Questions For The Annual Meeting
For those attending the TAMPOA Annual Meeting tomorrow, here are some questions to think about and put to those in charge.
Just how much of our money has the TAMPOA Board spent to date on the Southard street litigation on The Andersen Firms fees? How much on each lawyer from Andersen? How many hours has each lawyer put in that we were charged for? What is the hourly rate of each lawyer who has worked on the litigation?
Just how much money has the TAMPOA board spent on attorneys who are not from the Andersen Firm on the Southard Street litigation? How much on each lawyer? How many hours has each lawyer put in that we were charged for? What is the hourly rate of each lawyer who has worked on the litigation?
What amount of money is still owed the Andersen Firm for the Southard Street litigation? For other matters?
What amount of money is still owed other attorneys for the Southard street litigation? For other matters?
What does Andersen say will be the cost of future work through the trial of the law suit?
What does Andersen say will be the cost to go through Summary Judgment. (Often cases are decided by the judge without a trial when on certain issues there is no dispute among the parties over the material facts. For example, there may be no dispute about the fact that the City of Key West refused to honor the Contract it entered into with TAMPOA, but only whether the contract was a lawful one. The City's defense is that the contract was not lawful. The judge could decide this issue without a full blown trial, that is, decide the issue by awarding summary judgment to one side or the other.) So, let's find out what the attorneys' fees will be through summary judgment. They should be significantly less than a full blown trial.
What makes the TAMPOA Board think that the City will honor any settlement? After all the City failed to honor the last contract.
What makes the TAMPOA Board think that the City wants to settle the case?
Why are the TAMPOA attorneys, i.e., The Andersen Firm, taking 30 depositions? How will these depositions answer the question of who owns Southard Street, which is the City's primary defense to the litigation? Many of the witnesses to be deposed appear to have nothing to do with who owns the street, but appear to be witnesses to the incident at the guard house with Commissioner Lopez. Judge Mark Jones has already told TAMPOA that incident is not relevant to the current litigation and will have to be raised in a separate lawsuit. Is TAMPOA planning more litigation, like going to Federal Court on some cock-a-mamy reverse condemnation lawsuit? What is the estimate of the cost of that? And who will be the lawyers representing TAMPOA? The Andersen Firm?
What efforts, if any, have been made to rain in the Andersen Firm and limit spending on the Southard street litigation? What instructions have been given the firm about its billing practices, such as itemizing the specific work done, the hours expended, the name of the lawyer performing the work, and the hourly billing rate of the attorney. We have had occasion to see some of the Andersen Firm's billing in the past and it has been very general -- more on the order of "For Professional Services: X dollars." Only a naive client would accept such a bill in major litigation.
Is the gate on Southard Street still a matter of contention with the City? What were the specific proposals made to the City about the gate? (We're not talking about the flapping arms which every knows the City would never agree to, much less issue permits for). Was the gate part of the proposal give to Commissioner Verge in this latest round of failed negotiations?
Why, if Tukey knows, did Shawn Smith and Verge reject this latest offer, which seemed like a pretty sweet deal for the City?
Since, if you want to believe the Citizen, which we don't, Verge appeared to disagree with TAMPOA's proposal, why was the proposal ever made in the first place, unless Verge did a switch-a-roo at the last minute? If this happened and Verge was initially in favor of the proposal, what makes the TAMPOA Board think that it can trust anything that Verge says? Remember, he voted against the last mediated settlement after assuring all he favored it? Why does the TAMPOA Board think it can trust the City at all? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the City Commissioners hate TAMPOA and Truman Annex; are going to do what they want; have no intention of settling the Southard Street dispute; and when the case goes to trial, will blame any adverse outcome on the judge and appeal, while residents of the Annex and the rest of Key West finance the adventure.
Has the very real possibility occurred to the attorneys the TAMPOA Board has representing them that TAMPOA could win the lawsuit with the City and still lose the Southard Street controversy, that is, obtain a ruling that TAMPOA owns Southard Street, but come out worse for it.? It all has to do with a concept called equity. Southard Street has been open and a two-way street since the beginning of Truman Annex. A judge could find that TAMPOA owns Southard street but then rule that the street is to be two way and must stay accessible to all, including the Navy, 24 / 7. While the City would have breached the contract it had with TAMPOA, there would be no consequences, except that the court would rule TAMPOA owns the street. Thus, TAMPOA would have spent, by that time, a million or more with nothing to show for it. In short, the equities would favor keeping the status quo, and our money spent on the litigation would have been wasted.
