Hometown Democracy & St. Pete Beach: Yet Another Vice Mayor Enters the Ring!

Today we continue to present the ongoing email dialog and debate about Amendment 4 (aka Hometown Democracy) and St. Pete Beach that is currently raging between the Vice Mayors of St. Pete Beach.  The intensity of the exchange ratcheted up a few more notches on August 10, 2010 when former St. Pete Beach Vice Mayor Ed Ruttencutter (that's right, yet another Vice Mayor!) jumped into the ring with the following email to current St. Pete Beach Vice Mayor Jim Parent:

Blogmeister Note:  Bolding and Italics are emphasis added by the Blogmeister and did not occur in the original

August 10, 2010

Mr. Parent:

I have explained this several times, and have been as polite as possible in the past, and I know that you have seen the explanations that I have presented.  I am now beyond simple courtesy and careful language.

St. Pete Beach has NEVER had a serious ballot issue in accordance with what you call our, "our mini-amendment 4 experiment here in SPB", also known as City Charter Section 3.15.  The SOLv comprehensive plan vote was a citizen initiative petition, in accordance with City Charter Section 7.02, and had nothing to do with our requirement for a vote on Comprehensive Plan amendments.  There has never been a Section 3.15 vote on a plan change that affected serious changes on land use, height, density or intensity.  The lawsuits were as a result of a Section 7.02 vote only.

 I am tired of explaining this politely, so I will make it clear.  Your statement, and that of others who repeatedly make similar arguments about the right of our voters to control changes to the city Comprehensive Plan that blame the lawsuits on Hometown Democracy type policy are either total stupidity on that parts of you and others who say that, or are a result of your intent to lie and mislead the voters of St. Pete Beach and the entire state of Florida.  Is that clear.  You are either too stupid to understand that of which you are talking, or you are intentionally defrauding those to whom you spread these lies.  There you have it.  Polite didn't work, so it should now be clear what your comprehension or intentions are.

 After quoting the ballot language used by St. Pete Beach in its 2008 election, Vice Mayor Ruttencutter continued:

Where did the ballot language explain, or even hint that the proposal would triple the maximum allowed building height, almost triple the number of hotel rooms allowed, allow condos along most of the length of the east side of Gulf Blvd., and require that all new buildings be built almost up against the sidewalk, put condos all over areas of the city where they were previously not allowed, including most of Corey Avenue, the Upham Beach neighborhoods, and up Blind Pass Road.  If the ballot language had included these bits of information, instead of just BS about green standards, energy efficiency and other such feel good stuff, which, by the way are not really clearly defined or required in the proposed plan, do you think that the voters would have approved the plan?  And the TC-1 land development regulation ballot language included the green statement and the height limit statements, but those issues were never addressed at all within the ordinance that the vote was to approve, making that ballot language a total fraud.  The commissioners who put that item on the ballot, and the people who circulated the petition for that item should have all been arrested for defrauding the electorate.

 Your weather forecast and farm report response to Mr. Moore was typical of people who spread crap and lather up with misleading irrelevancies to bore and confuse those to whom you apply such techniques of deception.  You didn't give him a straight answer about anything, and you perpetuated the same SOLv lies and deceptions that people have had to endure for over three years.  You put yourself on the commission after living here less than a year and have little or no knowledge of how we got to where we are, or anything of which you are discussing.  I suggest you read the SOLv plans that were presented to the voters and compare what they do to what the ballot language told the voters.  Even the name, Save Our Little village is a lie, since their plan intends to destroy the entire character of St. Pete Beach and to create a density and cityscape more like Manhattan with buildings up against the streets, towering above the bumper to bumper traffic jams it will create.  I strongly recommend that you read that plan and decide if that is the city to which you decided to move, or would you rather live in a warm version of Detroit or Chicago, or Cleveland, or whatever hell-hole from which you came.

There, polite didn't work.  Let's see if direct clear honesty can get through to you and your SOLv friends and supporters.

Ed Ruttencutter

Click here to see VM Jim Parent's Detailed Response and Rebuttal to Ruttencutter's Attacks!

 Read more about Amendment 4 / Hometown Democracy and why St. Pete Beach is a good example of its flaws.

Hometown Democracy & St. Pete Beach: Clash of the Vice Mayors - Part 3

The Debate between St. Pete Beach's Vice Mayors regarding Amendment 4 / Hometown Democracy and St. Pete Beach continues....


Click Here to see their prior emails


On August 9, 2010, former St. Pete Beach Vice Mayor Harry Metz emailed the following response to current Vice Mayor Jim Parent's August 8th email:

Let me see, were to start.

The litigation the City is in now has nothing to do with Hometown Democracy or Amendment 4, the suite [sic] against the City/slov [sic] is only about the Ballot Langue [sic] used to deceive the residents of St. Pete Beach, can we agree on that?

Harry Metz

On August 10, 2010, VM Parent emailed back the following:

Harry,
What I can agree to is that I am against Amendment 4. It is the wrong solution.

