissioner Don Crichlow and Mayor Joe Boles -- have removed themselves completely from the issue, unfairly and inconceivably pawning the entire situation onto the Salvation Army.
Four commissioners have gone back on their word by passing an inhumane no begging ordinance and doing absolutely nothing to help the homeless. Only Commissioners George Gardner has contacted the county and been working on creative solutions.
Where are our civic leaders? Where is the Chamber of Commerce and other business leaders? If 80 of you can meet at the winery to plot banning the homeless, couldn't you also come up with creative, long-term solutions?
Where are the majority of the churches?
There are a lot of good people working hard to help the homeless in St. Johns County, but they are overwhelmed and spread thin. It is my belief that government will not deal with this situation unless heavily pressured.
In the end, as with many social justice movements, the citizens of St. Johns County will need to step up. I want to personally ask everyone to get involved with PUSH (People United to Stop Homelessness) and Food Not Bombs and build a movement from there. Come out to the Plaza de la Constitucion any Monday, Thursday or Saturday, from 6 to 7 p.m., have a meal, meet those in need and organize mutual aid.
Sumner Gray
St. AugustineClick here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062707/opinions_4679263.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Sumner Gray
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 06/27/07
Editor: A man lies down on the railroad tracks, another is killed by gunshot along State Road A1A, another found dead under a bridge, the latest one drowns in a retention pond, and three others are known dead this year. These are residents of our community. Their fate is our failure.
All of us.
Contrary to what many uneducated residents think, these people do not choose to be homeless (anymore than a woman chooses to stay in an abusive relationship or an alcoholic chooses a beer at 9 a.m.).
Nothing is as simple as it seems.
St. Augustine City Commissioners -- Commissioner Don Crichlow and Mayor Joe Boles -- have removed themselves completely from the issue, unfairly and inconceivably pawning the entire situation onto the Salvation Army.
Four commissioners have gone back on their word by passing an inhumane no begging ordinance and doing absolutely nothing to help the homeless. Only Commissioners George Gardner has contacted the county and been working on creative solutions.
Where are our civic leaders? Where is the Chamber of Commerce and other business leaders? If 80 of you can meet at the winery to plot banning the homeless, couldn't you also come up with creative, long-term solutions?
Where are the majority of the churches?
There are a lot of good people working hard to help the homeless in St. Johns County, but they are overwhelmed and spread thin. It is my belief that government will not deal with this situation unless heavily pressured.
In the end, as with many social justice movements, the citizens of St. Johns County will need to step up. I want to personally ask everyone to get involved with PUSH (People United to Stop Homelessness) and Food Not Bombs and build a movement from there. Come out to the Plaza de la Constitucion any Monday, Thursday or Saturday, from 6 to 7 p.m., have a meal, meet those in need and organize mutual aid.
Sumner Gray
St. AugustineClick here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062707/opinions_4679263.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Letter: Noisy trucks demand police action
Letter: Noisy trucks demand police actionRobin SeversSt. AugustinePublication Date: 06/27/07
Editor: Why won't the police of St. Augustine do something about those large trucks with mufflers loud enough to shake the house?
They disturb tourists and residents at all hours of the day and night without recourse. A few noise violation fines handed out by police would go a long way in helping restore peace to our community. To the people who think their loud trucks are cool, the rest of us know you are, just compensating for something.
Robin Severs
St. AugustineClick here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062707/opinions_4679263b.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Editor: Why won't the police of St. Augustine do something about those large trucks with mufflers loud enough to shake the house?
They disturb tourists and residents at all hours of the day and night without recourse. A few noise violation fines handed out by police would go a long way in helping restore peace to our community. To the people who think their loud trucks are cool, the rest of us know you are, just compensating for something.
Robin Severs
St. AugustineClick here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062707/opinions_4679263b.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Letter: What? Fish Island again?
Letter: What? Fish Island again?Rene TiecheCrescent BeachPublication Date: 06/29/07
Editor: How many appeals are enough? What part of no doesn't developer Jim Young understand? We've had county commission and P and Z plus city denial 3 strikes you're out "final" or are they trying to jockey around commissioner's in their favor? This development needs to be buried for good.
