By DOTTY NIST
A $60,000 contract has been approved for distribution and tracking of easement packages for the Walton County Hurricane & Storm Damage Reduction (WCH&SDR) Project, but there will be a delay in the packages being sent out to beachfront property owners in the project area. It had previously been anticipated that the easement language and an informational letter on the project would be sent out by the end of April. Now that is not to happen until after May 12, when the letter in revised form is scheduled to come before the Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC).
The decision on the contract took place at the April 14 BCC regular meeting at the South Walton Annex. There was considerable discussion and public comment on the WCH&SDR Project at several points during the meeting.
During public comment taken at the outset of the meeting, Kent Safriet, an attorney representing opponents of the WCH&SDR Project, told the BCC that his concern about the project has been growing and that he believed it had been mismanaged by the Walton County Tourist Development Council (TDC). Safriet noted that a lawsuit had been filed challenging the project.
Filed April 8 in United States District Court in Pensacola, the lawsuit alleges that, due to its color, material in the borrow area for the project would be prohibited from placement on the beach per Walton County’s White Sand Protection Restrictions (Section 4.07.00 of the Walton County Land Development Code).
Safriet said that for 50 days the TDC had failed to answer his questions regarding the applicability of the white sand protection regulations to the project. He discussed recent statements on the matter attributed to Jim Bagby, TDC executive director, on this question. Bagby was not present for the meeting due to the recent death of a loved one.
Safriet maintained that the exemption from the white sand protection restrictions that is set forth for beach and dune restoration projects conducted by the county would not apply in this case. “This project is not conducted by the county. This project is conducted by the Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers),” he argued.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) is federal sponsor for the project.
Maintaining that the TDC had not previously looked into whether the white sand protection restrictions would apply to the project, Safriet called for the organization to be held accountable for that. He also charged that the TDC appears be taking the role of an “advocacy group” for the project rather than a governmental agency providing information to the BCC.
“They have an agenda. They want to turn the beach public for tourism purposes,” Safriet asserted.”Eventually someone is going to have egg on their face,” he warned.
Davis acknowledged that the response to Safriet’s questions had been late but stated that this had not been solely the TDC’s responsibility. He does not usually provide legal opinions to anyone other than the BCC, he continued. Davis observed that the lawsuit is essentially about public records and who is sponsor/applicant for the WCH&SDR Project. The latter question will be decided in the lawsuit, he commented.
Later in the meeting Davis requested and received permission to seek outside legal counsel to represent the county in the lawsuit It was discussed that a hearing on the lawsuit was scheduled for April 20.
There was also a request by Jennifer Vigil of the TDC staff for approval of a not-to-exceed $60,000 contract with American Government Services Corporation for quality control, mail-out services and tracking of status for easement packages for the WCH&SDR Project.
The more than 900 property owners in the project area are to be provided with an informational letter and construction easements. They will have the choice of whether to sign and have their property included in the project.
Blue Mountain Beach resident and property owner Emmett Hildreth asked the BCC not to approve the contract. He charged that sending out the easements would constitute unauthorized practice of law in the state of Florida.
District 4 Commissioner Sara Comander wondered if the BCC should proceed with spending money on the contract. She was unsure whether enough signed easements would be returned to justify the expense.
District 5 Commissioner Cindy Meadows recalled that the BCC had previously decided to “let the people decide” about this project that had been “inherited” from previous county commissions. The ACOE has indicated that the project would not proceed unless a sufficient number of owners agree to the easements, she noted.
If the easement packages are not sent out, the BCC will not know what the beachfront owners’ answer will be, Meadows continued. She said she has been hearing a lot of “nos” from owners, but “you never know.”
District 1 Commissioner Bill Chapman agreed, saying that he has been getting more emails within the last month from people in favor of the project.
In response to the concerns expressed by Hildreth, Davis vowed to make sure that the county was not doing anything illegal in sending out the packages.
Meadows’ motion for approval of the contract with American Government Services Corporation carried with all aye votes of the four commissioners present.
Still later in the meeting, attention turned to the letter to be sent out with the easements. Davis told the commissioners that Safriet had proposed changes to the draft letter and that he himself had proposed one change. Davis said he did not object to the changes proposed by Safriet.
“Who’s going to sign the letter?” Hildreth asked. Davis responded that he would suspect that either he or the TDC would sign.
Hildreth said he had asked who would enforce the contents of the easement and was told President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.
Art Miller, TDC treasurer and a TDC member since April 2014, commented that the TDC had not seen or approved the letter. He objected to the TDC being held out as a “culprit” in a recent newspaper ad placed by opponents of the WCH&SDR Project. He maintained that the TDC as a group had not voted on the issue of the project.
Miller also objected to the project being referred to as “beach nourishment.” “That’s not the process that’s going on here,” he said, calling it instead “fortification.”
Suzanne Harris of Edgewater Beach Condominium urged the BCC to “get it straight” who the easements would be mailed out to. It was discussed that some homeowners’ associations have the authority to approve easements on behalf of their members and some do not.