The suit against the city appears to me to be about one person’s lack of understanding about ballot language. Comprehensive plans are complex. They are difficult to understand.

Summing up a minor Comp Plan change, let alone a large change or entire Comp Plan, in 75 words will always lead to differences of opinion as to what the summary should say. Should it mention building height in one of a dozen areas? Why that area? Should it note which areas have had land use restricted? Why that area? What specific restrictions? Should it note changes in light industrial usage? Those areas getting that use? Or those areas being blocked from that use? Should it say existing use or should it say legal licensed use? How many of those few examples can be put in a 75 word ballot? Perhaps the most important thing is the new and improved beach access requirements for everyone. That is what some people may think is most important. Maybe that should be in the ballot's 75 words.

Currently a limited number of people (your elected representative officials) study and enact comp plans as part of their legislative duties. Amendment 4 REQUIRES ALL VOTERS TO VOTE ON ALL CHANGES. Clearly, more voters voting on more complex issues in more election will lead to an increase in disagreement as to what is most important. More people, more opinions. More complexity, more opinions. More referendums required, more chances to disagree. More lawsuits just like we have. Amendment 4 doesn't even exempt redevelopment projects of less than 5 parcels. At least our local plan was thoughtful enough to exempt small issues.

At the risk of repeating myself again; more referendums, more ballots, more ballot language, more voters statewide, more lack of understanding, more lawsuits. Our situation is but a miniature of what will come to be if Amendment 4 passes.
 

In my research, the only deception that I have heard about from other people and, believe it or not, have heard first hand, is talk about 20 story buildings. That is not in the Comp Plan and calling that out as if it exists seems an obvious attempt to deceive (lie to) those who have not read the entire plan.
 

I am against Amendment 4. It is the wrong solution.
.
Jim Parent
Vice Mayor, St Pete Beach

Look Here for more information about St. Pete Beach and Amendment 4

Hometown Democracy St. Pete Beach Vice Mayor Debate - Part 2

Click Here to see Part 1 of this debate

Continuing our coverage of the SPB Vice Mayors Debate on Amendment 4!


On August 8, 2010, Vice Mayor Jim Parent emailed the following rebuttal to Vice Mayor Harry Metz's August 4th comments:   {Blogmeister's Note:  portions of Parent's response have been emphasized in Bold by the Blogmeister for emphasis - bolding did not occur in the original}

Harry:

It is clear that we have diametrically opposed views on Amendment 4.

I've formed my views on Amendment 4 after a lot of research and information gathering.  I will be the first to note that I did not invent the ideas that led to the beliefs I hold but rather cultivated them after doing what I feel I am very good at; gathering information from many sources, determining the veracity of that information, analyzing the facts and then developing my opinions.  In addition, we are lucky to have firsthand experience of the impact that our local "Vote-on-everything" environment has had on St. Pete Beach as we study Amendment 4's "Vote-on-everything" proposal.

I don't know which facts form the basis of your views.  You speak in general terms about greedy developers, corrupt bank loans, and bribery of public officials, but I am not aware of any corruption or bribery in St. Pete Beach.  In fact, during my tenure, I've seen special interests of different persuasions try to cajole, bully and threaten our city commission and I feel I've seen the commission shake it off and do what they think is the right thing to do.  I might not always agree with other commissioners but I do think they do try to do what they think is best for the city as a whole.

If you are aware of any criminal incidents (conspiracy, corruption, bribery, etc.), I encourage you to contact the district attorney, since the acts you allude to involve not only municipal malfeasance, but serious crimes.  I have had significant experience with law enforcement over the years and I know our legal system only works if people like you and I do not tolerate misconduct.

If you are not aware of any such incidents, I believe you do the people of the city of St. Pete Beach a grave injustice to make such unfounded suggestions, because such comments send the false message that our city government is corrupt.  While many Hometown Democracy supporters make general allegations of corruption, I believe you (and I) bear a higher duty to refrain from making such harmful and incendiary allegations.  The fact of your status as a former city commissioner and vice mayor of our city could easily create a false impression in the minds of Florida voters that you are privy to special knowledge or information on the subject.

You and I could (and probably will) have additional discussion about the specific merits and dangers of Amendment 4.  In general, after much research, I have concluded that, if it passes in November, Amendment 4 will cost Florida thousands of jobs and hurt working families.  we're in the deepest recession in our lifetime.  Amendment 4 may well prolong it.  I also believe (and experts agree) that Amendment 4 would raise property taxes, hurt our sluggish economy, and make it more expensive to live in Florida.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  Recession.  Oil Spill.  Amendment 4.  Three strikes.  The Florida Economy's out, for a very long, long time.