What is the new TAMPOA Board planning to do as far as who negotiates with the City? Are they prepared to let someone other than Tom Tukey play that role? The reality is that the City residents hate Tom Tukey, as does the City Commission, despite what Verge may say to his face. A new negotiator might be helpful in changing the negotiation climate. This is nothing personal against Tukey, but merely a recognition that as a negotiator, he has done all he can, and it's time for a substitution.
What has the Navy said about the gate? Has it said that there must be access 24 / 7 ? If so, how will pedestrian Navy personnel be accommodated when they want to come past the guard house in the wee hours of the morning? Will they have gate keys or will the guardhouse be open 24 hours a day?
What plans, if any, does the TAMPOA Board have to improve communication with the TAMPOA membership? Is the Board going to improve the TAMPOA website?
At a minimum the TAMPOA Board should have to respond to these questions from the membership. If you go to the Annual Meeting, don't let the Board off the hook. Get some answers!
Just how much of our money has the TAMPOA Board spent to date on the Southard street litigation on The Andersen Firms fees? How much on each lawyer from Andersen? How many hours has each lawyer put in that we were charged for? What is the hourly rate of each lawyer who has worked on the litigation?
Just how much money has the TAMPOA board spent on attorneys who are not from the Andersen Firm on the Southard Street litigation? How much on each lawyer? How many hours has each lawyer put in that we were charged for? What is the hourly rate of each lawyer who has worked on the litigation?
What amount of money is still owed the Andersen Firm for the Southard Street litigation? For other matters?
What amount of money is still owed other attorneys for the Southard street litigation? For other matters?
What does Andersen say will be the cost of future work through the trial of the law suit?
What does Andersen say will be the cost to go through Summary Judgment. (Often cases are decided by the judge without a trial when on certain issues there is no dispute among the parties over the material facts. For example, there may be no dispute about the fact that the City of Key West refused to honor the Contract it entered into with TAMPOA, but only whether the contract was a lawful one. The City's defense is that the contract was not lawful. The judge could decide this issue without a full blown trial, that is, decide the issue by awarding summary judgment to one side or the other.) So, let's find out what the attorneys' fees will be through summary judgment. They should be significantly less than a full blown trial.
What makes the TAMPOA Board think that the City will honor any settlement? After all the City failed to honor the last contract.
What makes the TAMPOA Board think that the City wants to settle the case?
Why are the TAMPOA attorneys, i.e., The Andersen Firm, taking 30 depositions? How will these depositions answer the question of who owns Southard Street, which is the City's primary defense to the litigation? Many of the witnesses to be deposed appear to have nothing to do with who owns the street, but appear to be witnesses to the incident at the guard house with Commissioner Lopez. Judge Mark Jones has already told TAMPOA that incident is not relevant to the current litigation and will have to be raised in a separate lawsuit. Is TAMPOA planning more litigation, like going to Federal Court on some cock-a-mamy reverse condemnation lawsuit? What is the estimate of the cost of that? And who will be the lawyers representing TAMPOA? The Andersen Firm?
What efforts, if any, have been made to rain in the Andersen Firm and limit spending on the Southard street litigation? What instructions have been given the firm about its billing practices, such as itemizing the specific work done, the hours expended, the name of the lawyer performing the work, and the hourly billing rate of the attorney. We have had occasion to see some of the Andersen Firm's billing in the past and it has been very general -- more on the order of "For Professional Services: X dollars." Only a naive client would accept such a bill in major litigation.
Is the gate on Southard Street still a matter of contention with the City? What were the specific proposals made to the City about the gate? (We're not talking about the flapping arms which every knows the City would never agree to, much less issue permits for). Was the gate part of the proposal give to Commissioner Verge in this latest round of failed negotiations?
Why, if Tukey knows, did Shawn Smith and Verge reject this latest offer, which seemed like a pretty sweet deal for the City?
Since, if you want to believe the Citizen, which we don't, Verge appeared to disagree with TAMPOA's proposal, why was the proposal ever made in the first place, unless Verge did a switch-a-roo at the last minute? If this happened and Verge was initially in favor of the proposal, what makes the TAMPOA Board think that it can trust anything that Verge says? Remember, he voted against the last mediated settlement after assuring all he favored it? Why does the TAMPOA Board think it can trust the City at all? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the City Commissioners hate TAMPOA and Truman Annex; are going to do what they want; have no intention of settling the Southard Street dispute; and when the case goes to trial, will blame any adverse outcome on the judge and appeal, while residents of the Annex and the rest of Key West finance the adventure.
