Residents Respond To Tampoa Board Letter
The Tampoa Board has received many letters in response to its September 27, 2006 letter to Truman Annex residents in which Tampoa tried to explain its recent actions regarding Southard Street. We published Tampoa's letter here here shortly after we received it. Apparently the Tampoa letter was received about as well as its actions regarding Southard Street, and many Truman Annex residents are furious with the Tampoa Board. We have obtained copies of some of the letters the Board got and will be publishing a sample of the more interesting ones here in order for you to judge for yourself the level of discontent among Truman Annex residents over the actions of the Board. Each letter we obtained that was received by the Board was signed so the Board would know from whom it came. We have withheld the names and addresses here to protect the writers and the identity of our sources.
One pointed but thoughtful letter that was sent by e-mail to the Board reads:
To: Sterling Christian [Tampoa Operations Director]
Subject: Re: Letter to the TAMPOA Board of Directors
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:09:59 -0400
We read it. Now, please see that the Board gets this reply. Thanks.
Dear Board Members:
Once again, there has been horrible publicity in the newspaper. The articles of a couple of days ago were not unfair criticism of Tampoa; they were reports, with photos, of an actual event. We are not asked for "names and destinations" when we pass thru the Meadows or Bahama Village or Old Town or New Town. How does this Board have the audacity to ask others?
We have heard many times before all of the history outlined in the 9/27 letter to "Dear Neighbors." (Hah! You are not representing us in a very neighborly fashion, for sure.) We acknowledge that dealing with the City is frustrating. But the guards stopping vehicles on Southard is a new highly embarrassing stunt---pure grandstanding---that everyone can see thru. Tampoa looks foolish, exclusionary and hostile. Our understanding is that you have been ordered to cease and desist.
Your rationale of "waiver" for this latest antic is spurious. We have always exerted control---witness the guardhouse and locked gates---and have never relinquished this legal position in court documents. So there was absolutely no need to ask for names and destinations. How did this outrage benefit our community? If this was your attorney's "advice," you need a new attorney. Apparently, you were more concerned about being "sued for negligence" than acting in a reasonable manner. We venture to say the greater concern for you is being replaced by a new Board rather than a personal lawsuit.
Your letter also misleads the homeowners about eminent domain. It is NOT explicitly prohibited for the purposes of economic development. If your attorney has told you this, then his knowledge is sorely lacking---there was a (controversial) U.S. Supreme Court decision this last year to the contrary!
WHAT TO DO? We don't agree that "it's up to the Commission." It is up to you, too. If you believe you can't go any further in discussion, compromise and mediation, then think about resigning and let a new less-tired voice be heard.
Bill Verge informs me that he has been in weekly touch with Tom Tukey, trying to resolve the issue by mutual agreement. He proposes a "joint management agreement" for Southard, which sounds emminently reasonable. The Navy will open United for its use, relieving some traffic. The City is in agreement with steel gates that would be closed from 10 PM to 7AM. He says the current sticking point is that the Board wants drop arm gates in addition. Give it up! We don't need security in the daytime. And how about telling the homeowners about the progress so far.
The Board sets forth maintaining property values as the primary basis for this continuing, and expensive, brouhaha. We daresay that more stunts like you pulled this last week will do a lot more to bring down property values! Which persons who think they would like to own (expensive) property in Key West because of its well-known friendly, tolerant, accepting environment would want to live in an exclusionary, hostile, disliked, litiginous neighborhood? You are slowly but surely ruining our community, whether you comprehend that or not.
A couple of years, Tom Tukey asked a important question: What can we do to improve our PR image? Whatever the Board thought is was then, what does it think it is now?
With sincere concern,
[Names Withheld]
[Residents of Truman Annex]
posted by Conchette at 6:02 AM
2 Comments:
you need to look at florida states' new law re: eminent domain which was passed as a reaction to the supreme court's ruling. this new law does restrict eminent domain done for economic redevelopment.
when one deals with this city it is like dealing with slime. you can't depend on their word or even with their written word. bethel once said to me that any agreement one commission make does not require the next voted commission to necessarily follow (i'm not making this up!).
by the way bethel voted for the 2000 agreement documented by two role call votes in that commission meeting's minutes. he now says that he was never there and did not vote! this again in spite of people who were there and saw and heard him there!
the only way to settle this issue is in the courts and unfortunately not with mediation as reflected by our commissioner's unanimous rejection of the mediated agreement agreed to by the city's representatives at the last mediation session.
if you think otherwise you either live in a fantasy land or have not had the pleasure of dealing with our elected officials (ie. count your fingers after shaking hands with them). too bad.
Post a Comment
<< Home