Rene Tieche
Crescent Beach Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062907/opinions_46810A5.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Editor: How many appeals are enough? What part of no doesn't developer Jim Young understand? We've had county commission and P and Z plus city denial 3 strikes you're out "final" or are they trying to jockey around commissioner's in their favor? This development needs to be buried for good.
Rene Tieche
Crescent Beach Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/062907/opinions_46810A5.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Fish Island denial headed to court
Fish Island denial headed to court
City backs planning board in rejecting project
MARCIA LANE
marcia.lane@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 06/12/07
The next time the issue of a massive dock and marina for a development on Fish Island comes up it will probably be before a judge.
The St. Augustine City Commission, by a 5-0 vote Monday night, backed a decision by the St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board to deny the dock that opponents say will destroy one of the last unspoiled vistas in the area.
The commission was serving as an appellate court so there was no public hearing.
"We will be going on to court with this," said Fred Halback of Halback Design Group, who has been working with developer Jim Young, designing landscaping for the upscale project.
Court was almost inevitable no matter which way the vote went.
Opponents of the development indicated earlier they would fight the dock in court if the city approved it.
City Attorney Ron Brown told commissioners that, in making their decision, they needed to be able to show a court they had allowed due process, complied with essential elements of law for development criteria and that there was "substantive and competent evidence" to support the decision of the PZB.
Fish Island Development Inc. sought the dock and marina as part of its planned upscale development. The dock was to be more than 1,200 feet long and about 10 feet wide in order to accommodate golf carts. The marina was to hold 100 50-foot yachts.
The marina would have allowed most of the residents in the 177-unit development to have a boat slip. Without it, only about 30 of the units are waterside and eligible for individual docks.
Opponents said they were concerned about safety, erosion, destruction of the environment and loss of the Fish Island vista to the public.
Richard McGuire, attorney for the development, said at Monday's meeting that his client had done his homework, obtained state and federal permits, had a right to the dock because of the zoning and was "making a good faith effort to develop the property."
He argued the commission had to use fact-based evidence in making their decision and said the question of vista had been addressed.
Vista, public benefit and the environment were the three major issues addressed.
The issue of vista -- or the view -- came up several times as commissioners discussed their options.
Mayor Joe Boles said while there were no statutes defining what a scenic vista was, he thought it was like the obscenity case once before the U.S. Supreme Court. As one justice said, he might not be able to define obscenity but he knew it when he saw it.
Commissioners also stressed it would not be the first time a dock was denied.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/061207/news_4651283.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
City backs planning board in rejecting project
MARCIA LANE
marcia.lane@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 06/12/07
The next time the issue of a massive dock and marina for a development on Fish Island comes up it will probably be before a judge.
The St. Augustine City Commission, by a 5-0 vote Monday night, backed a decision by the St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board to deny the dock that opponents say will destroy one of the last unspoiled vistas in the area.
The commission was serving as an appellate court so there was no public hearing.
"We will be going on to court with this," said Fred Halback of Halback Design Group, who has been working with developer Jim Young, designing landscaping for the upscale project.
Court was almost inevitable no matter which way the vote went.
Opponents of the development indicated earlier they would fight the dock in court if the city approved it.
City Attorney Ron Brown told commissioners that, in making their decision, they needed to be able to show a court they had allowed due process, complied with essential elements of law for development criteria and that there was "substantive and competent evidence" to support the decision of the PZB.
Fish Island Development Inc. sought the dock and marina as part of its planned upscale development. The dock was to be more than 1,200 feet long and about 10 feet wide in order to accommodate golf carts. The marina was to hold 100 50-foot yachts.
The marina would have allowed most of the residents in the 177-unit development to have a boat slip. Without it, only about 30 of the units are waterside and eligible for individual docks.
Opponents said they were concerned about safety, erosion, destruction of the environment and loss of the Fish Island vista to the public.
Richard McGuire, attorney for the development, said at Monday's meeting that his client had done his homework, obtained state and federal permits, had a right to the dock because of the zoning and was "making a good faith effort to develop the property."
He argued the commission had to use fact-based evidence in making their decision and said the question of vista had been addressed.
