Dr. Oleske Informs DOMES She is Initiating Litigation

Dr. Deanna Oleske, the interim District 1 Medical Examiner who earlier this year had a tussle with some local funeral home directors, has now officially notified the District One Medical Examiner Support (DOMES) board that she is suing said funeral home directors.  She indicates litigation is commencing due to some letters written to the county earlier this year (by multiple local funeral home directors) describing allegations of barbaric treatment of corpses.  These letters  subsequently made their way into the press, and these letters  ultimately led to some better communication(s) between the ME's office and the funeral homes.

Dr. Oleske strenuously denied the allegations in the letters at the time, as did her operations director Dan Schebler.

 Although it seems everyone knew this litigation had commenced, apparently the folks that serve on the DOMES board may not have been aware--or made aware officially.

 They're aware now.

 Although the Escambia BCC is not being sued so far as I have been told, we are getting bombarded with public records requests from the Medical Examiner's lawyers.  The press and the ME and her staff have tried to argue that the letters were somehow connected to Escambia County's rejection of the Doctor's "We must have a new facility outside of Escambia County" arguments.  I believe we can get functionality in the current spaces with about a $2-$3 Million investment rather than a $20-$30 Million investment in new facility outside of Escambia County.  The one issue (alleged mistreatment of corpses) has nothing to do with the other (new facility) so far as I am concerned. 

 So, we will see where this all ends up.  Meanwhile, I have been told by a credible source that the Medical Examiner, Dr. Oleske, has put her "name in the hat" and applied to be the district 2 Medical Examiner in Tallahassee.  We will see what happens if she gets tapped for that position.  My understanding is the D2 ME's office is in a Quonset Hut type of PEB--think Gomer Pyle's Bunk Room Facilities--not a modern, large, state of the art facility the likes of which is being sought for Santa Rosa County by Oleske.  Also, a source familiar with operations of the D2 office reports that over there in that Circuit--the ME (who I am told is retiring) does not have in-house investigators but rather outsources that function to the local sheriff's office; staffing levels there are smaller than here.

 Lots of change coming if Oleske happens to be offered that job.

More to come.  See her letter from yesterday, below.

 

 

 

REAP Lodges Closing Permanently in less than One Month? In Two Weeks???

An email blast was sent out early Monday morning to County Commissioners and a host of others about the REAP Lodges facility's imminent closure due to funding constraints.

This is an unfortunate turn of events if it is, indeed, true.

My understanding was that REAP had secured ample additional funding and also was working toward its own organic fundraising which would propel it toward self-sufficiency.  Apparently, this is not the case.  My email to Mr. Whibbs:  

"Mr. Whibbs- I lament this development, as I know you have tried diligently to assist with our issues of the homeless and associated matters.  I was under the impression you had secured funding for REAP lodges through the city and the COC.  I will ask about this at our upcoming meeting because I know what you do to assist in this space is critical to our overall strategy of homeless reduction."

to which he responded, succinctly, "Thank you for anything you can do. Vinnie"

With respect to the vexing topic of eliminating/reducing homelessness locally--we need more folks on the front lines helping--NOT fewer.  More to come Wednesday at our 9:00 AM meeting ---  as I will be adding this as a topic for discussion on our agenda.  Read the letter Whibbs sent this morning, below.

 

86th Coffee with the Commissioner this Wednesday Morning: Talking Master Plans, OLF-8, and Beulah

Please join us for our 86th Coffee with the Commissioner event-This month's Coffee will feature County Administrator Wes Moreno and Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore. Moreno will provide an update on county business and Gilmore will discuss public safety matters. Horace Jones, Development Services Director, and Andrew Holmer, Development Services Deputy Director, will join as this month's special guests along with Marina Khoury from DPZ Co Design -- who has agreed to join the event from Paris, France, for a discussion on the Beulah Master Plan, OLF 8's Master Plan, and challenges with implementing a Master Plan that is both publicly acceptable and financially viable in this market. Residents are encouraged to send virtual questions and comments they would like to discuss during the event through Facebook or in advance of the coffee to District1@myescambia.com.

 

Let's Move Forward with the 250 Acres for Jobs

 

The jobs-creation acreage at OLF-8 and the residential mixed use portion should not be handcuffed together--- when we are good to go on the 250 acre jobs portion of this property.

We have now had three separate offers for OLF-8 where one of the first sales stipulations/conditions for such sales requires significant variances away from the approved Master Plan for OLF-8 in Beulah.

Three companies, three separate and distinct offers, three LOI's with strict requirements for variances away from our codes and ordinances as it pertains to deveolping OLF-8.

This means something.  Occam's razor applies.  Obviously there is something with the master plan which is making such a transaction not financially viable.

I lament this, but I am not entirely surprised.  In multiple discussions now with multiple industry professionals that have either already made offers for this field or who are considering doing so--the one common theme is that the plan as required is not financially viable/feasible in this market if strict adhearance in mandated.

