Quantcast
Channel: Clean Up City of St. Augustine, Florida
Viewing all 6488 articles
Browse latest View live

Listening to the Mother Trees (NPR)

$
0
0
This new scientific insight gives a whole new perspective on the immorality and absurdity of clearcutting of trees to build more Leviathan Levittowns here in St. Johns County, Florida.  Rather than living with nature in Northeast Florida, developers' demolition derby is destroying it.

Enough.  We need a moratorium on further large developments in St. Johns County.  Now.

From NPR, "To the Best of Our Knowledge":


Listening to the Mother Trees

Listen nowDownload file
Embed player
Ecologist Suzanne Simard discovered a way trees talk to each other, using an underground network of fungi to form tree communities. She compares them to human communities, and says the healthier a tree community is, the better the individual tree, just like people. Also like humans, “mother” trees take on a role of regeneration and nourishment of younger trees.
To the Best of Our Knowledge host Anne Strainchamps met Simard in a forest to talk about this natural connection.
This Q&A has been edited for clarity and length.
Anne Strainchamps: How did you get into forestry?
Suzanne Simard: My family came from Quebec and moved across and settled in the inland rainforest of British Columbia. My grandfather and my uncles all horse logged. Every summer we would spend in the cedar hemlock forests that were so rich and diverse and huge playgrounds for kids that just became part of me. I think I was always wired for forests and wired for Earth, so it's just a natural calling.
AS: When I’ve read popular articles or blog posts of your work the headlines often say, "Trees talk." Do you think trees can communicate?
SS: Absolutely. I look at how trees are connected below ground by these mutualistic fungi called mycorrhizal fungi. You can think of them as extensions of the root system. The plant or the tree depends on that fungus to go out and explore the soil and the fungus goes and explores and grows into all these little teeny tiny niches or accesses nutrients that are unavailable to the tree.
AS: So is this like a secondary or subsidiary root system?
SS: It is. In fact if you think about how much is down there compared to the root system itself under a single footstep in this forest there would be hundreds of miles of a fungal network buried under a single footstep.
AS: Wait, under a single footstep?
SS: Yes, under a single footstep. The way that communication happens is that through these mycorrhizal networks that link tree after tree after tree they send resources back and forth. When I say resources I mean things like carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, water, defense signals even so they all send resources or nutrients out to trees that might be struggling under stress.
We've seen that the more shaded a tree is, the more a nearby tree that's in the sunlight will send to that shaded tree.
AS: So the trees are helping each other?
SS: Yeah, it really turns upside down how we've traditionally thought and managed forests. And we still manage them to this very day on this competition model, that there are individuals competing for resources. But what I’ve found is that they're all connected together and that they're sharing these resources. It doesn't mean competition is not going on as well, but there's a multiplicity of interactions.
SS: We found that every tree was connected to every other tree, and the bigger and older the tree the more connected it was. So those trees we called them mother trees or hub trees. We called them "mother trees" because what we also found was that the young seedlings were regenerating within the network of the mother tree. Think of this like a huge brain growing out through the forest from the single tree.
AS: It sounds like neural networks.
SS: Yes. We've actually found that the patterning of the network is just the same as a neural network.
AS: Now I read that you said somewhere something about when a tree like a mother tree gets ready to die it will deliberately pass its resources onto its children.
SS: We have this thing called "kin recognition"  in animal species, and  we're discovering that there is actually kin recognition between plants. We've done some experiments to show that these mother trees will actually send more carbon to genetically related individuals than strangers. So that means that the mother tree is nurturing her young to pass on her genes to future generations.
AS: It's a pretty powerful lesson in terms of resilience also isn't it? I mean I would think would apply to human beings too and for the last decade or so health researchers have proved that people who have strong social networks of friends and family live longer and are healthier. Sounds like the same thing is true for trees.
SS: It is true. So the more connected those trees are, the more diverse and locally adapted the community is, the better off it's going to be. I'll just tell you my own personal experience. I had breast cancer a couple of years ago. I'm doing great. But the thing that really got me through was my connections, the friends I made. It was this incredible magical network where you could just feel the love going from person to person and we're all doing great. For me it was like I was living the very thing I was seeing in the forests. And I just feel so much comfort. I know I'm going to be okay, just like that tree is going to be okay as long as it stays within its community.

Burkhardt Family Demands Free Parking for Old St. Augustine Beach City Hall Dance "Business"

$
0
0
"You won't get the government off your back until you get your hands out of its pockets." 
--  Retired U.S. Senator Gary W. Hart (D-Colorado).



PAID PARKING DISCRIMINATION IN ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH, FLORI-DUH: BRUCE MAX ROYLE, the other-directed City Manager of the City of St. Augustine Beach, wants to start charging for 300 City-owned parking spaces, but NOT for the Burkhardt beer-distributing family and its "non-profit," its "place of business," the Dance Studio at the Old City Hall at the St. Augustine Beach pier park. Charging for parking is untenable if it is twisted to collect money from only some residents, but not affecting the 1%. Democracy is not a spectator sport. Ask questions, demand answers, expect democracy. Come listen, learn and speak out at St. Augustine Beach Commission special meeting, Monday, December 17, 2018 at 5 PM.


JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country."

That does not apply to rich guys, who want it all.

The process of implementing pay-to-park-rules with a smartphone app in St. Augustine Beach includes a number of misguided decisions being made by City of St. Augustine Beach staff.

Commissioners: wake up.

One of those decisions gives free parking to the family of the Burkhardt beer distributorship, who  operate a "non-profit" dance studio in the former St. Augustine Beach City Hall.

Rather than pay what others are paying, the Burkhardts are asking for a legal loophole. As Stephanie Burkhardt wrote St. Augustine Beach City Manager BRUCE MAX ROYLE: "We do have 350 dancers currently enrolled and 16 employees currently serving at our place of business, so it will be a huge deal for us. I greatly appreciate you thinking through the logistics of how these St. Augustine Beach locals will be able to continue their children's after school activities without financially burdening them and keeping the flow of traffic consistent."

Never thought I would see the day when the politically-connected Dance Company chintzed on paying for parking, when others will pay.

What a travesty.

As Bill Clinton said in his Second Inaugural, "Nothing great was ever accomplished by being small."

Pay for your parking, dammit.

St. Augustine Beach City Commission meets Monday, December 17, 2018 at 5 pm.

Full backup materials here:  http://www.staugbch.com/sites/default/files/fileattachments/city_commission/meeting/packets/40011/commission_book_12-17-2018.pdf

Here's the paperwork on the Burkhardt's demand for free parking on behalf of themselves and their dance customers:




page26image4098172448
Max Royle
From: Sent: To:Cc:Subject:
Stephanie,
Max Royle
Friday, 
November 30,2018 3:38 PM'The Dance Company'
Comm 
GeorgeRE: SAB Proposed Paid Parkíng
Correct. The areas of concern aren't the pier parking lot and County streets, such as Pope Road. The County may decideat some time in the future to require paid parking for the pier parking lot and itiroads.The City's proposed pay-by-phone plan will apply only to City-owned parking areas and the rights-of-way of City-ownedstreets. However, the Commission has decided to exclude from the plan the 12 parking spaces that are on city property west of the former city hall and along the alley between the former city hall and the former garage. The reason is that
these spaces are shared with The Dance Company and the Art Studio Group.Max
From: The Dance Company  Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 2:23 PMTo: Max Royle 
Subject: 
Re: SAB Proposed Paid Parking
Thank you for replying, Max. So the areas of concern are not the Pier parking lot at this time? was under theimptession that was why we were notifi.ed, but it is it the other, now free, SAB parking spaces that the letter wastefetdng to? It didn't speci$r area so assumed it included pier.
Stephanie
The Dance Company370 A1A Beach Blvd.St. Augustine, FL 32080 904-471-4946
On Friday, November 30, 2018, 1:58:10 PM EST, Max Royle  wrote:
Ms. Burkhardt,
page26image4098927088page26image4098927440
-11 -
page27image4098052848
ln reply to your recent email: The 12 parking spaces west of the former city hall are considered shared parking spacesand the City doesn't intend to designate them for paid parking. However, as these are public spaces, the City can'tdesignate them for a particular group. What will happen is what has been the case for years: persons going to the ArtStudio or to the city hall for purposes related to The Dance Company's events can park at any one of the 12 spaces that'sunoccupied.
What you may want to keep in mind is that the County may eventual designate the pier parking lot for paid parking andthat may affect events that The Dance Company puts on. can't say when the County will decide about the paid parking.
Max
From: The Dance Company 
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 1:24 PMTo: Max Royle 
Subject: Fw: SAB Proposed Paid Parking
typed your emailwrong when originally sent this! Please see below---- Fonuarded Message ---From: The Dance Company 
To: mrovle@cityofsab.ord comuqeorqe(@cityofsab.orq Sent: Friday, November30,2018, 1.21:03 PM ESTSubject: SAB Proposed Paid Parking
Hello,
Thank you for your letter, Mayor George, regarding the upcoming meeting addressing the new pa¡dparking system.
I'm trying to understand how it will be set up- will there be a local/residential option? I know that someof the details have yet to be discussed and I'm working on getting someone to sub my classes so Ican attend the meeting, but wanted to gather as much information as possible beforehand.
-18-
page28image4057527904





Justice in jeopardy: Florida's Supreme Court is about to be politically re-shaped. (Tallahassee Democrat, Trelvis D. Randolph opinion column)

$
0
0
FLORIDA SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION FLAWS: I agree with NAACP attorney Trelvis D. Randolph: Florida's take on a "modified Missouri plan" needs modification.


Justice in jeopardy: Florida's Supreme Court is about to be politically re-shaped | Opinion
Trelvis D. Randolph,
Your Turn
Published 10:00 a.m. ET Dec. 15, 2018
Tallahassee Democrat



Governor-elect Ron DeSantis’ looming appointments of three Florida Supreme Court justices brings into stark relief the urgent need to institute a fair, nonpartisan and merit-based selection process for judicial nominations in our state.

The process for nominating state judges has become increasingly politicized. This has serious consequences for our state, as Florida’s Supreme Court has repeatedly acted as an important check against overreach by the Legislature and governor, protecting Floridians from unconstitutional laws and executive actions on issues including gerrymandering, voting rights, public education, abortion rights and more.

Before 2001, Florida’s process for nominating judges was considered among the best in the nation. But that year, the Florida Legislature placed the authority to select who sits on Judicial Nominating Commissions entirely in the hands of the governor. As a result, JNCs have been turned into political patronage committees.

Judicial nominees put forward now are less likely to yield the best choices for a fair and impartial judicial appointee but are instead more likely to be politically connected and deeply partisan. The commission has been packed by outgoing Gov. Rick Scott and is more interested in evaluating whether a potential justice is in alignment with the governor’s priorities rather than reflective of the diversity of our state, experienced, well-qualified, fair and independent.

The looming partisan shift in the court’s makeup will impact a wide range of issues, including laws involving accident victims, clean water, medical malpractice, reproductive rights, public education and gun safety reforms.

We need to ensure members of the JNCs are appointed in a nonpartisan fashion and that the appointment process results in a more diverse — and less politically influenced — court. Among the most critical of these reforms is removing the governor’s outsized influence and increasing citizen participation.