Has the very real possibility occurred to the attorneys the TAMPOA Board has representing them that TAMPOA could win the lawsuit with the City and still lose the Southard Street controversy, that is, obtain a ruling that TAMPOA owns Southard Street, but come out worse for it.? It all has to do with a concept called equity. Southard Street has been open and a two-way street since the beginning of Truman Annex. A judge could find that TAMPOA owns Southard street but then rule that the street is to be two way and must stay accessible to all, including the Navy, 24 / 7. While the City would have breached the contract it had with TAMPOA, there would be no consequences, except that the court would rule TAMPOA owns the street. Thus, TAMPOA would have spent, by that time, a million or more with nothing to show for it. In short, the equities would favor keeping the status quo, and our money spent on the litigation would have been wasted.
What is the new TAMPOA Board planning to do as far as who negotiates with the City? Are they prepared to let someone other than Tom Tukey play that role? The reality is that the City residents hate Tom Tukey, as does the City Commission, despite what Verge may say to his face. A new negotiator might be helpful in changing the negotiation climate. This is nothing personal against Tukey, but merely a recognition that as a negotiator, he has done all he can, and it's time for a substitution.
What has the Navy said about the gate? Has it said that there must be access 24 / 7 ? If so, how will pedestrian Navy personnel be accommodated when they want to come past the guard house in the wee hours of the morning? Will they have gate keys or will the guardhouse be open 24 hours a day?
What plans, if any, does the TAMPOA Board have to improve communication with the TAMPOA membership? Is the Board going to improve the TAMPOA website?
At a minimum the TAMPOA Board should have to respond to these questions from the membership. If you go to the Annual Meeting, don't let the Board off the hook. Get some answers!
posted by Conchette at 8:12 PM
11 Comments:
I wasn't there but I heard that you really made a fool of yourself today. Since the audience booed you and cheered the board, I guess you're clearly now the resident nut case. Too bad Sue.
Your silence at the annual meeting was again deafening. I think that the sense of the community was clear. Don't you?
In reply to the above post: You heard wrong. Perhaps if you had attended the Annual Meeting you wouldn't be making such a comment. We don't think you have your facts right. Booing or cheering are indicative of little or nothing. Booing is indicative of bad manners and an unwillingness to listen to an opposing point of view, even if you don't agree with it. It appears you are in that camp. Are you in that camp?
We think that before calling us names, you should look at yourself and how you sound. Maybe the "resident" whom you are dissing is you.
By the way who is Sue? Someone you seem to dislike as much as us? Or are you just showiwng us another side of your ignorance?
We don't agree that there was any clear "sense of the community" at the annual meeting except division. We do hope that the new TAMPOA Board members can make a difference and bring new leadership to the Board. We agree that there was that sense of hopefulness along with a realization that any chance of settling the Southard street dispute is quite unlikely.
gee conchette, the board got a standing ovation during the meeting. weren't you there? the only negativity shown was by one of the owners at harbor place and she did eventually get the sense of the community.
I figured it'd only take you a few days to revise history. The fact is: only ONE person showed a discordant point of view, and the boos erupted after said person attempted to monopolize the meeting. And another fact is: the room exploded with applause in kudos to that evil dictator Tom Tukey.
Despite your attempts to imply that there's rampant discord within Truman Annex, anyone who attended the meeting (without blinders on) knows that by and large the membership is in favor of what the Board and the legal representation are doing.
Sorry, your tight little circle of co-conspirators have had no impact.
It'll be entertaining to see you continue here in your fairyland seeking approval from the outsiders who hate the Annex. Of course only THEY will take you seriously anymore....
why do "we" keep referring to ourselves as "we"? is this the royal "we" or do "we" have some sort of multiple personality or schizoid problem?
We think our circle of readers has had an impact. And there is discord in the Annex. That is what has caused the Board to change. Anyone who lives in the Annex knows that.
To the Anonymous one asking about "we:" We think you are able to figure out the meaning of "we" without our help.
Sorry but "we" don't have a clue. "We" guess that "you" (pl) don't either.
We're clear about the meaning. We're sorry you're not. You'll just have to keep on guessing like you usually do.
Post a Comment
<< Home