Said one such offerer "We can get about 70% there, with the areas and the uses and even the street layouts--we just cannot make the other 30% and in order for this deal to make business sense for us as a company--we have to have relief from that 30% which includes some of the very proscriptive design code."

There is obviously some wisdom in this individual's words--- as each of these three separate offers are from primarily residential builders and each such plan--thus far--looks to build more single family housing than mixed use, commercial, and/or high density commercial with residential lofts.

So if we are going to only settle for absolute 100% compliance with the DPZ plan for the southern, mixed use portions of the field--- I believe we need to go ahead and start off with moving the 250 acres on the northern part of the field forward for job creation with a re-booted triumph grant.  The board has signalled it's intent to hold back 250 acres for job creation--separate and apart from the rest of the field--due to the curveball we were thrown with the state's recently enacted "Live Local Act" which pre-empts our ability to prevent owners of commercial properties anywhere from immediately creating high-density residential apartments on such commercial properties.  If we sold the northern portion of OLF 8 as a part of any one-package all in one sale---we would not be able to prevent such a purchaser from building apartments on that commercial jobs producing parcel thanks to the state's passage of this law.  Our local control on this matter has been stripped by the state legislature.

So, with all of this as the backdrop, now is the time to move forward with creating jobs on the 250 acres of commercially zoned areas on the north east portion of OLF 8.  I discussed this on Rick's Podcast Thursday Morning.  If the board wants to create jobs with this portion, which we signalled strongly at our last meeting, now is the time to move forward, reboot our triumph gulf coast application, and get going.  There are companies that need this space at this location--good companies with good jobs.

Meanwhile, we can wait for the perfect "unicorn" offer from a developer to build the balance of the field on the south side, in complete/absolute 100% adhearance to the master plan as enacted.  We can make that portion fabulous.  Eventually.  If we get a buyer.  Maybe.

But that might just mean we never get that section developed.  It might mean we never get a restaurant, shop, or any other amenity developed on that portion of the field if the requirments are absolutely rigid and the county in intransigent with respect to ANY variances requested by an offeror.  My prediction is we may never get an offereor who will pay top dollar to build it 100% as the plan specifies.  Look back at the first three offers for my rationale for this prediction.

So the southern portion of the field might very well remain a field if that is the case.  I know many would be just fine with that--because such individuals really never wanted anything built there anyway.

But the largest tragedy of that scenario is that it makes it harder, if not next to impossible, for us to ever recoup the county taxpayers' existing $14.5 Million debt on the whole parcel if the southern, most valuable retail/commercial frontage parcels on 9-Mile road remain "unsaleable."

But at this point the jobs portion and the residential mixed use portion should not be handcuffed together when we are good to go on the jobs portion.  Time to get moving.

Why Conflate Two Separate Issues?

Sometimes no matter how much spaghetti is thrown at a wall---none of it sticks.

The recent article by Jim Little of the PNJ had an appropriate headline and summary of a recent scandal at the county:  Someone stole information from the county's servers illegally, this issue is being investigated by the FBI, and currently Jonathan Owens, my former political opponent who I dispatched in the 2020 primary and who worked as former lighting-rod commissioner Doug Underhill's secretary--- has publicly proclaimed he has this stolen property.  Doubling down, I'm told he(Owens) went on the radio and was giddy about explaining how he read all the personal, private, privileged and confidential information that was contained within this stolen data file.  Going further, he even admitted to disseminating this stolen property.  

Now, he does not say how he came to possess it other than providing a flimsy, unbelievable story that this file magically appeared on his desk.  Abracadabra!  But really, who would buy that explanation?  It is unbelievable, and that's the polite way I will put that.

So yes, the story got that aspect of the issue right.

But then came a huge part of the story that was about an unrelated issue:  the now settled cases of alleged, purported misconduct at the county's EMS division from four years ago.  

No doubt, there were some problems with record keeping and organization and multiple persons were alleged to have been a part of some falsification of certifications and mismanagement of call logs.

But here is the fact:  Six personnel from the county all but had their careers destroyed with these allegations from a former medical director who herself is now gone.  Of these six, only one was adjudicated guilty.  The other five settled their cases and WERE NOT CONVICTED.  The county paid a $5,000.00 fine, we got new medical directors, we got new leadership, and our EMS department moved forward.  Case closed.  Ever since that witch hunt by a former medical director--which it was--we have been cleaning up the mess, paying huge settlements and legal bills for the abyssimal way these former employees, now exonerated, were treated by the county.  No due process, allegations that were untrue, and careers ruined.  

But all that is in the rear view.

So why conflate this current case of theft and mishandling of protected information with the ancient history of that case?  

Now, this same former medical director did file a Federal Qui Tam claim post-employment with a couple of lawyers who specialize in this.  But that is a separate case from the falsification of records case.  