The list of candidates the JNC recently forwarded to Governor-elect DeSantis has been widely criticized for being overtly partisan and lacking any African-American nominees – meaning Florida’s Supreme Court will be without an African-American justice for the first time in 36 years. Senate Democratic Leader Audrey Gibson of Jacksonville responded by announcing that her caucus will seek to reform the nominating process for judges during the next legislative session. State Sen. Perry Thurston is already exploring legislation.

Last year, legislation to ensure the judicial nominating process is nonpartisan and addresses judicial diversity was filed in the Legislature but never heard in committee. The Florida Constitution Revision Commission considered a similar set of reforms that fell just one vote shy of advancing in the committee stage. However, with public pressure mounting on elected officials to protect the integrity of our courts, lawmakers would be wise to support Sens. Gibson and Thurston and adopt urgently needed reforms.

Governor-Elect DeSantis won election by a scant four tenths of a percent. Neither DeSantis nor Scott were handed a mandate by voters to radically make over the Florida Supreme Court.

Florida needs to insulate our courts from politics and special interests, and that starts by reforming the judicial nominating process. Only then can Floridians be confident in the fairness and independence of our courts.

Trelvis D. Randolph is a partner in the Miami office of Cole, Scott and Kissane, PA. He is also general counsel for the Miami-Dade branch of the NAACP.

What's not in the Scott Maddox indictment is as intriguing as what is included | Analysis. (Tallahassee Democrat)

$
0
0
Former Florida Democratic Party Chair SCOTT MADDOX, former Mayor of Tallahassee, stands accused of racketeering and other federal crimes, the result of a three-year long investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It's time for Democrats to reclaim our party from corrupters.

While SCOTT MADDOX is clothed with the presumption of innocence, our Democratic Party in Florida has too often been a lickspittle and a lapdog for the rich and powerful. We haven't elected a Governor since 1994. Meanwhile, Democrats and Republicans for years have worked together to appease developers and other polluters.

Enough corruption.






What's not in the Scott Maddox indictment is as intriguing as what is included | Analysis

See how the FBI investigation evolved. Tallahassee Democrat
LINKEDINCOMMENTMORE
The sweeping 66-page, 44-count federal indictment of political power duo Scott Maddox and Paige Carter Smith marks a major turning point in a three-year public corruption probe into the capital city. It is chock full of details alleging bank fraud, lying on income tax returns, taking bribes and shaking down clients looking to do business with the City of Tallahassee.
It outlines a racketeering enterprise allegedly set up by the former city commissioner and longtime business partners by using Maddox’s influential positions on the City Commission and Community Redevelopment Agency to steer business to their clients and enrich their coffers. In doing so, the indictment said, they deceived city officials and the public.
And while it doesn’t mention Mayor Andrew Gillum, the investigation that produced it loomed large over his campaign for governor and may have cost him the election.
Just as eye-opening are the things the indictment doesn’t address, and an assistant US attorney's comments that the investigation is ongoing.

In the FBI spotlight
Those subpoenas produced more than 240,000 pages of public records.
The projects they worked on include the DoubleTree Hilton Hotel, the Gateway Center and the Edison Restaurant, which collectively received several million in tax dollars to help with construction and add other improvements like sidewalks.
At the top of the list are J.T. Burnette, Chad Kittrell, Kim Rivers and Adam Corey, who was the subject of three subpoenas along with his businesses Cascades Holdings and the Edison Restaurant.

THE COREY-GILLUM CONNECTION

Corey is a former lobbyist who had clients before the city commission, and restaurateur who was a longtime friend of former Mayor Andrew Gillum and his one-time campaign treasurer.
Early on it became clear that Corey was at the center of the FBI probe. The Democrat, which has extensively chronicled the investigation, reported that it was Corey who was introduced to three undercover agents who were posing as developers and medical marijuana entrepreneurs. He escorted them around town, set up meetings with Gillum and his staffers and with city planners and the city manager. It was at his taxpayer subsidized restaurant, The Edison, that some of those meetings took place.
It was at Corey’s house that a fundraiser for Gillum’s gubernatorial campaign was held, with the catering and drinks tab apparently picked up by an FBI undercover agent.
It was Corey’s lobbying firm that sent tickets to city officials to FSU football games.
It was Corey who organized a trip to Costa Rica that Gillum and his wife joined in on, along with Gillum’s campaign manager Sean Pittman and his wife. It was during that trip Corey set up a meeting between Gillum and the undercover agents.
And it was Corey who with the undercover agents arranged several outings in New York City later that summer, including a boat trip and seeing the hit Broadway show, “Hamilton.”
It was Corey and the Edison on the last subpoena issued by the FBI in May, seeking more information about how Corey won the contract to renovate the 100-year-old Electric Building at Cascades Park into the Edison restaurant. 
The subpoena asked for material related to the bid application process to renovate and take over the historic building. They include reviews, approval documents and staff evaluations of the project proposed by Corey and Cascades Holdings, the company he and Ryan Grindler created to attract investors to help finance the Edison.

A SPLINTER INVESTIGATION?

Federal investigators also asked for copies of a city audit of the Edison. 
The subpoena may have been an update of the FBI’s previous requests – seeking any new emails, audits, reviews generated since the last information dump in October.
Another theory is that the subpoena is part of a new investigation, separate from or an offshoot of the years-long FBI investigation into the CRA and people and businesses who interact with the city, according to two sources within City Hall.
One source referred to the investigation as a "splinter" of the larger one, while another said the subpoena was not part of the larger one going on for the previous year. The indictment makes no mention of a separate investigation.
Why did he cut ties with Mike Miller? Can voters believe in his honesty? Andrew Gillum addresses issues head on. Tallahassee Democrat
Does that mean Corey and Gillum are in the clear?
Assistant U.S. attorney Steve Kunz said the FBI public corruption investigation is ongoing “with respect to these matters” when he argued not to release the names of witnesses. What did he mean by “these matters.” Was he referring to the issues outlined in the indictment or other people? 

BUSINESS ROLL-CALL

The other names on the subpoenas read like a who's who of the business community: John “J.T.” Burnette, Kim Rivers, IB Tallahassee, Inkbridge Acquisitions, Chad Kittrell, Hunter and Harp Holdings, Duval Partners, Frank Whitley, Whitley Construction, Melissa Oglesby, KaiserKane, Catherine Baker, Shelton Dean, Sunnyland Solar.
There is an oblique reference to Burnette as the “Person G” who acted as a go-between for undercover agents looking to do business with Maddox. While the indictment mentions the Adams Street Lofts real estate deal, it doesn’t detail the involvement of Burnette and Kittrell.
Other than that, nada.
No mention of Rivers, the brains behind much of the so-called “financial engineering”behind many of Burnette’s and Kittrell’s projects, including ones that received tax credits or funding from the CRA. 
No mention of the Jennings Street building that was home to many of their limited liability corporations and a fount for campaign cash
No Sunnyland Solar, which received tens of millions in state business incentives and federal loans as well as matching city and county funds but went belly up.


WHAT HAPPENED IN VEGAS

The indictment is short on details about Maddox’s trip to Vegas with FBI undercover agents posing as businessmen looking to do business with the city, perhaps living up to the slogan, “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.”
One paragraph in the indictment describes Maddox traveling with “Company F”representatives believed to be Mike Miller of Southern Pines and his cohorts – the bald-headed Brian Butler, who said he was an environmental consultant, and the long-haired Mike Sweets, who posed as a medical marijuana entrepreneur.
The indictment said he accepted a charter flight and hotel room and meal expenses from Company F, and told an anecdote about “threatening to destroy a former client’s business deals if the former client” didn’t pay his fee to Maddox.
The Democrat published a photo of Maddox and Burnette in a Las Vegas hotel roomwith the undercover agents, several unidentified people surrounding a little person in costume. Nothing in the indictment explains what Maddox was doing in that hotel room or what led him there.
Both Burnette and Maddox refused to comment about the photo when it was first brought up last September.
"As much as I would like to comment, I continue to follow the city attorney's advice about commenting or speculating during an open investigation," Maddox said at the time. "I have full confidence in our judicial system and await the conclusion of the process."
Is Mike Miller a developer from Atlanta? Or someone else? Wochit
In an interview with investigators on May 24, 2017, Maddox claimed the company hadn’t attempted to pay him and he was not involved in the company’s introduction to Carter-Smith.

COVERT OPERATION

The indictment does tip its hat to comments made by former FBI case supervisor Josh Doyle, now executive director of the Florida Bar.
During his interview with the Bar, Doyle discussed his most recent case he ran and his former role as coordinator of a public corruption task force during a videotaped interview with the Florida Bar’s search committee. 
The case he described — and went into in greater detail on his application — bears plenty of similarities with the three-year FBI probe that resulted in indictments for Maddox and Carter-Smith. Doyle’s name is across the top of one of the first two subpoenas delivered to City Hall. 
As a case agent on “significant investigations,” Doyle said, it was his job to assemble teams of people who had the best skills to perform the tasks needed. He told the search committee he was “concluding a case now in which we have an investigative team of 25 people … that includes agents, undercover employees, focus on technology to gather evidence, and analysts.”
The operation had a $500,000 budget he had to justify to superiors. He also knew the dollars spent would be subject to audits. On the application, Doyle said the investigation deployed three covert vehicles, an airplane, audio and video surveillance technologies, and the use of techniques that hadn’t been employed in decades.
Josh Doyle interviews for his position as executive director of the Florida Bar. He speaks about his FBI experience at about the 4-minute mark.
While a chartered jet is mentioned, the indictment makes no mention of other vehicles or the use of audio and video surveillance technology in agents' interactions with Maddox in Las Vegas or Gillum in New York.

BURNER PHONES AND CITY HALL

The indictment states that after the first round of subpoenas hit City Hall in June 2017, Maddox and Carter-Smith had cell phones not registered to any specific person, otherwise known as burner phones, purchased for communications between themselves and others, including a city staff member.
That tantalizing sentence raises questions about how deep Maddox’s network into City Hall went. The indictment refers to a $64,000 fine levied against Waste Pro, the city’s waste hauler, identified as Company C. The regional vice presidents called Maddox and Maddox talked to then-City Manager Anita Favors, who reduced the fine to $7,000.
Waste Pro regional vice president Ralph Mills appeared before the grand jury the same day the City Commission renewed a $6 million contract with Waste Pro.
Likewise, when a residential property developer and client of Governance had issues with the city’s refusal to approve a certain type of fencing around one of his developments in 2017, he asked Maddox to intervene with city officials. Maddox contacted the city manager at the time, Rick Fernandez, and several days later a city official emailed to tell the developer the city had changed its position on the fence.
Stephen Dobson III, attorney for Scott Maddox, and Stephen Webster, attorney for Paige Carter-Smith, discuss the corruption case outside federal court. Jeff Burlew, Democrat senior writer
Around January of 2017, the same company had an issue with the city’s Utilities Department work at one of the company’s apartment complexes. The owner sent Maddox a text message, and he responded: “All good. I can handle city guy no prob. Already had a word at the top. Should be straightened out.”
The indictments also failed to mention the skybox-hopping at Florida State University football games between lobbyists city officials, and the undercover agents. 

FALLOUT FROM INVESTIGATIONS

Accepting tickets from Corey led to the resignation of Fernandez, who turned in a phone that had text messages between him and lobbyists in Corey’s firm.
The indictments led to the removal of Maddox from office and the resignation of Carter-Smith as chief executive officer of the Downtown Improvement Authority, the forced resignation of Fernandez. They are awaiting trial set for January 14 in U.S. Judge Mark Walker’s courtroom.
Whether they are joined by others as yet to be indicted co-conspirators only time will tell.
Scott Maddox and Paige Carter-Smith were indicted on a total of 44 charges. Dillon Thompson, Tallahassee Democrat
Contact Schweers at jschweers@tallahassee.com.