Vista, public benefit and the environment were the three major issues addressed.
The issue of vista -- or the view -- came up several times as commissioners discussed their options.
Mayor Joe Boles said while there were no statutes defining what a scenic vista was, he thought it was like the obscenity case once before the U.S. Supreme Court. As one justice said, he might not be able to define obscenity but he knew it when he saw it.
Commissioners also stressed it would not be the first time a dock was denied.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/061207/news_4651283.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Letter: City Commission should uphold the PZB decision
Letter: City Commission should uphold the PZB decisionKen BryanSt. AugustinePublication Date: 06/10/07
Editor: For the second time, May 7, 2007, the city of St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board (PZB) voted unanimously, 6-0, to reject the request by applicant Fred Halback, for a proposed 10-foot by 240-foot pier to a 1,080-feet, 100-slip marina. It would dock 50-foot yachts and sailboats for the exclusive use of owners of townhouses and estate homes who don't yet live in St. Augustine.
The private pier is so long over the wetlands, the users would use golf carts to get to boat docks.
Environmental experts, consultants and a biologist testified on May 7 that direct elimination of salt marsh would have cumulative negative impacts to the environment. Increased vessel operation in the area could locally elevate turbidity and sedimentation. Accidental discharge of gasoline, oil, sewage and trash also may have a deleterious impact on marine sources and habitats. No pump-out station or harbor master are planned.
This is not about the applicant's property rights. It is about the property rights of the city and the citizens, who own the submerged bottom lands and marsh that would be harmed. The marina would negatively impact the public scenic vista contrary to the city's comprehensive plan and city code which specifically require marinas and docks to "benefit the public as a whole." The plan declares these areas to be "the most environmentally sensitive areas of the city."
The Mickler-O'Connell Bridge on State Road 312 is the main route for evacuation of thousands who live on Anastasia Island. Concrete floating docks and large boats may pose a risk of damage to the bridge in the event of a major hurricane and therefore is a safety issue and huge concern of many of us who live here.
When the City Commission meets Monday, we ask that it reject this proposal.Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/061007/opinions_464310b.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Editor: For the second time, May 7, 2007, the city of St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board (PZB) voted unanimously, 6-0, to reject the request by applicant Fred Halback, for a proposed 10-foot by 240-foot pier to a 1,080-feet, 100-slip marina. It would dock 50-foot yachts and sailboats for the exclusive use of owners of townhouses and estate homes who don't yet live in St. Augustine.
The private pier is so long over the wetlands, the users would use golf carts to get to boat docks.
Environmental experts, consultants and a biologist testified on May 7 that direct elimination of salt marsh would have cumulative negative impacts to the environment. Increased vessel operation in the area could locally elevate turbidity and sedimentation. Accidental discharge of gasoline, oil, sewage and trash also may have a deleterious impact on marine sources and habitats. No pump-out station or harbor master are planned.
This is not about the applicant's property rights. It is about the property rights of the city and the citizens, who own the submerged bottom lands and marsh that would be harmed. The marina would negatively impact the public scenic vista contrary to the city's comprehensive plan and city code which specifically require marinas and docks to "benefit the public as a whole." The plan declares these areas to be "the most environmentally sensitive areas of the city."
The Mickler-O'Connell Bridge on State Road 312 is the main route for evacuation of thousands who live on Anastasia Island. Concrete floating docks and large boats may pose a risk of damage to the bridge in the event of a major hurricane and therefore is a safety issue and huge concern of many of us who live here.
When the City Commission meets Monday, we ask that it reject this proposal.Click here to return to story:http://staugustine.com/stories/061007/opinions_464310b.shtml © The St. Augustine Record
Saturday, June 09, 2007
This view is worth preserving--come speak against speculator's appeal on Monday, June 11, 2007 in St. Augustine
Come out to speak to the St. Augustine City Commission on Monday, June 11, at 5 PM at 75 King Street, City Hall and Lightner Museum Building, First Floor. The proposed Fish Island development should be rejected. The National Park Service must acquire the property for the proposed St. Augustine National Historical Park, National Seashore and National Scenic Highway. Please see below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)