But MOST IMPORTANTLY:  The personal, private, priviledged and confidential text messages these lawyers so desperately want to keep, the ones allegedly provided to them outside of the normal discovery process, the ones that were stolen, the ones that cannot be verified as accurate, and the ones that are being investigated by law enforcement for the way they were inappropriately obtained---have no bearing on that Qui Tam case.  None whatsoever.  I am a part of the legislative in this county--I have no day in-day out operational oversight of any department--let alone EMS billing.  I'm not a fact witness to any of these overbilling allegations, and any discussion of the former Medical Director contained within these stolen text messages from my personal phone would be irrelevant hearsay and not a part of any case--let alone this particular one.  This is all setting aside the fact that these files were not provided as a bonafide records request, they were obtained unlawfully and there is no way to discern whether or not lines have been added into this particular file nor whether or not other lines have been deleted or manipulated.  Bottom Line:  There is no way to authenticate what Jonathan has given to these lawyers in this Qui Tam case.  So why are the lawyers burning up the taxi meter, running up costs, on chasing this issue down a rabbitt hole?

So now comes the news journal-- conflating a serious, major theft with a closed case and a current case for which the stolen files have no bearing?

I know why the plaintiff's lawyers are doing this---they are running up the check hoping for some settlement of this case to cover these exhorbitant fees, throwing spaghetti at the wall, making tons of discovery requests, then modulating them and moving them around.  They are grasping at straws and hoping to find something to help their case.  So they are doing what these sorts of lawyers, working on contingency, do.  Doing what lawyers do--It's why they are so dang popular and beloved 😀.  

But why is the PNJ carrying these lawyers' water--instead of separating the real from the faux as they should?

Has the New Auction for OLF 8 Begun?

As I had anticipated would be the case--the BCC has now received a fresh offer for all 540 acres of OLF 8 for the tidy sum of $40 Million Dollars. (and I anticipate several more in the coming weeks)

In this particular, very bare bones, three page offer (see it below)--no mention of the DPZ Master Plan--but multiple requests for full cooperation in rezoning the property, achieving preliminary site plan approvals, and amending the comprehensive plan.  So there is that.

-120 day inspection period requested

-total of $1 Million in earnest money, with an additional $100,000 that goes hard after several steps are taken and after the inspection period.

-Three (3) 30-day extensions requested.

I see some issues with the offer, chief among them is the guidance that the BCC already gave signalling that we will reserve 250 acres for job creation--so I would expect that this offer will have to be re-tooled.

Some of the speakers at recent meeting should be ecstatic.  It is someone other than DR Horton.....

We will see what the full board chooses to do with this offer--as this decision is up to the full 5-member board.

90% Growth in Available Units for Short Term Rentals Is What Fueled Dramatic Rise in Perdido Key Bed Tax Collections 2021-2022

 Recently there has been a series of meetings aimed at improving and enhancing the advertising of Perdido Key in District 1.  For the last several years, all county marketing has been centralized under the "Visit Pensacola" brand.  I'm told by folks familiar with this matter that "Perdido Key gets plenty of coverage and advertising--just look at their year over year tourist tax development (TDT) collections growth--that's the proof."   Nobody is knocking what Visit Pensacola does, it is just that Perdido Key is not Pensacola Beach--they are two separate and distinct areas of the county.

Currently, the Perdido Key Chamber of Commerce leases the Perdido Key visitor's center from Escambia County.  Within the visitor's center, "Visit Pensacola" maintains a presence, complete with rack cards, displays, and murals. There are also multiple employees of Visit Pensacola who staff this visitor's center through the week.  One issue that has been brought to my attention by the Perdido Businesses and citizens with whom I have spoken is that the Visit Pensacola employees who work in Perdido Key often recommend out of the area restaurants and other attractions to visitors who are coming to Perdido Key.  In one instance, a guest asked where a good restaurant was for a bite to eat.  Instead of pointing this particular guest to the Florabama, Crab Trap, Oyster Bar, or the Sunset Grill---the employee said "I'd recommend you go to Pensacola Beach, to the Grand Marlin"   There have been other similar occurrances of which I have been made aware.

In addition to this, there has been a lot of disdain about Perdido's Chamber of commerce--because as a state line chamber of commerce--they naturally have some members in Alabama.  About 60 of the 400 members of the Perdido Chamber of Commerce are Alabama businesses.  Of that 60 Alabama entities, however,  only 5 (Five) collect 5 cent bed taxes.  And of that five---4 of the 5 are owned by well-respected Escambia County businessman, Julian McQueen's.  company Inisfree Hotels.

Nobody is trying to knock Julian McQueen's hotels in Alabama.  It is a separate market from Pensacola Beach---very different and unique.  And Perdido Key actually lines up more with them and is closer in proximity to that market than it is to Pensacola Beach.  Perdido Key is 25 miles away from Pensacola Beach.