Senator Bill Nelson's Farewell Address

$
0
0
Here's the farewell address of Florida's senior United States Senator, Bill Nelson.  He will be greatly missed.

Pam Bondi’s (and Rick Scott’s) Texas-sized role in Affordable Care Act fight --- Since taking office in 2011, Bondi and Scott were relentless in opposing the 2010 health care law.

$
0
0

FLORI-DUH's phony populist politician poohbahs want to take away your health care.  PAMELA JO BONDI and RICHARD LYNN SCOTT are tools of the ruling classes.  Have they fooled your friends or your family members?  Friends don't let friends vote Republican.

From Tampa Bay Times:







Pam Bondi’s (and Rick Scott’s) Texas-sized role in Affordable Care Act fight

Since taking office in 2011, Bondi and Scott were relentless in opposing the 2010 health care law.

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (right) listens to Gov. Rick Scott (podium) [MONICA HERNDON | Times]
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor's Friday night ruling to throw out the Affordable Care Actshocked many judiciary and health-law experts who never expected such a far-reaching decision.
Although the law will remain in effect while it's appealed by a number of states with Democratic attorneys general (California, New York) and probably end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, O'Connor's ruling eliminates President Barack Obama's signature 2010 health care law.
Gone is the individual mandate to buy insurance. Gone are consumer protections that prohibit charging more or refusing to cover patients with preexisting conditions. Millions now face having no health insurance, just like before the law.
So let's not forget the critical role that Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and Gov. Rick Scott played in this legal fight.
Bondi was a little-known prosecutor from Hillsborough County who had grown her profile with regular appearances on Fox News. She made it clear that she fully supported a lawsuit filed by Florida's then-Republican Attorney General Bill McCollum that challenged the Affordable Care Act.
"People don't want it and we can't afford it," Bondi said about the health care law said on the campaign trail.
Scott, a former health care executive, ran for office vowing to repeal the law, too. His campaign website in 2010 stated: "Rick led the fight to defeat President Obama's government-run public option" and that he "supports a state constitutional amendment in Florida that prohibits the federal government from imposing President Obama's individual mandate." After getting elected, he told congressional leaders in December 2010 that "I am going to focus on the repealing of the health care bill because I think it's the biggest job killer ever in the history of this country."
Upon taking office in 2011, Bondi and Scott were relentless.
"This is about liberty, it's not just about health care. And the federal government cannot force us to purchase a product or a good," Bondi said. "We all know we need health care reform. This is not the way to do it."
But Obamacare was upheld in a 2012 Supreme Court decision that said it was constitutional because the individual mandate was enforced by a tax penalty. (Florida ended up paying $38,610 for its share of the multistate challenge after getting reimbursed most of the $300,000 it spent to launch the lawsuit).
After Congress repealed that tax penalty in 2017, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed another challenge to the law in February. Its argument: Without that tax penalty, the constitutional rationale that justified the upholding of the law in 2012 no longer existed. President Donald Trump's administration refused to defend the law.
Bondi, who faced no reelection battle, signed on to Paxton's lawsuit. Gov. Rick Scott, who faced a tough battle against U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, did not. Although he was a driving force in the initial challenge against the law, in election mode, his staff wouldn't say if he supported or opposed this one. Instead, he vowed that preexisting conditions should be covered.
O'Connor's decision throws out those protections, but there's no penalty for Scott to pay.
A conservative judge who has ruled against the Affordable Care Act before, O'Connor ruled well after the midterms, during which Democrats made the Affordable Care Act the main issue.
As for Bondi, it's unclear if she'll ever seek public office again.
Despite their victory, Bondi and Scott didn't celebrate on Twitter, as they have in the past.
Bondi did tout a ruling on robocalls:
Meanwhile, Scott had an innocuous tweet about the economy.
It was left to Democrats to draw attention to the decision on social media.

Val Demings willing to impeach Donald Trump. (Florida Politics)

$
0
0
Former Orlando Police Chief, Val Demmings, now in Congress, willing to vote to impeach DONALD JOHN TRUMP.

Former Jacksonville Sheriff, John Rutherford, now in Congress: are you willing to vote to impeach?

Looking forward to his holding a public forum in St. Augustine so we can talk to our Congressman.




Vel Demings

FEDERAL

Val Demings willing to impeach Donald Trump

U.S. Rep. Val Demings today told MSNBC President Donald Trump could face impeachment proceedings once Democrats take over as House majority.
During an interview with host Alex Witt, the Orlando Democrat said representatives will take whatever action warranted once Special Counsel Robert Mueller provides information to Congress.
“We are going to do our job,” Demings said. “If the Mueller investigation leads to impeachment, we’re going to do our job up to and including impeachment.”
Demings serves on the House Judiciary Committee, where New York Democrat Jerry Nadler will take over as chairman when Congress reconvenes.
Nadler last week told CNN it would be an impeachable offense if Trump gave money to his attorney Michael Cohen to hush women alleging affairs, which Cohen alleged happened in an interview with ABC News earlier this week.
A federal judge this week sentenced Cohen to three years in prison for fraud and other charges.
While Trump attorneys cast doubt on Cohen’s credibility, Demings, a former Orlando police chief and detective, said cases often rely on unsavory characters for evidence.
“When we’re building criminal cases, a lot of the people who help us do that are not considered reliable witnesses,” Demings said. “But there’s always corroborating evidence.”
She said Trump should be concerned with the supporting tapes and witnesses that back up Cohen’s account.
That includes National Enquirer executive David Pecker cutting an immunity deal with prosecutors in exchange for testimony the Florida-based media outlet paid former Playboy model Karen McDougal for her story about an affair with Trump, then buried the story.
Recording of potentially incriminating conversations could also serve as prima facie evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the president, Demings said.
Demings stressed impeachment proceedings would not be something House Democrats or the Judiciary committee will take lightly.
“Impeachment is a very serious process. It should be reserved for very serious situations,” Demings said. “As we have all witnessed in the past in American history, it is tough on the American people. It’s tough on Congress. It’s painful.”
But the job of Congress must be to provide oversight on the administration, and that means considering all appropriate enforcement.
“Since the special counsel’s investigation began, things have not gotten better for the president,” Demings said. “They have gotten worse. Many people involved in his campaign or in his administration have either been indicted or have been sentences, as we have seen this week.”
Notably, Cohen’s sentencing related to charges brought forward from federal prosecutors in New York, not from Mueller’s investigation. But Mueller holds significant discretion in his operation, which is focused on Russian election meddling.
Demings predicted more incriminating evidence will be made public in the future.
Demings later reiterated on Twitter that the option of calling on Trump’s removal could become a real possibility.
“When we take over the House, we’re going to provide real oversight and hold the president accountable,” Demings wrote.
“We’re going to consider all options, up to and including impeachment. To not consider all options would be dereliction of duty.”

Should we be able to indict a sitting president? Consider Spiro Agnew. (WaPo)

$
0
0
I agree with Emeritius Duke University Law Professor Walter Dellinger.  There is no constitutional prohibition on indicting the president.  There are only the histrionic inhibitions of a few janissaries in the Department that calls itself "Justice" -- the dicta of those timid souls must not deter our search for truth and justice.




Should we be able to indict a sitting president? Consider Spiro Agnew.


Spiro T. Agnew, left, and Richard M. Nixon at the Republican National Convention in 1968. (AP)
Contributor, PostEverything
Walter Dellinger was head of the Office of Legal Counsel from 1993 to 1996 and acting U.S. solicitor general from 1996 to 1997. 
What does the nation do if it turns out that a president of the United States has committed serious crimes that a prosecutor can prove beyond a reasonable doubt? One possible resolution would be to offer a plea bargain in which the commander in chief agreed to resign the presidency in exchange for utmost leniency. Perversely, the more financially corrupt or psychologically unstable the White House occupant, the greater his or her bargaining power: Only if you let my client go scot-free, a president’s lawyers could argue, will you be allowed to pry the nuclear codes from his hands.
That is a powerful bargaining chip but one with an expiration date. At the strike of noon on his successor’s Inauguration Day, when the (former) president’s Air Force One turns into a pumpkin, he loses that leverage and becomes like any other citizen before the bar of justice. That gives a provably corrupt president a great incentive to end his term early — and on his terms.
The end of Spiro T. Agnew’s vice presidency is instructive — and provides a good example for why we should be able to indict a sitting president.
On Oct. 10, 1973, Agnew resigned as vice president of the United States and pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion. He was sentenced to a fine of $10,000 and a period of unsupervised probation. He basically walked out of the courtroom and into a life of playing golf and making money peddling influence. As the tale is told in the excellent 1974 book by Richard M. Cohen and Jules Witcover, “A Heartbeat Away: The Investigation and Resignation of Spiro T. Agnew” (and in the terrific podcast “Bag Man”), this bargain was highly controversial. The sentence was extraordinarily light for crimes so serious committed by an official so high in the nation’s trust.
Agnew’s corruption began when he served as Baltimore County executive and continued throughout his term as governor of Maryland. For years, Agnew used his government offices for bribery and extortion, steering government contracts in exchange for money. After he was elected vice president, the payments continued. Most shockingly, packets of cash were delivered to Agnew at the White House itself. The evidence of Agnew’s guilt was overwhelming.
But what was to be done? Impeachment by the House and a trial in the Senate did not seem to be a viable course of action. In fact, Agnew sought to initiate an impeachment process in the belief that the charges would become enmeshed in a cumbersome political process that could offer him more protection than risk. House Speaker Carl Albert declined Agnew’s request, saying the criminal process should proceed. (In a related matter, Solicitor General Robert H. Bork rejected Agnew’s argument that a sitting vice president could not be indicted.)
Attorney General Elliot Richardson authorized a plea bargain so favorable to Agnew that the young lawyers in the U.S. attorney’s office who had been investigating the case were understandably dismayed. Richardson, however, was looking at a larger context.
President Richard M. Nixon’s Watergate scandal was simultaneously exploding, and Nixon seemed to be imploding. If Watergate took down the president, it was imperative that Agnew be out of the line of succession. The urgency of the situation, and the imperative to avoid having a corrupt felon take over the presidency, gave Agnew enormous bargaining power. And he used it.
But the most significant impediment to holding a president accountable to justice is the statute of limitations. Generally, most federal crimes must be charged within five years or forever be barred. For crimes committed while the president is in office, there will be time enough at the end of the president’s term. But if a president engaged in financial crimes before taking office, or committed crimes to gain that office, the time for charging those crimes could well expire before his or her term concluded.
That is one of the reasons a grand jury should be permitted to indict a sitting president, as long as all further proceedings are postponed while he or she is in office. Unless an indictment could issue against a sitting president, there would be a perverse incentive for an alleged White House felon to seek reelection simply to avoid indictment while waiting for the statute of limitations to expire on crimes he had committed. The history of the Justice Department’s conflicting positions on this question does not categorically foreclose issuing an indictment against a sitting president.
Even where lawful, the use of the criminal process against sitting or former presidents should be undertaken with caution. In an ideal world, what our presidents and presidential candidates should most fear are voters, not prosecutors. But where the crimes are extremely serious and the proof compelling, the principle that no one is above the law may leave little choice but to proceed to court.