Davis commented that one of Safriet’s suggestions, with which he was in agreement, had been to include in the letter that homeowners’ associations should consult their documents on this issue.
Safriet said he appreciated Davis agreeing with his edits to the letter, but he asked, “Why are we moving forward?” “We’re wasting $60,000,” he told the commissioners, adding that he believes the BCC does not support the project, which he called, “a hot potato.” Referring to Miller’s comments, Safriet observed that the TDC is now “distancing themselves from this project.” He warned that the county would not be getting signed easements from owners in the project area. Safriet assured the commissioners that any support they have been getting for the project has been from people who do not live on the beach. He also argued that agreeing to an easement would violate a property owner’s mortgage. “It’s time for it to be dropped,” he said of the project.
Meadows observed that TDC boards from years past had approved moving forward with the project, which has been an effort of many years. She noted that the ACOE had performed studies and determined that the beach was approximately five feet lower than it should be. Hundreds of beach nourishment projects are taking place on beaches all over the United States, Meadows continued. “A lot of things people are saying are overcomplicating the process,” she commented.
“Can we take his word that everyone is opposed to it?” Meadows asked of the project, referring to Safriet’s contention. She observed that her job is to listen to everyone, including people who may not be present and who may want the project.
“My opinion is that you listen to the people.” Meadows said.
“My opinion is we need to hear from everyone,” District 2 Commissioner Cecilia Jones later agreed.
Blue Mountain Beach homeowner and resident Janet Huckabee addressed the commissioners, first commenting on a letter written by her husband, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, that had recently been run as an advertisement in local newspapers. Mike Huckabee was not present at the meeting.
His letter was in opposition to the WCH&SDR Project and also charged and objected that the TDC had plans to use privately-owned beach properties for vending . This was apparently a misunderstanding, as county code requires written permission from an upland property owner even for vending to take place on the beach adjacent to their property. The sale of hot dogs and t-shirts on the beach was also discussed in the letter as being planned, and county code prohibits the sale of these or any other merchandise items by beach vendors. Items provided by vendors consist of chairs, umbrellas, and equipment for water-based activities, all of which are offered on a rental basis.
Mrs. Huckabee said the letter had first been sent to all five county commissioners and that the only response received was from Meadows. It had also gone out to some neighbors, she said, who has asked if it would be all right for them to run it in the papers, to which her husband had said that he would not care.
She acknowledged that there had probably been misrepresentations in the letter but said that if so it was because of incorrect information that “was told to us.” She was not specific about the information source.
Huckabee said residents had found information that the county had presented to them at meetings on the WCH&SDR Project to be untrue.
“We don’t trust the government, simple as that,” Huckabee continued, “so we don’t trust letters that’s going to be sent to homeowners.”
She told the commissioners that after seeing in the news what is happening in Panama City Beach, “I really don’t want that down here, quite frankly, and if you have more beach, you have more trouble.”
Huckabee spoke against the $60,000 contract, saying that all that should be required was a stamp to send each packet out and one for it to be returned. “I haven’t heard one single person say that they want this,” she said of the project.
Huckabee asked if residents would be able to see what responses were to the easement packages. Chapman responded that he would expect this information to be provided by county staff, with a breakdown of “no response,” yes and no.
Huckabee said residents had been told that there would have to be a certain length of properties consenting to be part of the project in order for a project to be built.
Meadows responded that in one-on-one meetings with commissioners ACOE representatives had indicated that the minimum length that would make for a feasible project would depend on a variety of factors, among those elevation, topography, and mean high water. It could be a mile or 1 1/2 mile, Meadows said, there would be no way to know until the ACOE had a chance to look at and analyze at the responses to the easement packages. They might say that a project would not be feasible, she concluded.
“I’m the government, and I’m here to help you,” Huckabee quipped to the commissioners before sitting down.
“I know you people are trying to do what you believe to be the right thing,” said Fort Panic beachfront homeowner Ed Goodwin. Goodwin said he had purchased his property in 1971 and built his house in 1978. The house, he said, has been through numerous hurricanes and is still standing.
He acknowledged that he would like to see more sand on the beach. “There is a real credibility issue,” Goodwin told the commissioners, adding that he does not get the feeling that the TDC is “serving me.” He has stated that he does not plan to sign an easement.
“I would love to have the tourists come on my property,” Goodwin said, but he was concerned that if he did so he would give up control of his property. According to his title, he owns “out into the water,” Goodwin explained.
“I suggested such things as a recreational trust,” he said. Such trusts are used by landowners in some areas of the country to provide for the use of their property by the public.
South Walton County resident Bob Hudson urged for the responses to the easement packages to be directed to an independent party.
Chapman and Meadows concurred on this being a good idea. Davis agreed to think that possibility through.
He said he would revise the letter based on Safriet’s and his own suggestions and bring it before the BCC for consideration at their May 12 regular meeting.