Meanwhile, back at the visitor's center in Perdido Key--rack cards are meticulously controlled by Visit Pensacola, with one such prominent rack card advertising an Out of State (Alabama) Gambiling Casino and another announcing "Welcome to Pensacola Beach!"  Of more than 100 posts to Visit Pensacola's Instagram over the last year--not one post had a #Hastag Perdido Key.  Every single one of the posts had hastags for Pensacola Beach or downtown.  Additionally, a recent perusal of the "Beach Events" page on Visit Pensacola was all but EXCLUSIVELY spotlighting Pensacola Beach, with the reader having to go eight clicks deep through the pages to find even one Perdido Key beach establishment listed.  The Perdido Key Chamber's website is not linked to Visit Pensacola's site for reasons unknown, yet Pensacola Beach's Chamber website is linked.  Why is that?

Perdido Key feels neglected and the businesses out there are not happy about it.  Remember, they are the #2 highest collector of Bed tax dollars behind only Pensacola Beach, in all of Escambia County.

Yet, I'm told if we bolster the Perdido area with better, more directed marketing--we will essentially be "Sending money to Alabama businesses." or "Competing against ourselves [Escambia]." I simply disagree.  It is a cop out and I can tell you as a person who frequently spends time at a Pensacola Beach Condo I own---visitors to either location will vote with their feet as it pertains to food and beverages; e.g. just because they are staying in Pensacola Beach or Perdido Key does not mean every dollar such visitor spends will be in Escambia County's jurisdiction.  People travel, people eat and drink out of jurisdiction.  Do I want all people in both locations to only spend money in Escambia County's jurisdiction so we collect the sales tax?  Of course.  Is that a realistic expectation?  no.  In Pensacola Beach, a vast majority of long duration visitors buy groceries over the bridge at Publix or Wal Mart.  All name-brand pizza delivery companies that deliver on Pensacola Beach to visitors staying there (Dominos, Pizza Hut, Papa Johns)  similarly are located out of our taxing jurisdiction, over the bridge in Santa Rosa County where the grocery stores are.  And when these visitors gas up their vehicles, by and large they skip the one high-price gas station in Pensacola Beach for one of the significantly less-expensive stations in.........drumroll.......you guessed it--Gulf Breeze   Santa Rosa County, out of our jurisdiction.

Similarly--in Perdido Key visitors staying in condos there may go over to Cobalt of the Hangout in addition to spending money in Escambia County at Perdido area restaurants.  

So--food an beverage choices happen, we can't hold visitors hostage at either beach once they arrive there for a visit.

But the money we are discussing, TDT, are not collected anywhere other than lodging accomodations, not at retail establishements or restaurants--so those discussions are red herrings anyhow, when we are talking about year over year TDT collections increases.   

The 2021-2022 year over year Bed Tax collections gains at Perdido Key were NOT driven by slick marketing for Perdido Key that Visit Pensacola placed.  These increases were organic, primarily due to the growth in new units coming on the market in Perdido Key via VRBO, AirBnB, Expedia, and other online owner-operated lodging solutions--in addition to work the Perdido Key Chamber did, in addition to the work Visit Pensacola did, in addition to the work Alabama state-line chambers did.

And I have the information to prove this,  information from the clerk.

I reached out to staff from the clerk's office for data on the number of unique, individual collectors in the 32507 (Perdido Key) Zip code to see what was driving this huge jump in gross-dollar TDT collections.  

The metric has only been tracked since late 2021--but the pattern is obvious;  there are a huge number of new rental units (TDT collectors) coming online in Perdido Key, and that is driving the increase year over year--it is obvious to the most casual observer.  Now, If the number of available units had held static and the gain was 52% that would point to something dramatic happening in terms of marketing and this conversation would not be happening.  But that is not what the story tells.  

Look at just 5 months side by side  to see the reason why the gains are occurring (month on top, total number of unique collectors on the bottom):

  

In just those 5 months compared, above, the available units jumped by 90% year over year--yet collections did not match growth and were "only" up 52%.  What does that mean?

There are ongoing conversations to improve this situation, I have discussed the issue with no real resolution at yesterday's TDC board meeting, where I informed that board I'd be bringing this issue to the BCC for discussion at an upcoming BCC meeting to work toward a better situation between Visit and Perdido Key to fix some of these untenable issues.  Naturally, any sort of a change to the current status quo has, is, and will be running into a buzz saw of opposition from hoteliers, advertisers, and others who are quite comfortable with the current state of things.  I happen to believe some minor tweaks and some autonomy for Perdido Key can fix things.  Unfortunately, a meeting on this topic I facilitated and attended last week produced no meaningful solutions going forward.

So I'll keep working on it from my end and through the BCC at the next meeting.