New report on Russian disinformation, prepared for the Senate, shows the operation’s scale and sweep. (WaPo)

$
0
0
Ask your Senator-elect, RICHARD LYNN SCOTT, your Congressmen, and your local Republican leaders about their continuing support for a President* elected with Russian help.

Ask St. Johns County Republican Chair JERRY THOMAS CAMERON, MICHELLE SERGE PAWLOWSKI, MARTIN MILLER, et al.

Ask Sheriff DAVID BERNARD SHOAR, who legally changed his name from "HOAR" in 1994.




New report on Russian disinformation, prepared for the Senate, shows the operation’s scale and sweep

The report, a draft of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is the first to analyze the millions of posts provided by major technology firms to the Senate Intelligence Committee.


Some of the Facebook ads linked to a Russian effort to disrupt the American political process and stir up tensions around divisive social issues. (Jon Elswick/AP)
A report prepared for the Senate that provides the most sweeping analysis yet of Russia’s disinformation campaign around the 2016 election found the operation used every major social media platform to deliver words, images and videos tailored to voters’ interests to help elect President Trump — and worked even harder to support him while in office.
The report, a draft of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is the first to study the millions of posts provided by major technology firms to the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), its chairman, and Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), its ranking Democrat. The bipartisan panel hasn’t said whether it endorses the findings. It plans to release it publicly this week.
The research — by Oxford University’s Computational Propaganda Project and Graphika, a network analysis firm — offers new details of how Russians working at the Internet Research Agency, which U.S. officials have charged with criminal offenses for interfering in the 2016 campaign, sliced Americans into key interest groups for targeted messaging. These efforts shifted over time, peaking at key political moments, such as presidential debates or party conventions, the report found.
The data sets used by the researchers were provided by Facebook, Twitter and Google and covered several years up to mid-2017, when the social media companies cracked down on the known Russian accounts. The report, which also analyzed data separately provided to House Intelligence Committee members, contains no information on more recent political moments, such as November’s midterm elections.
“What is clear is that all of the messaging clearly sought to benefit the Republican Party — and specifically Donald Trump,” the report says. “Trump is mentioned most in campaigns targeting conservatives and right-wing voters, where the messaging encouraged these groups to support his campaign. The main groups that could challenge Trump were then provided messaging that sought to confuse, distract and ultimately discourage members from voting.”
Representatives for Burr and Warner declined to comment.
Washington Post’s Craig Timberg on 'failure' to quickly understand Russia's disinformation campaign
Washington Post National Technology Reporter Craig Timberg discusses missed signals at the start of Russia's disinformation campaign.
The report offers the latest evidence that Russian agentssought to help Trump win the White House. Democrats and Republicans on the panel previously studied the U.S. intelligence community’s 2017 finding that Moscow aimed to assist Trump, and in July, they said investigators had come to the correct conclusion. Despite their work, some Republicans on Capitol Hill continue to doubt the nature of Russia’s interference in the last presidential election.
The Russians aimed particular energy at activating conservatives on issues such as gun rights and immigration, while sapping the political clout of left-leaning African American voters by undermining their faith in elections and spreading misleading information about how to vote. Many other groups — Latinos, Muslims, Christians, gay men and women, liberals, Southerners, veterans — got at least some attention from Russians operating thousands of social media accounts.
second report — released Monday after being prepared for the Senate Intelligence Committee by researchers for New Knowledge, Columbia University and Canfield Research — emphasized this aspect of the Russian operation, saying, “The IRA created an expansive cross-platform media mirage targeting the Black community, which shared and cross-promoted authentic Black media to create an immersive influence ecosystem.”
This report, though largely tracking with the one from Oxford and Graphika in its conclusions, also offered some new statistics, including that the Russians posted more than 1,000 YouTube videos for their disinformation campaign and that Instagram generated more than twice the “engagement” among users than either Facebook or Twitter. Such metrics track user comments, shares, likes and other actions that go beyond having an item merely appear on their screens. 
Both reports also offered some of the first detailed analyses of the role played by YouTube, a subsidiary of Google, and Instagram, owned by Facebook, in the Russian campaign, as well as anecdotes about how Russians used other social media platforms — Google+, Tumblr and Pinterest — that have received relatively little scrutiny. The Russian effort also used email accounts from Yahoo, Microsoft’s Hotmail service and Google’s Gmail.
The authors of the report by Oxford and Graphika, while reliant on data provided by technology companies, also highlighted the companies'“belated and uncoordinated response” to the disinformation campaign and, once it was discovered, their failure to share more with investigators. The authors urged that in the future they provide data in “meaningful and constructive” ways.
Facebook, for example, provided the Senate with copies of posts from 81 Facebook pages and information on 76 accounts used to purchase ads, but it did not share posts from other user accounts run by the IRA, the report says. Twitter, meanwhile, has made it challenging for outside researchers to collect and analyze data on its platform through its public feed, the researchers said.
Google submitted information in an especially difficult way for the researchers to handle, providing content such as YouTube videos but not the related data that would have allowed a full analysis. The YouTube information was so hard for the researchers to study, they wrote, that they instead tracked the links to its videos from other sites in hopes of better understanding YouTube’s role in the Russian effort.
Facebook and Google did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In a statement, Twitter stressed it had made “significant strides” since the 2016 election to harden its digital defenses, including the release of a repository of the tweets that Russian agents previously sent so that for researchers can review them. “Our singular focus is to improve the health of the public conversation on our platform, and protecting the integrity of elections is an important aspect of that mission," the company added.
What we know about Russia's cyber tactics
Here's what we know about the Kremlin's playbook for creating division in the U.S. 
Facebook, Google and Twitter first disclosed last year that they had identified Russian interference on their sites. Critics previously said that it took too long to come to an understanding of the disinformation campaign, and that Russian strategies have likely shifted since then. The companies have awakened to the threat — Facebook, in particular, created a “war room” this fall to combat interference around elections — but none has revealed interference around the midterm elections last month on the scale of what happened in 2016.
The report expressed concern about the overall threat social media poses to political discourse within nations and among them, warning that companies once viewed as tools for liberation in the Arab world and elsewhere are now threats to democracy.
“Social media have gone from being the natural infrastructure for sharing collective grievances and coordinating civic engagement to being a computational tool for social control, manipulated by canny political consultants and available to politicians in democracies and dictatorships alike,” the report said.
Researchers also noted that the data includes evidence of sloppiness by the Russians that could have led to earlier detection, including the use of Russia’s currency, the ruble, to buy ads and Russian phone numbers for contact information. The operatives also left behind technical signatures in computerized logs, such as Internet addresses in St. Petersburg, where the IRA was based.
Many of the findings track, in general terms, work by other researchers and testimony previously provided by the companies to lawmakers investigating the Russian effort. But the fuller data available to the researchers offered new insights on many aspects of the Russian campaign.
The report traces the origins of Russian online influence operations to Russian domestic politics in 2009 and says that ambitions shifted to include U.S. politics as early as 2013 on Twitter. Of the tweets the company provided to the Senate, 57 percent are in Russian, 36 percent in English and smaller amounts in other languages.
The efforts to manipulate Americans grew sharply in 2014 and every year after, as teams of operatives spread their work across more platforms and accounts to target larger swaths of U.S. voters by geography, political interests, race, religion and other factors. The Russians started with accounts on Twitter, then added YouTube and Instagram before bringing Facebook into the mix, the report said.
Facebook was particularly effective at targeting conservatives and African Americans, the report found. More than 99 percent of all engagement — meaning likes, shares and other reactions — came from 20 Facebook pages controlled by the IRA, including “Being Patriotic,” “Heart of Texas,” “Blacktivist” and “Army of Jesus.”
Together, the 20 most popular pages generated 39 million likes, 31 million shares, 5.4 million reactions and 3.4 million comments. Company officials told Congress that the Russian campaign reached 126 million people on Facebook and 20 million more on Instagram.
The Russians operated 133 accounts on Instagram, a photo-sharing subsidiary of Facebook, that focused mainly on race, ethnicity or other forms of personal identity. The most successful Instagram posts targeted African American cultural issues and black pride and were not explicitly political.
While the overall intensity of posting across platforms grew year by year — with a particular spike during the six months after Election Day 2016 — this growth was particularly pronounced on Instagram, which went from roughly 2,600 posts a month in 2016 to nearly 6,000 in 2017, when the accounts were shut down. Across all three years covered by the report, Russian Instagram posts generated 185 million likes and 4 million user comments.
Even though the researchers struggled to interpret the YouTube data submitted by Google, they were able to track the links from other sites to YouTube, offering a “proxy” for understanding the role played by the video platform.
“The proxy is imperfect,” the researchers wrote, “but the IRA’s heavy use of links to YouTube videos leaves little doubt of the IRA’s interest in leveraging Google’s video platform to target and manipulate US audiences.”
The use of YouTube, like the other platforms, appears to have grown after Trump’s election. Twitter links to YouTube videos grew by 84 percent in the six months after the election, the data showed.
The Russians shrewdly worked across platforms as they refined their tactics aimed at particular groups, posting links across accounts and sites to bolster the influence operation’s success on each, the report shows.
“Black Matters US” had accounts on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google+, Tumblr and PayPal, according to the researchers. By linking posts across these platforms, the Russian operatives were able to solicit donations, organize real-world protests and rallies, and direct online traffic to a website that the Russians controlled.
The researchers found that when Facebook shut down the page in August 2016, a new one called “BM” soon appeared with more cultural and fewer political posts. It tracked closely to the content on the @blackmatterus Instagram account.
The report found operatives also began buying Google ads to promote the “BlackMatters US” website with provocative messages such as, “Cops kill black kids. Are you sure that your son won’t be the next?” The related Twitter account, meanwhile, complained about the suspension of the Facebook page, accusing the tech company of “supporting white supremacy.”

Republicans have fancy new HQ. (Ponte Vedra Recorder)

$
0
0




St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee unveils new headquarters

Posted 
In preparation for the upcoming 2018 midterm election, the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee held an open house Friday, Oct. 5 to officially unveil its new headquarters at 2155 Old Moultrie Road in St. Augustine.
“We were just extremely fortunate to get 2,800 square feet that’s laid out in a perfect configuration for running a political party,” said Jerry Cameron, chair of the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee. "We’ve got a phone bank room, a reception area … and this looks to me more like a state or national headquarters than a REC headquarters.”
St. Johns County Commissioner Jimmy Johns and Florida Rep. Cyndi Stevenson were on site to celebrate the occasion, as was Lt. Col. Michael Waltz, the Republican candidate for Florida’s Congressional District 6 seat, which was recently vacated by Republican gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis.
Waltz, a combat decorated Green Beret who led the search for Pvt. Bowe Bergdahl following his desertion, stressed that Republicans should not get complacent going into this year’s election.
 “A lot of people think, ‘Oh, it’s Ron DeSantis’ seat. You made it through the primary, Mike. Great job,’ but the Dems are coming after this seat,” he said, highlighting Florida’s status as a key swing state in presidential elections and the tentative nature of the Republicans’ current control of the House of Representatives.
“I plan to fully support the Commander in Chief,” he added, “and I’m telling you, if we lose the House, it’s going to be impeachment, open borders, abolishing ICE, repealing the tax cuts and going to socialized medicine. That’s Nancy Pelosi’s agenda and I’m not going to let that happen.”
Alluding to the contentious governor’s race between DeSantis and Democrat Andrew Gillum, Waltz also stressed the importance of maintaining Republican control at the state level, stating: “We’ve all seen what Ron is facing with Gillum, a socialist. Straight up, (Gillum) runs to the left of Bernie Sanders, and (DeSantis) has got a fight on his hands and I have a fight on my hands. You all are the ground troops in this fight for our country, and I couldn’t be more honored to be on your team.” 
Stevenson, who is running for re-election to State House District 17, agreed with Waltz that Republican complacency in November could mean disaster for both Florida and the country. 
“We need the cabinet, we need the governor and we need Mike Waltz in our Congress,” she said. “We can’t afford to lose DeSantis as our governor and lose an ally for Trump in Washington. (Democrats) are specifically targeting Republican state legislatures for this very reason. … We’re seeing growth like we’ve never seen before, but we should not take it for granted because we’re comfortable.”