So how about the specifics?  There are many issues and problems with Amendment 4 that we could talk about but this time I'll focus on the "Jobs Issue."  I believe that Amendment 4 will cost us jobs.  My experience with Florida's economy, dating back almost 30 years, clearly says that the rejuvenation of that (Florida and St. Pete Beach's) economy and job market depends on our ability to attract and retain major industries and employers.  Tourism is one of Florida's primary industries and the source of a major portion of its jobs, and my research tells me it's been an important part of St. Pete Beach's economy since the 1920's.

Common sense also says that a decline in Florida (and St. Pete Beach's) hotel capacity or facility deterioration would cause a decline in the number of our tourism-related jobs.  You seemingly acknowledge that Amendment 4 will impact our tourism-related jobs when you say:

"This city doesn't need the large 12 or 20 story hotels, [sic]there are many houses that have extra room or to accommodate the over flow of tourist [sic] this is what the residents have done long before I came here in 1950...The size of the hotel now should be all is needed [sic]..."

 Of course, our amended comp plan doesn't allow for 20 stories, but our city's voters did agree, by an overwhelming majority vote, to allow the city's hotels to re-develop up to 12 stories along a 0.9 mile stretch of Gulf Blvd.  Dr. Pyle has proudly admitted tht his ballot challenge litigation has brought this redevelopment to a halt, and which in turn has impacted our local tourism-related industry and job market.

Since all of Florida's cities will be subject to ballot challenge lawsuits like Dr. Pyle's if Amendment 4 passes; I'd say St. Pete Beach is a pretty good indication of the harmful impact Amendment 4 could have on the Florida's effort to preserve, or, ideally stimulate the economy and its job market.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  However, my examination of Amendment 4 is ongoing, and I will gladly consider any facts you may wish to present that might better inform my analysis.

Jim Parent, Vice Mayor, St. Pete Beach


Click here to see more of the dialog between VM  Harry Metz and VM Jim Parent



 Click here to READ MORE ABOUT HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY AND ST. PETE BEACH

Two St. Pete Beach Vice-Mayors Debate Hometown Democracy / Amendment 4

What started as a simple statement of opposition to Amendment 4 by St. Pete Beach Vice-Mayor Jim Parent has blossomed into a fascinating debate about Hometown Democracy and St. Pete Beach, including rebuttals by former St. Pete Beach Vice-Mayor Harry Metz.  Metz is an outspoken advocate of Amendment 4 whose views have been featured by pro-Amendment 4 bloggers and the Amendment 4 campaign.

On August 3, 2010, Metz emailed a link to a recent Hometown Democracy / Amendment 4 campaign press release to the St. Pete Beach city commissioners.  In response, current St. Pete Beach Vice Mayor Jim Parent emailed the following:

Harry,
I am not in favor of amendment 4 because I believe it will damage Florida's economy.
Recession, Oil Spill, Amendment 4.
Three strikes. Out?
.
Jim Parent
Vice Mayor, St Pete Beach


Several hours later, Metz emailed the following rereply:


VM

I understand your situation and your hotel neighbor. It's a shame you never had a chance to study A4 in depth
to understand what Florida is all about. I guess you need to live in the area for a few years to understand the
residents who have lived here most of their lives and love our beach.

The economy is down because the DEVELPOERS/HOTELIERS built and built with Corrupt bank loans, people saw the opportunity to make a quick money, some loan officers, restate agents and on and on used their money power to bribe, influence the Politicians. The residents didn't do any of this, they just tried to keep what they had. Now the Developers want to again rape what is left of our state, they will again make their millions leaving this state in shambles, take their millions and move elsewhere to rape and pillage again.

This city doesn't need the large 12 to 20 story hotels, there are many houses that have an extra room or two to accommodate the over flow of tourist this is what the residents have done long before I came here in 1950. Just look at what Ms Martohue wants to do to Upham Beach with the solv Comp Plan, the SMALL HOTEL and houses HAD MOST OF THEIR DENSITY TAKEN and moved most of it to the LARGE HOTEL DIST. The size of the hotel now should be all is needed, many of the hotel now are very deep in debt, why NOW should the resident have to be taxed to support them, and we do support them. What happened to the MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars when the Trade Winds sold two of their buildings as time share. Did they use the profits to upgrade the RESORT, no they put it in their pockets and now cry poor, poor me

The Oil Spill has nothing to do here on West Coast, if the hotels hadn't started mooning and crying poor
because they through they could make some quick money, the attention would never drawn to the West Coast. Look at the Tampa Bay Chamber, they are also crying for more money from BP to alert the tourist that the WestCoast is open for business.

Jim I believe you have a lot of common sense and you do try to study what is on the Commission Agenda, but please open your eyes and ears and see what is going on around you, instead of listening to your neighbor. When was the last time you unplugged your computer an walked around your neighborhood and talked to ALL the residents like you said you were going to do before you walked into your Commission seat. You can talk  about strike three and out, please make sure it's not in your backyard.

Harry

Click Here to see Vice Mayor Jim Parent's response to Vice Mayor Harry Metz


Click here to read more about Hometown Democracy and St. Pete Beach