| In late 1994 into 1995, a developer wanted to build 219 homes on the Kanapaha Prairie Uplands. That would have meant 219 wells and 219 septic tanks near the Pierson Sink and only a few feet above the Floridan Aquifer. Five attys said they would not work pro bono but would answer a few questions. They all said the proposed development was probably inconsistent with the comp plan. ***Then - anyone who speaks before the commissioners should have a prepared talk written up and ready to hand to the clerk and say, "I'd like this to be included in the permanent public record." (That should also be written on the copy you hand in. Then check to make sure it does get in the record.) The written part in the record is important in case of a court challenge. This type of commision meeting is called quasi-judicial. Some people refused to do that and their points were not considered in the two subsequent court cases, but most of us did and we had a wonderful record for the courts. *** We started to gather info and to study the comp plan and found several items to challenge. It soon became obvious that the planners had followed some sections of the comp plan, but ignored others. By the week before the night the commissioners were going to vote, we had piles of info. In our last meeting, we decided on the issues we thought were strongly in our favor and wrote them down on a large pad. Each of us (about 8-10) chose one of the topics we had listed. We gave that person any material we had collected. They took it home, wrote a short talk (no more than 5 mins is given to each person) and typed it. In that way, we avoided having 10 people get up and speak randomly, all saying the same thing. We have PhD's in the area who identified themselves as UF faculty members. They qualified as expert witnesses. Even those of us who were not "experts" were able to refer to specific regulations, reports, comp plan sections, FL St Statutes, etc., based on all the research we had done. That is called substantial, competent information. We verified everything by complete statute number, comp plan element policy number, etc, and included it all in the written document we put in the public record. We had a packed house the night of the vote. It was so well orchestrated that our presentations flowed, one after another. After we spoke, each of us walked over to the the clerk and handed in our written copy. Some folks also had printed out material to hand directly to each commissioner. Several had pictures and prepared slides of text to demonstrate their points. As we spoke, the commissioners paid close attention to what we were showing them. Only one commissioner was nodding off. When the time came for them to vote, at 12:55am!, they each explained why they were going to vote for or against. Margaret Eppes and Kate Barnes, both of whom had been expected to vote for the developer, spoke about the high quality of info we had given them. They both said they had never seen a group of citizens so well prepared and organized. They voted to deny the plan. L Brown and B Summers voted for the developer. All eyes were on Charles Chestnut... We had landed heavily on the danger of pollution of the aquifer. We didn't use the word "environment" one time; it was always the "quality of potable water" because that is the language of the comp plan. Commissioner Chestnut had attentively listened and said he was so concerned about the risks to the water supply that he was voting against the development. We won!!The developer took the county to court, saying they had not given him a fair hearing. Judge Doughty found in favor of the county. One main reason he gave was that citizens had provided so much good info. How did he know that? Because most of the speakers had typed up and handed in the info to be "included in the permanent public record" which was all given to the judge. The developer went to Tallahassee to the appeals court. All the records were sent to them. The court would not even hear oral arguments. They said the written record clearly showed Judge Doughty had been correct. By Ellie Schwab - modified 10/26/2003 | ||