Hotelier buys former St. Augustine cigar factory, plans to create hotel. (SAR)

$
0
0
Monopoly power in St. Augustine, Part XXII.  Controversial hotelier KANTI PATEL buys another office building, with plans to turn it into a hotel, eventually.  Antitrust law enforcers, take notice.

From St. Augustine Record:





Hotelier Kanti Patel recently purchased the Solla-Carcaba building at 88 Riberia St., a former cigar factory that’s now used for offices, and he plans to turn the building into a hotel.
Patel purchased the St. Augustine property via his business Vista Hotel VIII in September for $2.25 million, according to the St. Johns County Property Appraiser’s website.
He said on Thursday that he doesn’t know when he wants to open the hotel, but the project is under design. He plans to have 50 rooms at the hotel and keep the exterior of the building intact.
“We’re going to keep the historical look and save everything outside,” he said.
The current zoning of the property, Commercial Low-Two, allows for hotels and motels of up to 50 units, according to the city. The height limit is 35 feet.
For now, he plans to keep the office spaces occupied, though he has raised the rent on tenants to help afford the building, he said.
Troy Blevins, property manager for Patel, said the office rental rates hadn’t been raised in about 17 years, and Patel raised them to market rate. In some cases, that meant raising the rates about 80 percent. Patel waited a few months before raising the rates, Blevins said.
Patel has developed large hotels in St. Augustine, including the Hilton St. Augustine Historic Bayfront hotel. He’s also developing a hotel at one corner of San Marco Avenue and West Castillo Drive.
The building is on the National Register of Historic Places. It was built in the early 1900s on marsh once owned by Henry Flagler.

How Colorado did a 180 on gay rights -- The alliance between corporate America and LGBTQ rights. (WaPo)

$
0
0
Hate is bad for business.  Here in St. Johns County, Florida, our hopelessly provincial County Administrator, MICHAEL DAVID WANCHICK, and five Republican County Commissioners put a proposed County Charter on the ballot -- twice -- in 2008 that omitted GLBTQ people from Section 10.06 (Nondiscrimination).

We, the People, defeated these bigoted burghers -- twice -- in 2008.

When a Charter is proposed again, it must include a meaningful nondiscrimination provision.

In 2012, the City of St. Augustine amended its Fair Housing ordinance, listing sexual orientation as a protected class.

In 2013, the City of St. Augustine Beach made both sexual orientation and gender identity protected classes for its Fair Housing ordinance and for employment, both government and private sector.

No response, no discussion, no change at St. Johns County, which former County Commission Chair Ben Rich, Sr. told Folio Weekly in 2008 was "one of the last bastions of the Ku Klux Klan."

Colorado no longer allows the KKK and its klucking "churches" to dictate homophobia, having suffered international boycotts as a result of its unconstitutional Amendment 2, struck down by the United States Supreme Court in Romer v. Evans.

St. Johns County can profit from Colorado's example (or not).

Quo vobis videtor? (What do y'all reckon?)

From The Washington Post, on how Colorado proved that hate is no way to run a state.









Made by History

How Colorado did a 180 on gay rights

The alliance between corporate America and LGBTQ rights






In January, Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) greets marchers in Denver ahead of the annual parade to mark the birthday of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. In November, Polis became the first openly gay person to be elected a governor in the United States. (David Zalubowski/AP)
Over the past month, attention has been lavished on the diversity of the incoming freshman class of the House of Representatives. Less noticed is another critical first: Coloradans voted into office Jared Polis, the first openly gay governor elected in U.S. history.
Twenty-five years ago, Colorado voters also made history in the battle over gay rights. But they did so for the opposite reason, approving Amendment 2, an amendment to the Colorado constitution that prohibited all gay rights laws in the state. So how did Colorado go from being, in the words of author Armistead Maupin, “the South Africa of the U.S. for gays” to electing an openly gay governor? One clue: Polis, in addition to being openly gay, is a multimillionaire. Colorado’s evolution from Amendment 2 to Polis reveals how gay rights activists found an unlikely ally in their war with the Christian right: corporate America.
In 1992, few people would have guessed Colorado would one day elect an openly gay governor. In fact, it seemed far more likely that the state would blaze the way for a national rollback of gay rights. The conservative Christians who drafted and campaigned for Amendment 2 used a powerful slogan, “No Special Rights,” which suggested gay men and lesbians sought not equal but “special” rights. This slogan, combined with an ad campaign that used lurid images from San Francisco’s gay pride parade, enabled Amendment 2 to defy pollsters and secure victory by a 53 percent to 46 percent margin in November 1992, even as Bill Clinton and Democratic Senate candidate Ben Nighthorse Campbell carried the state.
Emboldened by this victory, conservative Christians sought to take the “Colorado Model” nationwide. Amendment 2 clones sprung up in states ranging from Oregon to Michigan to Florida. At a meeting of Christian right organizations, one of the authors of the amendment promised the crowd, “There is a national movement coming out of Amendment 2.”
Amendment 2 did produce a national movement, but not of the sort the Christian right intended.
Calls to boycott Colorado, led by the Denver-based organization Boycott Colorado, began within a few days of the amendment’s passage. Soon national groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force joined the effort.
Multiple organizations canceled conventions in Colorado; a major publishing company changed its plans to relocate to Denver; and the city councils of New York, Philadelphia and Atlanta endorsed the boycott. Many of these cities supported the boycott for material reasons as well as ideological ones. When Ed Rendell, then the mayor of Philadelphia, declared that he would not attend a meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors held in Colorado, he quickly added: “As a statement of denouncing bigotry and affirming civil rights, I will personally request that the conference be moved to Philadelphia, the birthplace of civil rights.” Colorado’s loss could be Philadelphia’s gain.
“Affirmative hatred is bad business,” declared one pro-boycott activist, and the numbers seemed to bear him out: The estimated impact of the boycott grew from $20 million at the end of 1992 to $120 million by the end of 1993. Surveying the damage, a Denver Post reporter concluded: “Amendment 2 may be the biggest public-relations disaster ever to hit Colorado.”
Colorado’s business community had always been lukewarm toward Amendment 2. Though the pro-amendment campaign included some small-business owners, most of the state’s larger businesses opposed the amendment as unnecessary. Denver’s Chamber of Commerce even paid for a newspaper ad in which companies with branches in Colorado, such as Apple, denounced the amendment. But in 1992, most of the state’s business community was focused on defeating a different initiative, one that they felt cut taxes too sharply. Defeating Amendment 2 was secondary.
The boycott refocused their attention. The state’s business community now turned sharply and vocally against the amendment. This was true even in the arch-conservative community of Colorado Springs, home to dozens of evangelical Christian ministries, some of the nation’s largest evangelical churches and Colorado for Family Values, the evangelical-led organization that had drafted Amendment 2.
Even there, business leaders attacked the amendment and the “extremists” who sponsored it. The city’s Chamber of Commerce touted Colorado as “a tolerant, caring place to live,” while the chamber’s president declared that “diversity is important in the community and the work force.” Dozens of executives rallied behind an effort called “Come Together Colorado” that would have repealed Amendment 2. They were less interested in advancing gay rights than in protecting their city’s reputation as a good place to do business — something they were quite open about. Colorado Springs, said one employer, “cannot afford divisiveness, misdirection or intolerance if it’s serious about recruiting investments.”
Meanwhile, as clones of Amendment 2 appeared around the nation, liberal groups used the Colorado boycott to recruit allies from the corporate world. A briefing book published by the American Civil Liberties Union suggested that organizers “make the anti-gay initiative an economic development issue as a way to seek out allies.” They could do so by emphasizing the “negative impact an anti-gay initiative can have on the state’s economy.” This was a conscious strategy on the part of activists. As one leader in the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force put it, the boycott was a way “to send [a] message to other states: Should they pass another initiative, it will be a high price to pay for discrimination.”
One anti-gay leader scoffed at this strategy: “What are they going to do? Boycott the whole country?” But it worked. “No Special Rights” initiatives were put forward in eight states in 1994: Idaho, Oregon, Arizona, Maine, Missouri, Michigan, Florida and Washington. Six failed to even make the ballot. The two that did, in Oregon and Idaho, went down to defeat. Two years later Amendment 2 itself was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in Romer v. Evans.
Convincing corporations that social conservatism was bad business was only the first step. Some Colorado executives went a step further by using their wealth to actively advance gay rights. Foremost among them was software entrepreneur Tim Gill. Gill, himself openly gay, responded to Amendment 2 by creating the Gill Foundation. The foundation — headquartered in Colorado Springs, in a direct rebuke to that city’s conservative element — disbursed millions of dollars to organizations throughout Colorado with the aim of raising the profile of gay philanthropy.
One of Gill’s allies: Jared Polis, then a wealthy entrepreneur. Polis joined Gill and two other wealthy Coloradans in what was sometimes called “the Gang of Four,” a group dedicated to shifting Colorado leftward, particularly by funding opposition to socially conservative Republicans.
In the decades since, the corporate world has only become more vocal in its opposition to local laws that target sexual nonconformity. For instance, North Carolina’s “bathroom bill,” which would have (among other restrictions) required transgender people to use the bathroom corresponding to the sex listed on their birth certificates, triggered a massive boycott that cost the state billions.
Boycotts and targeted philanthropy were effective because they exploited a divide in the conservative coalition, between those who prioritized social issues and those who did not. Even for most Colorado business leaders who opposed gay rights, the issue was of secondary importance to them — not worth losing money to a boycott or rejecting a donation from the Gill Foundation.
This, then, was the “Colorado Model” that emerged from Amendment 2: not a national campaign against gay rights, but a strategy to split social conservatives from their allies in the business community through a careful application of threats and incentives. That Polis, a wealthy businessman and outspoken advocate of gay rights, should be the one to realize the culmination of this model seems fitting.

Politicians have caused a pay ‘collapse’ for the bottom 90 percent of workers, researchers say. (WaPo)

$
0
0
Union-busting politicians like Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chair Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn). President DONALD JOHN TRUMP, St. Johns County Sheriff DAVID SHOAR and his henchmen, including County Administrator MICHAEL DAVID WANCHICK, have collapsed worker income and buying power.

When Democrats unite and support working people, we win.

But when corporativists like Hillary Clinton rule, workers lose and so do Democrats.

Flori-DUH Democrats who trim their sails and pull their punches are undercover Republicans.\

Hint: Hillary Clinton was a partner at the Rose Law firm and lawyer for and member of the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart, circa 1985-1992, when Wal-Mart formulated its destructive policies of:


  • importing cheap, defective Chinese products, 
  • suppressing unionization and
  • destroying Main Street small businesses.

