 |
| Condo Owners near the County's 330 foot parcel of Beachfront property in Perdido Key next to the Crab Trap Restaurant love to use our beach as their own "private" beach. They even advertise it! Now that we're going to #OpenOurBeach--this group of condo owners is doing everything they can to try to stop us. They like it just the way it is, because it is a comfortable status quo for them. |
This Thursday morning we will have our monthly committee of the whole meeting. This week one of the items on the agenda is a 15 minute item from Tim Day in Natural Resources about the current status of our plan to #OpenOurBeach access point in Perdido Key next to the Crab Trap.
This 330' parcel directly the Gulf of Mexico was purchased by the county 7 years ago for habitat protection and public beach access.
But special interests have fought us tooth and nail over the last several years as the county began the plans to finally open this site to the public. They have fought us in court and as the county ran this project through the development review process.
The entire sordid history of this can be reviewed here
The backup for this Thursday's discussion is empty. What I fear is that those who are opposed to opening this access, along with their acolytes, will attempt to "scare" the full BCC into paralysis on this project. They will urge us to "wait" to build this access until "the court case is finalized." (this could be pushed out forever in an attempt to stymie the opening of this access to the public)
I am of the belief that we don't have to wait. We have checked the boxes and we have done our planning. We have a nice sketch of what we can build and we are ready to go. So I asked our attorney about what it is that could potentially shut us down, and the conversation went a little something like this:
JEFF B: "Absent a dispositive ruling from the circuit court (i.e if there is another judge rotation, or no action is taken, or the plaintiffs push this out with additional motions or requests for continuance-- and the case is just languishing there) -----is there anything preventing the county from moving ahead with construction of the improvements provided we follow the DRC process and settle/resolve any appeals from that process. Or to put it another--- way: Is there anything in either of these processes that would prevent us from moving forward with construction of the improvements prior to the final dispositions of any appeals to the circuit court?"
ALISON R: "At this time, there is no requirement that we stop. Anything we do is at our own risk. The DRC was last Wednesday and there is a 15-day window for a potentially aggrieved party to appeal that to the BOA. They haven’t appealed it yet. There is some concern about other parties (such as environmental groups) becoming interested in what is going on there, but that is speculative at this time. They might be more interested in federal causes of action."
JEFF B: "That is what I thought. So, if we let the court process and other outside interested parties’ potential suits work their way out on one track, and we build the access on another track, ----- wouldn’t it take a judge’s ruling to force us to remove improvements once we had completed them and opened the access point? Wouldn’t that be the only mechanism any aggrieved party would have at that point, once the access was built?"
ALISON R: "Or an injunction prior to completion"
JEFF B: "A hypothetical: If we built it out and it was being used by the public prior to the final disposition of the case (s) in circuit court, and if after it was open the judge ruled in favor of the condo owners and against the county----------would the access park have to be shuttered pending an appeal or could the park remain open while the county’s appeal of the judge’s ruling went forward to the first DCA?"
ALISON R: "I think most likely that would be true. It is possible that some unexpected order or outcome could happen, but almost positive it would stay until final resolution."
Commissioner, can I get a little bit better understanding of the Writ of Certiorari that was filed. It is to force the decision back to the BOA is it not? The BOA would then have to rehear the County argument for the zoning change and conditional use, correct. Not a lawyer but you have access to one and a brother who is very familiar with the law. Am I wrong in this assumption? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
ReplyDeleteDon't let Underhand and Owenhill and the planning Nazi (s) stop the county and people of the county from enjoying our own property and property rights. Thank you for your leadership in this endeavor. The link to the sordid history tells the tale.
ReplyDeleteThis was on the RESTORE MYIP plan fully vetted and sent to the Department of the Treasury. The funding was in place and noted there in that document and voted on by the full board The truth is Douglas Underhill tried to change that and say it was a portal to get more funds. It seems he wanted that so the public would not use it and he wanted to keep that frontage for himself. How any one would even entertain the idea of putting his aide and friend and business partner on the board for D1 seems unethical. I have never witnessed such blatant corruption and fully remember who was assisting namely Jacqueline Rogers by gathering public records citizens sent to commissioners and released them on Escambia Citizen Watch facebook bundled together in a file to try to intimidate citizens for Underhill and say it was political. No -- the public owns that beach. Owen's campaign is backed by some of the same developers Underhill had.
ReplyDeleteOpen Our Beach.
Take it out of D2 discretionary. Underhill says he doesn't want it. yeah right.
ReplyDeleteHe's still telling lies about it on his commissioner page. If he wanted to put in amended RESTORE to purchase more beachfront he could have but failed to. Failed on other real estate negotiations also. yeah we saw that.
If anybody comments on his page to correct the record he hides it. He is taking a swipe at you politically on this. Defacto for his b. buddy. Too bad some people cant see through him. Larry Down Jr did with his latest you tube. Ha Ha...Smells Doug a coming..
People need to watch this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTfWJfjuYKc
I "See it now: "monsters under the bed""
ReplyDeleteReality is that the monster burning the bed down had bolted from that COW for a photo op with Ronnie in myrtle grove to point at dirt that probably never became sidewalk anyways.
The county should not be 5 kingdoms but the lower left part has doul gas under hand waging battle on you and the citizens in the county and further take the hit.
D2 Discretionary !
ReplyDeleteCan't make this stuff up. The guy who tries to win elections by calling other people "good ole boys" has his BFF running for a seat to try to replace you. HA HA HA #Dildodoug
This segment of the COW on ECTV 2/13 will be internet gold.
Wait for it... put on your hip wader boots.
Speaking of the discussion on the agenda for Thursday COW
ReplyDeleteNo attachments on the agenda for the COW 2/13--- word on the street-- the administrator is trying to be LESS transparent Does doing away with the Escambia ask app makes it so people can't see everything that's been reported and NOT done?
Is this new "government online" a one way, hide it behind red tape wall or an improvement?
She did say if hired she would do things for who is in the ring and not for the critics -- maybe she needs a reminder she works for the people not to form the Gilley Corporation.
She reminds me of the lady on the Harry Potter series who was over the ministry of magic. M.o.M. She has a lot of experience but needs to be watched. The Selover incident is an prime example.
Underhill is blaming toxic activists and logical fallacy (flat out deception) that opening this prevented acquiring other land. People should note the full board except him voted to get this accomplished. It was purchased with public money.
ReplyDelete