United States Supreme Court Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis called it "the race to the bottom."

Enough.

Here endeth the lecture.  Here's the data -- well-nigh irrefragable.

From The Washington Post:






Politicians have caused a pay ‘collapse’ for the bottom 90 percent of workers, researchers say



(Illustration by Christopher Ingraham for the Washington Post)
Political decisions by elected officials are largely responsible for a “collapse in pay for the bottom 90 percent” of the labor market since 1979, according to a new analysis of wage stagnation by the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank.
While many economists pin much of the blame for wage stagnation on impersonal market forces, such as free trade and technological change, EPI’s Josh Bivens and Heidi Shierholz contend that specific policy decisions — including efforts to weaken unions, the decay of the minimum wage and monetary policy that prioritizes low inflation over full employment — are responsible for tilting the balance of power away from workers and toward their employers.
By their calculations, that shift in power cost the bottom 90 percent of wage earners $1.53 trillion in income in 2015 alone, or $10,800 for every American household.
As Bivens and Shierholz tell it, a relatively recent thread of economic research into monopsony power — which they define as “the leverage enjoyed by employers to set their workers’ pay” — has helped economists explain some of the wage stagnation observed in the United States over the past 40 years. You can think of monopsony power as the flip side of monopoly power: If monopoly power lets companies charge higher prices to consumers, monopsony power lets them pay lower wages to workers. Either way, it spells trouble for people who buy things and work for a living.
Research into monopsony power finds that many job markets are dominated by a relatively small number of employers. If you are, say, a coal miner, there may be just one or two coal mines within 100 miles of your home. If the mine you’re working at is treating you unfairly, you don’t have many options for finding a new job — particularly if you already left the other mine for similar reasons. In the absence of any serious competition for the most talented workers, employers have a huge amount of leeway in setting workers' salaries, and they often set them at levels below what traditional economic theories would expect.
If rising monopsony power — that is, the increasing dominance of a small number of large firms — were fully to blame for recent wage stagnation, Bivens and Shierholz argue, you’d expect to see wages stagnating across the board. If a coal mine has the leeway to skimp on pay for its low-skill workers, in other words, it’s probably skimping on pay for high-skill workers, as well.
But that’s not what appears to be happening, Bivens and Shierholz say. Instead, much of the wage stagnation observed since the 1970s has occurred at the low end of the wage spectrum. Think of all the charts you’ve seen showing how income has exploded at the top of the wage distribution while staying flat everywhere else. Superstar managers and highly skilled employees have made out very well over the past few decades, while wages for rank-and-file, low-skill workers have hardly budged.
Bivens and Shierholz say that poor wage growth is less a function of increasing employer power and more a product of deliberate efforts to undermine worker power. Policymakers, for instance, have been reluctant to raise minimum wages, which would directly benefit workers at the bottom of the income distribution. They’ve taken steps to make it harder for workers to secure bargaining power, eroding union membership in the process. And Bivens and Shierholz maintain that the Federal Reserve has contributed to the problem by prioritizing low inflation over high employment.
Many of these policies were put in place with good intentions — to boost productivity and the health of the economy as a whole. But the data show that productivity has actually slowed since the 1970s. “Between 1973 and 2017,” Bivens and Shierholz write, “net productivity grew half as fast as it had from 1948 to 1973.”
Bivens and Shierholz conclude that if policymakers are interested in boosting wages, they should work to increase the power of workers relative to employers by prioritizing strong unions, high minimum wages and full employment. “In short, the policy movement to disempower workers not only led to less equal growth, but was also associated with significantly slower growth,” they write.
Ioana Marinescu, an economist with the University of Pennsylvania who has written extensively on the causes of wage stagnation, said she generally agrees with the paper’s findings but thinks the EPI authors' emphasis on certain policy decisions is overstated. She points out that wage stagnation has happened in other wealthy countries that have pursued different economic policies. She also says that policies to reduce monopsony power have a real role to play in bringing wages up across the board.
“There is no reason not to go after abuses of dominance in the labor market if we go after abuses of dominance in the product market,” Marinescu said. Hence, antitrust legislation could have the double effect of lowering consumer prices and boosting wages.
Bivens and Shierholz generally agree: “We certainly do not mean to imply one should ignore potential policy opportunities that could erode employer power (e.g., through more robust antitrust enforcement),” they write in their conclusion. “But the larger opportunities are likely those that lead to more labor market balance in the power between employers and workers by increasing worker power — not trying to move the labor market toward a competitive ideal that is not attainable.”

What We Now Know About Russian Disinformation -- The Senate gave my research team data from social media companies. The picture that emerges is grim. By Renée DiResta, NY Times

$
0
0
Russian interference in our 2016 Presidential election is now irrefutable.  Thanks to the Senate Intelligence Committee for doing its job without fear or favor, with bipartisan leadership.   No thanks to the discredited U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.  Thankfully, the Democrats will now be a majority in the House come January 2019.  Adam Schiff (D-California) will be House Intelligence Chair.    Exposing Russian attacks on our Nation is fundamental to protecting national security and preserving, protecting and defending the U.S. Constitution.  From The New York Times:








What We Now Know About Russian Disinformation

The Senate gave my research team data from social media companies. The picture that emerges is grim.
By Renée DiResta
Ms. DiResta is the director of research at a cybersecurity company.
CreditJenice Kim
Image
CreditCreditJenice Kim
The Russian disinformation operations that affected the 2016 United States presidential election are by no means over. Indeed, as two new reports produced for the Senate Intelligence Committee make clear, Russian interference through social media — contrary to the suggestion of many prominent tech executives — is a chronic, widespread and identifiable condition that we must now aggressively manage. 
The Senate committee asked two research teams, one of which I led, to investigate the full scope of the recent multiyear Russian operation to influence American opinion executed by a company called the Internet Research Agency. The Senate provided us with data attributed to the agency’s operations given to the Senate by Facebook, Twitter and Alphabet (Google’s parent company), companies whose platforms were manipulated for that purpose.
Our report, announced by the committee on Monday, concludes that Russia was able to masquerade successfully as a collection of American media entities, managing fake personas and developing communities of hundreds of thousands, building influence over a period of years and using it to manipulate and exploit existing political and societal divisions. While Russia is hardly the only geopolitical actor with a well-thumbed disinformation playbook, a look at the data — which concerned the Internet Research Agency’s operation over the last three years — reveals its enthusiasm for and commitment to modern information warfare.
Regardless of what any tech executives may have said, the data indicate that this was not a small-scale problem fixable by tweaking a platform’s advertising purchase policy. Rather, it was a cross-platform attack that made use of numerous features on each social network and that spanned the entire social ecosystem.
ADVERTISEMENT
Tech executives have also stressed that Russian disinformation efforts were a small percentage of the total content on any individual platform during the years in question. That is correct. But it obscures the more important point: For subgroups of targeted Americans, such as African-Americans, the messaging was perhaps ubiquitous. 
And disinformation does not stay within a subgroup. “Virality,” a term beloved by internet marketers, is apropos here: A vulnerable few contract an initial “infection” that then spreads exponentially through the broader population, ultimately enabling the infection to “jump” into entirely different populations (including offline populations, in this case).
In official statements to Congress, tech executives have said that they found it beyond their capabilities to assess whether Russia created content intended to discourage anyone from voting. We have determined that Russia did create such content. It propagated lies about voting rules and processes, attempted to steer voters toward third-party candidates and created stories that advocated not voting.
Our analysis underscores the fact that such influence operations are not specific to one platform, one malign actor or one targeted group. This is a global problem. The consolidation of the online social ecosystem into a few major platforms means that propagandists have ready audiences; they need only blanket a handful of services to reach hundreds of millions of people. And precision targeting, made possible by a decade of gathering detailed user behavior data (in the service of selling ads), means that it is easy and inexpensive to reach any targeted group.
Ultimately, the biggest lesson from the Senate committee’s request for our investigation of Russian interference is the troubling absence of adequate structures for collaboration among multiple stakeholders, private and public alike, to establish solutions and appropriate oversight.

The hard truth is that the problem of disinformation campaigns will never be fixed; it’s a constantly evolving arms race. But it can — and must — be managed. This will require that social media platforms, independent researchers and the government work together as partners in the fight. We cannot rely on — nor should we place the full burden on — the social media platforms themselves.





The landscape of disinformation is, frankly, a grim one. Russia has already signaled its intention to continue information operations. Terrorists strategically counter attempts to kick them off popular platforms. Domestic ideologues adopt the manipulative distribution tactics used by foreign propagandists. 
But there is some cause for hope. With our report (and that of others) on the Internet Research Agency data, we now have a far more complete picture of what happened with Russian disinformation efforts from 2014 to 2017. There is heightened public interest in the topic, the social platforms are actively participating in trying to find solutions and the government’s investigation is fueling a conversation about regulation. Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, has even proposed a comprehensive new cyberdoctrine.
With discipline, rigor and broad collaboration, we can meet this challenge, establishing standards, protocols and governance that will defend the integrity of our information.
Renée DiResta is the director of research at New Knowledge, a cybersecurity company that monitors disinformation.

Officers Had No Duty to Protect Students in Parkland Massacre, Judge Rules. (NY Times)

$
0
0
Florida's legislature needs to change the law if there is "no duty" to protect school children.  When Florida's legislature believed that property owners were not adequately protected, it adopted by Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Protection Act.  Why not a law requiring LEOs at schools to do their jobs?  This Broward County Sheriff's Department Keystone Kops routine must be ended.  Now.



Officers Had No Duty to Protect Students in Parkland Massacre, Judge Rules

A federal judge in Florida ruled that the Broward County schools and the county sheriff’s office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14.CreditSaul Martinez for The New York Times
Image
A federal judge in Florida ruled that the Broward County schools and the county sheriff’s office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14.CreditCreditSaul Martinez for The New York Times
The school district and sheriff’s office in the Florida county that is home to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School had no constitutional duty to protect the students there during the deadly February massacre, a federal judge has said in a ruling.
The decision was made in a lawsuit filed by 15 students who said they suffered trauma during the Feb. 14 attack in Parkland, Fla. A total of 17 students and staff members lost their lives; 17 others were injured.
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Nikolas Cruz, 20, the former Stoneman Douglas student who is accused of opening fire at the school on Valentine’s Day. He has pleaded not guilty, but his lawyers have said he would plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence.
The Dec. 12 ruling, by Judge Beth Bloom, came on the same day that a county judge, Patti Englander Henning, came to the opposite conclusion. Judge Henning found that Scot Peterson, the armed sheriff’s deputy who heard the gunfire but did not run in and try to stop the attack, did have an obligation to confront Mr. Cruz.

The two decisions in rapid succession highlight an assumption often made: the belief that the public has a right to receive protection from police officers.
But police officers, in fact, generally are not under any legal obligation to protect citizens who are not in their custody.
“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out.
“Courts have rejected the argument that students are in custody of school officials while they are on campus,” Mr. Hutchinson said. “Custody is narrowly confined to situations where a person loses his or her freedom to move freely and seek assistance on their own — such as prisons, jails, or mental institutions.”
ADVERTISEMENT
There are exceptions, Mr. Hutchinson said, as when a crossing guard who is specifically assigned to protect children traveling across a street allows a child to get run over while, say, the guard is being distracted by a smartphone. The crossing guard is in a “special relationship” with the children, in legal eyes.
When an officer has a “special relationship” with people, or acts to “enhance the risk” of harm, the officer can be liable for any resulting injury under state negligence laws, Mr. Hutchinson said.
This is likely how Judge Henning found that Mr. Peterson did have a duty to protect those inside the school and refused to dismiss the negligence lawsuit filed by Andrew Pollack, whose daughter Meadow was killed.
The county lawsuit argued that Mr. Peterson had a “special relationship” with students and staff members at the school because he was specifically assigned to offer them protection.
Video footage and other evidence shows Mr. Peterson, the only armed officer at the school, staying outside while shots could be heard exploding from inside the school. Mr. Peterson also launched a “code red” to put the entire school on lockdown.
“They also argued that he enhanced the risk of death, or injury, by Mr. Cruz by negligently ordering a lockdown, which prevented escape from the building,” Mr. Hutchinson said. “Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson. But I would not be surprised if the state case was reversed on appeal. It is very difficult to establish liability in this area of law.”
The federal decision is expected to be appealed.
A state commission that has been investigating the attack found last week that there was a multitude of failures on the part of the school and law enforcement officials in the response to the shooting.
At least eight sheriff’s deputies who raced to the school and heard gunshots stayed outside the building, the commission wrote in a 400-page draft report, and officers lost even more time scrambling to retrieve bulletproof vests from their cars.





County Commission creates special taxing unit for beach renourishment. (SAR)

$
0
0


1. I supported the 3-2 vote on MSTU.  
2. Record coverage leaves much to be desired.
3. Enough handouts and catering to wealthy landowners in the pages of the St. Augustine Record.
4. To Stuart Korfhage: Please contact the actual owners of the  Ponte Vedra Inn and Club and Ponte Vedra Lodge and Club for a followup story.  Do your job, without fear or favor to wealthy landowners who don't want to pay their fair share.  Ask questions, demand answers.  Expect Democracy.
5. ULTIMATE ANSWER: FEDERAL FUNDS by adoption of St. Augustine National Historical Park and National Seashore, preserving and protection some 130,000 acres of current government land and protecting us from flooding.





Commission creates special taxing unit for beach renourishment
The St. Johns County Commission voted 3-2 on Tuesday to create a Municipal Service Taxing Unit in order to raise $1.2 million for beach renourishment for about 9 miles of beach from the Duval County line south to Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve. [PETER WILLOTT/THE RECORD]

By Stuart Korfhage
Posted Dec 18, 2018 at 8:08 PM
Updated at 6:36 AM
St. Augustine Record

The St. Johns County Commission took the first step toward paying for the first phase of beach renourishment in Ponte Vedra Beach at Tuesday’s meeting.

But aside from the clarity of the general direction, there really wasn’t much decided.

The board voted 3-2, with commissioners Jeb Smith and Jimmy Johns dissenting, to create a Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) in order to raise $1.2 million for beach renourishment. The money would pay for permitting, studies and design of a renourishment plan for about 9 miles of beach from the Duval County line south to Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve.

With the creation of the MSTU, the Commission has the option to levy an additional 0.6 mills. It’s expected to take two years to raise the $1.2 million. The Commission authorized the immediate transfer of $1 million from the General Fund to pay for the Phase I work to continue, and the MSTU or some other funding source will eventually pay back the fund.

However, the MSTU is just the starting point. Just because it’s available doesn’t mean it will be used.

Commissioners talked about several other options for funding the first phase. The county is looking at possible grants from the state and federal governments. It’s possible one or both of those would provide some money, although chances are good that it would be matching funds.

Also, the commissioners talked about using the Tourist Development Council “bed tax” money. Even though they didn’t vote on the issue Tuesday, there is some support among commissioners to use $700,000 from TDC reserves.

There’s also the pending issue of raising the bed tax on short-term rentals from 4 percent to 5 percent in order to fund beach renourishment in the county. That issue has gone through the first reading, but it’s not clear whether there will be the four votes needed to implement the increase.

Because the county is already into the 2019 fiscal year, the MSTU can’t be activated until the fall when the 2020 fiscal year begins. In the meantime, the Commission has time to see if other funding sources emerge that would make the temporary millage increase unnecessary.


The important part, at least for Commissioner Henry Dean, was getting something in place that would guarantee some action in beach renourishment.

“To me, job No. 1 is to create the MSTU now and then as we go forward in January, February and March we’re going to have some key decisions to make,” Dean said. “There are a lot of moving parts, but what’s not moving right now is the fact that in order to go forward with a beach renourishment project for Ponte Vedra Beach, the first step — and we must do it today if we’re going to — is to enact the MSTU.”

Dean added that he would consider a one-time influx of TDC reserves but that he wants a sustainable funding source rather than to just raid another agency’s budget.

“My goal, frankly — and it’s no surprise if you’ve heard me speak over the last six months on the issue — is that was have a one-cent increase in the bed tax for all of the reasons I have enumerated,” Dean said. “And there will be funds available more immediately if we go forward with that route to help fund the engineering study.”

Smith said he was concerned about the lack of total support for the MSTU, including the owners of the Ponte Vedra Inn & Club and Ponte Vedra Lodge & Club. There was a survey sent to the 746 affected properties, and 65 percent returned the surveys. Of those, 92 percent came back in favor of the MSTU.

“We looked at the map and saw several tracts that were not desirous to be involved in (the MSTU),” Smith said. “When someone doesn’t want to participate, I have a tremendous amount of apprehension and reluctance toward it.”

County Public Works Director Neal Shinkre said although there is some resistance to the MSTU by some of the beach landowners, many who voted against the MSTU still want to see the renourishment project go forward.


“We have been in touch with several of those property owners that ... were against the (MSTU) at the start,” he said. “Based on the last board meeting, we reached out to them to better understand.

“They gave me (several) points to communicate to the board: One was that they were very supportive of the project. They would prefer that one-time (Tourist Development) reserves would be used for the project, but they understand that’s a decision by the board.”

There was no serious discussion about how to fund the construction phase of the project, which would start no sooner than mid-2020 and is estimated to cost more than $30 million.

St. Augustine Beach commissioners support $2.50 hourly rate for paid parking and resident discount. (SAR)

$
0
0
No business plan.  Eleven (11) public hearing witnesses opposed this hare-brained scheme.  No St. Augustine Record reporter attended the meeting.  More pitiful PR for pitiful St. Augustine Beach City Manager for Life BRUE MAX ROYLE.

Privately-owned, secretive PASSPORT salesman KELSEY OWENS speed-answers a few questions from incurious St. Augustine Beach Commissioners, whose half-baked plan has folks up in arms.



St. Augustine Beach commissioners support $2.50 hourly rate for paid parking and resident discount


By Sheldon Gardner
Posted Dec 18, 2018 at 8:08 PM
Updated at 6:36 AM
St. Augustine Record

Residents and visitors can expect to start paying for parking soon in St. Augustine Beach.

At a special meeting this week, commissioners supported charging $2.50 per hour for 300 spaces in the city. If everything is implemented as discussed, St. Augustine Beach residents will pay a discounted rate of 50 cents an hour, and St. Augustine residents will pay $1.25 an hour.

Enforcement hours are expected to be 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. The city is working with the company Passport Labs to create the city’s paid parking system.

The system will accept payments via a smartphone app, said Kelsey Owens, a sales director for Passport. People can also add more time to their spaces via the app.

“They can extend their parking, so if I only paid for one hour, but you know what, I want to hang out at the beach a little bit longer, I can extend directly from my beach chair. I don’t even have to go back to my vehicle,” she said at the meeting.

People who have cellphones that aren’t smartphones will be able to pay over the phone by calling a number posted on signs at the paid parking spaces, she said.

Passport charges 35 cents on top of the hourly charge, which goes to the company. But that’s a one-time charge per parking session, Owens said. For instance, people who have already paid for parking wouldn’t have to pay 35 cents again if they add more time for their parking space.

Commissioners are expected to vote on the contract with Passport and resolutions solidifying the parking rates and other details in early 2019. City officials want the system to be fully up and running by April, City Manager Max Royle said.

The city has a list of all of the areas scheduled to be included in the paid parking system. They include more than 100 spaces on 2nd Avenue and close to 40 spaces on 16th Street, east and west of A1A Beach Boulevard, according to backup materials. City officials don’t plan to implement paid parking in several areas where public parking is shared with adjacent businesses.


To keep traffic from spilling into neighborhoods, the city plans to put up more signs restricting parking on residential roads, Royle said.

The city plans to hire a parking enforcement officer as well, he said. The officer will not only help enforce the paid parking system, but will also help deal with people who are trying to illegally park in residential areas.

In addition to the city’s efforts, Royle said he expects the county to begin charging for parking at the pier, which is county property.

“Once the county says we’re going to put paid parking at the pier, all our visitors are going to start looking for the free spaces,” Royle said at the meeting. “And that’s our side streets, and our plazas and so forth.”

Jesse Dunn, director of the county’s budget office, said the county plans to solicit proposals in January for paid parking at the pier to see whether it makes sense for the county to move forward with the effort.

Editorial: Public has right to know the integrity of our sheriff. (HCN)

$
0
0


Excellent editorial by Michael Gold in Historic City News blog re: St. Johns County Sheriff DAVID SHOAR, who legally changed his name from "HOAR" in 1994.

SHOAR's coverups proliferate.  The St. Augustine Record was uncritical about SHOAR's unctuous ukase about hiring his own (undisclosed) forensic auditor without consultation with St. Johns County.

Hiring his own forensic auditor is a badge of fraud.

Will Florida Governor RICK SCOTT or Governor-elect RON DeSANTIS can suspend SHOAR from office and will the Florida State Senate can remove him for cause?

That's what the Florida State Senate did in 1971 by 44-2 vote with corrupt Sheriff LAWRENCE O. DAVIS.

SHOAR that he falsely states on the SJSO website that corrupt segregationist DAVIS was "exonerated" by the Florida State Senate, and refused to modify his hagiography.   Read it here:

In the final analysis, the County Commission needs to require SHOAR to testify under oath at its January 15, 2019 meeting re: embezzlement by SHOAR's handpicked Finance Director, RAYE BRUTNESS.  SHOAR wants a $15,000,000 training center, communications center and no-bid property purchase from the USINA family.  Commissioners decided at their December 18, 2018 to revisit the issue of the training center in the context of a refinancing.

There is no business case for the training center, and SHOAR falsely claimed to have a "$2 million check" from the FBI and to have commitments from local law enforcement agencies to pay for training (no MOU documents were produced in response to my Open. Records requests to the agencies in quo).

Jesse Dunn, SJC BoCC OMB Director, confirmed to me in-person yesterday that Shoar did not confer before hiring forensic auditor.

I spoke yesterday and told Commissioners that Shoar has repeatedly lied and must placed under oath at January 15, 2019 meeting.  See Commission discussion on consent item 16 -- pulled by Commissioner Jeb Smith re: Sheriff's office embezzlement and Shoar demand for a $15 million training center, communications center and land purchase without a proper business plan of accountability.  

Watch Commissioners and my December 18, 2018 testimony to St. Johns County Commissioners here:  http://stjohnscountyfl.swagit.com/play/12182018-671.  






Editorial: Public has right to know the integrity of our sheriff

Michael Gold, Editor
HISTORIC CITY NEWS
St Augustine, FL
December 17, 2018



For more than 60-years, I’ve called St Augustine and St Johns County my home — not by choice, but by the grace of God, I happened to be born here. I have a deep-rooted interest in the safety and security of our residents and I’ve stood to defend their lives and property as both a sworn law enforcement officer and civilian law enforcement analyst.

At one time, my father worked for Sheriff L. O. Davis as a jailer, as did I as a police explorer. I lived through the legislature’s decision to remove Sheriff Davis from office in St Johns County over allegations of political and financial corruption. I was here when Sheriff Dudley Garrett was appointed by the Governor to replace Sheriff Davis and recall the challenges Garrett faced in order to restore integrity to our local sheriff’s department.



One of the most important things Sheriff Garrett did, besides swearing me in as a lawman, was to begin releasing information about internal affairs of the agency to prove to the public that a new broom sweeps clean. When he found employees that operated outside the margins of the law, who profited financially or otherwise to “look the other way”, he very publicly terminated them.

That spirit of integrity continued under Sheriff Francis O’Loughlin and under Sheriff Neil Perry, the bar was raised to a new level for professionalism and integrity. The citizens of St Johns County came to expect no less. It took three administrations to lift the stigma of underhanded, self-profiting corruption. As an informed observer and stakeholder, it has become apparent to me that our current sheriff, David Shoar, will undo thirty-years of reputation building by three fine law enforcement leaders; Sheriff Garrett, Sheriff O’Loughlin, and Sheriff Perry.

The most recent scandal, embezzlement of more than $700,000 by the woman Shoar appointed to Director of Finance, simply highlights the lack of respect Shoar has for the taxpayers of this county who continue to pay him $ 146,521.00 annually, plus benefits. Shoar has already checked out, but we are still paying for him. He’s hired a non-law enforcement amateur as the “undersheriff” and pays him $ 128,315.00 annually, plus benefits, for all intents and purposes, to do his job for him. We are paying two people to do the same job and hoping one will show up.


Shoar is going to leave office, voluntarily or involuntarily, in much worse condition than Sheriff Perry left it to him. The Michelle O’Connell homicide, for example, and Shoar’s botched investigation, tell a lot about Shoar and his integrity. Neither Shoar nor his then “undersheriff” Joel Bolante, appeared at the crime scene — even though the shooting involved one of their deputies. That didn’t stop Shoar from backing the deputy involved, Jeremy Banks, in a civil lawsuit against Rusty Rodgers, the FDLE Agent investigating him. The Federal Judge hearing the case ruled against Banks, finding for Rodgers; saying that Agent Rodgers would have been within his rights to detain Banks as a murder suspect.

Shoar also used his influence to push Supervisory Special Agent in charge of the FDLE Jacksonville Regional Operations Center, Dominick Pape, to retire. Shoar was furious that SSA Pape supported Agent Rodgers continued investigation of Deputy Banks. Rather than get into a brawl between Shoar and FDLE Commissioner Gerald Bailey, in 2013, Pape took a director position with a large private security firm and began collecting his state retirement. In August 2015, Pape accepted an appointment to oversee the Investigations Bureau with the Palm Beach Gardens Police Department at the rank of major. In May, he was promoted to Assistant Chief. Today he oversees the day-to-day operations of the department.


And, guess who wound up with Pape’s former position as Special Agent in Charge of the FDLE Jacksonville Regional Operations Center and Crime Laboratory? None other than Mark Brutnell, the husband of the woman who admits to stealing the three-quarters of a million dollars from Shoar’s office.

As with the investigation of Michelle O’Connell’s homicide, Shoar wants to investigate himself in the matter of the Brutnell embezzlement. Over severe conflicts, Shoar insists that he should be allowed to choose his own forensic auditor. Even Shoar is questioning what his choice of annual auditors was doing for the last 5-years, yet he wants to control the auditors responsible for uncovering the fraudulent handling of taxpayer money that went undiscovered so long. His purpose appears obvious — he wants to be able to spin the results of the forensic audit to make sure that he has the least amount of pie on his face and that the forensic audit heaps a pile of responsibility on the annual auditors to make sure he has a basis to sue them for the stolen money.

Now Shoar is trying to hide essential details about his choice. For over a week, Historic City News has been in communication with the sheriff’s office attempting to obtain the name of the forensic auditing firm. A response to that request remains unanswered. I think we all should pay close attention to who he’s hired since he clearly doesn’t want us looking into their role.



The bottom line is that we deserve a better accounting of how our tax money is being spent. And if we discover questionable documents or conflicts within the documents, that is the time to come forward with clear and accurate explanations, not to run and hide like the cat who ate the canary.

As a sheriff, David Shoar is a public embarrassment. He is a moral opportunist and resorts to bible thumping if it suits his purpose, but he is indeed a hypocrite. Whether the legislature or our incoming governor decide to impeach Sheriff Shoar or not, I refuse to sit back and allow him to feather his own nest at the expense of the reputations of fine men and women who have already paid the price of one corrupt St Johns County sheriff.

WUFT Investigates "PEAK FLORIDA"

$
0
0
The National Public Radio affiliate in Gainesville, Florida has issued its "PEAK FLORIDA" report, asking the questions never asked by local news media in St. Johns County and Jacksonville.  

Working with the University of Florida Journalism School, "PEAK FLORIDA" asks the questions about development that we're all asking, but which WJCT, WFOY and WFCF are not asking.  All of their licenses are up for renewal decisions next year.)

Here is "PEAK FLORIDA":





(Illustration by Jerald Pinson)

Florida’s Growth: A Cliffhanger

Data story and graphics by Joan Meiners

Florida is booming.

Data from the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research show the state now growing at a rate of 919 new people a day. With weakened development regulations, combined with sea rise and more-severe storms predicted by scientists as temperatures warm, how will Florida manage its growth?
Urban growth (orange) between 1990 and 2017. Map data source: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Geospatial Open Data. 

The state’s population has doubled since 1980.

1980

9.7 million

1990

13 million

2000

16 million

2010

19 million

2018

21 million

 Elevation data shows the land mass remaining with a 2m rise in sea level, possible by 2100. Map data source: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection Geospatial Open Data. 

While rising seas shrink its land.

As sea rises and the coast becomes more hazardous, Florida will have less and less space for its growing population and native wildlife. A recent report by Climate Central used FEMA flood maps and sea rise projections to find the cities most at risk from coastal flooding by 2050. Nine of the top 10 were in Florida.

Development continues apace.

Ten years after the housing crash of 2008, Florida’s market has rebounded. Housing permit numbers from the Enterprise Florida Data Center show the number of housing permits issued in Florida’s 10 most-populous counties is approaching pre-crash numbers. Some financial advisors warn of another reckoning.

New-home construction remains just as vigorous in flood-prone areas.

Despite the science showing the pace and path of sea rise, development is proceeding in flood-prone areas at a slightly higher pace than in safer regions, according to an analysis by Climate Central and Zillow. The report found 908 new Florida homes – together worth more than $1 billion – built in areas likely to flood by 2050.

Intensifying storms drive migration.

Scientists say climate change is aggravating the impacts of hurricanes and other tropical storms. In 2017 after Hurricane Maria caused widespread destruction on the island, thousands of Puerto Rican Americans were forced to flee to the mainland.
Data from the UF Bureau of Economic and Business Research show more Puerto Ricans arriving and staying in Florida in 2017 than in any other year since 2005. Amid more-severe storm impacts, Florida could see more migration from Caribbean islands – until Floridians become the ones forced to move.
Using flight data, this graph represents the total number of one-way movements from PR to FL in each of the last 12 years. Data source: BEBR.ufl.edu. 
Watch: A Journey from Puerto Rico
Video story by Brianna Barone

Schools are overwhelmed.

Schools are struggling to accommodate the new influx of students, both from steady increases in state population and sudden ones caused by catastrophic events. Hurricane Maria added approximately 12,500 students from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to Florida’s public school system.
Data on enrollment of new students from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands into Florida schools following Hurricane Maria in September 2017. Data source: BEBR.ufl.edu. 
The green areas represent Florida conservation land, the orange cities. Map data source: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection Geospatial Open Data. 

Florida’s wildlife is at risk.

Increasing development risks cleaving habitat and migration corridors used by bears, panthers and other wildlife. Each hour, about 20 more acres of rural Florida are lost to development, according to the Florida Wildlife Corridor project. With strategy, wildlife scientists say some 15 million key acres could still be protected in support of biodiversity and ecosystems.

Crops give way to rooftops.

Urban development is also squeezing out Florida’s signature crop as citrus greening makes it harder to farm. Florida’s orange production decreased 16 percent to 68.8 million boxes in 2017, according to the Florida Department of Agriculture. Grapefruit was down nearly 28 percent to 7.76 million boxes.
A look at the value of Florida citrus crops, 2004 to 2017.  Data source: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 

What happens next is a wildcard.

For now, scientists expect population to continue to grow. But as seas continue to rise, Floridians could begin to leave the coasts for interior Florida — or leave the state.

The problems of growth and sea rise could compound and the great Florida in-migration could flip.

When scientists combined Florida’s projected population growth with future impacts of sea rise, they found that far more people – between 1.2 million and 6 million – could be displaced from coastal homes as soon as 2100.
FEMA officials survey damage on Highway A1A near St Johns County after Hurricane Matthew. Photo by Eileen Lainez-FEMA

Many Floridians may leave …

By 2100, scientists Mathew Hauer, Jason Evans and Deepak Mishra found, up to 6 million Floridians may have to find other homes. They may head to Texas, Georgia, the Carolinas, Virginia, New York, Massachusetts and California.
Map data source: “Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States,” by Mathew E. Hauer et. al., Nature Climate Change, 2015. 
This 1992 photo shows the impact of Hurricane Andrew on a trailer park in Richmond West west of the Miami Zoo. Wikimedia commons

Others may be left behind. 

Could Floridians join the rising membership of climate refugees – people displaced by changing environments? Across the globe, those pushed from their homes often have the deepest local roots, with nowhere else to go and few resources to start over. But there is another choice.

Planning for a sustainable future can help. 

Smarter growth is key. We can develop more-compact urban areas; plan to protect water and land; restore more coastal wetlands to create storm barriers; legislate to conserve wildlife corridors; and adopt transportation and energy options that accommodate 22 million Floridians with minimal pollution. But we will have to work together.

This is Peak Florida

Read our series on Florida’s growth pressures and the solutions at hand.

ALL FLORIDA RADIO STATION LICENSES UP FOR RENEWAL

$
0
0





ALL Florida radio stations must file their applications to renew their licenses by October 1, 2019 with the Federal Communications Commission.

The licenses ALL expire on February 1, 2020.

How well are we served by our local radio stations here in Florida?

From Hate Radio stations (failed Bolesian Mayoral candidate Kris Phillips' WFOY) to our indifferent, lackluster   Jacksonville NPR affiliate (WJCT) to our staid no-news college station (like Flagler College's WFCF, "Radio With a Reason"), in the immortal words of Newton Minow, is our local AM and FM radio bandwidth a "vast wasteland?"

Do any of these radio stations deserve to have their licenses renewed in light of the fact that they fail to cover the news here in St. Johns County, fail to investigate our corrupt Sheriff and his political machine, and ignore tree-killing wetland-destroying "developers?"

WUFT has shown the way with its "PEAK FLORIDA" program.

Will there be license renewal challenges -- pursuant to the WLBT precedent --  to the licenses of  hopelessly provincial local yokel radio stations in Flori-DUH?

What do you reckon?



October 1, 2019February 1, 2020
Viewing all 6488 articles
Browse latest View live